Muhammad Exposed

[jesus_4_us]

If Paul were making things up, he wouldn't have been received so warmly BY JESUS' VERY OWN FOLLOWERS WHO HAD FIRSTHAND KNOWEDLEGE OF WHAT JESUS SAID AND DID!

Third, it is a deliberate lie by the author TTA when he says that Paul "urged all the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, he told them not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs (Acts 21:21), this goes against what Jesus(P) himself taught". Here is the passage in question:

"... Then they said to Paul: ‘You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. THEY HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT YOU TEACH ALL THE JEWS who live among the Gentiles TO TURN AWAY FROM MOSES, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs. What shall we do? They will certainly hear that you have come, so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow. Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. THEN EVERYBODY WILL KNOW THERE IS NO TRUTH IN THESE REPORTS ABOUT YOU, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law. AS FOR THE GENTILE BELIEVERS, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.’ The next day Paul took the men and purified himself along with them. Then he went to the temple to give notice of the date when the days of purification would end and the offering would be made for each of them." Acts 21:20b-26

The context shows that Paul WAS BEING FALSELY ACCUSED of teaching that the Jews need to turn away from the Law of Moses. As the context shows it was the Gentiles who were not required to observe the Law of Moses, something which both Paul AND THE OTHER APOSTLES were in agreement on.

This means that the author either has not read the passage and is therefore speaking out of irresponsible ignorance. Or he has read the passage and is therefore willfully lying.

Finally, we now turn the tables and examine some of the "words" of Jesus in the Quran which are not found in the Gospels:

And (appoint him) as a messenger to the Children of Israel, (with this message): ‘I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave: And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and I bring the dead into life, by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe; (I have come to you), to attest the Torah which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. It is Allah Who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a Way that is straight. When Jesus found unbelief on their part he said: 'Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?' Said the disciples: 'We are Allah's helpers: We believe in Allah, and do thou bear witness THAT WE ARE MUSLIMS.' 'Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Messenger. then write us down among those who bear witness.’" S. 3:49-53

"At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: ‘O Mary! truly a strange thing has thou brought! O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!’ But she pointed to the babe. They said: ‘How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?’ He said: ‘I am indeed a servant of Allah. He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet; And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live; (He hath made me) kind to my mother, and not overbearing or unblest; So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)’! Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute." S. 19:27-34 Since the Gospels do not record Jesus or his contemporaries saying any such things does this then not demonstrate -according to TTA's own criteria -that Muhammad was a snake and a liar? It is Muhammad, not Paul, who made up fraudulent speeches of not only Jesus, but of the other prophets and messengers of God as well (for details see, e.g., Rev. Tisdall's work The Original Sources of the Qur'an).

[jesus_4_us]

This in itself sufficiently vindicates Paul's honesty and integrity while exposing the shoddy scholarship and intentional deception of the author.

We move on to some more of the author's deliberate insulting and false statements.

Conclusions

It is very clear from the above exposition that Paul was a hypocrite, and hence, how can the Christian missionaries expect Muslims to accept this snake as a legitimate "follower" of the Messiah Jesus(P), son of Mary? Paul clearly told others to make peace but he himself did not practice what he had preached when he had a sharp disagreement with Barnabas and they parted company (Acts 15). This totally contradicts what he had earlier taught, namely "be at peace with all men" (Romans 12) and "forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you." (Col. 3:13)

He had also taken his revenge upon John (called Mark) because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work in Acts 15, even though he told the Romans, "Never take your own revenge, beloved!" (Romans 12). It seems that it was Barnabas who was more religious than Paul because he did not taken the revenge upon John.

Which leads us to the question:

If Paul himself has failed to follow what he had taught, would he indeed follow what Jesus(P) had taught?

And only God knows best.

RESPONSE:

First, we observe that TTA has his chronology all muddled up. Paul wrote the letters to the Romans and Colossians YEARS AFTER the incident reported in Acts. It is simply wrong to state, "This totally contradicts what he had earlier taught," because at the time of the reported disagreement with Barnabas those letters were not yet written. Thus, Paul has not contradicted his own teaching.

