Maulana Maudoodi’s introduction to the last two chapters of the Quran,
surah Al-Falaq and An-Nas, known as Mu'awwidhatayn (the two Surahs in
which refuge with Allah has been sought). (Tafheem-al-Quran)
To read this online: http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=114
________________________________________
Name
Although these two Surahs of the Qur'an are separate entities and are
written in the Mushaf also under separate names, yet they are so
deeply related mutually and their contents so closely resemble each
other's that they have been designated by a common name Mu'awwidhatayn
(the two Surahs in which refuge with Allah has been sought). Imam
Baihaqi in Dala'il an-Nubuwwat has written that these Surahs were
revealed together, that is why the combined name of both is
Mu'awwidhatayn. We are writing the same one Introduction to both, for
they discuss and deal with just the same matters and topics. However,
they will be explained and commented on separately below.
Period of Revelation
Hadrat Hasan Basri, 'Ikrimah, 'Ata' and Jabir bin Zaid say that these
Surahs are Makki. A tradition from Hadrat 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas also
supports the same view. However, according to another tradition from
him, it is Madani and the same view is held also by Hadrat 'Abdullah
bin Zubair and Qatadah. One of the traditions which strengthens this
second view is the Hadith which Muslim, Tirmidhi, Nasa'i and Imam
Ahmad bin Hanbal have related on the authority of Hadrat 'Uqbah bin
'Amir. He says that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peach) one day said
to him: "Do you know what kind of verses have been revealed to me
tonight? - these matchless verses are A'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and
A'udhu bi-Rabbin-nas. ThisHadith is used as an argument for these
Surahs to be Madani because Hadrat 'Uqbah bin 'Amir had become a
Muslim in Madinah after the hijrah, as related by Abu Da'ud and Nasa'i
on the basis of his own statement. Other traditions which have lent
strength to this view are those related by Ibn Sa'd, Muhiyy-us-Sunnah
Baghawi, Imam Nasafi, Imam Baihaqi, Hafiz Ibn Hajar, Hafiz Badr-uddin
'Ayni, 'Abd bin Humaid and others to the effect that these Surahs were
revealed when the Jews had worked magic on the Holy Prophet (upon whom
be peace) in Madinah and he had fallen ill under its effect. Ibn Sa'd
has related on the authority of Waqidi that this happened in A.H. 7.
On this very basis Sufyan bin Uyainah also has described these Surah
as Madani.
But as we have explained in the Introduction to Surah Al-Ikhlas, when
it is said about a certain Surah or verse that it was revealed on this
or that particular occasion, it does not necessarily mean that it was
revealed for the first time on that very occasion. Rather it sometimes
so happened that a Surah or a verse had previously been revealed, then
on the occurrence or appearance of a particular incident or situation,
the Holy Prophet's attention was drawn to it by Allah for the second
time, or even again and again. In our opinion the same also was the
case with the Mu'awwidhatayn. The subject matter of these Surahs is
explicit that these were sent down at Makkah in the first instance
when opposition to the Holy Prophet there had grown very intense.
Later, when at Madinah storms of opposition were raised by the
hypocrites, Jews and polytheists, the Holy Prophet was instructed to
recite these very Surahs, as has been mentioned in the above cited
tradition from Hadrat Uqbah bin Amir. After this, when magic was
worked on him, and his illness grew intense, Gabriel came and
instructed him by Allah's command to recite these very Surahs.
Therefore, in our opinion, the view held by the commentators who
describe both these Surahs as Makki is more reliable. Regarding them
as connected exclusively with the incident of magic is difficult, for
to this incident related only one verse (v.4), the remaining verses of
Surah al Falaq and the whole of Surah An-Nas have nothing to do with
it directly.
Theme and Subject-Matter
The conditions under which these two Surahs were sent down in Makkah
were as follows. As soon as the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
began to preach the message of Islam, it seemed as though he had
provoked all classes of the people around him. As his message spread
the opposition of the disbelieving Quraish also became more and more
intense. As long as they had any hope that they would be able to
prevent him from preaching his message by throwing some temptation in
his way, or striking some bargain with him, their hostility did not
become very active. But when the Holy Prophet disappointed them
completely that he would not effect any kind of compromise with them
in the matter of faith, and in Surah Al-Kafirun they were plainly
told: "I do not worship those who you worship nor are you worshipers
of Him Whom I worship. For you is your religion and for me is mine",
the hostility touched its extreme limits. More particularly, the
families whose members (men or women, boys or girls) had accepted
Islam, were burning with rage from within against the Holy Prophet.
