Tuesday, 19 January 2010

The Ahadiths on Adult Suckling

”Some more proof that all is true”

Most of the People in our daily life and almost many Muslims who used to visit FFI really don’t agree with the Previous part of that topic.

But after really studying and working on that topic I found many ahadiths on this topic, where Mohammed says that women have done this and also Ayesha, the most loving wife of Mohammed, did that (and her sisters too)…

Here are the list of ahadiths which proves the above mentioned topic

Chapter 28 :SUCKLING OF A YOUNG (BOY) Book 8, Number 3424:
‘ A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man ‘Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn ‘Umar (the words are): Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) laughed.

Book 8, Number 3425:
‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hadhaifa, lived with him and his family in their house. She (i.e. the daughter of Suhail came to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Salim has attained (puberty) as men attain, and he understands what they understand, and he enters our house freely, I, however, perceive that something (rankles) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa, whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said to her: Suckle him and you would become unlawful for him, and (the rankling) which Abu Hudhaifa feels in his heart will disappear. She returned and said: So I suckled him, and what (was there) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa disappeared.

Book 8, Number 3426:
Ibn Abu Mulaika reported that al-Qasim b. Muhammad b. Abu Bakr had narrated to him that ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail b. ‘Amr came to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, Salim (the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa) is living with us in our house, and he has attained (puberty) as men attain it and has acquired knowledge (of the sex problems) as men acquire, whereupon he said: Suckle him so that he may become unlawful (in regard to marriage) for you He (Ibn Abu Mulaika) said: I refrained from (narrating this hadith) for a year or so on account of fear. I then met al-Qasim and said to him: You narrated to me a hadith which I did not narrate (to anyone) afterwards. He said: What is that? I informed him, whereupon he said: Narrate it on my authority that ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) had narrated that to me.

Book 8, Number 3427:
Umm Salama said to ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her): A young boy who is at the threshold of puberty comes to you. I, however, do not like that he should come to me, whereupon ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) said: Don’t you see in Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) a model for you? She also said: The wife of Abu Hudhaifa said: Messenger of Allah, Salim comes to me and now he is a (grown-up) person, and there is something that (rankles) in the mind of Abu Hudhaifa about him, whereupon Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him (so that he may become your foster-child), and thus he may be able to come to you (freely).

Book 8, Number 3428:
Zainab daughter of Abu Salama reported: I heard Umm Salama, the wife of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), saying to ‘A’isha: By Allah, I do not like to be seen by a young boy who has passed the period of fosterage, whereupon she (’A'isha) said: Why is it so? Sahla daughter of Suhail came to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Allah’s Messenger, I swear by Allah that I see in the face of Abu Hudhaifa (the signs of disgust) on account of entering of Salim (in the house), whereupon Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She (Sahla bint Suhail) said: He has a heard. But he (again) said: Suckle him, and it would remove what is there (expression of disgust) on the face of Abu Hudhaifa. She said: (I did that) and, by Allah, I did not see (any sign of disgust)on the face of Abu Hadhaifa.

Book 8, Number 3429:
Umm Salama, the wife of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), used to say that all wives of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) disclaimed the idea that one with this type of fosterage (having been suckled after the proper period) should come to them. and said to ‘A’isha: By Allah, we do not find this but a sort of concession given by Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) only for Salim, and no one was going to be allowed to enter (our houses) with this type of fosterage and we do not subscribe to this view.

Book 8, Number 3430:
‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) visited me when a man was sitting near me, and he seemed to disapprove of that. And I saw signs of anger on his face and I said: Messenger of Allah, he is my brother by fosterage, whereupon he said: Consider who your brothers are because of fosterage since fosterage is through hunger (i.e. in infancy).

According to above ahadiths, I really think that this is a total discrimination with women in Islam. I don’t know why Muslim male don’t allow this to their wives and daughters. If this is allowed in Islam then why are they so strict with there women to wear for example the veil (BURKA)? According to these Islamic scriptures Muslim women really don’t need a shirt. They can walk even in markets and do shopping without shirts….all they have to do is to make Mahrum to every Male and they can walk easily.

Although this is not a big issue in Islamic Scriptures, they hide many real things from theyr community.

But I want to ask a question here for every Muslim male and female.

1. What is really the need of that act?
2. Is it possible for moderate Muslims to accept this act and allow there females to do this?
3: What will be the result of this act, if males are not at home?
4. Will Muslim males allow their wives to do this act in front of them or behind them?

This is really harsh to accept. But if you don’t accept what scriptures says to you, then it means you are denying the scriptures

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/10/the-converses-on-adult-suckling-part-ii/


Did Muhammad Drive out the Jews of Medina for Attacking & Killing Muslims?

”Muhammad’s excuses and Allah’s cheating, in order to implement the first genocide of history”

In the course of exchanging comments on an article The Qur’an and Hadith: Which is More Authentic? in www.islam-watch.org , Mr. Abu Shuja’ah, a prominent Islamic propagandist on the Internet, made a number of outrageous claims. On the question of why Muhammad attacked, slaughtered and exiled the Jews of Medina, he claimed:

The Jews were driven out of Medina for attacking and killing Muslims. Consider it a mirror of today’s Gaza.

While Shuja’ah makes a case for justification of Muhammad’s atrocities against the Jews of Medina, I, before going into this discussion, affirm that Muhammad had no justification at all.

Let us start with a review of Prophet Muhammad’s encounter with the Jews of Medina. He relocated to Medina in June 622 CE on the background that his mission at Mecca had failed, had become stagnant, while his faith was making rapid progress in Medina even in his absence acquiring some 76 converts over the previous three years. It should be noted that his mission in Mecca, his hometown, made only 150 converts at least over the previous 13 years of his prophetic mission.

