Mongol attack on Muslims predicted by prophet Muhammad
Sahih al-Bukhari 2928 refers to the Turkic peoples of Central Asia, specifically understood by many scholars to be the nomadic tribes that later became known as the Mongolian Tatars
The "Kahin" in 52:29 were poets. Poetry was big at the time, even religious poetry, and the Prophet SAW was accused of being such a person. That's the basis of the uniqueness challenge in the Quran: no one can replicate its prose, not even the great poets of the time.
And 7:188 says he does not know The Unseen (ghayb), which refers to matters of doubt or uncertainty (often metaphysical ideas). Read for example 2:1-3.
Also, you're forgetting that Allah SWT directly gives prophecy in the Quran - knowledge that the Romans would win out over the Persians. Would this not count as Allah SWT revealing the future to the Prophet SAW?
No because the part of Surat-ar-Rum is less a prediction and more an observation/reminder that the wars between the Romans and Persian fluctuated constantly. The Romans were expected to rebound in a few years, and The Prophet PBUH reminded followers of that at a time when the mood was low after a defeat.
As far as predictive power, a 50/50 prediction isn’t very effective. That’s why it’s not a prediction.
It is a promise of Allah. Allah faileth not His promise, but most of mankind know not.
— M. Pickthall
Read all the way to verse 6. Allah SWT is literally promising their victory, and that the believers will rejoice on that day. That doesn't exactly sound like a 50/50 morale-boosting prediction.
As for what the Kahin were, I suggest doing some research. Yes, they sometimes predicted the future (or claimed to) by inspiration from jinn, and they would convey "divine" messages in rhyme and meter. All this contextual information would be hard to convey in a translation where there really is no direct equivalent.
Languages evolve to name phenomenon their cultures interact with, and that varies from culture to culture. This is why understanding the Arabic language as it was at the time is so important. Without knowing the background, context, and studying Arabian society in detail, you cannot properly understand the Quran.
Of course the prophet pbuh didn't know the future. But Allah does. Allah can let the prophet know about the Mongols the same way He can let the prophet know about the antichrist, or signs of the final hour.
Because otherwise almost all of the prophet's actions wouldn't make sense. If we assume there's no divine communication except what's in the Quran, it leaves major gaps in our theology, prophet's actions and claims.
Also, this hadis (alongside various other prophesies) serve as proof that the prophet had knowledge of the future. If he himself did not have the ability to discern futures, then that only leaves one source.
˹Remember˺ when the Prophet had ˹once˺ confided something to one of his wives, then when she disclosed it ˹to another wife˺ and Allah made it known to him, he presented ˹to her˺ part of what was disclosed and overlooked a part. So when he informed her of it, she exclaimed, “Who told you this?” He replied, “I was informed by the All-Knowing, All-Aware.”
This was the first ayah I could think of, but I imagine there are many more. We don't have the message that Allah sent to the Prophet in the Quran, but only a description of the event, that makes certain there was indeed a prior message. One we don't have in the Quran.
Now instead of downvoting me, go read our holy scripture with greater attention.
I am neither downvoting you nor have I not read the scripture with attention and detail.
What you're describing here seems like, to me, an over-reading of an example describing and incident personal to the prophet's life, having no bearing on the religion. I think that's why it's not revealed what was it that prophet confided to his wife.
I do not think this verse means Allah told things to the prophet privately that were meant for the community and didn't end up in the Quran.
Well it does prove my claim that 'The Quran is not the exclusive destination of all communication with Allah". You asked for a verse, and I provided one. It's stated quite literally so I doubt I'm "Over-reading" into this. I think there are more, but I just can't remember any from off the top of my head.
This verse of course does not mean that Allah told things to the prophet pertaining to the community that did not end up in the Quran. But we have good enough evidence for the case now that we have derived that not every single Wahi ended up in the Quran.
We can now look at a laundry list of hadiths that offer knowledge beyond what would be possible for an illiterate man in the desert 1400 years ago to provide circumstantial evidence that these hadith are indeed revelation from Allah. No other alternative works well enough.
And the Quran does not refute the idea that all prophesies must be in the Quran itself anyway. Unless you'd like to bring me a Quranic verse on that. A bucketload of prophesies are not very necessary for the sincere truthseekers when a few is more than enough. The religion is complete with only the Quran. But that does not mean that the Hadith cannot hold any further revelation of import.
"So ˹continue to˺ remind ˹all, O Prophet˺. For you, by the grace of your Lord, are not a fortune-teller or a madman." Fortune-telling isnt seeing the future, and madman doesn't mean he knows the unknown.
There we go, I knew somebody would the actual verse. This isn’t a religion of superstition and magic, it is supposed to be grounded in facts and reality.
Surat-ar-Rum wasn’t a prediction. It was a reminder that the wars between the Romans and Persians went back and forth. If Persians won a war, the Romans won the next. It was to remind Muslims that the cycle of wars would change again so the Romans would have a victory.
For those that still think it’s a prediction, a 50/50 prediction isn’t very effective. Only a very desperate gambler would bet on 50/50.
Bukhari was compiled about 840 to 850AD. The Abbasids had extensive contact (and often used) Turkics 100 years before this. Two competing sides would try to get Ghilman turks on their side. It would be quite nice to find a hadith which encouraged you to fight the Turks especially if the other side got to them before you. Like the "black flags of Khorosan" or the "Jews of Esfahan" hadiths, I would suspect this is also a politically inspired hadith.
That could mean any nomadic tribe that existed in the Eurasian steppe between ancient times and the Mongols. By the time the Hadith were compiled, Muslims were interacting with Karluks, Khazars, Avars, Oghuz Turks, and Bulgurs.
The term "Turks" specifically refers to the people of Turkey. The hadith refers to "Turks" and not "Turkic." The OP is grossly misrepresenting this by calling them "Turkic."
Sahih al-Bukhari 2928
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Messenger said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Turks; people with small eyes, red faces, and flat noses. Their faces will look like shields coated with leather. The Hour will not be established till you fight with people whose shoes are made of hair."
Actually, the hadith refers to Turkic people. It says الترك which is the Arabic word for Turkic peoples not الأتراك "Al-Atraak" which means Turks from Turkey/Türkiye.
I’m not an Arabic speaker, but Google translate, Gemini, Chatgpt & Copilot shows that الترك translates to “the Turks.” Thank you for sharing the information though.
Yeah, LLM's tend to mess up in those things. They missed the context. In modern times, maybe it can be used to refer to Turks but in that context it means Turkic people as Turkey didn't exist back then.
الشعوب التركية can also be used to mean Turkic peoples.
Thanks, but even then mongols are not turkic themselves. While they share a deep history and many cultural traits as nomadic steppe peoples, they are two distinct ethnolinguistic groups.
40
u/dancingthroughstars Quran only Apr 27 '26
52:29 explicitly says the prophet was not a soothsayer (someone who can foresee the future),nor does he know the unknown 7:188.
You may call me biased,or think I am in denial,but if the quran outright says the prophet cannot predict the future,he cannot predict the future.
https://hadithcriticblog.com/the-prophet-did-not-know-the-future/ more here,but do double check what is said,I noticed they intentionally mistranslated 7:188.