Dogs unfortunately became scapegoats. All that started when the pagans of Mecca asked 3 questions to Muhammad as a Test and he was unable to answer those questions for the next 15 days, and he made an excuse that Gabriel didn't come to him with answers due to the presence of a puppy in his home.

Imam Syuti recorded the following tradition in the commentary under verse 18:23 (link):

أخرج ابن المنذرعن مجاهد، أن قريشاً اجتمعت فقالوا: " يا محمد، قد رغبت عن ديننا ودين آبائنا، فما هذا الدين الذي جئت به؟ قال: هذا دين جئت به من الرحمن. فقالوا: إنا لا نعرف الرحمن، إلا رحمن اليمامة - يعنون مسيلمة الكذاب - ثم كاتبوا اليهود فقالوا: قد نبغ فينا رجل يزعم أنه نبي، وقد رغب عن ديننا ودين آبائنا، ويزعم أن الذي جاء به من الرحمن. قلنا: لا نعرف الرحمن إلا رحمن اليمامة، وهو أمين لا يخون.. وفيّ لا يغدر.. صدوق لا يكذب، وهو في حسب وثروة من قومه، فاكتبوا إلينا بأشياء نسأله عنها. فاجتمعت يهود فقالوا: إن هذا لوصفه وزمانه الذي يخرج فيه. فكتبوا إلى قريش: أن سلوه عن أمر أصحاب الكهف، وعن ذي القرنين، وعن الروح. فإن يكن الذي أتاكم به من الرحمن، فإن الرحمن هو الله عز وجل، وإن يكن من رحمن اليمامة فينقطع. فلما أتى ذلك قريشاً أتى الظفر في أنفسها فقالوا: يا محمد، قد رغبت عن ديننا ودين آبائك... فحدثنا عن أمر أصحاب الكهف وذي القرنين والروح. قال: ائتوني غداً. ولم يستثن، فمكث جبريل عنه ما شاء الله لا يأتيه، ثم أتاه فقال: سألوني عن أشياء لم يكن عندي بها علم فأجيب حتى شق ذلك عليّ. قال: ألم ترنا لا ندخل بيتاً فيه كلب ولا صورة؟ - وكان في البيت جرو كلب - ونزلت { ولا تقولن لشيء إني فاعل ذلك غداً إلا أن يشاء الله واذكر ربك إذا نسيت وقل عسى أن يهدين ربي لأقرب من هذا رشداً } من علم الذي سألتموني عنه أن يأتي قبل غد؟ ونزل ما ذكر من أصحاب الكهف ونزلويسألونك عن الروح... } [الإسراء: 85] الآية ".

Ibn Mundhir narrated from Mujahid that pagans of Quraysh gathered and they said to Muhammad: "You have deviated from the religion of our ancestors. From where did you get this new religion?" Muhammad replied: "This religion is from Rehman." The Quraysh said: "We don't know any other Rehman except the one from Yemen." The Quraysh considered Musaylmah Kadhab from it (who was another person who claimed false prophethood in the era of Muhammad, and who also claimed his new religion from al-Rahman i.e. God). Then Quraysh wrote to Jews that there had appeared a person among them, who claims himself to be a prophet, and he had left the religion of their ancestors ... Jews replied: "Asked him 3 questions about the Ashab-e-Kuhf (The people of Cave), Dhulqarnain and Ruh (i.e. the Spirit). If he will really be able to reply to those questions, then he is from Rahman who is God. But if Rahman is from Yemen, then he will not be able to reply them." Quraysh became happy upon it and they said to Muhammad: "If you have already left the religion of our ancestors, then tell us about Ashab-e-Kuhf (The people of Cave), Dhulqarnain, and the spirit."  Muhammad said to them: "Come to me tomorrow (and I will reply)." But Muhammad forgot to say Insha-Allah (i.e. if Allah wills). Gabriel came to him after only 15 days. Muhammad said to Gabriel: "Quraysh came to me and they asked me about somethings (as a test of my prophethood), which I didn't know. Thus, I was in a very difficult state during this period." Gabriel replied: "Have you not seen we (i.e. angels) don't enter a house which has a dog or a picture? And there was a puppy in your house (who entered the house and Muhammad didn't know about it)." Upon that it was revealed: [... and do not enquire about them from any one of them. And never say of anything, "Indeed, I will do that tomorrow," Except (when adding), "If Allah wills." Quran 18:22-24] (i.e. puppy entered his house while he forgot to say Insha-Allah).

Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3227:

Narrated Salim's father: Once Gabriel promised the Prophet (that he would visit him, but Gabriel did not come) and later on he said, "We, angels, do not enter a house which contains a picture or a dog."

The actual situation was:

  • Muhammad neither knew anything about those 3 questions nor had he had any contact with any god or angel.
  • Therefore, Muhammad started inquiring others about them, and it took Muhammad 15 days to gather the information. 
  • And then he made an excuse that he was not able to answer the questions the next day (as he had promised), while he forgot to say Insha-Allah, and thus a puppy entered his house and Gabriel was unable to enter the house and come to him with the answers of those questions. 

But this excuse cannot be accepted, while:

  • Muhammad did indeed go outside of his house too during those 15 days for relieving himself and to pray in the mosques. Why didn't then Gabriel come to him there? 
  • How the purity of a great angel like Gabrial was unable to overcome the impurity of a small puppy? 
  • And how the purity of Muhammad himself was not able to overcome the impurity of a small puppy?
  • What about the 2 angels Kiraman Katibin (who are sitting on the shoulders of every person and recording their good/bad deeds according to Islam)? Are Kirman-Katibeen also expelled from the house through dogs, and one is free to do any sin inside the house and no one is there to record it?
  • And if dogs are really so impure, why did the people of the cave take a dog along with them? 

In simple words, Muhammad used that puppy as a scapegoat for his inability to answer those questions the next day

 Table of Contents:

Muhammad's answer to those 3 questions after collecting some incomplete information from people

Muhammad was inquiring people for information about those 3 questions. After 15 days, he came up with the answers. Nevertheless, the answers were still very vague and a lot of excuses were made not to answer things clearly and correctly. 

Let us see the answers:

(1) The People of Cave (Ashab-e-Kuhf):

Muhammad failed completely in telling the exact numbers of the people of the cave:

Quran 18:22:

Some will say concerning them: "They were three and their dog, the fourth"; and some will say: "They were five, and their dog, the sixth" -- all this being merely guesswork; and still others will say: "They were seven, and their dog, the eighth." Say: "My Lord knows their number best. Only a few know their correct number. So do not dispute concerning their number, but stick to what is evident, and do not question anyone about them (i.e. Muhammad was asking questions about them from people during those 15 days)." (Maududi)

On one side, Muhammad claimed that his Allah knew their numbers exactly, but on the other side Allah didn't tell exactly their numbers. Why?

What harm would have happened if Allah had told the exact numbers of the people of the cave? 

The exact reason is Muhammad asked this question to different people during those 15 days and got contradictory answers about their numbers. Some told him they were 7, some said 5, and some said 3. Thus, in the end, Muhammad and his so-called Allah failed completely to answer the exact question i.e. how many were they?

Thus, Muhammad totally denied to answer this question by telling Meccans that he cannot tell their numbers exactly while his Allah had prohibited him to dispute their numbers, and he (i.e. Muhammad) had to stick only to what is evident (i.e. the people of the cave indeed exist). 

Actually, the incident of the people of the cave was only a fairy tale. But Muhammad took it to be a real incident. 