The prophet was invited to Medina by his Medinan disciples (those 76 or so), who belonged to the two Pagan tribes, Aws and Khazraj; and he settled down without facing any opposition from any group, including the Jews, who were richer and more influential in Medina. It is anticipated that the Jews might’ve been welcoming of him, as he was converting them to a monotheism, which he presented to the Jews as a sister-religion to Judaism and Christianity.

Muhammad continued his preaching unimpeded and the polytheists converted to Islam at a high frequency. But the problem with the Jews started only after Muhammad became too ambitious to present himself also as a prophet, a saviour, of the Jews (& Christians) too. So Muhammad initially started pampering the Jews & Christians. He gave Moses a status even higher than his own [Bukhari 4:610,612]. Qur’anic verses pampered them saying, Allah gave them ‘guidance and light’ in the form of Torah [Q 5:44] and the Jews are “righteous” people [Q 6:153-54], who ‘excelled the nations’ [Q 45:16].

And he adopted many Jewish rituals and customs—fasting, circumcision, praying toward Jerusalem etc.—to make Islam truly look like an Abrahamic creed for the first time. Allah’s and Muhammad’s reason behind all these goody-goody sayings and gestures toward the Jews was to come out later; it was Muhammad’s ambition to become a prophet of Jews as well. So Allah reveals (Q 3.5):

(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

The same is repeated in Q 5:48:

And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed…

But, if they failed to follow Muhammad, Allah threatens them with punishments in the next verse (Q5:49):

…And if they turn away, then know that Allah’s Will is to smite them for some sin of theirs. Lo! many of mankind are evil-livers.

Despite all these pleadings and threats, the Jews did not accept Muhammad as their prophet and ruler. Instead, the Jews became staunch critics of Muhammad’s revelations, because they had the inner knowledge of what is in the Torah, which Muhammad said he brought in its entirety through his Qur’an. They could easily point out the errors in Muhammad’s messages, which they did putting Muhammad in a defensive and embarrassing position.

Muhammad (or Allah) eventually became sure that the Jews (& Christians) would, in no way, embrace his message. So Allah came down with a verse (Q 2:120) to relieve Muhammad from further persuasion of them, allowing him do what was needed—the subject of this debate:

Q 2:120 Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: “The Guidance of Allah,-that is the (only) Guidance.” Wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor helper against Allah.

And not long after Allah revealed these verses, Muhammad, while pursuing with some 300-plus Muslim raiders to attack and plunder a Meccan caravan returning from Syria under Abu Sufian, engaged the Meccans in the battle of Badr and achieved stunning success against an opposition at least double in strength. Muhammad’s confidence was ‘sky high’. The Jews can be challenged now to mete out Allah’s promised punishment to them for rejecting Muhammad, such as in verse 5:49 cited above.

Now let us see how Muhammad initiate violence against the Jews, according to the prophet’s earliest and most original biographer Ibn Ishaq (c. 750 CE, preserved through Ibn Hisham):[1]

Meanwhile there was the affair of the B. Qaynuqa. The apostle assembled them in their market and addressed them as follows: ‘O Jews, beware lest God bring upon you the vengeance that He brought upon Quraysh and become Muslims. You know that I am a prophet who has been sent—you will find that in your scriptures and God’s covenant with you.’ They replied, ‘O Muhammad, you seem to think that we are your people. Do not deceive yourself because you encountered a people (i.e. the Quraysh) with no knowledge of war and got the better of them; for by God if we fight you, you will find that we are real men!’

So Muhammad obviously tried to threaten the Jews to submission to his religious and political authority, pointing to them what happened to the Quraysh at Badr—a fate that may visit them too, if they didn’t submit. But they Jews rejected his threatening invitation with defiance.

Now, the plot to punish the Jews will be well-coordinated by both Muhammad and Allah. So, Allah also comes with his own threats to the Jews as Ibn Ishaq (p. 363) notes:

A freedman of the family of Zayd b. Thabit from Sa’Id b. Jubayr or from Tkrima from Ibn ‘Abbas told me that the latter said the following verses (Q 3:13) came down about them: ‘Say to those who disbelieve: you will be vanquished and gathered to Hell, an evil resting place. You have already had a sign in the two forces which met’, i.e. the apostle’s companions at Badr and the Quraysh. ‘One force fought in the way of God; the other, disbelievers, thought they saw double their own force with their very eyes. God strengthens with His help whom He will. Verily in that is an example for the discerning.’ [Qur’an 3:13]

As the threatening notice of submission served to Banu Qainuqa first by Muhammad, followed by Allah was flatly rejected, it was time for Muhammad to look for an excuse to execute the threat. If Allah is to be believed, Muhammad found no excuse to attack the Jews. So Allah had to create one, an outrageously silly one at that in verses 8:55–58. The Jews are the worst of beasts, of living creatures, because they would not believe in Muhammad’s messages:

Q 8:55: For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.

What punishment do they deserve for being the worst beast because of their rejection of Muhammad? It’s defined in previous verse (Q 8:54), which says they deserved the same punishment Pharaoh suffered for rejecting the ‘Signs of their Lord’ (brought by Moses):

…after the manner of the people of Pharaoh and those before them: They treated as false the Signs of their Lord: so We destroyed them for their crimes, and We drowned the people of Pharaoh: for they were all oppressors and wrong-doers.

To create an excuse for attacking the Jews, Allah falsely accused the Jews of breaking treaty in the next verse 8:56:

They are those with whom thou didst make a covenant, but they break their covenant every time, and they have not the fear (of Allah).

Here Allah says the Jews broke treaty repeatedly. In this verse, Allah lied on two counts. First, there was no treaty between Muhammad and the Jews that the latter ever signed, which I will address at the end of this discussion. Second, even if a treaty existed, the Jews never broke it, even not once, forget about their breaking it ‘every time’ as Allah accuses them of. It becomes evident from the next verse, in which Allah commands Muhammad to attack the Jews:

Q 8:58: If thou fearest treachery from any group, throw back (their covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms: for Allah loveth not the treacherous.

