Prophecies in the Quran: Difference between revisions

A major theme in the Quran are prophecies of an eschatalogical nature, i.e. concerning the last day. In Surah al-Rum ("The Romans"), there is also a prophecy concerning contemporary military-political events, which at that time were also seen in a broader eschatological context, and has been of considerable interest to academic scholars.

The Romans (Byzantines) have been defeated in the nearest land - Quran 30:2-7

This famous Quranic passage does not mention the Persians (Sasanids), though it was understood in tafsir (commentary) tradition to be a reference to the long-running war between the Byzantines (Romans) and their Sasanian (Persian) imperial rivals. Given the importance of their rivalry, often a topic of prophecy in late antiquity, it is perhaps unsurprising that a prophet would be expected to comment on the situation.

In 614 CE, the Sasanids captured Jerusalem from the Byzantine empire, a moment of great dispair for the Christian world and seems to be the defeat mentioned in Q. 30:2. In 622 CE the Byzantines had a significant victory over the Sasanids in Anatolia, modern Turkey. This marked the end of the first stage of the war and is commonly claimed to be the fulfilment of the prophecy. Fighting continued, with the Romans increasingly successful. The end of the war came in 628 CE when the Byzantine emperor Heraclius accepted the surrender of the Sasanids, regained Jerusalem and returned to that holy city the relic of the "true cross" which the Sasanids had taken as spoils of war during their conquest of Jerusalem 14 years earlier (see Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628).

The Arabic word translated "a few" years in verse 4 is biḍ'ʿi, which traditionally and in Arabic dictionaries indicates a range of three to nine (though there is significant doubt about this definition, discussed below). Three to nine years would fit the eight year gap between the capture of Jerusalem and the Byzantine victory under Heraclius in Anatolia, though critics sometimes point out that this was by no means the end of the war.

That did not come until some years later in 628 CE, fourteen years after Jerusalem was captured in 614 CE; Jerusalem itself was only recovered to great rejoicing in 629 CE under the peace treaty. Rather, Anatolia marked what turned out to be a turning point in Byzantine fortunes. Indeed, the prophecy most likely is an attempt to predict a conclusive victory that ends the war rather than an intermediate battle. As set out below, wars between these two sides were often the topic of prophecies in late antique eschatalogical tradition, in which the final victory of the Romans (Byzantines) over the Persians was seen as an apocalyptic prelude to the end times.

Apocalyptic prophecies of a final Byzantine victory in late antiquity

In his article, 'The Romans Will Win!' Q 30:2‒7 in Light of 7th c. Political Eschatology, academic scholar Tommaso Tesei demonstrates that there were a number of similar contemporary Christian prophecies about the Byzantine-Sasanid war with an ultimate victory for the Romans.^[1] These are framed in an eschatological context, with the final victory commencing a glorious period in prelude to the apocalypse. He writes, "the opening verses of sūrat al-Rūm bear a striking resemblance to prophecies circulating in the Middle East at the time when the Qurʾānic passage purportedly was formulated."

For example, he writes that "In a passage of the History of Maurice, composed by Theophylact Simocatta during the reign of Heraclius (r. 610–641 CE), the author reports a prophecy attributed to the Sasanian sovereign Khosrow II." Tesei's quote from this passage includes the following lines:

A mid 7th century prophecy by Pseudo-Ephrem includes the following:

Similar prophecies occur in several 7th century Jewish works, including Sefer Elijah, which links it to a prophecy in the Biblical Book of Daniel. According to common Rabbinical interpretation, the fourth and last great imperial power in that Biblical prophecy was the Byzantine empire, destined to collapse and be followed by the coming of the messiah. For Christians, a more positive interpretation had the Roman empire as that fourth power, with the Byzantines being a Christian continuation thereof as the final world power to prepare for the coming kingdom of heaven. Imperial campaigns were cast in this context as eschatalogical events of cosmic grandeur. Throughout the 6th century Byzantine emperors had propagandist policies marked by intense escatalogical inclinations. After the capture of Jerusalem in the early 7th century, propaganda was needed against Christian pessimism and Jewish eschatalogical expectations during the war.^[2] Thus, Jewish eschatalogical prophecies were of a Byzantine defeat, whereas Christian versions give them victory and a period of rule before the end.

