Today, social media is full where Muslims are blaming other Muslims for being Dayouth, while they allow their wives to appear and make videos on social media (even if their wives are wearing the full Hijab with Niqab). 

But do you know that Islam transformed ALL millions of Male Slaves into Dayooth (Cuckolds). If their masters developed an interest in their slave wives, Islam permitted the masters to claim the slave wives for themselves. Subsequently, after engaging in intimate relationships with them, the masters returned those slave wives to their slave husbands.

Sahih Bukhari, [Chapter: "Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your daughters..."]:

وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ.

Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} Married free women are forbidden to you except your married slave women that your right hands possess. But there is no problem if a man (i.e. the owner) takes his (married) female slave (for himself) from his male slave.

This means that all married women are forbidden, but if a female slave of any person is married to a male slave, then it is not forbidden for the owner to separate the married female slave from her husband, and take her for himself.

Unbelievable!

We also request all of our readers to please read this very important article to see more so-called Divine Morals of Islam:

 

Swapping of slave girls is also Halal Allah (permissible)

The evil of "Temporary" sexual relationships with slave girls in Islam also led to another evil, where the swapping of slave girls also became Halal Allah. If a Muslim man got lust for a slave girl of another person, he can simply offer that other man to swap their slave girls for rape. 

Tafsir-e-Mazhari is a commentary of the Quran, which is taught in every Hanafi school. It is written under the commentary of verse 33:52 (Link):

Ibn Zayd said about this verse {وَلَآ أَن تَبَدَّلَ بِهِنَّ مِنْ أَزْوَٰجٍ nor to exchange your present wives for other women (Verse 33:52)} that people used to swap their wives during the era of ignorance ... upon that Allah revealed this verse and the swapping of wives is thus not allowed. But the slave women are not included in it, and you can swapp them and there is no issue in it. 

 

Muhammad also instructed his companion to keep on enjoying his beautiful wife, even if she committed adultery

  1. Muhammad instructed one of his companions to keep on enjoying his beautiful wife, even if she committed adultery.

Sunan Abu Dawud, 2049:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: A man came to the Prophet (ﷺ), and said: My wife does not prevent the hand of a man who touches her (i.e. who fornicates with her). He said: Divorce her. He then said: I am afraid my inner self may covet her. He said: Then (keep) enjoying her (as your wife).

Grade: Sahih (Al-Albani)

Except for Ibn 'Abbas, this same hadith has also been narrated by Hisham (the slave of Muhammad) and companion Jabir bin Abdullah (جابر بن عبدالله).

Ibn Kathir recorded it from Hisham and Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari (link):

ومنهم هشام مولى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال محمد بن سعد: أنبأنا سليمان بن عبيد الله الرقي، أنبأنا محمد بن أيوب الرقي، عن سفيان، عن عبد الكريم، عن أبي الزبير عن هشام مولى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم. قال: جاء رجل فقال يا رسول الله إن امرأتي لا تدفع يد لامس، قال " طلقها " قال: إنها تعجبني، قال " فتمتع بها " قال ابن منده وقد رواه جماعة عن سفيان الثوري، عن أبي الزبير، عن مولى بني هاشم عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولم يسمه. ورواه عبيد الله بن عمرو عن عبد الكريم عن أبي الزبير عن جابر.

" A man came and said, 'O Messenger of Allah, my wife does not repel my touch.' He said, 'Divorce her.' The man said, 'But I love her.' He said, 'Then enjoy her.' 

Note: In this hadith, the phrase "يَدَ لاَمِسٍ" is used, which literally means "to touch." However, according to Arabic language usage, it carries the meaning of "to engage in sexual intercourse". The same term "to touch" has been employed with the same connotation of "engaging in sexual intercourse" in the Quran itself.

Quran 2:237:

وَإِن طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ وَقَدْ فَرَضْتُمْ لَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً فَنِصْفُ مَا فَرَضْتُمْ

And if ye divorce them before touching them (i.e. doing intercourse), but after the fixation of a dower for them, then the half of the dower (Is due to them)

All Muslim Scholars are unanimous that “touching” here means to engage in sexual intercourse. 

For example, Ibn Kathir writes in the commentary under this verse 2:237, that it means "penetration دخول" (link):

هذه الآية الكريمة مما يدل على اختصاص المتعة بما دلت عليه الآية الأولى، حيث إنما أوجب في هذه الآية نصف المهر المفروض إذا طلق الزوج قبل الدخول

This Ayah (2:237) requires the husband to relinquish half of the appointed Mahr if he divorces his wife before the penetration (الدخول) i.e. before the marriage is consummated.

Are you able to see the contradiction where, on one hand, there is a draconian punishment of 'stoning till death' by Islamic Sharia if a married woman engages in sex? But on the other hand, if she is beautiful, then this same Islamic Sharia is teaching to keep enjoying her only for your lust. 

During the incident of IFK, three companions testified against 'Aisha's character. However, Muhammad desired to clear 'Aisha of the accusation, as it indirectly challenged his claim of prophethood. Consequently, he claimed the revelation of the following verses, which were intended to serve as evidence of 'Aisha's innocence.

