…with wisdom and good exhortation, and argue with them in the manner that is best.” The verse is not speaking of what they call demonstrative, rhetorical, or dialectical syllogisms. For the syllogisms they regard as “demonstrative,” some of whose features were outlined earlier, never yield anything except a universal conclusion that does not point to any specific, concrete matter—and most of those universals exist only in the mind, not in external reality. What the Messenger brought comprises two categories: information and commands.
As for the information, he informed us about Allah—His particular names and attributes. They themselves admit that such matters cannot be known through their syllogisms. Indeed, with respect to what the Messenger conveyed from his Lord, may He be exalted, they are among the farthest of people from true knowledge; in fact, the unbelieving Jews and Christians, even after their scriptures have been abrogated and altered, are closer to the Messenger in this regard than they are. The same holds for what he reported about the angels, the Throne, the Footstool, Paradise, and Hellfire: none of this can be ascertained by means of their logical proofs. The Throne is not the ninth sphere, nor is the Footstool the eighth, as has been clarified elsewhere; yet even if that were conceded, such things could never be established by logical syllogism.
The Messenger also related specific events—such as Noah’s discourse with his people and the particular circumstances of his story; likewise the detailed affairs of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, peace be upon them all. None of this can be known through their syllogisms, demonstrative or otherwise, for their proofs yield only universal propositions, whereas these matters are particular and concrete.
He likewise reported past events and foretold future ones in precise detail. He even spoke about the Tatars: it is soundly transmitted in both al-Bukhārī and Muslim, through multiple chains, that he said,
“The Hour will not come until you fight the Turks: small-eyed, flat-nosed, ruddy-cheeked, wearing footwear of hair, their faces like hammered shields.”
Is it conceivable that their syllogisms and demonstrations could ever point to a specific individual or to a given nation—much less describe them with these traits—some seven hundred years before they appeared?