Chapter Four
The Position of Maulana Maududi and Maulana Islahi
In the previous chapters, the esteemed teacher, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi’s position has been presented in full detail. In terms of its fundamental reasoning and central idea, it is based on the perspectives of Syed Abul A‘la Maududi and Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi. In their discussion on this topic, they have expressed this with great clarity. Their words are as follows:
I am not unique in the matter of the splitting of the moon; I do not have a separate opinion. There is a perspective of scholarly researchers on this topic which I consider to be correct. Before me, two esteemed scholars have expressed this perspective in their exegeses. My revered teacher, Imam Amin Ahsan Islahi, has articulated this in his exegesis Tadabbur-e-Qur’an, and prior to him, the esteemed contemporary scholar, Maulana Syed Abul A‘la Maududi, has expressed it in Tafheem-ul-Qur’an. Maulana Syed Abul A‘la Maududi addressed all aspects of this matter, meticulously analyzing all the material to explain the nature of the event, what is stated in the narratives, how one should view it, what objections arise, and how much weight the different interpretations hold. He has conducted a very thorough analysis of all these aspects. I fully agree with every word of his on this matter. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that I am unique in this or have a separate opinion. (Video Recording of 23 Objections, Splitting of the Moon)
In this context, it is essential that the explanations of these eminent scholars on all aspects of the subject be presented verbatim. This will bring forth the contents that have been detailed in the preceding pages.
Maulana Maududi and Maulana Islahi have expressed their stance in their commentaries Tafheem-ul-Qur’an and Tadabbur-e-Qur’an under the initial verses of Surah Al-Qamar. Their discussions are as follows.
1. Subject and Addressees of Surah Al-Qamar
1. Subject and Addressees of Surah Al-Qamar
According to both commentators, the audience of the surah is the disbelievers of the Quraysh. They have been warned that the Hour of Judgment is near. As a sign of this, the moon has been split. The purpose is that if they wish to understand, they can comprehend through this clear sign. Now, very little time remains for them. By mentioning the fate of previous nations, it has been cautioned that ‘if you continue on this path, your fate will be similar to theirs.’
Maulana Maududi states:
The disbelievers of Mecca have been warned regarding their obstinacy in opposing the invitation of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). The astonishing event of the splitting of the moon was a clear sign that the Day of Judgment, which the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) was informing about, could indeed occur, and its time was drawing near. … As the discourse begins, it is stated that these people do not accept when advised, do not take lessons from history, nor do they come to faith even after witnessing clear signs with their own eyes. Now, they will only believe when the Day of Judgment is actually established, and they are rushing toward the Day of Reckoning after emerging from their graves.
After this, the conditions of the people of Noah, ‘Ad, Thamud, the people of Lot, and the followers of Pharaoh are briefly described to illustrate how these nations suffered a painful punishment for rejecting the warnings of the messengers sent by God. After recounting the story of each nation, it is repeatedly emphasized that this Qur’an is an accessible means of admonition. If any nation were to take heed from it and turn to the right path, the punishments that befell those earlier nations would not become necessary for them. So then, what greater folly could there be than to reject this simple and clear source of guidance, and instead insist that one will not believe until punishment is actually witnessed?
Maulana Islahi writes:
The audience in this context refers to the deniers who were demanding a sign of punishment as evidence for the truth of the Qur’an’s warnings. They were seeking a sign that would convince them of the inevitability of the Qur’an’s threats if they continued to reject it. They have been cautioned by recounting the history of previous nations—in more detail than indicated in the previous surah—why they do not learn from the fate that befell those nations? Why are they stubbornly insistent that only when the same befalls them will they believe? It is a great favor of Allah that instead of showing you a sign of punishment, He has revealed a book to you that is comprehensive and complete in every aspect for your education and admonition, addressing all your doubts and suspicions, and adorning it with all necessary qualities and virtues. Yet, your condition is such that instead of seeking Allah’s mercy, you are asking for His punishment. (Tadabbur-e-Qur’an 87/8)
2. Anshaqqa Refers to an Event of the Past or the Future
2. Anshaqqa Refers to an Event of the Past or the Future
Some commentators have expressed the view that the statement Iqtarabat al-Saa‘ah Wa anshaqqa al-qamar does not refer to an incident from the time of the Prophet, but is a prophecy about an event that will occur on the Day of Judgment. An objection to this interpretation is that anshaqqa is a verb in the past tense; how can it be taken to refer to a future event? In response, it is argued that using the past tense to highlight the certainty and inevitability of a future event is an established rule in Arabic language and literature. Both Maulana Islahi and Maulana Maududi acknowledge this rule, but they consider its application incorrect in this context. Therefore, according to them, it is an incident from the time of the Prophet.
