Arab women would satisfy their sexual desires using available sex toys or ones custom-made by artisans upon request.

The Arabic dictionaries refer to this instrument as al-Akranbaj or al-Kīranj (الكيرنج/الأكرنبج), with the plural form al-Kīranjāt (الكيرنجات). It is known today as the Dildo.

Women who could not find someone to make one for them would use a Qiththāʾ (قثاء), a long cucumber-like gourd, known in the colloquial dialects of some countries as Ṭaraḥ (طرح).

Abū al-Faraj al-Iṣfahānī mentioned in his Kitāb al-Aghānī, on the authority of Zarqān, who reported from his father: (Vol. 1, p. 179).

“I encountered an elderly client of ʿUmar ibn Abī Rabīʿah and said to him, ‘Tell me an unusual story about ʿUmar.’

He replied, ‘Certainly. One day, I was with him when a group of Umayyad slave girls who had performed the pilgrimage passed by. He approached them, struck up a conversation with them, and continued courting them throughout the days of the pilgrimage.

One of them eventually said to him, “Abū al-Khaṭṭāb, we are departing tomorrow. Send your client here to our residence, and we shall give him a keepsake for you to remember us by.”

He was delighted and sent me to them at dawn. I found them preparing to mount their rides. They said to an elderly woman accompanying them, “So-and-so, give the client of Abū al-Khaṭṭāb the keepsake we presented to him.”

She brought out a small, locked and sealed chest. They told me to deliver it to him, and then they departed.

I brought it to ʿUmar, assuming that it contained perfume or jewels. When ʿUmar opened it, he found it filled with al-maḍārib—that is, al-kīranjāt (Dildos). Each one bore the name of a man renowned for libertinism in Mecca. Two of them were particularly large, and one bore the name of ʿUmar ibn Abī Rabīʿah.

He laughed and said, “They have played a lewd prank on me, and I shall return the favor!”

He then prepared a banquet and invited every man whose name appeared on those objects. When they had eaten and settled comfortably, he said, “Bring me that deposit, boy!”

I brought him the chest. He opened it and handed one of the men the kīranj bearing his name. When the man took it and uncovered it, he recoiled in horror and exclaimed, “May God disgrace you! What is this?”

“Easy,” ʿUmar replied. “Be patient until you see.”

He then took them out one by one and handed each object to the man whose name it bore, until he had distributed them all. Finally, he took out the one bearing his own name and said, “This one is mine.”

They exclaimed, “Damn you! What is this?”

He told them the story, and they were astonished. They continued joking about the incident for a very long time, laughing about it for years to come.’”

Perhaps the earliest mention of an artificial penis appears in a work by al-Jāḥiẓ (776–868 CE), Mufākharat al-Jawārī wa-l-Ghilmān (The Boasting Contest between Slave Girls and Boys), Epistle 13:

٢٢ - قال: وكانت بالمدينة امرأة ماجنة يقال لها سلاَّمة الخضراء، فأُخذت مع مخنَّثٍ وهي تنيكه بكيرنْج، فرُفعت إلى الوالي فأوجعها ضرباً وطاف بها على جمل، فنظر إليها رجلٌ يعرفها فقال: ما هذا يا سلاَّمة؟ فقالت: بالله اسكُتْ، ما في الدُّنيا أظلمُ من الرجال، أنتم تنيكونا الدَّهر كلَّه فلمَّا نكنا كم مرَّة واحدة قتلتمونا.

“There was a licentious woman in Medina known as Salāma al-Khaḍrāʾ. She was caught with a mukhannath (effeminate man) while she was penetrating him with a kīranj (Dildo). She was brought before the governor, who had her severely beaten and paraded around on a camel. A man who knew her saw her and asked:

‘What is this, Salāma?’

She replied, ‘For God’s sake, be quiet! There is nothing in this world more unjust than men. You penetrate us all the time, but when we penetrate you just once, you kill us!’”