Secondly, let us quote Colossians in context to expose the author's willful twisting of ******ure:

"My fellow prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, AS DOES MARK, THE COUSIN OF BARNABAS. (You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, WELCOME HIM) ... OUR DEAR FRIEND LUKE, the doctor, and Demas send greetings." Colossians 4:10, 14

Paul refers to Mark as being present with him in the very same epistle where Paul commands believers to forgive one another! This clearly demonstrates that, unlike Muhammad, Paul did in fact practice what he preached, SINCE HE DID FORGIVE MARK! Other places where Paul speaks highly of Mark includes:

"And so do MARK, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, MY FELLOW WORKERS." Philemon 24

"Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, BECAUSE HE IS HELPFUL TO ME IN MY MINISTRY." 2 Timothy 4:11

These statements were all written after Paul's dispute with Barnabas about Mark. This shows that despite Mark's disloyalty to Paul on their first trip, Paul and Mark later reconciled for the sake of Christian love and unity!

Before we turn to an examination of Muhammad's words and deeds, we need to come to a proper understanding of the incident in Acts that was abused by TTA to accuse the Apostle Paul.

These missionary journeys were quite dangereous. Preaching to anyone that his religion is wrong and God is calling them to repentance is bound to stir up opposition. On the first journey Barnabas and Paul were persecuted and finally expelled from Antioch (Acts 13:50), nearly stoned in Iconium (Acts 14:5-6) where they were able to flee, and finally Paul was actually stoned and left for dead in Lystra (14:19).

In such dangerous missions it is very important that all members of the team can fully trust each other. Mark had abandoned Paul and Barnabas in the early part of their first missionary journey (Acts 13:13). The time came to plan the second journey for revisiting also those areas where they had encountered the hostile opposition mentioned above. We read:

Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, "Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns

where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." Barnabas wanted to take

John, also called Mark, with them, but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had

deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. They had such a sharp

disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, but Paul

chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. (Acts 15:36-40

[jesus_4_us]

In every industry, company, government, administration, army and also in the church, the leaders of a team or project have to decide who would be suitable co-workers that should be recruited for a specific given task. Paul and Barnabas disagreed whether Mark would be a good team member, having the strength of character and the stamina necessary to persevere when the situation would become difficult and even dangerous again.

Paul and Barnabas had become deep friends during the years that they had worked together. The experience of being persecuted, together risking their lives for the common cause and nearly being killed inevitably creates a deep bond between people. But they were both men of strong convictions. In this case, they could not come to an agreement. Because of their deep bond, they did not shrug it off as if their disagreement didn't matter. They were deeply committed to each other. They really argued long and sharp because it was important to both of them to solve their disagreement and travel together. However, none was able to convince the other, so that in the end, they decided to separate and make two teams instead.

Note that there is no report of an argument between Mark and Paul. There is no mention that Paul was angry and revengeful against Mark. Regarding their personal relationship, Paul had probably forgiven Mark long ago. This was not about personal grudges on Paul's side, but about his responsibility of selecting team members who were suitable for the difficult mission they had ahead of them. Mark knew that he had deserted them and was certainly sorry for what he had done. He probably had not even requested to be taken on the next journey because he knew he had no right to it. This was Barnabas' idea and the disagreement was between Paul and Barnabas. Mark probably only heard about it afterwards.

To "live at peace with all men" can hardly mean: employ anyone for any job disregarding his training, ing, and proven (un)reliability. We may personally have forgiven a person who has failed us, but still not think that the person is currently qualified for a certain job. That is no sin.

Later, after Paul became convinced that Mark had grown and was now reliable and trustworthy, he took him on journeys again and gave him responsibilities as we have read above. In fact, apart from Paul's refusal to take him on this particular journey, everything Paul says about Mark in several different letters is only positive.

