Sahih al-Bukhari 3297, 3298:

Narrated Ibn `Umar: That he heard the Prophet (ﷺ) delivering a sermon on the pulpit saying, "Kill snakes and kill Dhu-at- Tufyatain (i.e. a snake with two white lines on its back) and Al-Abtar (i.e. a snake with mutilated tail) for they destroy the sight of one's eyes and bring about abortion." (`Abdullah bin `Umar further added): Once while I was chasing a snake in order, to kill it, Abu Lubaba called me saying: "Don't kill it," I said. "Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered us to kill snakes." He said, "But later on he prohibited the killing of snakes living in the houses." 

The same report is narrated in Sahih Muslim from Ibn ʿUmar as well. But in that narration dogs are also added alongside snakes, stating that dogs and snakes both cause loss of eyesight and induce miscarriage in women.

Sahih Muslim, 2233b, c:

Ibn 'Umar reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) commanding the killing of dogs and the killing of the striped and the short-tailed snakes, for both of them affect the eyesight adversely and cause miscarriage.

The same report is also narrated in Sahih Muslim from ʿAisha (link), in which she likewise attributes to snakes the blame for weakening eyesight and causing miscarriage.

Modern science has not shown that the number of miscarriages in the West is caused by keeping dogs in the home or by the presence of snakes.

One can only shake his head at this strange religion.

In defense of this hadith, the largest Islamic website IslamWeb.net writes (link):

"The meaning of 'snakes take away sight and cause miscarriage' is that by virtue of their poisonous glance they take away eyesight and destroy it. Others say it means that their bite causes blindness. By 'causing miscarriage' is meant the fetus either by their look if one looks at them, due to their poisonous glance, or for some people, the fear they produce. This interpretation is given by the author of ‘Awn al-Maʿbūd’ commenting on Sunan Abu Dawud."

The author of Awn al-Maʿbūd is inventing such excuses on his own, while the whole world’s experience and science contradict this:

  • People do not lose their eyesight because of the "poisonous look" of dogs or snakes.

  • And a dog bite or a snake’s venomous bite does not directly cause blindness or miscarriage; it can cause severe illness, madness, or death, but not the phenomena described here.

  • Merely being frightened by a dog or snake does not make a person lose eyesight or cause miscarriage.

  • It makes no difference whether a snake has two stripes or a cut tail. Any venomous snake’s bite can be fatal; the fear factor is similar for any deadly snake.

Concerning not killing household snakes, the same website writes (link) that the Prophet said these might be jinn who have accepted Islam. Therefore, give house snakes three days’ warning. If after three days they do not leave, then kill them because they are devils.

Prophet Muhammad’s instruction: Do not kill household snakes because they may be Muslim "jinn"

The Prophet’s teaching not to kill household snakes (even if venomous) is very interesting.

Please note first that:

  • The concept of jinn does not exist in Judaism and Christianity or the Bible.

  • Rather, the jinn concept was present among some other peoples and was adopted into pre-Islamic Arab society, and it was from there that Muhammad incorporated it into Islam. The reason is that the jinn concept creates fear, and that fear has been used by charlatans and magic-workers to deceive innocent people. Muhammad, too, used this fear to control his followers.

Now let us look at the story by which Muhammad is said to have turned household snakes into jinn.

Sahih Muslim, 2236a:

Abu as-Sa'ib said that he visited Abu Sa'id Khudri in his house, (and he further) said: I found him saying his prayer, so I sat down waiting for him to finish his prayer when I heard a stir in the bundles (of wood) lying in a comer of the house. I looked towards it and found a snake. I jumped up in order to kill it, but he (Abu Sa'id Khudri) made a gesture that I should sit down. So I sat down and as he finished (the prayer) he pointed to a room in the house and said: Do you see this room? I said: Yes. He said: There was a young man amongst us who had been newly wedded. We went with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) (to participate in the Battle) of Trench when a young man in the midday used to seek permission from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) to return to his family. One day he sought permission from him and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) (after granting him the permission) said to him: Carry your weapons with you for I fear the tribe of Quraiza (may harm you). The man carried the weapons and then came back and found his wife standing between the two doors. He bent towards her smitten by jealousy and made a dash towards her with a spear in order to stab her. She said: Keep your spear away and enter the house until you see that which has made me come out. He entered and found a big snake coiled on the bedding. He darted with the spear and pierced it and then went out having fixed it in the house, but the snake quivered and attacked him and no one knew which of them died first, the snake or the young man. We came to Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) and made a mention to him and said: Supplicate to Allah that that (man) may be brought back to life. Thereupon he said: Ask forgiveness for your companion and then said: There are in Medina jinns who have accepted Islam, so when you see any one of them, pronounce a warning to it for three days, and if they appear before you after that, then kill it for that is a devil.

Now consider these points:

  • There was no heavenly Allah present in the sky in a demonstrable way, nor did Muhammad possess supernatural power to restore life. Thus Muhammad could not literally resurrect the young man.

  • To deflect the people's demand, Muhammad claimed the slain snake might have been a Muslim jinn, hence was not to be harmed.

  • To give his claim weight he further instructed that household snakes be given three days' grace, and only after three days, if they remain, should they be killed as devils. In other words, the poor wife would have had to stand at the door for three days and nights waiting to see whether the snake on the bed was a real snake, a Muslim jinn, or a devil.

Does any angle of this make this religion look like it comes from a heavenly Allah?

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 →