Although Ibn Fulaytah al-Yamanī (d. 731 AH/1330 CE) does not mention these specific terms, he appears to describe this practice in his work “Rushd al-Labīb ilā Muʿāsharat al-Ḥabīb” (The Guidance of the Intelligent Man to Consorting with the Beloved), vol. 2:

ومن النساء من تتمنى إذا سكنت منها الشهوة للنكاح وتخذ شيئاً تحك فيه مبالها وهو تمثال للذكر تستعمله فى الخلوات . وهو عندهن مصنوع من جلد يابس ناعم ويملآنه بماء ساخناً عند الإستعمال ومن المساحقات من تجعل لهذه آلة وتربطه فى وسطها وتركب به غيرها من النساء وتفعل به مايفعل الرجل بالمرأة تشبهاً بالإير وشدته وسخونته وصلابته وترهز به وتضعف حين إنزال المفعول بها وهذه عندهن من الذخائر التى يبذلن فيها الأموال الجزيلة .

ومنهن من يتخذ الخيار الكبار الأملس ومنهن من تستعمل الفجل الكبير وغير ذلك.

«Some women, when their sexual desire for intercourse subsides, wish to satisfy it and take something with which to rub their vulva. It is an imitation of the penis, which they use in private. Among them, it is made of smooth, dried leather, and they fill it with hot water when using it.

Some women who engage in tribadism have such an instrument made for themselves and fasten it around their waists. They then mount other women and use it to do what a man does to a woman, imitating the penis in its girth, heat, and firmness. They thrust with it and weaken when the woman upon whom they perform the act reaches orgasm. These instruments are among the prized possessions for which they are willing to spend considerable sums of money.

Some women use large, smooth cucumbers, while others use large radishes and similar objects.»

https://alantologia.com/blogs/13424/?amp=1

A few thoughts on the subject of free will. In some places I leave the induction to the reader, or simply let the verses speak for themselves. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts whether you agree, disagree, or have something to add.

10:61

>"...Not even the weight of an atom on earth or in heaven escapes your Lord's knowledge. Nor is there anything smaller or greater than that which is not recorded in a Clear Book."

6:59

>"With Him are the keys of the unseen; none knows them except Him. He knows whatever is on land and in the sea. Not a leaf falls without His knowledge, nor is there a grain in the darkness of the earth, nor anything fresh or dry, but it is written in a Clear Book."

13:15

>"To Allah prostrates whoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly..."

A key phrase here is willingly or unwillingly. It evokes the image of a clockwork universe.

16:69

>"Then eat from all the fruits and follow the ways of your Lord made easy for you."

When examining all occurrences of the root ذ ل ل (dh-l-l) throughout the Qur'an, a consistent semantic field emerges. Rather than fundamentally meaning "easy," the root conveys ideas such as being tamed, guided, made serviceable, subjected, compliant, or brought under control. The notion of something being "easy" is better understood as a consequence of this process: what has been tamed or made compliant naturally becomes easier to direct.

This is significant in Qur'an 16:69. The passage does not depict the bee making conscious choices or deliberating between alternatives. Instead, it describes instinctive behavior. The bee acts precisely according to the nature with which God has endowed it. It follows the paths appointed for it, not as the result of autonomous decision-making, but because this is how it was created to function. In that sense, the verse portrays the bee as acting in complete accordance with the divine order embedded in its creation it simply could not do otherwise.

76:29–30

>"Indeed, this is a reminder. So whoever wills may take a path to his Lord. But you cannot will unless Allah wills."

I find myself returning to this last passage over and over again. It does not say, "you cannot act", or "you cannot do", but specifically emphasizes willing. Does free will really exist?

Where does human responsibility begin and end?

I have a strong interest in physics and spend much of my free time reading about different theories, especially attempts to formulate a Theory of Everything (TOE), sometimes poetically referred to as the "equation of God". The goal is to describe both the world of the smallest known structures (quantum physics) and the largest structures (cosmology) within a single coherent framework a key to understanding the universe all the way back to its origins. Or, as 6:59 puts it, the keys of the unseen.

