The Splitting of the Moon (Shaqq al-Qamar) is considered as a magnificent miracle of the Messenger of Allah, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). This view is held by Qur’anic exegetes (mufassirīn), hadith scholars (muhaddithīn), and biographers of the Prophet’s life (seerah writers), based on the opening verses of Surah al-Qamar and numerous narratives found in the hadith literature. It is stated in Surah Al-Qamar that the Hour of Judgment is near, and the moon has split, but the deniers of the Messenger (PBUH) will not believe. Even if they witness a sign, they will turn away from it and say that this is magic continued from the past. The hadith narrations describe the splitting of the moon as a physical and observable event that occurred approximately five years before the hijrah (migration) to Medina. Among its eyewitnesses were the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), his noble Companions, and the disbelievers of Quraysh. The Prophet (PBUH) and his Companions were present in Mina at the time. The moon was full and clearly visible. Suddenly, it split apart and separated into two distinct parts—one moved to one side of the mountain, and the other to the opposite side. This astonishing sight lasted for a brief moment, after which the two halves rejoined.
The Prophet (PBUH) addressed the people and said: “Bear witness to this event.” The disbelievers witnessed it directly, yet they could not trust their own eyes. Thus, they attempted to dismiss it by calling it magic. Some among them suggested delaying a final judgment until those who were away on travel had returned, reasoning that their testimony would be decisive: “Our eyes may have been bewitched, but theirs could not be, as they were not present.” This proposal was accepted, and when the travelers returned, they confirmed that they too had witnessed the splitting of the moon exactly as described. Consequently, denial of the event became impossible for the Quraysh. Nonetheless, they still refused to believe and remained resolute in their rejection and denial of the Prophet’s warning.
This account represents the combined meaning of the narrations reported from Abdullah ibn Masʿud, Jubair ibn Mutʿim, Abdullah ibn Abbas, Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all) and others. The authenticity of this combined meaning is agreed upon by both exegetes and hadith scholars. In some transmission paths attributed to Anas (RA), an additional detail appears: that this event occurred in response to a demand by the Quraysh for a sign, and that it took place twice during the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH). Some scholars and hadith experts have accepted this addition, while others have rejected it, considering it to be a narrator’s error or oversight.
Despite general scholarly agreement on the occurrence of the splitting of the moon, there exists a difference of opinion regarding its miraculous nature. Most scholars of hadith and exegesis classify it among the miracles of Prophethood, attributing its occurrence directly to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). However, some other scholars regard it as one of the signs of Allah, but do not apply the conventional theological term muʿjizah (miracle) to it. In their view, classifying it as a prophetic miracle is neither accurate from a scholarly perspective nor appropriate in terms of established terminology. Two eminent contemporary scholars, Maulana Syed Abul A‘la Maududi and Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi, adhere to this latter position.
The respected teacher, Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, agrees with the overall view of both Maulana Maududi and Maulana Islahi on all aspects of the discussion regarding shaqq al-qamar. He has adopted this as his own position as well. Accordingly, he affirms the event of the moon’s splitting as a physical reality and views it as a manifestation of the absolute power of the Lord of the Worlds. In his understanding, this event occurred during the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH) as a means of reinforcing his warning and alerting his deniers.
He bases his position primarily on the Qur’an but fully accepts the authentic narrations in support and explanation of it. However, he does not consider the term muʿjizah appropriate for interpreting this event. The reason, he explains, is that the Prophet (PBUH) did not serve as an intermediary in causing the event. In Surah al-Qamar, the word used for it is āyah (sign), not muʿjizah. From analogous cases in the Qur’an, it becomes clear that if the conventional term muʿjizah is to be applied, it should be reserved only for those signs that occur through the mediation of prophets. For signs manifested directly by Allah, this terminology is not suitable.
The current composition is an exposition of the esteemed teacher’s viewpoint. It comprises four chapters and several appendices. The introductory chapter is titled ‘The Meaning and Referent of Āyah.’ It serves as the foundation for the subsequent discussions. In this, based on the parallels in the Qur’an, the applications of the word āyah have been determined. In light of this, the reference of this word in Surah Al-Qamar is definitively established. The title of the second chapter is: ‘In the Light of the Holy Qur’an.’ In this, an analysis of the relevant verses of Surah Al-Qamar is presented in the context of the discussions from the first chapter. It details the nature, reality, and purpose of the Splitting of the Moon. The third chapter analyzes the narratives present in the hadith literature regarding the Splitting of the Moon. It addresses all the fundamental narratives and their various aspects. The fourth chapter summarizes the viewpoints of Maulana Abul A‘la Maududi and Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi on the subject under discussion. The purpose of this is to present the perspectives with which the esteemed teacher has fully concurred, along with their original sources, and to make it clear that the esteemed teacher’s opinion is not unique but is rather a reiteration of the opinions of two prominent scholars.
The final section comprises several appendices. In view of academic and technical requirements, it includes certain important elements of the material and some explanatory discussions. The purpose of these is to provide convenience to readers who may wish for further scrutiny or desire access to the sources of the discus.