Certainly Paul was disappointed with Mark after his desertion at the first journey, and he was not willing to take him again on the very next journey, but revenge? Where is there any mention of Paul being vindictive and making an attempt of taking revenge as TTA claims? Where is there any indication that Paul tried to harm or hurt Mark? Did he injure him or try to kill him? Did Paul curse him, insult him, or seek to spread false rumors about him? Did he try to separate him from his wife and get her for himself? Did he try to sue him in court or try to destroy his professional career? No to all of this. There was no attempt of any kind of revenge. What is TTA talking about?

TTA has failed to bring proof on all counts of his charge. The decision not to take Mark on this journey was made by Paul in his position as responsible team leader. There is no indication anywhere that on a personal level Paul and Mark were (a) not at peace with each other, that (b) Paul ever took revenge against Mark or (c) had not forgiven him.

After looking at Paul's responsible and peaceful behavior towards Mark who abandoned him on a dangerous journey, or to Barnabas who disagreed with him on the right action, let us shortly contrast this with Muhammad's way of response.

Abdullah ibn Sa'd Ibn Abi Sarh was one of Muhammad's companions and for some time acted as his scribe writing down the revelations of the Qur'an. Because of a certain incident Abdullah came to the conviction that Muhammad was not a prophet after all and left him. What is Muhammad's response? He gave the order to kill Abdullah (see this article for details). In fact, there are at least a dozen people which Muhammad commanded to execute for reasons of personal revenge (see Muhammad's and his Personal Enemies) as well as the genocide against the tribe of the Banu Qurayza. Not satisfied with the murder of his personal enemies in his own life time, Muhammad instituted the death penalty for apostasy in Islamic law: If anyone leaves Islam, kill him (consult these pages for details), thus ending freedom of religion and freedom of conscience once and for all. Sura 111 is dedicated to the curse of Abu Lahab, one of Muhammad's uncles, who opposed him. And even on his death bed, Muhammad had nothing better to do than to curse the Jews and the Christians (see for example this article). And this list could be continued with many more examples.

The members of Bismikaallahuma including TTA, the author of the currently discussed article are proud to be followers of Muhammad. For them, there is no reason to doubt that Muhammad was a true and the final messenger from God. They find nothing questionable in Muhammad's behavior that would throw doubt on his authority. But the grave offense of Paul, to refuse to take Mark on a journey with him, and him having an argument with Barnabas are clear proof that Paul is a hypocrite, snake, liar and false apostle. Are we the only ones who have the impression that there is something grossly out of balance in the author's thinking and ability of discernment? A serious loss of common sense?

Maybe TTA does not think the above examples count, because Muhammad was consistent: He killed those who opposed them in agreement with the command of the Qur'an to kill the disbelievers. He cursed his opponents, just like in the Qur'an he puts curses on those who oppose Islam. Therefore, Muhammad cannot be accused of being a hypocrite. As ridiculous as that excuse would be, we will entertain it for the moment, and in the second part below we will present a detailed examination of a number of serious discrepancies between Muhammad's words and deeds.

[jesus_4_us]

What would TTA have done, if Paul had just accepted the suggestion of Barnabas and taken Mark with them despite his serious failure? Most likely he would have quoted a couple of verses on disciplining disobedient believers (several were quoted above) and would have complained that Paul preaches disciplining the disobedient but here he just forgives -contrary to his own preaching! Therefore, Paul is a hypocrite, snake, liar and false apostle.

Clearly the problem is not with Paul, but with various Muslims who desparately seek to find anything that may subtract from the authority of Paul because the Gospel he so clearly preached exposes Muhammad's message as anti-Christian, vastly inferior and not coming from God.

TTA has presented to us his criteria for a test of an apostle of God, criteria applied by him in his article to the Apostle Paul. As a Muslim and author publishing at Bismikaallahuma TTA is part of the effort to call people to Islam, as the religion of God, to believe in Muhammad as the last messenger of God, and to follow Muhammad as the ideal role model for human behavior. TTA claimed (though falsely and only by twisting what the Bible actually says) that because Paul did not do what he preached, and is, therefore, a hypocrite, a liar, a snake and a false apostle, definitely not sent by God and not to be believed or followed.