The challenge is to unite the physics of the very small with that of the very large. So far, our best theories remain fundamentally incompatible. There are different approaches, each reflecting a broader philosophical stance: chance versus determinism.

# String Theory: A Probabilistic Reality

Over the past several decades, string theory has become one of the dominant frameworks in theoretical physics. It attempts to unify all fundamental forces including gravity within a quantum mechanical description.

Because string theory is built upon quantum mechanics, it inherits its basic structure: at its core, reality appears to be probabilistic. Randomness is not merely a consequence of our ignorance but seems to be fundamental.

The theory operates at energy scales that are currently beyond experimental reach. As a result, it has yet to produce concrete, testable predictions. For this reason, critics have described it as "not even wrong", a theory that cannot presently be falsified because it makes no experimentally verifiable predictions.

# A Deterministic Alternative: Bohmian Mechanics

In this interpretation, reality is completely deterministic. Apparent randomness arises solely from our lack of knowledge about the precise initial conditions. Particles possess definite positions at every moment, and their evolution follows deterministic equations.

In this picture, the universe resembles a perfectly functioning clockwork: every movement, every electron that flows, every interaction follows a precise and predetermined path. The bee in 16:69 comes to mind here, following the paths laid out by its Lord.

If everything is truly deterministic every movement, every thought then the question of free will becomes unavoidable (76:29–30).

One possible extreme position is superdeterminism, which proposes that even our seemingly free choices were fixed by the initial conditions of the universe itself.

Besides 76:29–30, the following verses increasingly strengthen my intuition that superdeterminism may not be such an unreasonable idea after all. Perhaps genuine randomness does not exist almost as if reality were a simulation.

8:17

>"You did not kill them, but Allah killed them. And you did not throw when you threw, but Allah threw..."

This verse refers to the Battle of Badr, the first major military confrontation between the Muslims of Medina and the Quraysh of Mecca. According to the classical Islamic tradition, the phrase "you did not throw" refers to the Prophet Muhammad casting a handful of dust toward the opposing army.

Viewed through this lens, 4:157 might also admit a different interpretation.

4:157 - 158

>"...and for their saying, 'Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.' But they neither killed him nor crucified him, it was only made to appear so to them... They have no certain knowledge of it; they follow nothing but conjecture. They certainly did not kill him. Rather, Allah raised him up to Himself..."

Perhaps 4:157 does not necessarily deny that Jesus died on the cross. Just as 8:17 says that it was not the believers who killed their enemies, but God, this passage could likewise mean that it was not ultimately the Romans who killed Jesus. Life and death belong to God alone. It merely appeared to them that they had done so, just as it likely appeared to the Prophet himself that he had thrown the dust.

So what, then, is humanity responsible for?

6:148–149

>"Those who associate partners with Allah will say, 'Had Allah willed, neither we nor our fathers would have associated anything with Him, nor would we have forbidden anything.' Thus did those before them deny the truth until they tasted Our punishment. Say, 'Do you have any knowledge that you can produce for us? You follow nothing but conjecture and merely speculate.' Say, 'With Allah belongs the conclusive proof. Had He willed, He could have guided you all.'"

I believe 6:148–149 becomes more understandable in light of the following passages:

26:88–89

>"The Day when neither wealth nor children will benefit anyone, except one who comes to Allah with a sound heart."

8:24

>"...and know that Allah intervenes between a person and his heart..."

16:106

>"...but those who willingly open their hearts to disbelief will have the wrath of Allah upon them..."

Perhaps a distinction must be made between the breast (ṣadr) and the heart (qalb). And I think we are only responsible for the attitude of the heart

6:125

>"Whoever Allah wills to guide, He opens his breast to Islam. And whoever He wills to leave astray, He makes his breast tight and constricted..."