Revelation of this verse was a direct command to attack Banu Qainuqa, the first Jewish tribe to face Muhammad’s sword, as Al-Tabari cites the account of al-Zuhri that a verse being brought by Gabriel to Muhammad, which said, ‘And if thou fearest treachery from any folk, then throw back to them their treaty fairly’ [Q 8:58]. Whereupon, Muhammad said, ‘‘I fear Banu Qaynuqa’’ and ‘the Messenger of God advanced upon them.’[2]

So, if Allah is to be believed, this verse was obviously a command, a license, to attack Banu Qainuqa. Although Allah accused the Jews of breaking treaty repeatedly in the earlier verse, here Allah only mentions Muhammad’s fear that the treaty may be broken in the future; the Jews hadn’t broken any treaty yet, which didn’t exist anyway.

In fact, the real reason as to why the Jews should be attacked can be found in the next verse (Q 8:59):

And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape.

The Jews were trying to outstrip Allah’s purpose. Allah tried to persuade them in so many verses to accept Muhammad as their prophet, but they not only rejected the repeated pleadings of Allah, but they also ridiculed those messages; they found so many faults with his messages, causing ridicule and embarrassment to Muhammad (& Allah). How dare they! They deserve the gravest of punishment for crime of such mammoth proportion. Let them not escape.

In sum, Muhammad attacked the Jews for his fear that Banu Qainuqa might break some treaty sometime in the future—that is, they did not break it yet but they likely would; and he rushed to attack them.

While this is the reason given by Allah and Muhammad for attacking Banu Qainuqa, there is another story created by later about the Jews, who allegedly killed a companion of Muhammad. Mr. Shuja’ah also mentioned about it in our previous exchange in making his case as to why the Jews deserved what Muhammad did to them, saying:

The Jews hated Islam and still do. They poisoned Muhammad (saw) and killed one of his companions.

Prophet Muhammad was poisoned after his conquest of Khaybar in 628 CE by an enslaved Jewish woman in revenge. By this time, Muhammad had cleansed all the Jews of Medina. So this poisoning incident cannot be considered as a reason for Muhammad’s punishing the Jews of Medina.

Concerning the Jews’ killing one of Muhammad’s companions, a story is included in his later biography by Al-Waqidi (d. 822). According to the story, sometime after the threat to Banu Qainuqa by Muhammad and Allah, a Meccan girl, married to an ansar (Medinan convert), went to the shop of a goldsmith in the market-place of Banu Qainuqa (Qainuqa were goldsmiths & richest community), where waiting for some ornaments, she sat down. A silly Jewish prankster pinned the lower hem of her skirt behind to the upper dress. When she stood up, the awkward exposure excited laughter, and she screamed with shame. A Muslim, apprised of the affront, slew the prankster; and the brethren of the Jew fell upon the Muslim murderer and killed him in return.

It should be noted here that because of this silly incident, nobody deserved to die. The prankster deserved a rebuke at best. Muslims’ killing him was an act of barbarism, unacceptable to any kind of justice. And of course, after the two lives from the two parties, one from Banu Qainuqa and other from Muslims, had been lost, the justice/injustice was equal on both side; and it should been resolved by calling a meeting between leaders of the two parties.

But no, Muhammad was just waiting for something like this to occur. And on the pretext of this brawl, says al-Waqidi, Muhammad besieged the entire community of Banu Qaynuqa. After a fifteen-day siege, the Jews surrendered. In order to mete out the deserving punishment to the Jews, which was to be similar to the way Allah had destroyed the people of Pharaoh by drowning them all, Muhammad ordered the surrendered men to be tied for their summary execution. At this point, Abdullah ibn Obayi—the famed hypocrite of Islam, but a rather humane chief of the Khazraj clan, who had converted to Islam but had a dubious allegiance to Muhammad’s mission—firmly intervened. He even threatened Muhammad with consequences had he slaughtered the Jews.[3] As a result, Muhammad prudently relented from slaughtering the prisoners. Instead, he exiled them to Syria.

On the basis of this discussion, I conclude the Jews never ever aggressively attacked and killed Muslims, as Shuja’ah claims, which made Muhammad to attack and evict them. Muhammad, therefore, had no justification to attack the Jews. Instead, it is Muslims, who were responsible for shedding blood of a Jew of Banu Qainuqa first for no justifiable reason. And Muhammad’s attacking the whole community and attempting to slaughter them en masse, on account of an individual ignorable silly act, was an instance of taking unjustified barbarism to the extreme.

Did a treaty, the so-called Constitution of Medina, exist between Muslims and the Jews?

We have noted above that Allah accuses the Jews of repeatedly breaking a treaty. Ibn Ishaq likewise writes:

Asim b. ‘Umar b. Qatada said that the B. Qaynuqa were the first of the Jews to break their agreement with the apostle and to go to war, between Badr and Uhud, and the apostle besieged them until they surrendered unconditionally.

Muslims boast about this so-called treaty—known as the ‘Constitution of Medina’ and considered the ideal blueprint of the Islamic state—as an epitome of tolerance, human rights and justice to people of all faiths in Islamic state. I will go into detail of the terms of the treaty, which is readers can find in Ibn Ishasq (p. 231-232): it is nothing but a document, demanding unconditional subjugation of all Medinans to the political and religious commands of Muhammad, a recent refugee in Medina. I will, however, prove that the treaty was never signed by the Jews; they probably never saw it. This treaty, according to Ibn Ishaq, begins as thus:

In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful. This is a document from Muhammad the prophet between the believers and Muslims of Quraysh and Yathrib, and those who followed them and joined them and labored with them.[4]

It becomes clear that this document was an invitation from Muhammad and his Muslim community to other tribes of Medina (the Jews included) to assemble after Muhammad and follow his commands. This opening in no way suggests that it was signed by any non-Muslim party. And moreover, we have seen above that not only Muhammad but also Allah agreed that the Jew would not accept Islam and submit to Muhammad’s leadership. Under these circumstances, is there any ground to believe that the Jews would sign a document, which starts with the words: “This is a document from Muhammad the prophet…” Signing this document means not only submitting to Muhammad’s leadership, but also to his prophethood, a claim which the Jews ridiculed in the least.