Tesei also points to 'the Syriac Alexander Legend', which is known to have influenced another Quranic passage, as a famous example of such propaganda. In this legend, the Persian king's astrologers predict a final Roman victory over the Persians, and then wrongly predict that its reign will last til the end of time.^[1] At the time, Tesei followed the common view that the Syriac Alexander Legend was composed in 629-30 CE. Since then (in 2023), he has demonstrated and helped build a new academic consensus that it was actually composed in the mid 6th century (with a small later interpolation shortly after Heraclius's final victory over the Sassanids in 628 CE). The prediction therein of an ultimate Roman victory goes as follows:^[3]

Tesei is of the view that the traditional Meccan period dating of Surah al-Rum should be ignored and that the opening verses should be regarded as an ex-eventu prophecy made shortly after 628 CE i.e. revealed after the event, as was a common practice in late antique literature (and is the case with most of the above examples).^[5] He suggests that a non-political version of imperial propagandist prophecies filtered through to Muhammad from his Arab-Byzantine allies around 628, possibly influenced by monophysite Christian rejection of imperial war propaganda.^[6]

He also suggests that Q. 30:4, which states that "And that day the believers will rejoice", could be interpreted in terms of eschatalogical expectations that an ultimate Roman victory over the Sasanids would herald the unfolding of the final stage of sacred history, in line with the similar 7th century prophecies about the war. To support this he notes that the phrase "And on that day" (wa-yawmaʿiḏin) has eschatalogical connotations when it is used elsewhere in the Quran, as does the reference to Allah's "promise" (waʿd) in verse 6, though others have pointed out there are exceptions.

Adam Silverstein concurs with Tesei's assessment that the Quranic passage should be viewed in a wider, eschatalogical prophetic context of late antiquity, though draws on and emphasises more strongly the Jewish sources before the 7th century which allows time for them to have influenced the Quran during the Meccan period when the verses were traditionally revealed and may support an alternative reading of the Quranic passage in which the Romans are prophecised to be finally defeated (see the section on variant readings below; Silverstein himself argues we must remain agnostic as to which reading is correct. In this alternative reading, the rejoicing of the believers in verse 4 would be due to the downfall of the Romans rather than their victory.^[7]

Criticisms and other views

Tesei's article has received a number of academic criticisms, particularly by Zishan Ghaffar, as detailed below,^[8] as well as from Mehdy Shaddel, who points out that known ex-eventu prophecies in late antique apocalypses have a 2-part structure: an ex-eventu prophecy (to gain the reader's trust) followed by an attempted actual apocalyptic prediction about the future, unlike the Quranic passage.^[9]

Ghaffar has criticised Tesei for interpreting the Quranic passage as an ex-eventu prophecy since "a few years" would be an unnecessarily vague prediction if made after the events had transpired, unlike known ex-eventu prophecies. Unlike typical apocalyptic prophecies, it also does not fortell how events will unfold up to the end time.

Ghaffar also rejects any suggestion that the passage is an apocalyptic prophecy since the Quran emphasises that the no-one but Allah knows the date of the end time, so would not make such a prediction. It should be noted, however (per Tesei) that Christians believed a Roman victory would commence a period of rule until the second coming i.e. not an immediate apocalypse.

Instead, Ghaffar innovatively interprets Q30:2-7 not as a prophecy, but rather a description of events and reassurance/invocation that the tide will turn by the help of Allah, using a formulaic phrase of invocation to Allah / Rahman seen on a number of pre-Islamic rock inscriptions.

Q30:5 starts with binaṣri l-lahi... (By the help of Allah... )
Q30:6 starts with waʿda l-lahi (the promise of Allah...)

Ghaffar argues that in those verses "The Qurʾān is using the same formula for invocations as in South Arabia: (b-nṣr w-rdʾ ʾlhn)“ (CIH 540), (b-rdʾ rḥmnn) (CIH 6), (b-nṣr w-rdʾ rḥmnn)“ (MAFRAY –Abu Ṯawr 4)."^[10]

This, he argues, recalls Byzantine propaganda as seen on an imperial coin widely issued by Heraclius after the loss of Jerusalem: Deus adiuta Romanis ("May God help the Romans").^[11]

Nevertheless, the passage read as a whole is generally understood to be intended as a prophecy. While a proposed eschatalogical aspect is contested by academic scholars, it is very likely that the passage is at least meant to prophecise a conclusive victory in the Byzantine-Sasanid conflict (not merely a turning of the tide) and the timing thereof. The contemporary expectations and prophecies mentioned above were always about the conclusion of the war.