It is certainly fair to ask whether Muhammad passes the test of these same criteria established by TTA. Therefore, we now logically proceed to the second part of this paper.

[jesus_4_us]

What about Muhammad?

We now turn the tables on Muhammad to see if he passes the author's own test. Muhammad taught that men should have up to four wives, provided that one can treat all of them fairly:

If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice,

two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only

one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from

doing injustice. S. 4:3

Yet Muhammad failed to live up to his own criteria since he had more than 4 wives and did not treat them all fairly:

O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and

those whom thy right hand possesses out of the captives of war whom Allah has assigned to thee;

and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts,

who migrated (from Makkah) with thee; and any believing woman who gives herself to the

Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her;-this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess;-in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Thou mayest defer (the turn of) any of them that thou pleasest, and thou mayest receive any thou pleasest: and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn) thou hadst set aside. This were nigher to the cooling of their eyes, the prevention of their grief, and their satisfaction -that of all of them -with that which thou hast to give them: and Allah knows (all) that is in your hearts: and Allah is All-Knowing, Most Forbearing. It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee, except any thy right hand should possess (as handmaidens): and Allah doth watch over all things. S. 33:50-52

The hadiths state:

Narrated Qatada:Anas bin Malik said, "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day andnight and they were ELEVEN IN NUMBER." I asked Anas, "Had the Prophet the strength forit?" Anas replied, "We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men)."And Sa'id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (noteleven). (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268)

Narrated 'Ata:We presented ourselves along with Ibn 'Abbas at the funeral procession of Maimuna at a placecalled Sarif. Ibn 'Abbas said, "This is the wife of the Prophet so when you lift her bier, do not Jerkit or shake it much, but walk smoothly because the Prophet had NINE WIVES and he used toobserve the night turns with eight of them, AND FOR ONE OF THEM THERE WAS NONIGHT TURN (SAM-This refers to Saudah. More on her later)." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7,Book 62, Number 5)

Narrated Anas bin Malik:The Prophet used to pass by (have sexual relation with) all his wives in one night, and at thattime he had NINE wives. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 142)

What makes this so shameful is that according to Ar-Razi, there was a man who had ten wives. When he becam a Muslim, Muhammad told him, "Keep four, AND LEAVE THE REST." (Razi, At-Tafsir al-Kabir, commenting on Q. 4:3)

[jesus_4_us]

Al-Tirmidhi provides the name of the person in question:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar

Ghaylan ibn Salamah ath-Thaqafi accepted Islam and that he had ten wives in the pre-Islamic period who accepted Islam along with him; so the Prophet (peace be upon him) told him to keep four and separate from the rest of them.

Ahmad, Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah transmitted it. (Al-Tirmidhi, Number 945 taken from the Alim CD-ROM Version)

We are also told in Sunan of Abu Dawud, Number 922 (Alim CD-ROM Version): Narrated Al-Harith ibn Qays al-Asadi

I embraced Islam while I had eight wives. So I mentioned it to the Prophet (peace be upon him).

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Select four of them.

Is this not exhibiting an astonishing measure of hypocrisy on the part of Muhammad?

Some Muslims claim that S. 33:52 forbade Muhammad from marrying any more wives. Yet, this still leaves us with the problem of Muhammad of having more than four wives. Furthermore, some Muslim scholars say that S. 33:52 was actually abrogated. Here are Ibn Kathir's comments regarding S. 33:52:

More than one of the scholars, such as Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid, Ad-Dahhak, Qatadah, Ibn Zayd, Ibn Jarir and others stated that this Ayah was revealed as a reward to the wives of the Prophet expressing Allah's pleasure with them for their excellent decision in choosing Allah and His Messenger and the Home of the Hereafter, when the Messenger of Allah gave them the choice, as we have stated above. When they chose the Messenger of Allah their reward was that Allah restricted him to these wives, and forbade him to marry anyone else or to change them for other wives, even if he was attracted to their beauty -apart from slave-girls and prisoners of war, with regard to whom there was no sin on him. THEN ALLAH LIFTED THE RESTRICTION STATED IN THIS AYAH AND PERMITTED HIM TO MARRY MORE WOMEN, but he did not marry anyone else, so that the favor of the Messenger of Allah towards them would be clear.