Similarly the document ends with these words:

God approves of this document…Muhammad is the apostle of God.

We can again be sure that the Jews would never have signed this document, which says “Muhammad is the apostle of God”, which they flatly rejected, indeed ridiculed, all along. Quite agreeing with this assertion, Montgomery Watt (a Western Islamic scholar favorite to Muslims, whose books are published in Pakistan) records that there were nine contracting parties in this document: they were the Muslim refugee from Mecca and Medinan Arab tribes (non-Jewish), who had become essentially Islamic by converting to Islam in large numbers after Muhammad’s arrival in Medina. None of the Jewish tribes were a co-signatory in this document.[5]

This proves beyond doubt that the Jews would never have signed this document. Instead, it was most likely a document that records a secret understanding between Muhammad and the Medinan pagan-turn-Muslim tribes, who had long-standing alliances with the Jewish clans. As Muhammad was planning to deal with the Jews because of their obstinate refusal to embrace Islam, he needed this document or understanding with his Medinan converts to create an excuse to strike the Jews. There is no alternative “logical” explanation to it.

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/11/muhammad-drove-out-the-jews-of-medina-for-attacking-killing-muslims/


Revisiting the Issue of Islamic Monotheism

”More Examples of Muhammad’s Blatant Violation of Tawhid"

We continue with our challenge to the oft-repeated assertion of Muslims that Islam teaches a very strict and uncompromising monotheism. In this article we will be presenting examples from the reported statements of Muhammad in order to test and see whether in fact Islam’s prophet was a strict unitarian who affirmed and taught the concept of Tauhid, e.g. the specific kind of Islamic monotheism that is held by countless numbers of Muslims all over the world. We want to test the assertion that Muhammad was uncompromising in his commitment to absolute monotheism.

To begin with, Muhammad is reported to have forbidden his followers from calling anyone Sayyid or Master since Allah is the only Sayyid a Muslim has:

Narrated from Abdullah bin Ash-Shikhkhir who said:

I went with a delegation of Banu 'Aamir to Allah's Messenger and we (the delegation) said, “You are our lord (Sayyid).” To this he replied, “The Lord ((as-Sayyid)) is Allah, the Blessed and Exalted.” Then we said, “You are one of us most endowed with excellence and superiority.” To this, the Prophet replied, “Say what you have to say, or part of what you have to say, and do not let the Satan get you carried away.” [Abu Dawud reported this Hadith with valid Isnad]

It is narrated from Anas:

Some people said, “O Messenger of Allah, O the best amongst us and son of the best of us, you are our master and also the son of our master.” So he (the Prophet) said, “O people, say what you have to say; do not allow the Satan to fascinate you. I am Muhammad, the slave of Allah and His Messenger. I do not like you to raise me above my status to which I have been raised by Allah, Most Noble and Majestic is He.” [Reported by An-Nasa'I with valid Sanad] (Kitab At-Tawheed, by Sheikh-ul-Islam Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab, translated by the Compilation and Research Department Dar-us-Salam [Dar-us-Salam Publications Riyadh-Saudi Arabia, 1996], CHAPTER No: 66. The Prophet's safeguarding of Tauhid, pp. 185-186: see also this link; comments within double parentheses and underline emphasis ours)

However, Muhammad must have forgotten that according to the Qur’an there is another Sayyid besides Allah, specifically John the Baptist!

And the angels called to him, standing in the Sanctuary at worship, 'Lo, God gives thee good tidings of John, who shall confirm a Word of God, a chief (sayyidan), and chaste, a Prophet, righteous.' S. 3:39 Arberry

Notice how the following English commentary translates the title:

And the angels, namely, Gabriel, called to him, standing in the sanctuary, in the temple, at worship that (anna, means bi-anna; a variant reading has inna, implying a direct speech statement) ‘God gives you good tidings (read yubashshiruka, or yubshiruka) of John, who shall confirm a Word, being, from God, namely, Jesus, that he is God’s Spirit; he is referred to as [God’s] ‘Word’, because he was created through the word kun, ‘Be’; a lord, with a following, and one chaste, forbidden from women, and a prophet of the righteous’: it is said that he never sinned and never so intended. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn)

It must have also slipped Muhammad’s mind that Allah in the Qur’an calls Potiphar, the man who took Joseph in, Sayyid or lord of his wife:

So they raced with one another to the door, and she tore his shirt from the back. They both found her lord (sayyidaha) (i.e. her husband) at the door. She said: “What is the recompense (punishment) for him who intended an evil design against your wife, except that he be put in prison or a painful torment?” S. 12:25 Hilali-Khan

What makes this particular example quite interesting is that not only does Allah address Potiphar as Sayyid he even goes so far as to call him al-Aziz,

And women in the city said: “The wife of Al-'Aziz is seeking to seduce her (slave) young man, indeed she loves him violently; verily we see her in plain error.” S. 12:30

(The King) said (to the women): “What was your affair when you did seek to seduce Yusuf (Joseph)?” The women said: “Allah forbid! No evil know we against him!” The wife of Al-'Aziz said: “Now the truth is manifest (to all), it was I who sought to seduce him, and he is surely of the truthful.” S. 12:51

Which happens to be one of the exclusive names of Allah!