Note: Linda Kelly wrote (link):

Hadith tells us that angels won't enter a room where there is a dog. That means that for 309 years that the sleepers (i.e. the people of cave who were sleeping in the cave) were in the cave, no angel ever entered. Yet God says "We turned them...." The use of "we" clearly indicates the participation of angels. There is absolutely no reason to mention the dog as part of this story, except to make it clear to future generation that dogs are permitted to live among people, right "in their midst." And 18:22 clearly shows that the dog was counted right along with the believers

(2) Dhulqarnain:

Quran 18:83-88:

And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about Dhul-Qarnayn. Say, "I will recite to you about him a report." We granted him power in the land and endowed him with all kinds of resources. He set out (westwards) on an expedition, until when he reached the very limits where the sun sets, he saw it setting in a spring (of) dark mud;
(.....then Quran told about the story of Dhulqarnain about his journey towards the last part of East ... and then Quran told about the story about the construction of wall which protects against Gog and Magog).

Here Muhammad again failed to tell the actual question, i.e. who the real character was behind Dhulqarnain. And this vague answer by Quran/Muhammad let Muslims in an endless cycle of confusion. For example:

  • Ibn Ishaq said that Dulqarnain was from Egypt. 
  • Ibn Hisham said that Dhulqarnain was Alexander the Great, who built the city of Athens.
  • And when Ali Ibn Abi Talib was asked about Dhulqarnain, then he said that he was a pious man, and he had two horns and thus he was known as Dhulqarnain (which means a person with two horns). 

All these contradictory statements only prove that none benefitted from these verses about the question of who the real character was behind Dhulqarnain. 

Moreover, there are so many scientific mistakes in this story of Quranic Dhulqarnain. For example:

  • When the Quran claims that the sun sets into a spring of dark water, then it is a huge scientific mistake. 
  • Moreover, today science has made it possible to search the whole planet earth, but neither has anyone ever found the wall that was made by Dhulqarnain, nor the nation of Gog and Magog whose numbers are so great that they outnumber the people on this planet earth. 

We need a separate detailed article about these scientific mistakes in the Quranic story of Dhulqarnain. 

(3) Ruh (The Spirit):

And the 3rd answer was even vaguer than the first 2 answers. 

Quran 17:85:

They ask thee concerning the Spirit. Say: "The Spirit (cometh) by command of my Lord: of knowledge it is only a little that is communicated to you, (O men!)"

Actually, Muhammad simply denied answering this 3rd question by hiding behind the excuse that only little is told to humans about the spirit. 

Result of these 3 Answers:

  • Muhammad didn't answer those 3 questions, but he actually "dodged" those 3 questions.
  • And as a result, not even a single person from Quraysh considered Muhammad to pass that test, and none of them accepted Islam. 

Muhammad's Allah didn't know about the Panting of dogs 

After the incident of Muhammad's test, he continued to present dogs in a bad light. 

Quran 7:176:

So his example is like that of the dog: if you chase him, he pants, or if you leave him, he [still] pants. That is the example of the people who denied Our signs. 

What does the panting of a dog have to do with accepting or rejecting the message? 

Muhammad's Allah didn't even know that panting is a natural process through which dogs cool down their bodies through evaporation. It is the same as we humans cool down our bodies through sweating.

But does our sweating mean that we reject the message? If not, how can the panting of dogs be claimed as rejecting the message? 

It is a very bad and totally wrong example, which could not be expected from an All-Wise divine entity. 

Orders of killing all Dogs in Medina

After coming to Medina, the situation was like this:

  • Muhammad already declared dogs to be impure, and should not be kept in the house as pets, otherwise, prayers would not be accepted. 
  • But the desert people loved their dogs. Their occupation was livestock, and dogs were very important to them. There were dogs roaming in Medina. 
  • Jews in Medina also knew about the incident when Muhammad presented the excuse of a puppy in the house for the 15 days delay of Gabrial regarding the bringing of revelation. But at the same time, they were watching Muslims of Medina (Aus and Khizraj tribes) keeping dogs close to them. 

It seems that Muhammad was angered by this behaviour of Aus and Khizraj Muslim tribes, where they kept their dogs close to them, despite his clear orders to turn them out of the houses. It may be the reason why Muhammad finally ordered to kill all the dogs. 

