Dogs unfortunately became scapegoats.

This began when the pagans of Mecca presented three questions to Muhammad as a test. However, he was unable to provide answers for the next 15 days. Muhammad then offered an excuse, stating that Gabriel had not visited him with the answers because there was a puppy in his home.

Imam Syuti documented the following tradition in the commentary on 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 ونزل{ ويسألونك عن الروح... } [الإسراء: 85] الآية ".

Ibn Mundhir narrated from Mujahid that the pagans of Quraysh gathered and said to Muhammad, "You have deviated from the religion of our ancestors. Where did you get this new religion from?" Muhammad replied, "This religion is from Rahman (i.e. another name of Allah)." The Quraysh responded, "We only know Rahman  from Yemen." They associated Musaylmah Kadhab with it, who was another person claiming false prophethood during Muhammad's era and also claimed his new religion was from al-Rahman, i.e., God. Then, the Quraysh wrote to the Jews, informing them that a person had emerged among them claiming to be a prophet, having abandoned the religion of their ancestors ... The Jews replied, "Ask him three questions about the Ashab-e-Kuhf (the People of the Cave), Dhulqarnain, and the spirit. If he can answer these questions, then he is from Rahman, who is God. But if Rahman is from Yemen, he will not be able to answer them." The Quraysh became pleased with this and said to Muhammad, "If you have already abandoned the religion of our ancestors, then tell us about the Ashab-e-Kuhf, Dhulqarnain, and the spirit." Muhammad told them, "Come to me tomorrow (and I will answer)." However, Muhammad forgot to say Insha-Allah (i.e., if Allah wills). Gabriel appeared to him after only 15 days. Muhammad said to Gabriel, "The Quraysh came to me and asked me about certain things (as a test of my prophethood), but I didn't know the answers. I was in a very difficult situation during this period." Gabriel replied, "Have you not seen that we (i.e., the angels) do not enter a house with a dog or a picture? There was a puppy in your house, and you were not aware of it." Consequently, the following revelation was sent down: "[... and do not say of anything, 'Indeed, I will do that tomorrow,' except (when adding), 'If Allah wills.' Quran 18:22-24]" (i.e., the puppy entered his house while he forgot to say Insha-Allah).

Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3227:

 Table of Contents:

• Muhammad's answer to those 3 questions after collecting some incomplete information from people
  • • (1) The People of Cave (Ashab-e-Kuhf):
    • (2) Dhulqarnain:
    • (3) Ruh (The Spirit):
    • The Collective Outcome of These Three Answers:
  • Muhammad's Allah didn't know about the Panting of dogs 
  • Orders of killing all Dogs in Medina
  • The Hints of Human Drama in the Revelations Regarding the Killing of Dogs
  • The Hints of Human Drama within the Revelations (Part 2: The Influence of Superstitions on Muhammad's Beliefs)
  • BENEFITS OF DOGS AS PETS 
  • Questionable Fabrication: Separating the Puppy Excuse from Gabriel's Delay in Muslim Accounts
  • 2nd Apologetic Excuse: Traditions of Ali and Maimuna also prove that this incident happened in Medina and not in Mecca
  • Conclusion:

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

After extensively questioning people, Muhammad managed to gather some incomplete information regarding the three questions. It took him 15 days to formulate his responses. However, despite his efforts, the answers remained ambiguous and lacked clarity. Muhammad resorted to making numerous excuses instead of providing straightforward and accurate answers.

Let us now examine 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 hand, Muhammad asserted that Allah possessed precise knowledge of the numbers of the people of the cave. On the other hand, Allah did not disclose the exact figures. The question arises: Why?

What potential harm would have arisen if Allah had revealed the precise numbers of the people of the cave?

The primary reason for this discrepancy is that during the 15-day period, Muhammad sought input from various individuals regarding the count, only to receive conflicting answers. Some claimed there were seven, others insisted on five, and a few maintained that there were three. Consequently, both Muhammad and his self-proclaimed Allah were unable to provide a definitive and accurate response to this question concerning the true number.

In light of this predicament, Muhammad outright refused to provide an answer, informing the Meccans that he was incapable of providing the precise numbers. He claimed that his Allah prohibited him from engaging in debates over the specifics of their count, compelling him to focus solely on the indisputable fact of their existence within the narrative of the people of the cave.