Say: Show me those whom ye have joined unto Him as partners. Nay (ye dare not)! For He is Allah, the Mighty (al-azizu), the Wise. S. 34:27

Allah is gracious unto His slaves. He provideth for whom He will. And He is the Strong (al-qawiyyu), the Mighty (al-azizu). S. 42:19; cf. 22:40; 30:5

Muhammad must have further forgotten that in another context he told his followers to call someone their Sayyid as opposed to Rabb:

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "You should not say, ‘Feed your lord (Rabbaka), help your lord in performing ablution, or give water to your lord’, but should say, ‘my master (e.g. Feed your master instead of lord etc.), (Saiyidi),’ or ‘my guardian (Maulai),’ and one should not say, 'my slave (Abdi),’ or ‘my girl-slave (Amati),’ but should say, 'my lad (Fatai), my lass (Fatati),’ and ‘my boy (Ghulami).’" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 46, Number 728)

Narrated AbuHurayrah: The Prophet said: None of you must say: "My slave" (abdi) and "My slave-woman" (amati), and a slave must not say: "My lord" (rabbi or rabbati). The master (of a slave) should say: "My young man" (fataya) and "My young woman" (fatati), and a slave should say "My master" (sayyidi) and "My mistress" (sayyidati), for you are all (Allah’s slave and the Lord is Allah, Most High. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 41, Number 4957)

We will have more to say concerning the use of Rabb in a moment.

To make matters worse Islamic traditions ascribe the following names to Muhammad: sayyid al-mursaleen (master of the sent ones/those that are sent), sayyid walad Adam (master of the sons of Adam), sayyid al-naas (master of mankind), sayyid al-kull (master of all).

Notice the following narratives:

3162. It is related that Abu Hurayra said, "We were with the Messenger of Allah responding to an invitation. He picked up the leg, which he liked, and ate some of it. He said, 'I will be the master (sayyid) of people on the Day of Rising. Do you know what that will entail? Allah will gather the first and the last on the same plain so that an observer will be able to see them, and some people will say, 'Do you not see what a state you are in and what has come to you? Why do you not look for someone to intercede with your Lord on your behalf?' Some people will say, 'Your father Adam!' They will come to him and say, 'O Adam! You are the father of mankind. Allah created you with His hand and breathed some of His spirit into you and He ordered the angels to prostrate to you. He made you dwell in the Garden. Will you not intercede with your Lord on our behalf? Do you not see what we are suffering and what has happened to us?' He will say, 'My Lord is angry today with such anger as has never existed before nor will again. He forbade me the Tree and I disobeyed. O my soul! My soul! My soul! Go to someone else. Go to Nuh.'

"They will go to Nuh and say, 'O Nuh! You are the first of the Messengers to be sent to the people of the earth and Allah called you a thankful slave. Do you not see what we are suffering and what has happened to us?' Will you not intercede with your Lord on our behalf?' He will say, 'My Lord is angry today with such anger as has never existed before nor will again. O my soul! My soul! My soul! Go to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.' They will come to me and I will prostrate under the Throne. It will be said, 'O Muhammad! Lift your head. Intercede and your intercession will be granted, Ask and you will be given.'"

Muhammad ibn 'Ubayd said, "I do not remember the rest of it." (Aisha Bewley, The Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari, Chapter 64. Book of the Prophets, V: The words of Allah Almighty, "We sent Noah to his People: 'Warn your people before a painful punishment comes to them ....” (71:1 to the end of the Surah))


Ibn al-Qayyim says: “It is preferred to pray for Allah's blessings on the Prophet during the day and night of Jumu'ah as the Prophet said: 'Make many prayers upon me during the day of Friday and the night of Friday.' The Messenger of Allah is the leader (sayyid) of mankind, and Jumu'ah is the best of the days of the week. Prayers upon him during that day are a privilege [he deserves] which belongs to no other. This act also has another wisdom to it and that is that all of the good that has passed onto this [Muslim] ummah, in this life and the hereafter, has passed through him. Allah has gathered the good of this life and the next life for this ummah, and the greatest honour and success will be granted to them on Friday. On that day, they will be granted their houses and palaces in paradise and that is the day they will be given more when they enter paradise. It is a day of celebration for them in this life. It is also a day in which Allah fulfills their needs and answers their prayers and requests in this world. They are aware of all of that and are able to attain it because of the Prophet and it is through him [that they received these teachings]; therefore, in gratitude and appreciation for the great blessings we received through him, we should make many prayers upon him during the day and night of Jumu 'ah.” (Fiqh-us-Sunnah, Volume 2, Number 126, Prayer. Friday Prayer: Recommended prayers and salutations on the Prophet – taken from the ALIM CD-Rom version)

See also the following *; *.

Muhammad further prohibited his followers from calling someone their Lord (Rabb) or slave (abd):

In As-Sahih (Muslim), Abu Hurairah narrated that Allah's Messenger said:

“One of you should not say, ‘Feed your Lord (Rabbaka), help your lord in performing ablution,’ but he should say, ‘My master’ (e.g. Feed your master instead of lord, etc.) (Saiyidi), or ‘My guardian’ (Maulai), and one should not say, ‘My slave ('Abdi),’ or ‘My slave girl ('Amati), but he should say ‘My lad’ (Fatai), ‘My lass’ (Fatati) and ‘My boy’ (Ghulami).” (Kitab At-Tawheed, CHAPTER No: 54. One should not say "My Slave (Male or Female)", p. 162)


Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "You should not say, ‘Feed your lord (Rabbaka), help your lord in performing ablution, or give water to your lord’, but should say, ‘my master (e.g. Feed your master instead of lord etc.), (Saiyidi),’ or ‘my guardian (Maulai),’ and one should not say, 'my slave (Abdi),’ or ‘my girl-slave (Amati),’ but should say, 'my lad (Fatai), my lass (Fatati),’ and ‘my boy (Ghulami).’" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 46, Number 728)

He even wrote in the Qur’an that Allah would never command people to take angels or prophets as Lords in place of him:

