What is meant by "miracle" (iʿjāz) in Islamic tradition, and why is it considered evidence for Muhammad's prophethood?

Miracle (iʿjāz) in Islamic tradition is a central concept referring to that which humans are incapable of producing the like of, particularly associated with the Quran as a sign of Muhammad's prophetic truthfulness. The basic idea: if someone brings something that transcends ordinary human capabilities and claims it is from God, this makes their claim more probable. However, the concept is deeper and more precise than this simplification, with a long history of philosophical, linguistic, and theological discussion that deserves reflection.

Insufficient Responses to Avoid

From some believers:

"The Quran is miraculous, and whoever doesn't see its miracle has a closed heart." This is a claim without argument. The question is not about the state of hearts, but about the nature of miracle and how to prove it. Many rational people throughout history have not been convinced by Quranic miracle, and explaining this through "closed hearts" provides no objective argument.

"The miracle is clear to anyone who reads the Quran in Arabic." Excessive simplification. Knowledge of Arabic is a necessary condition for appreciating Quranic eloquence, but it is not sufficient for proving miracle. Many eloquent Arabs throughout history did not acknowledge the miracle, and the matter requires more than mere linguistic taste.

"Scientific miracle in the Quran proves it is from God." This type of miracle is highly controversial even among Muslim scholars. Many claims of scientific miracle rely on forced interpretations of texts, and may harm more than benefit when science proves otherwise.

From some deniers:

"The Quran is merely an eloquent book, and Arabs produced many eloquent texts." This response ignores the specificity of the miracle claim. Quranic miracle is not merely "high eloquence," but a claim of transcending human capability in the context of challenge. The matter requires more precise analysis than mere superficial comparison.

"If the Quran were miraculous, everyone who heard it would believe." Flawed logic. Miracle—even if proven—does not automatically necessitate faith. People may reject truth for psychological, social, or intellectual reasons. Even sensory miracles in religious narratives did not lead to universal belief.

"The challenge to bring something like the Quran is not objective—who judges?" An objection with merit, but not decisive. True, determining "similarity" is difficult, but this does not negate the possibility of objective differences between texts. The matter requires clear criteria, not wholesale rejection of the idea.

Why These Responses Are Insufficient

They share a superficial treatment of a complex concept. Miracle in Islamic tradition is not merely a "beautiful text" or "scientific information," but a theological-philosophical concept with multiple dimensions requiring precise understanding before acceptance or rejection.

Serious Positions in the Discussion

First, the classical conception of miracle. Muslim theologians (mutakallimūn) and rhetoric scholars developed an integrated theory of Quranic miracle including:

1. Rhetorical miracle (iʿjāz bayānī): Not merely good style, but unique composition (naẓm) combining the highest degrees of eloquence with precision in meaning and psychological impact, consistently throughout a complete book.

2. Legislative miracle: An integrated legal and ethical system from an unlettered man in a Bedouin environment that founded a global civilization.

3. Unseen miracle (iʿjāz ghaybī): Reports about the near future (like Roman victory) and distant future that came true, and about the distant past matching later discoveries.

4. Historical challenge and incapacity: The Quran explicitly challenged them to bring something like it, and the most eloquent Arabs failed to respond despite strong motivation.

Second, the position of al-Bāqillānī and al-Jurjānī. These scholars developed the theory of "composition" (naẓm) that transcends mere eloquence to a unique linguistic-semantic structure. ʿAbd al-Qāhir al-Jurjānī particularly provided precise analysis of how Quranic composition is unique from any human composition.

Third, the critical Orientalist position. Some Orientalists like Theodor Nöldeke studied the Quran with critical methods and attempted to explain its characteristics without resorting to miracle. They saw it as a distinguished religious text but within human possibility. This position—despite Muslim rejection—deserves study to understand strengths and weaknesses in the miracle argument.

Fourth, contemporary approaches. Researchers like Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd and Muḥammad ʿĀbid al-Jābirī attempted to re-read miracle with modern methods. Some focused on the Quran's historical impact, others on its internal structure, and others on its interaction with cultural context.

Where We Stand in This Discussion Today

Miracle remains a living concept in contemporary Quranic studies. Modern research in linguistics and literary studies provides new tools for analyzing Quranic text and understanding its distinctiveness. At the same time, academic criticism raises important questions about miracle criteria and the possibility of proving it objectively.

From the "rational probability" (rajḥān ʿaqlī) perspective adopted by this site, miracle is considered a supporting indicator within the system of six indicators for evaluating prophethood, not a decisive proof by itself. This position allows appreciation of the miracle argument's strength without claiming absolute certainty.

For Advanced Reading

─ Intermediate level: The theory of composition (naẓm) in ʿAbd al-Qāhir al-Jurjānī and its applications
─ Advanced level: Miracle between normativity and description in contemporary linguistic studies
─ "Quranic Inimitability (Iʿjāz)" family page on the site
─ Comparison of the miracle concept with miracle concepts in other religions