Taking Women as Concubines
Imagine warriors fresh from slaughter, dragging terrified women and children back to camp, not as honored guests, but as sexual spoils to satisfy their lusts. This isn’t some ancient pagan ritual from a barbaric era—it’s the sanctioned practice of taking women as concubines straight from the heart of Islam, endorsed by Muhammad himself. Far from any divine mercy, this grotesque custom reveals Islam for the satanic fraud it truly is: a system masquerading as holiness while reveling in slavery, rape, and dehumanization. Rooted in hadiths from Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, the most authentic sources Muslims revere, this depraved doctrine exposes the Quran and its prophet as tools of demonic deception, preying on human weakness under the guise of divine law.
The infamous hadith narrated by Abu Saeed al-Khudri from the captives of Awtas lays it bare. These so-called companions of the Prophet, separated from their wives, whined about their raging desires for women. They captured thousands after the Battle of Hunayn, including innocent females from the Hawazin tribe, and rather than ransom them for peace or free them out of humanity, they lusted after them. When they asked Muhammad about coitus interruptus—trying to avoid impregnating their slaves—he shrugged it off: There is no harm in you not doing so, for there is no soul that is destined to exist until the Day of Resurrection but that it will exist. What a chilling revelation! Not only does this greenlight taking women as concubines as a free-for-all sex fest after jihad, but it twists predestination into a license for reckless brutality, claiming Allah predetermines every rape-born child anyway. This isn’t wisdom; it’s the satanic inversion of morality, where lust trumps life itself.
Historical Context of Taking Women as Concubines: Bloodshed and Booty
To grasp the full horror of taking women as concubines, we must dive into the blood-soaked history of 8 AH (630 CE). The Battle of Hunayn saw Muhammad’s army ambush the Hawazin and Thaqif tribes, slaughtering men and hauling off 6,000 women, children, and elderly as spoils of war. These weren’t combatants; they were families ripped from their homes, marched to Medina in chains. Abu Saeed al-Khudri, one of Muhammad’s inner circle, confessed their desperation: We desired women, and we were suffering from the absence of our wives. Suffering? Try the primal urge of conquerors eyeing helpless prizes.
Ransom was an option—freeing captives for money could have built alliances and spared lives—but no, the sahaba (companions) prioritized pussy over peace. Their question on ‘azl (coitus interruptus) wasn’t born of conscience; it was a pathetic attempt to dodge the consequences of mass enslavement while still getting their fix. Muhammad’s reply? No problem, knock yourselves out—Allah’s qadr (fate) ensures every bastard child destined to pop out will, regardless of your seed-spilling antics. This hadith, enshrined in Bukhari and Muslim, isn’t a footnote; it’s Islam’s blueprint for wartime whoredom.
Scholars like Imam al-Nawawi, in his commentary on Sahih Muslim, try to polish this turd by claiming ownership implies consent in slave-owning times. Consent? From terrified captives whose husbands and fathers lay dead? This is rape by fiat, dressed in fiqh (jurisprudence). Pre-Islamic Arabs executed captives; Islam didn’t abolish slavery but regulated it into a sex-slave industry. What a reform—turning mass murder into maternity wards for the victors. Byzantine and Persian empires had concubines too, but Islam supercharged it with theological justification, making taking women as concubines a pious duty.
The Prophet’s Distribution Practices in Taking Women as Concubines: Muhammad’s Share of the Spoils
Muhammad didn’t just permit taking women as concubines; he orchestrated it like a pimp divvying up the take. Sirat Ibn Hisham records how, after Hunayn, he personally distributed these women among his followers. Even Abu Sufyan, the former Meccan warlord turned convert, scored a concubine—proving Islam’s inclusivity extended to fresh off the battlefield rapists.
This wasn’t charity; it was conquest’s dividend. Female captives became ma malakat aymanukum—those whom your right hands possess—Quranic code (23:5-6) for fucktoys on demand, alongside wives. Concubines could bear children, earning um walad status (freed upon the master’s death), but only after serving as breeding stock. Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah, a Coptic Christian slave gifted to Muhammad, popped out his son Ibrahim—elevated from chattel to concubine mommy, all while her people were subjugated.
Fiqh manuals like Imam Malik’s Al-Muwatta spell out the rules: feed them, don’t beat them too hard, but screw away. Quran 4:24 even allows marrying those your right hands possess for a dowry, turning slavery into sanctioned seduction. Polemic? No, factual—Islam’s founder lived this depravity, fathering kids with slaves while preaching piety. Where’s the angelic Gabriel in this? Nowhere; this reeks of Satan’s playbook, luring men with virgins in paradise (Quran 55:56-58) after earthly orgies.
Theological Insights from the Hadith on Taking Women as Concubines: Predestination as Rape Excuser
Peel back the layers, and the hadith on taking women as concubines unmasks Islam’s theological rot. Predestination (qadr) here serves as a satanic smokescreen: why worry about impregnating slaves when Allah’s already scripted every soul’s birth? Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s Fath al-Bari calls it ijma (consensus)—unprotected sex with captives is halal because divine decree trumps human decency.
This fatalism is fraud: Islam preaches free will elsewhere (Quran 76:3) but flips it for fornication. Critics rightly scream hypocrisy—how can a merciful God predestine rape victims? Quran 90:13 rewards freeing slaves, yet jihad mandates capturing them first. It’s a vicious cycle: conquer, concubine, convert or castrate the culture.
Compared to Judaism or Christianity, which phased out slavery, Islam eternalized it. Muhammad’s example—dozens of concubines like Rayhana bint Zayd, whose tribe he massacred—shows not prophethood, but predation. Satanic indeed, inverting God’s image into a warlord’s wet dream.
Modern Relevance and Scholarly Defenses of Taking Women as Concubines
Fast-forward: global slavery bans (including Islam’s limp 1926 Mecca nod) render concubines obsolete, per some like Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Yet, the hadith lingers, fueling ISIS caliphates where Yazidi women were concubined en masse, citing Awtas as precedent. Modern apologists whimper context—but context was conquest, and the texts don’t expire.
Islam’s mercy is a mirage; taking women as concubines persists in Sharia courts in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, where women are property. Evolution? Hardly—Qaradawi praises its ethics, ignoring the screams. International law be damned; divine fraud trumps humanity.
This polemic isn’t hate; it’s exposure. Islam claims timeless truth, yet its core sanctioned sex slavery. Where’s reform? Stifled by blasphemy laws. Satan’s genius: cloak barbarism in Allah’s plan.
Conclusion: The Satanic Fraud Exposed by Taking Women as Concubines
Taking women as concubines isn’t a dusty relic—it’s Islam’s rotting core, laid bare by Abu Saeed al-Khudri’s hadith from Awtas. From Hunayn’s carnage to Muhammad’s handouts, this practice unmasks a fraudulent faith: predestination as predator’s pardon, Sharia as slaver’s charter. Compassion? Try calculated cruelty, assimilating tribes through trauma-bonded broods.
Timeless values? No—taking women as concubines teaches domination, not dignity. Sahih Bukhari and Muslim preserve this poison, proving Islam no mercy mission but Muhammad’s power play. Every destined soul? Try every destined subjugation under Allah’s plan—a demonic delusion demanding rejection.
Awaken: Islam’s emperor has no clothes, just concubine chains. Expose the satanic fraud; choose humanity over hadith hell. (Word count: 1,248)