And he commanded you not that ye should take the angels and the prophets for lords (arbaban). Would he command you to disbelieve after ye had surrendered (to Allah)? S. 3:80

He again seemed to forget that Allah refers to the slaves that Muslims owned as abd:

O believers, prescribed for you is retaliation, touching the slain; freeman for freeman, slave for slave (wal-‘abdu bil‘abdi), female for female. But if aught is pardoned a man by his brother, let the pursuing be honourable, and let the payment be with kindliness. That is a lightening granted you by your Lord, and a mercy; and for him who commits aggression after that -- for him there awaits a painful chastisement. S. 2:178

And do not marry the idolatresses until they believe, and certainly a believing maid is better than an idolatress woman, even though she should please you; and do not give (believing women) in marriage to idolaters until they believe, and certainly a believing servant (la‘abdum-mu’minun) is better than an idolater, even though he should please you; these invite to the fire, and Allah invites to the garden and to forgiveness by His will, and makes clear His communications to men, that they may be mindful. S. 2:221 Arberry

And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves (‘ibadikum) and your female slaves; if they are needy, Allah will make them free from want out of His grace; and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing. S. 24:32 Arberry

Moreover, he failed to recall that according to the Qur’an Jesus is one of those whom Muslims must accept as Lord:

They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from God AND the Messiah son of Mary (arbaban min dooni Allahi WA al-maseeha ibna maryama), and they were commanded to serve but One God; there is no god but He; glory be to Him, above that they associate. S. 9:31

The use of the Arabic conjunction wa (“and”) indicates that Allah is joining Jesus to himself as Lord since, according to Muslim scholars, this is the conjunction of partnership and/or equality!

The fact that mention of the Prophet is directly connected to mention of Allah also shows that obedience to the Prophet is connected to obedience to Allah and His name to Allah's name. Allah says, "Obey Allah and His Messenger" (2:32) and "Believe in Allah and His Messenger." (4:136) Allah joins them together using the conjunction WA WHICH IS THE CONJUNCTION OF PARTNERSHIP. IT IS NOT PERMITTED TO USE THIS CONJUNCTION IN CONNECTION WITH ALLAH IN THE CASE OF ANYONE EXCEPT THE PROPHET.

Hudhayfa said that the Prophet said, "None of you should say, ‘What Allah wills and (wa) so-and-so wills.’ Rather say, ‘What Allah wills.’ Then stop and say, 'So-and-so wills.’”

Al-Khattabi said, “The Prophet has guided you to correct behaviour in putting the will of Allah before the will of others. He chose ‘then’ (thumma) which implies sequence and deference as opposed to ‘and’ (wa) WHICH IMPLIES PARTNERSHIP.”

Something similar is mentioned in another hadith. Someone was speaking in the presence of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said, "Whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has been rightly guided, and whoever rebels against them both (joining them together by using the dual form)…” The Prophet said to him, “What a bad speaker you are! Get up! [Or he said: Get out!]”

Abu Sulayman said, “He disliked the two names being joined together in that way BECAUSE IT IMPLIES EQUALITY.”… (Qadi ‘Iyad, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta'rif huquq al-Mustafa (Healing by the recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), translation by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah Press, Inverness, Scotland, U.K.; third reprint 1991, paperback], Part One. Allah’s great estimation of the worth of his Prophet expressed in both word and action, Chapter One. Allah’s praise of him and his great esteem for him, Section 1. Concerning praise of him and his numerous excellent qualities, p. 8)

Thus, by grouping Allah and Jesus together through the use of wa the author(s) has/have invariably turned Jesus into Allah's partner and associate. And since the Arabic text originally had no markings this would mean that someone reading it would have clearly seen that Jesus was being placed alongside Allah as the Lord whom others had to believe in, as opposed to their rabbis and priests.

In fact Muhammad’s purported explanation of Q. 9:31 further proves that Jesus is one of those whom Muslims are required to take as their Lord:

- -They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah, and the Messiah, son of Maryam- - [9:31]. Imam Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Jarir At-Tabari recorded a Hadith via several chains of narration, from ‘Adi bin Hatim, may Allah be pleased with him, who became a Christian during the time of Jahiliyyah. When the call of the Messenger of Allah reached his area, ‘Adi ran away to Ash-Sham, and his sister and several of his people were captured. The Messenger of Allah freed his sister and gave her gifts. So she went to her brother and encouraged him to become Muslim and to go to the Messenger of Allah. ‘Adi, who was one of the chiefs of his people (the tribe of Tai') and whose father, Hatim At-Ta’i, was known for his generosity, went to Al-Madinah. When the people announced his arrival, ‘Adi went to the Messenger of Allah wearing a silver cross around his neck. The Messenger of Allah recited this Ayah...

- -They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah- -. ‘Adi commented, “I said, ‘They did not worship them.’” The Prophet said...

((Yes they did. They (rabbis and monks) prohibited the allowed for them (Christians and Jews) and allowed the prohibited,and they obeyed them. This is how they worshiped them.)) …

- -They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah…- - that the Christians and Jews obeyed their monks and rabbis in whatever they allowed or prohibited for them… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Suraht Al-A'raf to the end of Surah Yunus, abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, London, Lahore; First Edition: May 2000], Volume 4, pp. 409-410)

According to Muhammad’s logic obeying everything a person commands, especially in cases where some of the prohibited aspects of the faith are made lawful and/or vice-versa, is a sign that one has taken that particular individual or group of individuals as his/her Lord in the place of Allah.

Pay attention to Muhammad's words here since he nowhere qualified his position, i.e. he didn’t say that it is wrong to obey the rabbis and monks in forbidding the lawful or allowing the prohibited since they were not inspired to do so. Muhammad didn’t say that it would be alright for the believers to accept their decisions if they were receiving revelation from their Lord to forbid some of that which was lawful or vice-versa. His blanket statements suggest that anytime a person follows someone who prohibits that which Allah has made lawful or permits what Allah has forbidden then s/he is taking that particular individual(s) as his/her Lord.