The colours of Human Drama in the revelations about killing dogs

The Sharia Ruling regarding killings of dogs underwent 4 STAGES:

  • 1st Stage: Muhammad first ordered to kill ALL the dogs, irrespective of their usages and colours.
  • 2nd Stage: But when people protested against the killing of their dogs, then the Divine Command (i.e. Muhammad) retreated from its earlier position and allowed to keep the dogs for hunting and protection of livestock, but to kill all other dogs.
  • 3rd Stage: But people even protested it, and the Divine Command (i.e. Muhammad) further retreated and it cancelled the killing of other dogs too, except for the one who has black colour. The Divine Command this time also declared all black dogs to be devils.
  • 4th Stage: But people even protested upon the killing of their black dogs, and thus the Divine Command (i.e. Muhammad) further retreated and it cancelled even the killing of all black dogs, except the jet-black dogs having two spots (on the eyes).

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1572:

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered us to kill (all) dogs, and we carried out this order so much so that we also kill the dog coming with a woman from the desert.

Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 2845:

The Prophet (ﷺ) said: Were dogs not a species of creature I should command that they all be killed; but kill every pure black one.

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 510a:

Abu Dharr reported: The Messenger of 'Allah (ﷺ) said: When any one of you stands for prayer and there is a thing before him equal to the back of the saddle that covers him and in case there is not before him (a thing) equal to the back of the saddle, his prayer would be cut off by (passing of an) ass, woman, and black Dog. I said: O Abu Dharr, what feature is there in a black dog which distinguishes it from the red dog and the yellow dog? He said: O, son of my brother, I asked the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as you are asking me, and he said: The black dog is a devil.

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1572:

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered us to kill (all) dogs ... Then Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) forbade their killing. He (the Prophet further) said: It is your duty (to kill) the jet-black (dog) having two spots (on the eyes), for it is a devil.

This is a strange contradiction, if the devil was not present in the other dogs (except for jet black dog with two spots on the eyes), why then firstly Muhammad made to kill ALL the innocent dogs too (who didn't have the devil in them)?

Remember, a 'divine revelation' is not based upon the 'hit and trial method, but it is based upon the Divine Wisdom of All-Wise God, and thus it should be perfect in the very first stage.  

And an excuse can be made about alcohol, where Islamic orders went from lenient to strict in 3 stages according to human psychology (The 1st stage was to not to pray when you are indoctrinated. And the 2nd stage was a total prohibition of alcohol. And the 3rd stage was the introduction of 80 lashes as punishment). 

But in the case of dogs, things went in the opposite direction i.e. from strict to lenient orders. This means that firstly it was ordered against human psychology to kill all the dogs, and then later this order was changed multiple times and made lighter and lighter due to the PROTEST of the people. 

Yes, Muhammad was compelled to change the orders upon the extreme opposition and protest of people, who didn't want their pet dogs to be killed and also wanted to keep their dogs for hunting and guarding. We see this protest in this hadith:

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1573a

Ibn Mughaffal reported: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered the killing of dogs and then said: what is the trouble with them (i.e. Why were the people protesting)? How are dogs a nuisance to them (the citizens of Medina)? He then permitted the keeping of dogs for hunting and (the protection of) herds.

Conclusion: A divine revelation should be based upon divine wisdom, and should not be based upon the 'hit and trial' method. 

The colours of Human Drama in the Revelation (Part 2: Muhammad's superstitions)

In many parts of the world, if a black cat crosses your path, then it is taken as a bad omen. 

Muslims don't believe in it and make fun of Hindus and others who believe in it for believing in such superstition. Look at this Fatwa, where the Mufti is saying that it is ignorance to believe in it. 

And Muslims are absolutely right here. It is only a superstition by Hindus and others, and neither a black cat nor its crossing the path is any bad omen.

But do you know that Muhammad was also suffering from the same disease of superstition? Muhammad was part of an ignorant Arab society, that believed in the superstition regarding the black ram. And Muhammad followed this superstition of his society. 