Three to nine years?

Silverstein notes that the phrase biḍ'ʿi sinīn (three to nine years) in Q. 30:4 also occurs in Quran 12:42, where it refers to the imprisonment of Joseph, which in Genesis 4:1 lasted two years. He adds, "However, the earliest Muslim exegetes (the earliest being Zayd b. ‘Alī, ca. 740 CE), interpret the phrase as meaning either 'three to five years' or 'three to nine years'."^[12]

Critics would probably question then whether the definition was changed over time to accomodate events in the Byzantine-Sasanian war, or even whether the verse could have changed through abrogation as events unfolded during Muhammad's lifetime. It is also commonly noted that, whatever the definition of biḍ'ʿi sinīn, it is somewhat vague, as though the author was unwilling to commit to a more specific predicted duration.

Claim that the Byzantine victory of 622 CE fulfilled the prophecy

Given the late antique context set out above, in which any prophecy about the Byzantine-Sasanid wars would be understood to refer to a final triumph of the Byzantines, as an important event in sacred history (perhaps with apocalyptic connotations), it is unlikely that the Quranic prophecy in verses 3-4 was intended as anything less than the ultimate triumph of the Byzantines over the Sasanids. Critics would point out that this would not in fact come until 14 years after the Byzantines lost Jerusalem to the Sasanids and not within the 3-9 years predicted in Surah al-Rum.

The Byzantine victory in Anatolia in 622 CE is often presented as the fulfillment of the Quranic prophecy within the required timeframe. However, that first major Roman victory marked what turned out to be a turning point in the war, after which the Byzantines became increasingly successful, culminating in the Sasanid capitulation to Heraclius which did not come until 628 CE, and the recovery of Jerusalem (lost when the Romans were defeated in the "nearest land") under the peace treaty in 629 CE.

The verb ghalaba which occurs repeatedly in Q. 30:2-3 means "to overcome", "conquer", "become superior"^[13] and the context of the verse suggests that it forsees a victory that ends the war.

Dating the prophecy

Some hadith narrations state that the prophecy was made after the Persians defeated the Romans (the capture of Jerusalem in 614 CE), seven years before the first Byzantine victory, which took place in 622 CE in Anatolia. However, the hadith includes a rather unlikely story about a hasty bet made by Abu Bakr which seems intended to cement the definition of the time duration specified in the verse (see for example Jami` at-Tirmidhi 5:44:3194). One of the earliest Quran commentators, Muqātil ibn Sulaymān (d. 767 CE) similarly said that the verses were revealed after the Persians invaded Palestine (i.e. 613-14 CE).

Interestingly, a hadith in Sunan al-Tirmidhi, one of the main six Sunni hadith collections, states that this passage was not in fact intended as a prophecy but was uttered after an unspecified Roman victory at the time of the battle of Badr. The timing is a little off (Badr is believed to have occured in 624 CE, two years after the Byzantine victory in the Anatolian campaign), but there is conceivably a kernal of history here. The hadith is graded sahih in the Dar-us-Salam edition, though is generally graded weak due to the narrator.

Variant readings which change the meaning of the prophecy

Tommaso Tesei, in his detailed article on the topic of this Quranic propecy, notes that the consonantal skeleton of the Quran standardised by Caliph Uthman allowed a degree of ambiguity when reading the text due to the lack of diacritical marks. Variant readings mentioned by Islamic scholars and set out in Tesei's article included the opposite meaning to the standard reading. In this alternative reading, the passage would most likely by a prophecy that the Byzantine Christians would eventually be defeated by Muhammad's followers rather than being about the war with the Sasanids (the verses do not specify who the Romans are fighting).^[1]

Standard reading: ġulibat al-Rūm … sa-yaġlibūna, “the Romans have been vanquished … they will vanquish”;

Alternative reading: ġalabat al-Rūm … sa-yuġlabūna, “the Romans have vanquished … they will be vanquished”

In other words, without short vowel marks, which were not written in Quranic manuscripts until the 8th century the verb ghalaba غلب could be vocalised as victorious غَلَبَ or defeated غُلِبَ .