Thus, Muhammad’s explanation of Q. 9:31 inevitably leads to Christ being one of those whom Muslims are required to embrace as their Lord alongside Allah since the Qur’an exhorts the “faithful” to obey Jesus and further states that he came to make lawful some of that which was prohibited:

And I have come confirming that which was before me of the Taurat (Torah), and to make lawful to you part of what was forbidden to you, and I have come to you with a proof from your Lord. So fear Allah AND obey me. It is Allah who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a way that is straight. When Jesus found unbelief on their part he said: Who will be my helpers to Allah? Said the disciples: We are Allah's helpers: We believe in Allah, and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims. Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Apostle; then write us down among those who bear witness. S. 3:50-53

When Jesus came with Clear Signs, he said: Now have I come to you with Wisdom, and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah AND obey me. For Allah, He is my Lord and your Lord: so worship ye Him: this is a Straight Way. S. 43:63-64

The Qur’an also exhorts Muslims to obey Allah and Muhammad in all matters of faith:

Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah AND His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection. S. 9:29

It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah AND His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah AND His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error. S. 33:36 Hilali-Khan

In fact, to obey and swear allegiance to Muhammad is to obey and swear allegiance to Allah himself!

Whoever obeys the messenger has obeyed Allah, and whoever turns away: We have not sent thee as a warder over them. S. 4:80

Surely those who swear allegiance to you do but swear allegiance to Allah; the hand of Allah is above their hands. Therefore whoever breaks (his faith), he breaks it only to the injury of his own soul, and whoever fulfills what he has covenanted with Allah, He will grant him a mighty reward. S. 48:10

Muslims must also fully submit to Muhammad just as they submit to Allah:

But no, by thy Lord! they will not believe till they make thee the judge regarding the disagreement between them, then they shall find in themselves no impediment touching THY verdict, but shall surrender in full submission. S. 4:65

This is why Ibn Kathir could write that one is not a true believer until s/he completely submits to Muhammad’s decisions:

One Does not Become a Believer Unless He Refers to the Messenger for Judgment AND SUBMITS TO HIS DECISIONS

Allah said…

- -But no, by your Lord, they can have no faith, until they make you judge in all disputes between them,- - Allah swears by His Glorious, Most Honourable Self, that no one shall attain faith until he refers to the Messenger for judgment IN ALL MATTERS. Thereafter, whatever the Messenger commands, is the plain truth that must be submitted to inwardly and outwardly. Allah said…

- -and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission.- - meaning: they adhere to your judgment, and thus do not feel any hesitation over your decision, and they submit to it inwardly and outwardly. They submit to the Prophet's decision with total submission without any rejection, denial or dispute. Al-Bukhari recorded that `Urwah said, "Az-Zubayr quarreled with a man about a stream which both of them used for irrigation. Allah's Messenger said to Az-Zubayr…

- -O Zubayr! Irrigate (your garden) first, and then let the water flow to your neighbor.- - The Ansari became angry and said, `O Allah's Messenger! Is it because he is your cousin?' On that, the face of Allah's Messenger changed color (because of anger) and said…

- -Irrigate (your garden), O Zubayr, and then withhold the water until it reaches the walls (surrounding the palms). Then, release the water to your neighbor.- - So, Allah's Messenger gave Az-Zubayr his full right when the Ansari made him angry. Before that, Allah's Messenger had given a generous judgment, beneficial for Az-Zubayr and the Ansari. Az-Zubayr said, `I think the following verse was revealed concerning that case…

- -But no, by your Lord, they can have no faith, until they make you (O Muhammad) judge in all disputes between them.- -’" Another reason in his Tafsir, Al-Hafiz Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin `Abdur-Rahman bin Ibrahim bin Duhaym recorded that Damrah narrated that two men took their dispute to the Prophet, and he gave a judgment to the benefit of whoever among them had the right. The person who lost the dispute said, "I do not agree." The other person asked him, "What do you want then?" He said, "Let us go to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq." They went to Abu Bakr and the person who won the dispute said, "We went to the Prophet with our dispute and he issued a decision in my favor." Abu Bakr said, "Then the decision is that which the Messenger of Allah issued." The person who lost the dispute still rejected the decision and said, "Let us go to `Umar bin Al-Khattab." When they went to `Umar, the person who won the dispute said, "We took our dispute to the Prophet and he decided in my favor, but this man refused to submit to the decision." `Umar bin Al-Khattab asked the second man and he concurred. `Umar went to his house and emerged from it holding aloft his sword. He struck the head of the man who rejected the Prophet's decision with the sword and killed him. Consequently, Allah revealed...

- -But no, by your Lord, they can have no faith- -. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

Even more amazing than all of the above is that obedience to Muhammad actually takes precedence over worshiping Allah himself!

Narrated Abu Said bin Al-Mu'alla: While I was praying in the Mosque, Allah's Apostle called me but I did not respond to him. Later I said, “O Allah's Apostle! I was praying.” He said, "Didn't Allah say—‘Give your response to Allah (by obeying Him) and to His Apostle when he calls you?’" (8.24) (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 1)


CXLII: "O you who believe! Respond to Allah, AND to the Messenger, when He calls you to what will bring you to life! Know that Allah intervenes between a man and his heart and that you will be gathered to Him." (8:24)

4370. It is related that Sa'id b. al-Mu'alla said, "I was praying and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, passed by called me, but I did not answer until I had finished praying. Then I went to him and he said, 'What kept you from coming to me? Does not Allah say, "Respond to Allah, AND to the Messenger, when He calls you to what will bring you to life!" (8:24)?' Then he said to me, 'I will teach you a Surah which is the greatest of the Surahs in the Qur'an before you leave.' The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was about to leave, so I reminded him."

