Suffering of Pregnant Women Due to the Scientific Mistake of Muhammad

According to the Quran, the waiting period for a pregnant woman is until the birth of a child (Quran 65:4).

Prophet Muhammad further explained the scientific logic behind this Quranic order, stating:

Sunan Abu Dawud 2158:

The Messenger of Allah said: It is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the last day to water what another has sown with his water (meaning intercourse with a woman who is pregnant from her previous husband).

However, science is clearly proving that Allah is mistaken in matters of pregnancy. If a woman has conceived from one person, then no matter how much another person engages in intercourse, it will have no effect on the child or the crop. These were the notions of the ignorant times, and Allah is also a victim of these ignorant notions.

Once again, due to this divine ignorance, a helpless pregnant woman had to suffer. She was forced to suppress all her sexual desires throughout this period, while, on the other hand, a man giving a divorce was freely indulging in intimate relations with other wives and concubines right from the first night.

During pregnancy, a woman undergoes significant psychological pressure, and she needs the most a companion who can comfort her with love, provide her with affection and attention, and take care of her. Allah condemned this helpless pregnant woman to the isolation and helplessness of experiencing the most challenging stage of childbirth alone.

In principle, a pregnant woman should not observe any waiting period of even a single day, as the child is already present in her womb, and therefore, there is no issue of the child's lineage. If a husband, after giving a divorce, can engage in intimate relations with other wives and concubines right on the first night, why can't the helpless pregnant woman marry another man, especially when there is no issue with the child's parentage?

The sole reason is that there is no entity named Allah, and Muhammad was making the revelation on his own in the name of Allah. Since he was only a human, he was following the ignorant notions of that time. According to which, if another man engages in intercourse with a pregnant woman, the man's fluid starts to nourish the child. Modern science has refuted all these ignorant notions. It is important to note that any potential effects of sex in the state of pregnancy on the fetus would be positive. Sex with a man makes the mother happy, resulting in a positive impact on the fetus. There is no logical reason for Allah/Muhammad to oppose such positive effects on the mother and fetus.

Excuse Presented by Islamic Preachers::

Contemporary Islamic preachers assert that Allah's wisdom is affirmed, as they claim a pregnant woman can conceive a second pregnancy from another man, a phenomenon termed  "Superfetation".

Response:

  1. Superfetation, if it occurs at all among humans, is an extremely rare exception. However, laws are established for the general populace and not for extraordinary instances. In the entire medical history, only ten recorded cases of superfetation exist worldwide.
  2. Furthermore, these cases are met with skepticism in the scientific community, as they may be instances of twins (source).
  3. Additionally, most cases occurred in women undergoing fertility treatments like in vitro fertilization (IVF).
  4. Lastly, it's crucial to note that superfetation can only occur within a 10-day to three-week timeframe (source). Therefore, even if laws were based on superfetation, the 'Iddah (waiting period) of a pregnant woman would be at most three to four weeks. However, Muhammad mandated the 'iddah for pregnant women until the 9th month (i.e., until delivery). Consequently, Islamic apologists cannot justify the Islamic 'Iddah by invoking superfetation.
Details

Avoid this Trap

🛑 Before You Start Analysing Islam → Avoid this common trap (Recommended reading)

Latest Articles

Most Read Articles

Important Websites

Categories

How to Conduct a Fair Evaluation Using AI Models

The correct prompt for evaluating the arguments of this article with the help of AI:

If you also want to evaluate the arguments of this article with the help of AI models, then use the following prompt. This prompt forces the AI to conduct a review on an unbiased basis.

Prompt:

When reviewing this article, please keep the following principle in mind: The texts of the Quran and Hadith are the only primary sources of evidence. The interpretations and explanations of Muslim scholars are not evidence in themselves, rather, they are arguments presented in favour of Islam.  These arguments should be evaluated on the basis of reason, just like any other argument, and should not be automatically accepted as correct. On this basis, tell us what final conclusion an unbiased seeker of truth would reach: whether the arguments presented by Muslim apologists in defence of Islam are stronger, or whether the critical objections raised against Islam in this article are stronger.

Why is this prompt necessary?

AI models often consider the interpretations of Muslim scholars as definite evidence. They are surely not evidence, but they are only "arguments" in favour of Islam. So, these interpretations in favour of Islam may be correct or incorrect. Unless the AI is clearly told this distinction, it continues to treat every interpretation by the scholars as final proof in defence of Islam, after which no “criticism” of the Quran and Hadith can ever be considered valid.

Note:
The AI’s response is not a final judgment. The final decision must be made by you, using your own reason and understanding. The value of AI lies only in helping to organize and analyze arguments, provided that it is guided with clear and fair instructions.

About the Author & This Website

About the Author:

All arguments and analyses on this website are written by the author. AI tools are used only for spelling, grammar, and clarity improvements.

A Necessary Clarification: 

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 →