Nevertheless, Tesei argues that the standard reading is the most likely to be original, not least given its resemblance to other prophecies circulating in the 7th century middle east in which the Byzantines are ultimately victorious after defeat to the Persians. Similarly, Professor Sean Anthony has argued in favour of the standard reading and against the alternative readings, which are recorded by scholars from at least the 8th century CE though not attested in early manuscripts which are either ambiguous or contain the standard reading.^[14]

Nearest or lowest land?

Sometimes it is claimed that adnā l-arḍi in verse 3 should be interpreted in verse 30:3 to mean "the lowest land" rather than "the nearest land" (adnā is from the same root as the word dun'yā and is primarily defined as "nearest"; it could also mean "lowest" in the moral sense of ignoble, base, vile, mean or weak, though probably was not used in the sense of low elevation.^[15]). By this interpretation the Quran is claimed to have miraculously revealed that the Dead Sea in modern Israel was the lowest point on earth, a fact not known by humans until modern times. Besides the very questionable linguistic interpretation, the main problem with this miracle claim is that the Byzantines did not fight the Persians beside the Dead Sea, which is part of the Jordan rift valley, but rather they beseiged and captured Jerusalem in 614 CE, which is well above sea level.

Gog and Magog - Quran 18:93-101 and 21:96

Gog and Magog are mythical barbarian tribes with an eschatalogical role described in the New Testament book of revelation. The first century CE historian Josephus recorded that Magog was shut behind an iron wall built between mountains by Alexander the Great. In late antiquity, legends continued to develop in which they would break free and overun the earth in the last days, as seen in the Syriac Alexander Legend and its 7th century derivatives (see Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance). The earth was envisioned to be flat and largely unexplored in these legends, as also in the Quran, so it would be easy to imagine these tribes being walled off behind the world encircling mountains with no way around.

From a modern perspective, there is no way that any mountain range could seal off world-threatening tribes for millenia, without any trace of them or the mythical iron and brass wall being discovered.

Judgement day would be close to Muhammad's time

The idea of judgment day being imminent was a common belief in late antiquity, with many prominent Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian writings preaching the eschaton (the purposeful end of the world as part of God's divine plan for judgement day) was about to happen, which continued in early Islam.^[16] Although not a consensus belief, many academic scholars have argued Muhammad preached this belief in the Qur'an.^[17]

(Cf: Quran 21:1 and Quran 70:6-7. And see also e.g. Quran 40:18 and Quran 53:57 where its imminence/closeness is implied in the words azifati / āzifat.^[18])

Some take Quran 54:1 as a future prediction of a sign of judgment day, however Neuwirth (2024) notes the issue with interpreting this as a future event is not based on the Qur'an's words but later traditions.^[19] Alongside the moon splitting in this verse, which given the dubious scientific issues and lack of sightings from anywhere else in the world, modern academics have noted was most likely referring to a celestial phenomenon like a lunar eclipse,^[20] given as a sign of the hour close to happening, which the Meccans rejected due to it seemingly being unrelated to Muhammad.^[21]

The hour's non-arrival seemed to be a repeated source of contention with his audience, with opponents regularly questioning when it would arrive, and questioning why the punishment that was promised to them has not yet come.^[22] Though one might point out there may appear to be tension with the creation of a law-giving prophet and community building in the Medinan Qur'an, Shoemaker and Cook point out those preaching the end of the world often also preached living righteously until the hour arrived.^[23]

Alongside the plain meaning of the text, there is ample evidence this belief was held by many early Muslims too, including very early canonical and sahih rated hadith (see: failed eschatological predictions in the hadith) with more cited by Shoemaker.^[24] There are also many other non-canonical but early (within the first century of Islam) traditions stating the end of the eschaton would occur within Muhammad's lifetime or shortly after,^[25] in other sources such biographical 'seerah' material^[26] Later Islamic scholars like al-Tabari would often use metaphorical interpretations of these to reconcile the continued passage of time by pushing the predicted end date into the future.^[27]