In Tadabbur-e-Qur’an it is stated:
Some people have said that this refers to an event that will occur on the Day of Judgement, and that it has been expressed in the past tense to emphasize the certainty of its occurrence. According to them, the meaning is: “The Hour has drawn near, and the moon will split.” Although this view has been transmitted from some early scholars and is accepted by a certain group even in our time, the context of the discourse does not support it. There is no doubt that certain events of the Day of Judgement have indeed been mentioned in the Qur’an using the past tense to indicate their certainty. However, applying that understanding here would make the passage inconsistent with what follows.
Immediately thereafter, it is stated that whenever they see a sign, they turn away from it and say: “This is persistent magic.” Reflect carefully: if the splitting of the moon were to be an event related to the Day of Judgement, then what relevance would there be to saying this afterward? On the Day of Judgment, even the staunchest denier will not be in a position to dismiss anything as magic; rather, all will acknowledge that the messages delivered by the messengers turned out to be true, word for word. Accordingly, it is also mentioned later: Yaqulu al-kafiruna hadha yawmun ‘asir (The disbelievers will say: “This is a very difficult day.”) (8/91-92)
It is stated in Tafheem-ul-Qur’an:
Some people have interpreted this phrase to mean that ‘the moon will split.’ While it may be possible to take this meaning based on the Arabic language, the context of the text clearly rejects this interpretation. Firstly, if this meaning is taken, the preceding phrase becomes meaningless. If the moon had not split at the time of this revelation and is to split at some future point, it makes little sense to assert that the Hour of Judgment has drawn near on that basis. How can a future event be considered a sign of its nearness so as to be presented as a logical argument? Secondly, after taking this meaning, when we read the subsequent text, it seems that it does not coincide with it in any manner. The subsequent text clearly indicates that people at that time witnessed a sign, which was a manifest indication of the possibility of the Hour, but they dismissed it as a feat of magic, persisting in their belief that the coming of the Hour was not possible. In this context, the words anshaqqa al-qamar only fit correctly if they mean ‘the moon has split.’ If interpreted as ‘will split,’ the subsequent discussion becomes disjointed. Try placing this phrase in the sequence of the text, and you will sense that it renders the entire passage meaningless.
The Hour of Resurrection has drawn near, and the moon will be split. As for their state, no matter what sign they see, they turn away and say that this is ongoing magic. They have denied and followed the desires of their own selves. (5/228-229)
3. Relationship Between the Verses and Narrations Related to the Event
3. Relationship Between the Verses and Narrations Related to the Event
The event of the splitting of the moon is mentioned in both the Qur’an and Hadiths as well as in historical reports. Scholars of interpretation and comprehension alike understand that Hadiths and reports should be accepted as supplementary to the Qur’an. Consequently, both have presented these narratives in such a way that it appears the text of the Qur’an holds the primary status, and the narratives convey some of its details. Furthermore, this has been explicitly stated as well.
Syed Maududi writes:
The fact is that the incident of the splitting of the moon is established by the explicit words of the Qur’an and does not depend on the narrations of Hadith. However, the narrations provide details about it and reveal when and how it occurred. (Tafheem-ul-Qur’an 5/229)
Maulana Islahi has stated:
The question remains whether such an incident occurred during the time of the Prophet (PBUH). In my opinion, the answer is that the words of the Qur’an imply that it did occur, and this is supported by Hadiths as well. The details of the incident may vary in different Hadiths, but there is no reported disagreement on the occurrence of the incident itself. (Tadabbur-e-Qur’an 8/91-92)
4. A Miracle of Prophethood or a Divine Sign
4. A Miracle of Prophethood or a Divine Sign
In the introductory chapter under the title ‘The Meaning and Referent of Āyah,’ it was clearly established that in the Holy Qur’an, this word is used for the signs of Allah. It is used both in the sense of signs directly manifesting from Allah and also for the miracles of the noble prophets. There is no difference between the two in the sense that both are manifestations of Allah’s power and occur by His command. However, there is a difference in terms of expression: in the former, Allah deals directly without the mediation of a prophet, while in the latter, the mediation of a prophet is employed. In our religious terminology, the word ‘miracle’ is used for the sign that appears at the demand of the audience through the hand of a prophet. In this context, it is not appropriate to use the term ‘miracle’ or ‘miracle of prophethood’ for the event of the splitting of the moon. It should be referred to as a divine sign. Both Maulana Islahi and Maulana Maududi hold this position.
