Muslims are aware of Mohammed’s sultry passion for women and apologists of this cult often make excuses to conceal the flaw of their prophet. The most commonly used, and the best possible, defense that they present is so astonishing that it should be added to the agenda of “Ripley’s believe it or not”. Muslim apologists argue Mohammed married women from different tribes to create relationships with them and expand the sphere of Islam. 

Just one example would suffice to blow apart their house of cards. Mohammed had to make a strategic retreat from his first attempt of invading Mecca and was forced to make a humiliating settlement – the ‘Treaty of Hudaibya’. Evidently, Mohammed’s mercenaries were deprived from possible looting. So, with an intention of robbing, he decided to attack the Jewish tribes who settled in Khyber after being expelled from Medina. It was an unexpected attack and the innocent people of Khyber did not get a chance to defend themselves. According to one of Mohammed’s companions, “We met the workers of Khyber coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets” (Sira, 757). Although Muslim apologists put the burden on the Jews, claiming a defensive war for the Muslims, they refuse to admit that people don’t attack with spades and baskets. Even the people of the Stone Age used to fight with spears made of stones. 

After the massacre, “The women of Khyber were distributed among the Muslims” (Sira, 758), and Mohammed chose Safiya d. Abul-Huqayq, the newlywed wife of the tribe’s chief. Mohammed took her to his bed after a brief pretense of a wedding. Perhaps, if the thesis of Muslim apologists is correct, Mohammed must have tried hard to build a bridge between Muslims and the Jews of Khyber. The only problem was that none of the relatives of the poor girl Safiya were alive.     

Ibn Ishaq reports in Sirat Rasul Allah, “Abu ayyub, Khalid b. Zayd, brother of B. al-Najjar, passed the night girt with his sword, guarding the apostle and going round the tent until in the morning the apostle saw him there and asked him what he meant by this action. He replied, ‘I was afraid for you with this woman for you have killed her father, her husband, and her people, and till recently she was in unbelief, so I was afraid for you on her account’” (Sira, 766). 

If the marriage between Mohammed and Safyia was meant to develop a relationship with other tribes, I don’t know how Mohammed could have made friends with the deceased people, especially with those whom he killed! 

It’s human nature to seek revenge when a loved one is killed, and the people of Khyber were no exception. A Jewish woman, Zaynab d. al-Harith, put poison in a roast lamb that was offered to Mohammed (Sira, 764). The Muslim who took the first bite died immediately; however, Mohammed only had a morsel of the meat and he survived. Still, it must have been a deadly poison because Mohammed suffered the rest of his life because of the poison. He even admitted, “O Umm Bishr, this is the time in which I feel a deadly pain from what I ate with your brother at Khyber” (Sira, 765). 

Unlike “The Last Supper”, Mohammed indeed danced “The Last Dance” not joyfully but because of the pain. Ibn Ishaq records, “Then the Messenger of God’s illness intensified, the pain became fierce, so he said, ‘Pour seven skins of water over me from different wells so that I may go out to the people and instruct them.’ Aisha states: We made him sit in a tub (mikhdab) belonging to Hafsah bt. Umar and poured water over him until he began saying, ‘Enough, enough’” (al-Tabari, 1801). 

I don’t enjoy making fun of a dead person, specifically someone who died with such a pain, but it’s about time to clear the fabricated impression created by Muslim apologists. They have changed the history and altered the truth, they have turned a monster into an angel, and they have succumbed to lies and deception. Had Mohammed been a historical figure and remained as a shrewd warrior, we would not have to worry about him. Sadly, innocent Muslims perceive Mohammed as the symbol of a perfect human, mentor of morality and the role model to follow. It’s fascinating how a person who snatched women and slept with them after killing their loved ones could become a paradigm of morals and ethics!  

<  back