However others scholars have disputed the idea such as Dr Zishan Ghaffar, who states that the Qur'an takes an agnostic stance on when the eschaton will occur, noting many verses claiming the knowledge belongs to God and that Muhammad is not told when it will occur.^[28]

Cf: Quran 31:34

Sinai (2017) notes that stating the end is said to be 'nigh' while not specifying exactly when (or trying to foretell specific pre-judgment day historical signs to mark it is close) is not contradictory, and has been seen in other late antique Christian writings.^[29]

The day of resurrection

A large portion of the prophetic character of the Quran involves eschatalogical events around the last day. It describes a loud trumpet-like blast, the earth and mountains being lifted and the mountains pulverised, the heavens being split and rolled up, and so on.

The heaven will be split and rolled up like scroll

Many verses clearly convey a cosmography in which the sky has a two dimensional structure as a layered dome or flat layers (for detailed discussion and the views of academic scholars, see Cosmology of the Quran). On the last day it says the heavens will be split, rent asunder, with angels appearing at its edges.

These heavens are like roofs (saqf Quran 21:32, Quran 52:5), a building/edifice/tent (binaan Quran 2:22, Quran 40:64), a ceiling (samk Quran 79:28), in layers (Quran 71:15 and Quran 67:3), while Quran 13:2 further emphasizes this image by pointing out that, unlike what one would expect with an Arabian tent, the roof that is the sky is without visible pillars (perhaps phrased with deliberate ambiguity). Reinforcing the 2 dimensional imagery, Quran 81:11 adds that the sky is like a covering that can be 'stripped away', while Quran 21:104 states that it will eventually be rolled or folded up like a parchment and Quran 39:67 says that the heavens will then be held in Allah's hand. This will occur after it has been slit (furijat Quran 77:9), rent asunder with clouds (Quran 25:25), split (inshaqqat Quran 55:37, Quran 84:1, Quran 69:16 with angels appearing at its edges Quran 69:17). The heaven will become as gateways (Quran 78:19, a possibility also alluded to in Quran 15:13-15).

Contradictory prophecies regarding the last day and punishment of disbelievers

The Quran describes frequently the fate of disbelievers when it claims they will be brought to judgement before Allah on the last day. Critics have noticed that in some cases these prophecies are contradictory.

For example, a few verses claim that they will be unable to speak in their defence.

Another verse states that their body parts will bear witness of what they did.

However, various other verses state that they will be able to lie about their past conduct and describe dialogue taking place between disbelievers and believers or with Allah or angels on the day of resurrection. For example:

Another contradiction involves whether or not the disbelievers will be raised blind on the day of resurrection. The following verse clearly states that they will be blind:

Other verses, however, state that they will see and observe what is happening on that day.

Regarding the food of the disbelievers, the Quran also gives contradictory claims. They are variously described as being exclusively fed thorns (dhari), pus from wounds, or a hell fruit (zaqqum; see also in Quran 44:40-46 and Quran 56:41-52)

Regarding these verses and others, see the article Contradictions in the Quran.

Other prophecies

Preservation of the Quran

Quran 15:9 states "Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian." This has been taken as Allah's assurance that the Quran is safe from corruption. The exact interpretation varied and became stricter over time. A common notion today is that the book is preserved from the original, letter for letter, dot for dot. Such notions have faced challenges both due to modern academic work and the Islamic tradition itself. See the main article for detailed information.

Abu Lahab's fate

Surah 111, al-Masad, consists of five verses (Quran 111:1-5) condemning a man it calls Abu Lahab ("Father of the flame") and his wife to hell. According to tradition, Abu Lahab died some years later, still in disbelief.

It is often claimed in apologetics discourse that Abu Lahab could have destroyed the credibility of Muhammad and the Quran by converting or pretending to do so after the surah had been revealed. This notion that the prophecy was falsifiable has faced two main criticisms: Firstly, the surah does not state that Abu Lahab will never believe, but only that he is destined to be plunged into hell when he dies, which is unfalsifiable. If instead it is interpreted as a prophecy about Abu Lahab's continuing non-belief, critics argue it was self-fulfilling the moment it was made. He could not credibly come to believe in a book which prophecises that he will not do so.

See Also

• Muhammad's prophecies
• Scientific Miracles in the Quran
• Islam and Miracles

References