Maulana Maududi has elaborately stated his stance. In this regard, he has also critiqued the narrations that are presented as evidence to interpret the meaning of a miracle. He writes:
Here, the question arises: what was the true nature of this incident? Was it a miracle shown by the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) at the request of the disbelievers of Mecca as a proof of his Prophethood? Or was it a cosmic event that occurred in the moon by the power of Allah, to which the Prophet (PBUH) merely drew attention, so that it might serve as a sign of the possibility and nearness of the Hour? A large group of Islamic scholars counts this among the miracles of the Prophet (PBUH) and holds the opinion that it was shown at the demand of the disbelievers. However, this view rests solely on certain reports narrated from Anas (RA). Apart from him, no other Companion has explicitly stated this. In Fath al-Bari, Ibn Hajar writes: “Among all the chains through which this event has been transmitted, I have not come across any version—except the hadith of Anas—that conveys the idea that the event of the splitting of the moon occurred at the request of the polytheists.” (Bab Inshiqaq al-Qamar) A narration conveying the same idea has been reported by Abu Nu’aym al-Isfahani in Dala’il al-Nubuwwah from Abdullah ibn Abbas, but its chain of transmission is weak. Moreover, among the many reports transmitted from Ibn Abbas with strong chains in the major hadith collections, none includes this detail. Furthermore, both Anas and Ibn Abbas were not contemporaneous eyewitnesses of the event. In contrast, Companions who were present at the time—such as Abdullah bin Masud, Hudhayfah, Jubair bin Mut’im, Ali, and Abdullah bin Umar—none of them stated that the polytheists of Mecca had demanded a sign as proof of the Prophet’s truthfulness, and that this miracle of the splitting of the moon was shown in response. The most significant point is that the Noble Qur’an itself does not present this incident as a proof of the Prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH), but rather as a sign of the nearness of the Resurrection. (Tafheem al-Qur’an 5/229-230)
The statement of Maulana Islahi is as follows:
For such signs, it is not necessary for the Prophet to have presented them as his miracle. Rather, their manifestation can occur without any proclamation or challenge. It is also not necessary that the disbelievers demanded exactly this sign that manifested; rather, their appearance occurs even without a demand from their side, simply so that the objections raised by the disbelievers can be answered. A major reason why the disbelievers considered the Day of Judgment to be a very irrational concept was their skepticism regarding how it is possible that the entire universe could be completely disrupted in a single day. Their question about the mountains, as recorded in the Qur’an, indicates that they regarded these things as absolutely immutable, unshakeable, and eternal. By demonstrating the sign of the moon splitting, Allah showed them that none of the universe’s components, regardless of their magnitude, is autonomous, eternal, or unshakeable. Rather, everything is subject to the command of Allah Almighty. Whenever He wills, He will disrupt them all. (Tadabbur-e-Qur’an 91/8)
5. The Support and Confirmation of the Messengership of Prophet Muhammad
5. The Support and Confirmation of the Messengership of Muhammad (PBUH)
Both commentators, despite not classifying the splitting of the moon as one of the miracles of the Prophet, acknowledge that this event emphasizes the truth of the Prophethood and Messengership of the Messenger of Allah, and supports his warning and invitation.
Maulana Islahi has written:
We have referred multiple times in this book to a practice of Allah Almighty, that although signs of His power and wisdom are present throughout every inch of the heavens and the earth, and new signs continue to become manifest day by day, during the time of the messenger’s missions, Allah Almighty specifically reveals such signs through which the warnings of the messenger and the truthfulness of his claim to messengership become evident. This divine practice is mentioned throughout the Qur’an. We present one verse as an example. Allah has stated: ‘We shall also show them Our signs in the world around them and within them as well’
The purpose of these signs, as we have indicated, is to reinforce the warning of the Messenger. The messages that the Messenger proclaims through words are supported by evidence and signs that appear in this universe in various forms so that God’s argument is completely evident upon the people. A similar sign was manifested in the form of the splitting of the moon to support the warning of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), so that it would be clearly evident to the deniers of punishment and resurrection that the Qur’an’s warnings about the Day when the earth will be shaken, mountains will become dust and scatter in the atmosphere, seas will boil over, and the sun will become darkened are not just to intimidate them, but these are truths that will inevitably occur one day. These are not impossible events; their indications manifest in this world in one form or another. (Tadabbur-e- Qur’an 8/90-91)
Maulana Maududi states:
This was indeed a prominent proof of the truthfulness of the Prophet, as the event was confirming the news about the Day of Judgment that he had given to the people. (Tafheem-ul-Qur’an 5/230)