Imam Ahmad recorded that ‘A’ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, said: ‘The Messenger of Allah did not die until Allah permitted (marriage to other) women for him.’ It was also recorded by At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa’i in their Sunans.(Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 8, Surat Al-Ahzab, Verse 51 to the end of Surat Ad-Dukhan, p. 21; bold and capital emphasis ours)

What is even more astonishing is that S. 33:50 was revealed before 33:52 and yet the earlier verse canceled a verse that came later! The late Iranian Muslim scholar Ali Dashti writes:

"In Zamakhshari's opinion, ‘A’esha’s words show that verse 52 was abrogated by custom and by verse 49 (‘O Prophet, We have made lawful for you ...’). But an abrogating verse ought to come after the abrogated one. Nevertheless Soyuti, in his treatise on Qor’anic problems entitled ol-Etqan, maintains that in this case the earlier verse abrogated the later one." (Dashti, 23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad, Mazda Pub; ISBN: 1568590296, p. 128; bold emphasis ours)

Talk about confusion!

Muhammad also separated his wives into two groups. One group he would sleep with more often, while the others he would have sex with only when he liked. Al-Zamakhshari writes:

It is related that the Prophet (refrained from sexual intercourse and) put off temporarily the following wives: Sauda, Juwairiya. Safiyya, Maimuna, and Umm Habiba. In so doing he used to grant them a share (of sexual intercourse) according TO HIS WISH. Among the wives whom the Prophet preferred to take to himself belong ‘A’isha, Hafsa, Umm Salama, and Zainab (bint Jash). Thus, he used to put five off temporarily in order to take four to himself. (On the other hand) it is related that, disregarding divorce and the selection concerned with it, the Prophet treated (all his wives) the same, with the exception of Sauda, who relinquished the night

belonging to her to ‘A’isha and said (to the Prophet): ‘Do not divorce me but let me remain in thecompany of your wives!’ ... (Helmet Gatje, The Qur'an and Its Exegesis, translated and edited byAlford T. Welch [Oneworld Publications, Oxford England], pp. 90-91; bold and capital emphasisours)

Narrated 'Urwa from 'Aisha:The wives of Allah's Apostle were in two groups. One group consisted of 'Aisha, Hafsa, Safiyyaand Sauda; and the other group consisted of Um Salama and the other wives of Allah's Apostle.

The Muslims knew that Allah's Apostle loved 'Aisha, so if any of them had a and wishedto give to Allah's Apostle, he would delay it, till Allah's Apostle had come to 'Aisha's homeand then he would send his to Allah's Apostle in her home. The group of Um Salamadiscussed the matter together and decided that Um Salama should request Allah's Apostle to tellthe people to send their s to him in whatever wife's house he was. Um Salama told Allah'sApostle of what they had said, but he did not reply. Then they (those wives) asked Um Salamaabout it. She said, "He did not say anything to me." They asked her to talk to him again. Shetalked to him again when she met him on her day, but he gave no reply. When they asked her, shereplied that he had given no reply. They said to her, "Talk to him till he gives you a reply." Whenit was her turn, she talked to him again. He then said to her, "Do not hurt me regarding Aisha, ASTHE DIVINE INSPIRATIONS DO NOT COME TO ME ON ANY OF THE BEDSEXCEPT THAT OF AISHA." On that Um Salama said, "I repent to Allah for hurting you."Then the group of Um Salama called Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Apostle and sent her toAllah's Apostle to say to him, "Your wives request to treat them and the daughter of AbuBakr on equal terms." Then Fatima conveyed the message to him. The Prophet said, "O mydaughter! Don't you love whom I love?" She replied in the affirmative and returned and toldthem of the situation. They requested her to go to him again but she refused. They then sentZainab bint Jahsh who went to him and used harsh words saying, "Your wives request you totreat them and the daughter of Ibn Abu Quhafa on equal terms." On that she raised hervoice and abused 'Aisha to her face so much so that Allah's Apostle looked at 'Aisha to seewhether she would retort. 'Aisha started replying to Zainab till she silenced her. The Prophetthen looked at 'Aisha and said, "She is really the daughter of Abu Bakr." (Sahih Al-Bukhari,Volume 3, Book 47, Number 755)

