The truth of the splitting of the moon has been questioned by some individuals who argue that this event is not historically proven. Their point is that how is it possible for such a significant event to occur during an era enlightened by history, and yet no one is aware of it? Hence, according to them, if this event had indeed taken place, it was necessary for people from different parts of the world to have witnessed it and for narratives of it to be told in every region. However, the situation is such that it is not mentioned anywhere except in the books of Muslims.
In our view, this objection is baseless from several aspects.
Firstly, it is clear from both the Qur’an and Hadith that this sign was specifically for the Quraysh. It was not originally intended for the rest of the world. The purpose of its manifestation was to fully warn the addressees of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) about the impending punishment. In essence, it was a sign similar to the one that appeared in the form of a she-camel to the people of Prophet Salih (PBUH) or in the form of the birth of Jesus (PBUH) to the Israelites. These signs were related to the specific communities in which they appeared. It is not appropriate to view such signs in reference to all the people and nations of the world.
Secondly, this information is mentioned in the Qur’an. Based on the contents of this book, intellect and reason compel us to accept it as divine and non-human speech. Hence, if it is accepted by Muslims that this book is a supernatural miracle in its presentation, then reason and nature demand that all its information about the past, present, and future be considered true.
Thirdly, in response to the aforementioned objection, this question arises: If this incident is false, then why did none of the people from the region and community where this incident has been continuously narrated ever refute it? This was not some piece of news being shared behind closed doors with a select few and then passed on by word of mouth. Not at all, this was a public proclamation, broadcast day and night through the Qur’an in the streets and alleys. Among the listeners were Christians, Jews, and polytheists. Why did it not happen that one of their authors, poets, or historians refuted this widely known news, which would then be passed down as a historical document to subsequent generations?
Fourthly, looking at it from the perspective of Muslims, this was not a piece of news related to faith or life after death that required acceptance by believers of that time just because it was mentioned in the Qur’an. Instead, it was a sensory event. So, is there not even a single person from the early centuries of Muslims who denied the occurrence of this event or attempted to interpret the words of the Qur’an differently? If this did not happen, it means that this was an authenticated report of the Qur’an, which the Companions and their successors transmitted through their consensus and continuity. Therefore, denying this consecutively and widely transmitted report is a denial of a self-evident fact.
Fifthly, it should further be noted that this report has been transmitted through the most authentic historical sources, such as Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, and those who have narrated it are individuals whose integrity and reliability are beyond any doubt. Some among them were even eyewitnesses to the event. Therefore, to claim that history is silent regarding this matter is entirely incorrect. In reality, the very history that should speak on this matter is, in fact, proclaiming it openly and emphatically.
In response to the aforementioned objection, Muslim scholars have presented their arguments and evidences in their own respective styles. A few selected excerpts from their writings are presented below.
The historian and biographer, Syed Sulaiman Nadvi, writes:
The question is whether a famous incident from one country not being mentioned in the contemporary histories of another country can be taken as evidence of its denial. And if so, can you deny the Mahabharata of the Hindus? You could even deny all the miracles of Jesus (PBUH) and indeed the events of his life, because the contemporary Roman historians of Syria and Egypt did not document even a single letter about such extraordinary events. In contrast, it has been stated in the above-mentioned accounts that travelers coming from Arabia and Syria reported that they saw the moon split into two parts. (Seerat-un-Nabi 3/311)
He further wrote:
Allah manifested this sign for the people of Mecca, and it served as evidence for them alone. Therefore, it was not necessary for its appearance and sighting to occur throughout the entire world. Based on this, hypothetically, if the splitting of the moon was not observed in other parts of the world, it would not be a matter of surprise or astonishment. In fact, for those beyond the people of Mecca, not witnessing it in other cities and countries was a divine wisdom. Had it been visible to people generally across different regions of the world, it might have been considered a natural astronomical event, akin to the hundreds of other changes that had occurred before, as mentioned in astronomy and the science of natural history. However, since it was only seen by the people of Mecca, whether they were in the city or in caravans outside, this is clear and conclusive evidence that it was manifested solely as a sign for the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Praise be to Allah. (Seerat un-Nabi 3/312)
Maulana Syed Abul A‘la Maududi commented on this objection by writing:
This objection is weightless because this event occurred suddenly and only for a moment. It was not necessary for the eyes of the whole world to be fixed on the moon at this particular moment. There was no explosion that would draw people’s attention towards it. There was no prior information that people would have been waiting for it and looking towards the sky. It could not have been seen over the entire surface of the earth, but only in Arab regions and countries to its east, where the moon was visible at that time. The art and passion for historiography were not so advanced back then that those in the eastern countries who had witnessed it would have recorded it, testimonials would have been collected by a historian, and it would have been entered into any historical book. However, it is mentioned in the chronicles of Malabar that a king there witnessed the scene that night. As for books on astronomy and calendars, mentioning it would have been necessary only if it had caused any change in the moon’s speed, its orbit, or its rising and setting times. Since this did not happen, the attention of ancient astrologers was not drawn to it. Observatories of that time were not advanced enough to take notice of every event that occurred in the heavens and record it. (Tafheem-ul-Qur’an 5/230-231)
Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi has provided a very compelling response to this objection. He writes:
This doubt is not valid that if such an event had occurred, it would have been mentioned in the histories of other nations as well. On our planet and other celestial bodies, numerous events of upheaval and fragmentation, with separations and reunions between parts, occur frequently. However, in earlier times, observations of such events were confined to a limited scope. In our era, international institutions and observatories exist for the investigation of such changes. Consequently, if an event occurs, research institutions around the world immediately begin to investigate it, and information about it rapidly spreads to all corners of the world. These means of research and communication did not exist in the past, which is why the news remained confined to a specific area. However, that area consisted of highly credible individuals, thus there is no reason to deny the authenticity of the event itself. (Tadabbur-e-Qur’an 8/92)