In reality, the incident of the people of the cave is nothing more than a fictional tale. However, Muhammad regarded it as an actual event, leading to the discrepancies and uncertainties surrounding the details, including their exact numbers.

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).

Once again, Muhammad failed to provide a clear answer regarding the true identity of Dhulqarnain, leading to ongoing confusion among Muslims. The vague response given by the Quran and Muhammad perpetuated an endless cycle of uncertainty. This confusion is exemplified by various contradictory statements:

• According to Ibn Ishaq, Dhulqarnain was from Egypt.
• Ibn Hisham claimed that Dhulqarnain was Alexander the Great, who founded the city of Athens.
• When Ali Ibn Abi Talib was asked about Dhulqarnain, he described him as a pious man with two horns, hence the name Dhulqarnain (meaning "the one with two horns").

These conflicting accounts highlight the lack of clarity surrounding the true character behind Dhulqarnain. Consequently, none of these statements provided a definitive answer, leaving the question unresolved and contributing to the ongoing confusion among Muslims.

Furthermore, the story of Quranic Dhulqarnain contains numerous scientific inaccuracies. One notable example is the claim that the sun sets into a spring of dark water, which contradicts established scientific knowledge.

Additionally, advancements in modern science have enabled comprehensive exploration of the entire planet Earth. Yet, despite extensive searches, no evidence has been found of the wall constructed by Dhulqarnain or the nation of Gog and Magog, whose population supposedly surpasses that of the entire Earth.

Considering the extent of these scientific errors within the Quranic account of Dhulqarnain, it would be beneficial to dedicate a separate, detailed article specifically addressing these inaccuracies.

(3) Ruh (The Spirit):

The explanation regarding the concept of Ruh (The Spirit) was even more elusive compared to the previous two answers.

Quran 17:85 states:

"They ask you about the Spirit. Say: 'The Spirit is by command of my Lord, and you have not been given of knowledge except a little.'"

In essence, Muhammad evaded answering the third question by using the excuse that only limited knowledge about the spirit is granted to humans.

The Collective Outcome of These Three Answers:

The outcome of these three answers was that:

1. Muhammad did not provide direct responses to the questions; rather, he evaded them.
2. Consequently, not a single individual from the Quraysh considered Muhammad to have successfully passed the test, and none of them embraced 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. 

The verse compares the actions of those who deny the signs of Allah to the behavior of a dog, stating that if you chase him or leave him, he pants. This analogy raises questions about the connection between panting and accepting or rejecting the message.

Muhammad's Allah seemingly did not acknowledge that panting is a natural process for dogs to regulate their body temperature through evaporation, similar to how humans cool down through sweating. However, using panting as a symbol of rejecting the message appears to be an illogical and erroneous comparison.

Sweating, a natural bodily process in humans, does not imply rejection of a message. Therefore, it is puzzling why the panting of dogs would be attributed to message rejection.

This example is highly flawed and does not align with the wisdom one would expect from a divine entity characterized as All-Wise.

Orders of killing all Dogs in Medina

The situation in Medina after Muhammad's arrival unfolded as follows:

• Muhammad had already declared dogs to be impure and discouraged their presence as pets inside homes, as it would invalidate prayers.
• However, the people of the desert, whose livelihoods revolved around livestock, cherished their dogs, considering them highly valuable. Consequently, there were roaming dogs within the city of Medina.
• The Jewish community in Medina was aware of the incident in which Muhammad used the excuse of a puppy in his house to explain the delay in Gabriel's arrival with revelation for 15 days. Simultaneously, they observed that Muslims from the Aus and Khazraj tribes in Medina kept dogs in close proximity to them.

It appears that Muhammad grew displeased with the behavior of the Aus and Khazraj tribes, who disregarded his explicit orders to remove dogs from their houses. This might have been a motivating factor behind Muhammad eventually issuing a command to kill all dogs in Medina.