[jesus_4_us]

Muhammad’s wives complained about his preferential treatment of Aisha and demanded to be treated equally. Muhammad justified his preferential treatment by claiming that Divine revelations came to him on no other bed except Aisha's. If Muhammad is correct, this means that Allah himself distinguished Aisha's bed from the rest, implying that Allah was quick to satisfy Muhammad's desires. This is something that even Aisha herself noticed:

Narrated Aisha: I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily)." (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 311)

Muhammad's failure as a husband is further seen by his treatment of Sauda bint Zam'ah. Sauda was one of Muhammad's first wives. She had become old and Muhammad decided to divorce her. The Quran refers to this situation:

And if a woman fears ill usage or desertion on the part of her husband, there is no blame on them, if they effect a reconciliation between them, and reconciliation is better, and avarice has been made to be present in the (people's) minds; and if you do good (to others) and guard (against evil), then surely Allah is aware of what you do. S. 4:128

Ibn Kathir states:

Making peace is better than separation. An example of such peace can be felt in the story of Sawdah bint Zam'ah who WHEN SHE BECAME AGED, THE PROPHET WANTED TO DIVORCE HER, but she made peace with him by offering the night he used to spend with her to A'isha so that he would keep her. The Prophet accepted such terms and kept her.

Abu Dawud At-Tayalisi recorded that Ibn ‘Abbas said, "Sawdah feared that the Messenger of Allah might divorce her and she said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Do not divorce me; give my day to 'A'ishah.’ And he did ...

In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that 'A'ishah said that when Sawdah bint Zam'ah BECAME OLD, she forfeited her day to 'A'ishah and the Prophet used to spend Sawdah's night with 'A'ishah ...

<And making peace is better>. IT REFERS TO THE WIFE RELINQUISHING SOME OF HER MARITAL RIGHTS and his acceptance of the offer. Such compromise is better than total divorce, as the Prophet did when retained Sawdah bint Zam'ah. By doing so, the Prophet set an example for his Ummah to follow as it is a lawful act ... (the preceding citation taken and adapted from Tafsir Ibn Kathir -Abridged, Volume 2, Parts 3, 4 & 5, Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147 [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; first edition March 2000], pp. 599-601, and Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Part 5, Sura An-Nisa, ayat 24-147, abridged by Sheikh Muhammad Nasib Ar-Rafa’i [Al-Firdous Ltd., London, 2000 first edition], pp. 193-194; bold emphasis ours)

This is further confirmed in the two Sahih collections:

Narrated Aisha: Whenever Allah's Apostle wanted to go on a journey, he would draw lots as to which of his wives would accompany him. He would take her whose name came out. He used to fix for each of them a day and a night. But Sauda bint Zam'a gave up her (turn) day and night to 'Aisha, the wife of the Prophet in order to seek the pleasure of Allah's Apostle (by that action). (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 47, Number 766)

‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Never did I find any woman more loving to me than Sauda bint Zam'a. I wished I could be exactly like her who was passionate. As she became old, she had made over her day (which she had to spend) with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to ‘A’isha. She said: I have made over my day with you to ‘A’isha. So Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) allotted two days to ‘A’isha, her own day (when it was her turn) and that of Sauda. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3451)


Amazingly, while it was okay for Muhammad to marry whomever he chose and to prefer some wives above others, it was not all right for his son-in-law to take another wife:

Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:I heard Allah's Apostle who was on the pulpit, saying, "Banu Hisham bin Al-Mughira have

requested me to allow them to marry their daughter to Ali bin Abu Talib, but I don't give permission, and will not give permission unless 'Ali bin Abi Talib divorces my daughter in order to marry their daughter, because Fatima is a part of my body, and I hate what she hates to see, and what hurts her, hurts me." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 157)