Why Do Islamic Scholars Ignore the Truth About Muhammad’s Bewitchment?

Religious dogma, when coupled with a refusal to engage with inconvenient truths, can lead down dangerous roads. We’ve seen it time and time again: when uncomfortable facts are suppressed, when scholars and leaders deny the evidence of their own scriptures, the consequences can spiral far beyond theological disputes and seep into violence, terrorism, and even war. This kind of intellectual dishonesty—where religious authorities refuse to grapple with their own texts—creates fertile ground for extremism. And the case of Islamic scholars’ refusal to confront the bewitchment of Muhammad is a prime example.

The Denial of Muhammad’s Bewitchment: A Dangerous Omission

Let’s start with the issue at hand: Islamic scholars have long been reluctant to openly address the fact that Muhammad, according to highly respected sources like the Sahih Bukhari, was bewitched. For months, perhaps even a year, Muhammad was under the influence of black magic, believing he was engaging in normal activities (like being intimate with his wives) when in reality he wasn’t. This story is not hidden in obscure texts—it’s right there in one of Islam’s most trusted Hadith collections.

But rather than engage with this narrative, scholars often downplay it as a minor affliction, a temporary challenge faced by the Prophet. What they won’t admit is that this incident raises fundamental questions about the reliability of Muhammad’s revelations and his role as a divinely protected prophet. The implications are significant: if Muhammad was influenced by black magic, how can we be sure that his revelations weren’t similarly compromised? Yet, Islamic scholars evade this issue, preferring to stick to a sanitized version of their Prophet’s life.

Denial and Extremism: A Historical Parallel

Now, let’s draw a parallel with another dangerous form of denial: the refusal to acknowledge historical and scriptural truths that has, in many instances, led to extremism and violence. One stark example is the denialism around the teachings of certain extremist ideologies—where followers cling to a literal, narrow interpretation of religious texts while ignoring the broader, more peaceful teachings. This kind of selective blindness has given rise to groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and other forms of terrorism.

These groups often claim they are following the "true" word of Islam, cherry-picking verses that justify violence while ignoring others that promote peace and coexistence. When scholars refuse to confront problematic elements in their own traditions, they create an environment where extremists can thrive, twisting the faith to serve their violent ends. The denial of historical truths, much like the denial of uncomfortable religious narratives, has a history of paving the way to war and terrorism.

Qur’anic Contradictions: Ignoring the Seeds of Conflict

The issue of Muhammad’s bewitchment isn’t just about intellectual honesty—it’s about the very integrity of Islam’s sacred texts. Take Surah 15:42, where Allah tells Satan he has no power over the righteous. But then, in another part of the Qur’an, we have Muhammad himself, bewitched by a sorcerer and under the influence of dark forces for an extended period. If scholars refuse to reconcile this contradiction, they leave a dangerous gap—one that can be exploited by extremists who pick and choose their scriptures to suit their agenda.

This is not a mere academic exercise. Extremist groups feed on unresolved contradictions. They find legitimacy in theological gaps that religious leaders refuse to address, and they build narratives of holy war and martyrdom on the foundation of these unresolved issues. Just as scholars avoid dealing with the bewitchment of Muhammad, extremists avoid dealing with verses promoting peace and mercy. Both forms of denial create dangerous ideologies that can manifest in violence.

The Satanic Verses: A Ticking Time Bomb

The infamous Satanic Verses incident is perhaps one of the most significant ignored issues in Islam. According to early sources, Muhammad briefly recited verses that were influenced by Satan before being corrected by Allah. Islamic scholars are quick to dismiss this as an aberration, a momentary lapse that was quickly rectified. But what if this wasn’t an isolated incident? If Satan could influence one revelation, how can we be sure that other verses weren’t similarly affected?

Here’s where the danger lies: when scholars refuse to address these deep concerns, they push their followers into cognitive dissonance. And when faith becomes more about blind adherence than critical engagement, it creates space for radical interpretations. Extremists thrive in this space, where questions are discouraged, and doubt is seen as a threat. The refusal to confront the Satanic Verses story isn’t just about avoiding theological embarrassment—it’s about preventing the rise of dangerous ideologies that could emerge from unresolved contradictions.

Denial and the Path to War: Learning from History

We don’t have to look far back in history to see where denial and selective scripture interpretation can lead. Look at the rise of religious extremism across the world. When scholars refuse to engage with the totality of their religious texts, they leave the door open for violent interpretations. Wars in the Middle East, the rise of terrorism, and the recruitment of disillusioned young people into extremist groups all have roots in this kind of theological denialism.

When ISIS destroyed ancient cities or justified the enslavement of non-believers, they were drawing on selective readings of Islamic texts. They were exploiting the vacuum left by scholars who wouldn’t address problematic passages head-on. Just like the scholars who refuse to discuss Muhammad’s bewitchment, the deniers of extremist ideologies refuse to engage with the full complexity of their religion. The result is clear: violence, war, and terror.

Why Islamic Scholars Must Confront the Truth

The refusal of Islamic scholars to confront these uncomfortable truths about Muhammad’s bewitchment is more than just a theological oversight—it’s a form of denial that can have real-world consequences. By avoiding these issues, scholars are leaving a vacuum where extremist ideologies can thrive. They’re allowing a narrow, dogmatic view of Islam to dominate, one that can—and has—led to violence.

Scholars need to step up. They need to confront the bewitchment narratives, the Satanic Verses, and the contradictions within the Qur’an. By doing so, they can offer a more coherent, balanced version of Islam that resists the pull of extremism. If they continue to deny these truths, they risk pushing more people into the arms of radicals who are more than happy to exploit these theological gaps.

Conclusion: Denial as a Catalyst for Conflict

Denial of uncomfortable truths is not just an issue for Islamic scholars—it’s an issue for religious discourse across the board. Whether it’s denying historical atrocities, avoiding inconvenient scriptures, or refusing to engage with modern critiques, this kind of denial has long been a catalyst for extremism, terrorism, and war.

The case of Muhammad’s bewitchment is just one example of how religious authorities’ refusal to engage with their own texts can have dangerous consequences. By confronting these issues head-on, scholars can prevent the growth of extremist interpretations and help build a more peaceful and just world. The stakes are too high for anything less.

• BatPoo Forever

  @MyBatman1984

  FOLLOW BACK Extrapolating the arguments, critiquing the controversy. Transcending the cultural Bat Poo The Bat Truth Is Out There Let The Light Shine