The Hints of Human Drama in the Revelations Regarding the Killing of Dogs

The Evolution of Sharia Ruling on the Killing of Dogs in Four Stages:

• 1st Stage: Initially, Muhammad commanded the killing of all dogs, regardless of their roles or appearances.
• 2nd Stage: In response to public outcry against the mass killing of dogs, then Allah (i.e. Muhammad) revised the ruling, allowing people to keep dogs for hunting and livestock protection while maintaining the directive to kill all other dogs.
• 3rd Stage: However, further protests led to another revision, whereby the Divine Allah rescinded the order to kill all other dogs, except those with black coloration. In this stage, black dogs were deemed as associated with devils.
• 4th Stage: Continuing opposition to the killing of black dogs prompted yet another revision. Then Allah (i.e. Muhammad) reversed the ruling once more, abolishing the killing of all black dogs, except for those that were jet-black with two spots on their eyes.

Throughout these four stages, the Sharia ruling regarding the killing of dogs underwent transformations due to the protests and concerns raised by the people.

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:

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 an Intriguing Contradiction in the Sharia Rulings on Dogs.

The contradiction becomes apparent when considering that if the devil was not present in dogs other than the jet-black ones with two spots on their eyes, why did Muhammad/Allah initially decree the killing of all other innocent dogs who did not possess any demonic qualities?

It is crucial to remember that a "divine revelation" should not be subject to trial and error but rather should embody the flawless wisdom of an All-Wise God from its very inception.

When examining the evolution of Islamic orders regarding alcohol, we observe a progression from leniency to strictness in three stages, reflecting an understanding of human psychology. Initially, praying while intoxicated was prohibited, followed by a complete prohibition of alcohol, and finally, the introduction of 80 lashes as punishment.

However, the case of dogs follows an opposite trajectory—orders transitioned from strict to lenient. This means that the initial decree to kill all dogs went against human psychology, and subsequent modifications were made due to the protests of people who vehemently opposed the killing of their pet dogs and advocated for the retention of dogs for hunting and guarding purposes.

Muhammad/Allah was indeed compelled to change the orders due to the intense opposition and protest from people who were unwilling to part with their beloved canine companions. This sentiment of resistance is evident in the hadith:

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1573a: 

In conclusion, a divine revelation should be grounded in divine wisdom rather than relying on a trial-and-error approach.

The Hints of Human Drama within the Revelations (Part 2: The Influence of Superstitions on Muhammad's Beliefs)

In various parts of the world, the belief that encountering a black cat is a sign of bad luck prevails. Muslims, however, reject this notion and often mock Hindus and others who adhere to such superstitions. Look at this Fatwa, where the Mufti is asserting that believing in such superstitions is a sign of ignorance.

Muslims are justified in their dismissal of this superstition, as there is no inherent malevolence associated with either black cats or their act of crossing paths.

However, it is noteworthy that Muhammad himself was influenced by superstitions prevalent in the ignorant Arab society of his time. One such superstition pertained to the black ram, which Muhammad adopted due to the customs and beliefs of his society.

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1967:

Muhammad took the prevailing superstition surrounding the color black a step further by associating it with black dogs, resulting in more severe implications. While other cultures limited their belief in black cats as bad omens, Muhammad declared that black dogs were not only ill-fated signs but considered devils themselves.

According to Muhammad's teachings, the presence of a black dog could disrupt prayers or even sever the connection to the divine if they were in the vicinity or present within a household. Such beliefs were taken to an extreme extent, with Muhammad advocating for the killing of all black dogs.

By intertwining superstition with his religious teachings, Muhammad reinforced the negative perception of black dogs, exacerbating the superstitions surrounding them and promoting their harm. 

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 510a:

Please read the following articles (Credit: Silas):

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

Questionable Fabrication: Separating the Puppy Excuse from Gabriel's Delay in Muslim Accounts

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.

Response:

Muhammad's explanation that the presence of a puppy prevented Gabriel from visiting him for 15 days appears to be a highly implausible excuse. As a result, it seems that Muslims attempted to disassociate the puppy incident from Muhammad's inability to answer the questions during that time. This intention becomes evident through the creation of fabricated Hadiths aimed at separating the dog's involvement from Muhammad's 15-day struggle.

The fabrication becomes even more apparent when we examine the contradictory Hadith attributed to 'Aisha herself. In this Hadith, she denies witnessing such an incident unfold before her eyes (although in the first tradition, she is present on the spot and witnesses the incident directly).

This raises doubts about the authenticity of the accounts that aim to isolate the puppy incident from Gabriel's delay, suggesting a deliberate effort to alter the narrative and mitigate Muhammad's inability to answer the questions during that critical period.

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2106f:

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:

Response:

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. 

Conclusion: