Surah al-Qamar

It is also called Iqtarabat. It is reported from Ibn Abbas that it is called al-Mubayyidah (the Whitenizer) in the Torah, as it whitens the face of its companion on the Day when faces turn black. Al-Bayhaqi recorded this from him in Shu'ab al-Iman, though he noted that it is munkar (denounced/rejected).

It is a Meccan surah according to the majority. It has also been said that it was revealed on the day of Badr. Muqatil said it is Meccan except for three verses, from "Or do they say..." up to "...and more bitter." Some restricted the exception to "The gathering will be defeated..." which is refuted by what Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Tabarani in al-Awsat, and Ibn Marduyah recorded from Abu Hurayrah, who said: Allah Almighty revealed to His Prophet (peace be upon him) in Mecca before the day of Badr, "The gathering will be defeated and they will turn their backs." Umar ibn al-Khattab said: I said, "O Messenger of Allah, which gathering will be defeated?" When the day of Badr came and Quraysh were defeated, I saw the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) pursuing them with his sword drawn, saying, "The gathering will be defeated and they will turn their backs." Thus, it was for the day of Badr.

In al-Durr al-Manthur, al-Bukhari recorded from Aisha that she said: "It was revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him) in Mecca while I was a young girl playing, 'Rather, the Hour is their appointment, and the Hour is more grievous and more bitter.'" This, along with the previous report, refutes what was narrated from Muqatil. It is also said that it excludes the two verses, "Indeed, the righteous will be among gardens..."

Its verses are fifty-five by consensus. The connection between its beginning and the end of the preceding surah is evident, for He (Subhanahu) said, "The Approaching Day has approached," and here, "The Hour has approached." Jalal al-Suyuti said: It is not hidden what there is in the succession of these two surahs of excellent consistency in naming, due to the connection between the Star (al-Najm) and the Moon (al-Qamar). Furthermore, this surah follows that one like al-A'raf follows al-An'am, al-Shu'ara follows al-Furqan, and al-Saffat follows Yasin, in that it is a detailed account of the conditions of the nations whose destruction is alluded to in His saying, "And that He destroyed the first 'Ad and Thamud, and did not spare [anyone]. And the people of Noah..." up to His saying, "And the overturned cities He hurled down."

(In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. The Hour has approached) meaning, it is very close, (and the moon has split)

It separated, one part from another, and became two sections. This occurred during the era of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) about five years before the Migration. It has been authenticated from the narration of the two Shaykhs [Al-Bukhari and Muslim] and Ibn Jarir on the authority of Anas that the people of Makkah asked him (upon him be peace and prayer) to show them a sign, so he showed them the moon split into two parts, to the extent that they saw [Mount] Hira’ between them. The report of Abu Nu’aym, through the chain of Ad-Dahhak from Ibn Abbas, stating that the Jews asked for a sign and Allah (Exalted be He) showed them the moon already split, is not to be relied upon.

In the two Sahihs [Al-Bukhari and Muslim] and others, it is narrated from Ibn Mas’ud that the moon split during the era of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) into two groups: one group on the mountain and one group below it. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "Bear witness." From his [Ibn Mas’ud's] hadith also: The moon split during the era of the Messenger of Allah (upon him be peace and prayer), and the Quraysh said: "This is the magic of the son of Abu Kabsha." A man then said: "Wait for what the travelers bring you, for Muhammad cannot bewitch all the people." The travelers came, and they informed them of that [the splitting]. This is reported by Abu Dawud and At-Tayalisi. In the narration of Al-Bayhaqi, it is stated that they asked the travelers as they arrived from every direction, and they said: "We saw it," so Allah (Exalted be He) revealed: (The Hour has approached and the moon has split).

Abu Nu’aym recorded in Al-Dala’il on the authority of Ibn Abbas through a weak chain that he said: The polytheists gathered during the era of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), among them Al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah, Abu Jahl ibn Hisham, Al-’As ibn Wa’il, Al-’As ibn Hisham, Al-Aswad ibn Abd Yaghuth, Al-Aswad ibn Abd al-Muttalib, Rabi’ah ibn al-Aswad, and An-Nadr ibn al-Harith. They said to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace): "If you are truthful, then split the moon for us into two parts: half on Abu Qubays and half on Qaynuqa'." The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "If I do, will you believe?" They said: "Yes." It was the night of Badr, so the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) asked his Lord (Mighty and Majestic is He) to grant him what they asked. When evening came, the moon appeared as half on Abu Qubays and half on Qaynuqa', while the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was calling out: "O Abu Salamah ibn Abd al-Asad and Al-Arqam ibn Al-Arqam, bear witness."

The authentic hadiths regarding the splitting are numerous. There is disagreement regarding its being mutawatir (mass-transmitted). It has been said: It is not mutawatir. However, in the Sharh al-Mawaqif of Ash-Sharif, it is stated that it is mutawatir, which is the position chosen by the scholar Ibn al-Subki. He said in his commentary on the Mukhtasar of Ibn al-Hajib: "The correct view, in my opinion, is that the splitting of the moon is mutawatir, stated in the Qur’an, and narrated in the two Sahihs and others through various chains, such that there is no room for doubt regarding its being mutawatir."

The hadiths regarding it have come in authentic narrations from a group of the Companions, among them Ali (may Allah honor his face), Anas, Ibn Mas’ud, Ibn Abbas, Hudhayfah, Jubayr ibn Mut’im, Ibn Umar, and others. Yes, some of them were not present for it, such as Ibn Abbas, for he was not yet born at that time; and like Anas, for he was four or five years old in Madinah. This does not impugn the authenticity of the report, as is evident.

In the narration of Al-Bukhari and others from Ibn Mas’ud, it occurs: "We were with the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) in Mina when the moon split." This does not contradict what is authenticated from Anas that it was in Makkah, for he did not state explicitly that he (upon him be peace and prayer) was in Makkah at that exact moment; rather, the intent is that the splitting occurred while the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was residing in Makkah before he migrated to Madinah.

What the Hafiz Abu al-Fadl al-Iraqi recorded in his Nazm al-Sirah confirms the occurrence of the splitting. Abd ibn Humayd, Al-Hakim (who authenticated it), Ibn Mardawayh, and Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Dala’il recorded through the path of Mujahid from Abu Ma’mar from Ibn Mas’ud who said: "I saw the moon split into two parts twice in Makkah before the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) went out." As for the claim of consensus [on it being twice], it is not accepted. In Al-Mawahib, Hafiz Ibn Hajar says: "I think that his statement 'by consensus' relates to the fact of the splitting, not to it being 'twice,' for I do not know of any hadith scholar who affirmed that the splitting was repeated during his time (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). Perhaps the one who said 'twice' intended 'two parts'." This is the only way to reconcile the narrations. It is clear that this interpretation, despite being far-fetched, is not possible for the report of Ibn Mas’ud mentioned earlier due to the phrasing "two parts," which means "two sections."

What I hold regarding the interpretation of this is that "twice" in the statement of Ibn Mas’ud is a qualifier for the sighting and its repetition. It does not necessitate the repetition of the splitting itself; rather, he saw it split, turned his gaze away, then returned it and saw it likewise, unchanged. In this, there is an indication that it was a sighting free of doubt. The disbelievers did similar to this. Abu Nu’aym recorded through the path of ’Ata’ from Ibn Abbas who said: The people of Makkah came to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and said: "Is there a sign by which we might know you are a Messenger of Allah?" Jibril (peace be upon him) descended and said: "O Muhammad, tell the people of Makkah to gather this night to see a sign." The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) informed them of Jibril's message. They went out on the night of the fourteenth, and the moon split into two halves—one half on Safa and one half on Marwah. They looked, then they rubbed their eyes, then they looked again, then they rubbed their eyes again, then they looked. Then they said: "This is nothing but magic." So Allah (Exalted be He) revealed: (The Hour has approached and the moon has split).

If one of them had said, "I saw the moon split three times," meaning the sighting, it would be correct without issue and would not necessitate multiple instances of the actual splitting. Therefore, the statement of Ibn Mas’ud should be understood in this manner to reconcile the narrations.

Furthermore, if this hadith is authentic, it would be evidence for what Al-Busiri alluded to in his saying: "He split [the moon] for him, and the city...". The condition of every condition being a consequence implies that the splitting occurred on the night of the fourteenth, for the full moon (al-badr) is the moon on the night of the fourteenth. From this, one understands the flaw in the statement of the scholar Ibn Hajar al-Haytami in his commentary: "The apparent meaning of using 'full moon' instead of 'moon' is that the splitting was on the night of the fourteenth." I have not seen any predecessor for him in this, and perhaps he intended by "full moon" simply the moon itself.

Supporting the fact that it was the night of the full moon is what At-Tabarani and Ibn Mardawayh recorded through the path of Ikrimah from Ibn Abbas, who said: "The moon was eclipsed during the time of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), and they said: 'The moon is bewitched.' So (The Hour has approached) was revealed up to (continuous)." Even though an eclipse can, by custom, occur on the night of the thirteenth or the fifteenth, it is most commonly on the fourteenth. There is no necessity to equate the eclipse in this report with the splitting, for there is no barrier—as stated in Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah—to the moon experiencing an eclipse alongside its splitting. Yes, it is mentioned there that the context of the report is strange.

Furthermore, the moon, after splitting, did not have its pieces depart from the sky; rather, they remained in it, separated for a moment, and then reconnected. What some storytellers mention—that it entered the pocket of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and came out of his sleeve—is false and has no basis, as narrated by Sheikh Badr al-Din al-Zarkashi from his teacher Imad ibn Kathir. May the curse of Allah be upon the one who fabricated it. The report in Abu Nu’aym, which he recorded through the path of Ad-Dahhak from Ibn Abbas, stating that it split and became two moons, one on Safa and the other on Marwah, remaining there from the time of Asr until nightfall as they looked at it, then vanished, is not to be relied upon. How could it be, when that report contains that the splitting occurred upon the demand of the Jewish scholars, and that those who said "This is continuous magic" were them? This is contrary to what the many authentic reports state, as is clear to anyone who investigates. It is also common that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) pointed to the moon with his noble index finger and it split, but I have not seen this in any authentic report. And Allah (Exalted be He) knows best.

The philosophers denied the very possibility of the splitting, based on their claim that breaking and reconnection (al-kharq wa al-ilti’am) are impossible for celestial bodies. Their evidence for this is weaker than a spider's web; it has been pierced by the slightest breath of the thoughts of the true celestial scholars, a piercing that accepts no reconnection, as has been explained in its proper place.

Some atheists said: "If it had occurred, it would have been transmitted mutawatir, and all the people of the earth would have shared in knowing it, not just the people of Makkah, because it is a sensed, witnessed matter. People are partners in this, and human nature is eager to narrate the strange and report what has not been known. There is nothing stranger than the splitting of this great body, and it has not been recorded at all in ancient times. If it had any basis, it would have been immortalized in the books of astronomy and astrology; the observers would have mentioned it, as they existed long before the mission [of the Prophet]. Their unanimous omission and neglect of it, despite its significance and clarity, is something custom does not permit. Also, the breaking of such a great body is inconceivable. Furthermore, its breaking would necessitate a massive sound, many times louder than the most destructive thunderbolts, and it is not unlikely that most of the earth's inhabitants would have perished from it. Also, when it broke and became two pieces, its force of gravity would have vanished, like a mountain if it were split, so it would remain split, or at least remain so for many years."

The answer to this is that it happened at night, a time of heedlessness, and lasted for a short duration. Seeing the moon in one country does not necessitate seeing it in all countries, due to the difference in horizons (matali’). The moon might be rising for one group while absent for others, or eclipsed for some while not for others. The concern for astronomical observation was not at the level it is today, and the heedlessness of observers for a moment is not unlikely. The splitting does not alter its stations nor change its course; the most that could be said is that a force of movement was generated in the eastern piece so it could catch up with its western counterpart. What is there to prevent Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) from creating in it a speed similar to that which He (Exalted be He) created in the light of the sun? The masters of modern science have said: The distance between the earth and the sun is 340,000 farsakh, and its light reaches the earth in 8 minutes and 13 seconds, so light travels 70,000 farsakh per second.

It is not required to know the cause of every event; rather, many frequently witnessed events have no known cause, such as the sighting of stars appearing close despite their extreme distance—they have stated they have not discovered the reason for this. It is sufficient to note their failure to understand the true cause of vision by the eye. If someone had proposed to them, in the absence of knowledge, the properties of sight—despite it being a small piece of fat whose conditions are known to anatomists—they would have vehemently denied it, called it a total lie, and attributed it to madness.

Anyone who concedes the influence of souls to the extent that one person can strike another down just by looking at them and directing their intent toward them would not find it unlikely that there is a cause similar to that. It has been authenticated regarding the "evil eye" that some Bedouins who have a piercing eye can split the hump of a she-camel in two. Sometimes an image is formed for him from sand, he looks at it, and splits it, and the hump splits even without him seeing the camel itself. All of this is by way of concession; otherwise, the showing of Allah (Exalted be He) is sufficient for the splitting, as it is for all miracles and extraordinary events. If every event had to have a [natural] cause, it would lead to an infinite regression (tasalsul), and evidence has been established for its impossibility.

The claim that the breaking would necessitate a massive sound is rejected in the case at hand, as is the vanishing of gravity. Bodies are different in their properties, so it does not follow that the body of the moon and the earth are the same. It is possible that one of the two pieces became like a great mountain relative to the earth if it were lifted by a force, for instance, attracting it back to it if it did not go beyond the limit of its attraction, as they claim. It is insisted that that piece did not go beyond the limit of attraction. Moreover, we have no need for all of this after establishing possibility and the encompassment of His (Exalted be He) power, and that He (Glory be to Him) is the Doer of what He wills.

The bottom line is that the denier has nothing but the "improbability" (isti’bad), and he cannot provide any evidence for a "rational impossibility" (istihala dhatiyya). If it were to split, the improbability in such contexts is close to madness in the view of anyone possessed of a sound mind. It is narrated from Al-Hasan that he said: "This splitting is after the second blast of the Trumpet," and the use of the past tense is for the certainty of the occurrence. This is also narrated from ’Ata’. What supports the position of the majority is the recitation of Hudhayfah: fa-qad inshaqqa al-qamaru (the moon has indeed split), for the sentence there is a circumstantial clause (hal), implying proximity to the Hour and the occurrence of the splitting before the Day of Resurrection. Likewise is His (Exalted be He) saying:...