This is related from Abu Sa'id, a man of the Companions of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. He said “It is:'Praise be to Allah, the Lords worlds,' the Seven Oft-Repeated ones." (Aisha Bewley, The Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari, Chapter 68. Book of Tafsir)

Muhammad references Q. 8:24 to prove that the Qur’an itself testifies that responding to his call immediately is more important than praying to God! Talk about the height of arrogance and blasphemy! Instead of commending his companion for worshiping Allah Muhammad has the audacity to chide him for not setting aside his prayers in order to beckon to his prophet’s call. It is obvious from this example that a Muslim’s relationship to Muhammad takes priority over his relationship to his god. Which Muslim would dare to say that Muhammad did not understand the meaning of Q. 8:24? Which Muslim would want to claim that Muhammad misused this verse and sinned against God by behaving in an arrogant and blasphemous way, ascribing to himself a position that the Qur’an does not give to him? In any case, if this incident doesn’t convince Muslims that Muhammad placed himself on the same level as God, or even above him, then nothing will.

In light of the foregoing isn’t any wonder that the people accused Muhammad of demanding his followers to obey and venerate him in the same way that Christians revere and honour Jesus?

(Say) O Muhammad!: (If ye love Allah) and His religion, (follow me) follow my Religion; (Allah will love you) He will increase your love (and forgive you your sins) which were committed when you followed Judaism. (Allah is Forgiving) of whoever repents, (Merciful) towards whoever dies in a state of repentance. This verse was revealed about the Jews who claimed they were the children of Allah and His beloved ones. When this verse was revealed 'Abdullah Ibn Ubayy said: “Muhammad is commanding us to love him AS the Christians loved Jesus”, and the Jews said: “Muhammad wants us to take him as A COMMPASSIONATE LORD, JUST AS the Christians took Jesus as a compassionate Lord”. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, Q. 3:31)


It is related that 'Umar said to the Prophet, "Part of your excellence with Allah is that He has made obedience to you obedience to Him. Allah says, 'Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah' (4:80) and 'If you love Allah, then follow me and Allah will love you.'" (3:31) it is related that when this ayat was sent down, people said, "Muhammad wants us to take him as a mercy IN THE WAY CHRISTIANS DID WITH 'ISA, so Allah revealed, 'Say: Obey Allah, and the Messenger.'" (3:32) (Qadi ‘Iyad, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta'rif huquq al-Mustafa, p. 9)

Moreover, in the quotation from Ibn Kathir concerning Q. 9:31 Muhammad likened the people’s obedience to the rabbis and monks as worship or service:

- -They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah- -. 'Adi commented, “I said, ‘They did not worship them.’” The Prophet said...

((Yes they did. They (rabbis and monks) prohibited the allowed for them (Christians and Jews) and allowed the prohibited, and they obeyed them. This is how they worshiped them.)) …

Thus, by obeying whatever Jesus and Muhammad commanded, especially in regards to those prohibited aspects which both made lawful and/or vice-versa, the Muslim scripture is essentially demanding that Muslims worship or serve both Jesus and Islam’s false prophet as their Lords per Muhammad’s logic!

To summarize the mistakes and contradictions which arise from Muhammad’s inconsistent instructions:

Muhammad taught that it is not proper for Muslims to call others Sayyid or master since Allah alone is their Master. However, Muhammad seemed to forget that the Qur’an applies this title to two individuals, specifically Potiphar and the Baptist. Besides, he went against his own instructions by describing himself as the Sayyid or master of mankind and the children of Adam!
Muhammad said that Muslims shouldn’t address their servants as abdi or their abd, the Arabic word for slave, and yet he failed to note that Allah himself calls people the slaves or abd of others.
- Muhammad further warned Muslims that they should not use the term Rabb for anyone other than Allah. Again, it must have slipped Muhammad’s mind that the Qur’an exhorts Muslims to take Allah and Jesus as their Lords as opposed to their rabbis and monks.
Moreover, according to Muhammad’s own explanation of Q. 9:31 Muslims invariably end up making Jesus and Muhammad their Lords alongside Allah since they are required to fully obey and submit themselves to everything Jesus and Muhammad taught. As Muhammad himself noted, such obedience and submission is a clear sign of taking and worshiping a person as one’s very own Lord!

Now as we noted, it is quite possible that Muhammad forgot what he taught concerning all of these specific issues, explaining why he ended up contradicting and violating his teaching concerning Islamic monotheism. After all, the ahadith do mention that Muhammad used to forget certain verses of the Qur’an which he himself had personally taught his followers to recite:

Narrated Aisha: The Prophet heard a man reciting the Qur'an in the mosque and said, “May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such a Surah.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 61, Number 556)

He is also reported to have said that he was a human being who was prone to forget and that his followers should help remind him:

Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet prayed (and the subnarrator Ibrahim said, "I do not know whether he prayed more or less than usual"), and when he had finished the prayers he was asked, "O Allah's Apostle! Has there been any change in the prayers?" He said, "What is it?' The people said, "You have prayed so much and so much." So the Prophet bent his legs, faced the Qibla and performed two prostrations (of Sahu) and finished his prayers with Taslîm (by turning his face to right and left saying: 'As-Salamu'Alaikum-Warahmat-ullah'). When he turned his face to us he said, “If there had been anything changed in the prayer, surely I would have informed you ut I am a human being like you and liable to forget like you. So if I forget remind me and if anyone of you is doubtful about his prayer, he should follow what he thinks to be correct and complete his prayer accordingly and finish it and do two prostrations (of Sahu)." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Number 394)

Yet whatever the case maybe, whatever the reason may have been for Muhammad repeatedly contradicting himself, the fact remains that his commands and instructions expressly violate and conflict with the Islamic concept of Tauhid.

So much for Islam being a coherent, consistent message which supposedly affirms absolute, strict monotheism!

Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/muhammad_shirk.html