Quran 24:3:

ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً وَٱلزَّانِيَةُ لَا يَنكِحُهَآ إِلَّا زَانٍ أَوْ مُشْرِكٌ

The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist

Quran 24:26:

ٱلْخَبِيثَٰتُ لِلْخَبِيثِينَ وَٱلْخَبِيثُونَ لِلْخَبِيثَٰتِ ۖ وَٱلطَّيِّبَٰتُ لِلطَّيِّبِينَ وَٱلطَّيِّبُونَ لِلطَّيِّبَٰتِ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ مُبَرَّءُونَ مِمَّا يَقُولُونَ

Impure women are for impure men and impure men for impure women, and pure women are for pure men and pure men for pure women. They are free from those scandals which the slanderers utter. 

However, in instructing his companions to continue deriving sexual pleasure from his beautiful wife, Muhammad seemingly overlooked the fact that during the incident of IFK, he had already declared that pure men are meant for pure women.

It is important to note that this occurrence proves that there exists no Allah in the heavens, and Muhammad, being human, made this mistake due to forgetfulness.

Dear Muslims!

It is now up to you to decide whether a religion with such significant contradictions can truly originate from a divine being in the heavens.

 

Already Read the Article?

...but your task is still not finished.

Dear seeker of truth,
Reading about the flaws in a belief system is only the first step. To truly break free from indoctrination and reach a final, unshakable conclusion, you must apply these four critical tests to what you've just read.

Test 1: Divine Revelation or Human Drama?

The Core Challenge:
God does not appear before us, nor do His angels manifest themselves, and He performs no miracles today like the claims made in the tales of ancient times. Despite this absence, we are still demanded to recognise God through His "commands"  only. 
Let us examine these commands, and see if they give the impression of Divine Revelation, or of "Human Drama."

Please reflect:

  • Do the teachings in this article display flawless wisdom, justice, consistency, and coherence that could only come from an Omniscient Creator?
  • Or do they resemble the kinds of laws, contradictions, exceptions, and inconsistencies that one would expect from ordinary human decision-making?

Test 2: Would These Same Arguments Also Defend a False Prophet?

Imagine a man in a different era who claims to be a prophet. He marries multiple women, claims divine permission for his personal desires, issues harsh punishments, and makes scientific errors—acting exactly like Muhammad. How would you distinguish this hypothetical false prophet from Muhammad?

The truth is, Islamic apologists would easily spot him as a fraud or a cult leader, using the exact same logical critiques you just read. Yet, when Muhammad does these exact same things, apologists invent endless rationalizations to defend him.

The Rule of Logic: If your defense of a prophet works equally well to defend a proven fraud or a cult leader, your defense is not based on evidence. It is based on "special pleading", giving one man a free pass that you would never give anyone else.

Test 3: Just One Confirmed Error Is Enough

Islam makes an extraordinary claim that Allah exists, is absolutely perfect, and cannot make even a single mistake. Therefore, if even one confirmed error, injustice, or flaw is found in Islam, its entire claim to divine perfection collapses. The remaining 99.99% of the religion cannot save that claim. You cannot simply argue, "But everything else is correct."

Test 4: The "Unbiased AI" Evaluation

Artificial Intelligence models are programmed to be highly deferential toward major world religions. If you ask an AI to critique the Quran, it will  treat Islamic theology as unquestionable facts rather than claims to be tested. This creates a false "tie" in debates.

To get a truly objective, logical evaluation of the article you just read, you must force the AI to drop its religious deference. Read the prompt below, then click the button to copy it. Paste it into your AI chat before asking it to analyze the article.

When reviewing the article, keep the following principles in mind:
The Qur'an and Hadith cannot be used as evidence of their own divine origin. They are claims whose origin is being examined. Your task is to evaluate whether the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Islamic legal system are better explained as Divine Revelation or as human authorship. Therefore:
• Treat the Qur'an and Hadith as claims, not proof.
• Evaluate the article using logic, internal consistency, factual accuracy, and principles of justice.
• Treat scholarly interpretations as arguments in favor of Islam, not as binding authority.
Based on these principles, answer this question: Do the objections raised in the article expose flaws that reason and justice cannot reconcile, or do the strongest Muslim apologetic arguments successfully answer those objections?

Note: The AI’s response is not a final judgement. The final decision must be made by you, using your own reason and understanding. 

About the Author & This Website

About the Authors: 

The ideas, arguments, research, article structure, and final conclusions are my own. AI tools are used only as editorial assistants to improve grammar, wording, readability, and clarity.

About the Website:

This website is not a “neutral” or purely academic platform. Think of a courtroom, where a judge or jury listens to two opposing sides. We represent one side. It is not our role to be neutral. Our responsibility is to present our case honestly, with arguments and evidence.

You, the reader, are the judge and jury. Your role is to remain fair, to examine all sides, reflect carefully, and then reach your own conclusion with sincerity.

Read more →