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.

Most Read Articles

Latest Articles

Important Websites

Categories

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 →