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1967:

'A'isha reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) commanded that a ram with black legs, black belly and black (circles) round the eyes should be brought to him, so that he should sacrifice it. He said to 'A'isha: Give me the large knife, and then said: Sharpen it on a stone. She did that. He then took it (the knife) and then the ram; he placed it on the ground and then sacrificed it

But Muhammad went one step further, and he used this same superstition regarding the black colour, in order to kill the black dogs. 

Other cultures limited their superstition about the black cats to be bad omens only, but Muhammad made it several times worse by declaring:

  1. Black dogs are not only bad omens, but they are devils themselves. 
  2. Prayer is cut off even by the passing of a black dog, or if they are present in the house.
  3. And all black dogs should be killed

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 510a:

The Messenger of 'Allah (ﷺ) said: When any one of you stands for prayer and there is a thing before him equal to the back of the saddle that covers him and in case there is not before him (a thing) equal to the back of the saddle, his prayer would be cut off by (passing of an) ass, woman, and black Dog. I said: O Abu Dharr, what feature is there in a black dog which distinguish it from the red dog and the yellow dog? He said: O, son of my brother, I asked the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as you are asking me, and he said: The black dog is a devil.

Black dog devil or best & loyal friend

Dear Muslims:

  • Do you consider this black dog to be a devil who deserves to be killed?
  • Or do you see this black dog as a loving & caring and loyal friend of this baby?

Use the humanity inside you to decide. It will never misguide you. 

Please also remember that these orders of Muhammad i.e. to kill all the black dogs (or black dogs with two spots on eyes) is still valid today. Are you really going to act upon it today?


Please read the following articles (Credit: Silas):

  1. Report from Siskin Hospital.
  2. Report from BBC.
  3. Report from Swedish Medical Center.

1st Excuse by Islam apologists: The incident of Gabriel not entering the house of the Prophet didn't happen in Mecca but in Medina

Muslims claim that the incident of the puppy didn't happen during Muhammad's test in Mecca, but later in Medina. They present the following tradition by 'Aisha:

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2104a:

A'isha reported that Gabriel (peace be upon him) made a promise with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) to come at a definite hour; that hour came but he did not visit him. And there was in his hand (in the hand of Allah's Apostle) a staff. He threw it from his hand and said: Never has Allah or His messengers (angels) ever broken their promise. Then he cast a glance (and by chance) found a puppy under his cot and said: 'A'isha, when did this dog enter here? She said: By Allah, I don't know He then commanded and it was turned out. Then Gabriel came and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said to him: You promised me and I waited for you, but you did not come, whereupon he said: It was the dog in your house which prevented me (to come), for we (angels) do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture.


Muhammad's excuse of Gabriel not visiting him for 15 days due to the presence of a puppy, was a very ridiculous one. Thus, it seems that Muslims wanted to separate the excuse of the puppy from the incident of delaying of Gabriel for 15 days. Thus, they later fabricated Ahadith in order to separate the dog's issue from Muhammad's inability to answer the questions for 15 days. 

This fabrication becomes clearer when we see the contradictory Hadith from 'Aisha herself, where she is denying that this incident happened in front of her.

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2106f:

Abu Talha Ansari reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: Angels do not enter the house in which there is a picture or portraits. I came to 'A'isha and said to her: This is a news that I have received that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) had said: Angels do not enter the house in which there is a picture or a dog, (and further added) whether she had heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) making a mention of it. She said: No (I did not hear this myself), but I narrate to you what I saw him doing. I bear testimony to the fact that he (the Holy Prophet) set out for an expedition. I took a carpet and screened the door with it. When he (the Holy Prophet) came back he saw that carpet and I perceived signs of disapproval on his face. He pulled it until it was torn or it was cut (into pieces) and he said: God has not commanded us to clothe stones and clay. We cut it (the curtain) and prepared two pillowa out of it by stuffing them with the fibre of date-palms and he (the Holy Prophet) did not find fault with it.

As we can see, there is a 180-degree contradiction in both these traditions of Sahih Muslim. 

The logical conclusion is:

  • Either the 1st tradition is fabricated by later coming Islam apologists.
  • Or the 2nd tradition is fabricated by later-coming Islam apologists. 
  • Or both these two traditions are fabricated by later-coming Islam apologists. 

This shows that later coming Islam apologists wanted to hide something through this fabrication, and it may be very well the excuse of Muhammad that he failed to bring the answer while puppy stopped the Gabriel to enter his house.

2nd Excuse by Islam apologists: Traditions of Ali and Maimuna also prove that this incident happened in Medina and not in Mecca

Islam algologists also bring the following 2 traditions:

Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 845:

It was narrated that ‘Ali (رضي الله عنه) said: I used to come to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) every morning. If he cleared his throat, I would enter, and if he remained silent, I would not enter. He came out to me (on one occasion) and said: “Something happened last night. I heard some movement in the house, then I saw Jibreel (عليه السلام). I said: ‘What prevented you from entering the house?` He said: “In the house there is a dog.` I went in and I saw a puppy belonging to al-Hasan beneath a chair of ours. He [Jibreel] said: “The angels do not enter a house if there are three things in it: a dog or an image or a person who is junub.`

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2105:

Maimuna reported that one morning Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was silent with grief. Maimuna said: Allah's Messenger, I find a change in your mood today. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: Gabriel had promised me that he would meet me tonight, but he did not meet me. By Allah, he never broke his promises, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) spent the day in this sad (mood). Then it occurred to him that there had been a puppy under their cot. He commanded and it was turned out. He then took some water in his hand and sprinkled it at that place. When it was evening Gabriel met him and he said to him: you promised me that you would meet me the previous night. He said: Yes, but we do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture. Then on that very morning he commanded the killing of the dogs until he announced that the dog kept for the orchards should also be killed, but he spared the dog meant for the protection of extensive fields (or big gardens).


These 2 more Ahadith are not proving the point of view of Islam apologists (i.e. this incident happened in Medina), but:

  • These 2 more Ahadith are also proving the presence of the FABRICATION Factory of Ahadith by Islam apologists.
  • Not only these 2 more Ahadith are contradicting each other, but they are also contradicting the hadith of 'Aisha too. Logically, this incident can happen with either one of them among 'Aisha, 'Ali and Maimuna. Thus, it is again proof of the fabrication of Ahadith in order to hide the real story. 

There was no limit to the fabrication of Ahadith by Islam apologists. The whole FACTORY was present there for this purpose. 

We request the readers to read our article:

The Hadith Fabrication Factory in order to save the honour of Islam: There were 131 traditions (including Sahih Ahadith), which were present in Hadith books, which claimed Ishaq was the son who was sacrificed. But later Hadith Fabrication Factory by Islam apologists fabricated 133 traditions (including Sahih Ahadith) in order to counter the first Statement and they claimed it was Ismael who was sacrificed. Through this, they wanted to give preference to Muhammad and his ancestor (Ismael) over Jews and their ancestor Ishaq. 


  • Poor dogs were made scapegoats for the inability of Muhammad to answer the questions for 15 days.
  • They were killed, and they were hated throughout the 1400 years of the history of Islam for a crime for which they were not even responsible. 

Even if we assume that the incident of the puppy was not related to Muhammad's inability to answer the questions, still it is impossible to accept these Sharia Orders as a 'divine revelation' from any All-Wise and All-Knowing entity:

  1. Which is full of cruelty.
  2. Which is based on superstitions.
  3. Which is based upon a 'Hit and Trial' method and changes several times due to the anger and protest of people. 

Even if Muhammad had not ordered the killing of dogs, still only his claim of black dogs being devils is so illogical that humanity within us clearly guides us that it is wrong. 

These are not the colours of divine revelation, but of Human Drama.