They were cursing him, holding secret consultations to kill him
quietly in the dark of the night so that the Bani Hashim could not
discover the murderer and take revenge; magic and charms were being
worked on him so as to cause his death, or make him fall ill, or
become mad; satans from among the men and the jinn spread on every
side so as to whisper one or another evil into the hearts of the
people against him and the Qur'an brought by him so that they became
suspicious of him and fled him. There were many people who were
burning with jealousy against him, for they could not tolerate that a
man from another family or clan than their own should flourish and
become prominent. For instance, the reason why Abu Jahl was crossing
every limit in his hostility to him has been explained by himself: "We
and the Bani Abdi Manaf (to which the Holy Prophet belonged) were
rivals of each other: they fed others, we too fed others; they
provided conveyances to the people, we too did the same; they gave
donations, we too gave donations, so much so that when they and we
have become equal in honor and nobility, they now proclaim that they
have a Prophet who is inspired from the heaven; how can we compete
with them in this field? By God, we will never acknowledge him, nor
affirm faith in him". (Ibn Hisham, vol. I, pp. 337-338).
Such were the conditions when the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
was commanded to tell the people: "I seek refuge with the Lord of the
dawn, from the evil of everything that He has created, and from the
evil of the darkness of night and from the evil of magicians, men and
women, and from the evil of the envious", and to tell them: "I seek
refuge with the Lord of mankind, the King of mankind, and the Deity of
mankind, from the evil of the whisperer, who returns over and over
again, who whispers (evil) into the hearts of men, whether he be from
among the jinn or men." This is similar to what the Prophet Moses had
been told to say when Pharaoh had expressed his design before his full
court to kill him: "I have taken refuge with my Lord and your Lord
against every arrogant person who does not believe in the Day of
Reckoning." (Al-Mu'min: 27). And: "I have taken refuge with my Lord
and your Lord lest you should assail me." (Ad- Dukhan;20).
On both occasions these illustrious Prophets of Allah were confronted
with well-equipped, resourceful and powerful enemies. On both
occasions they stood firm on their message of Truth against their
strong opponents, whereas they had no material power on the strength
of which they could fight them, and on both occasions they utterly
disregarded the threats and dangerous plans and hostile devices of the
enemy, saying: "We have taken refuge with the Lord of the universe
against you." Obviously, such firmness and steadfastness can be shown
only by the person who has the conviction that the power of His Lord
is the supreme power, that all powers of the world are insignificant
against Him, and that no one can harm the one who has taken His
refuge. Only such a one can say: "I will not give up preaching the
Word of Truth. I care the least for what you may say or do, for I have
taken refuge with my Lord and your Lord and Lord of all universe."
Question whether Mu'awwidhatayn are, or are not, Quranic
The above discussion is enough to help one understand fully the theme
and content of the two Surahs, but since three points in the books of
Hadith and commentary concerning these Surahs have been discussed,
which are likely to create doubts in the minds, it is necessary to
clear them also here.
First, whether it is absolutely established that these two Surahs are
the Qur'anic Surahs, or whether there is some doubt in this regard.
This question arose because in the traditions related from an
illustrious Companion like Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud, it has been
said that he did not regard these two Surahs as the Surahs of the
Qur'an and had eliminated these from his copy of the Mushaf. Imam
Ahmad, Bazzar, Tabarani, Ibn Marduyah, Abu Ya'la, Abdullah bin Ahmad
bin Hanbal, Humaydi, Abu Nu'aim, Ibn Hibban and other traditionists
have related this from Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud with different
chains of transmitters and mostly on sound authority. According to
these traditions, he not only eliminated these Surahs from the Mushaf
but it has also been reported that he used to say: "Do not mix up with
the Qur'an that which is not of the Qur'an. These two Surahs are not
included in the Quran. This was only a command enjoined on the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) for seeking God's refuge." In some
traditions there is also the addition that he did not recite these
Surahs in the Prayer.
On the basis of these traditions the opponents of Islam had an
opportunity to raise doubts about the Qur'an, saying that this Book,
God forbid, is not free from corruption. For when, according to a
Companion of the rank of Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud, these two Surahs
are an annexation to the Qur'an, many other additions and subtractions
also might have been made in it. To rid the Qur'an of this blame Qadi
Abu Bakr Al-Baqillani, Qadi Iyad and others took the stand that Ibn
Mas'ud was not in fact a denier of the Mu'awwidhatayn being Qur'anic
but only refused to write them in the Mushaf. For, according to him,
only that which the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had allowed,
should be written in the Mushaf, and Ibn Mas'ud did not receive the
information that the Holy Prophet had allowed this. But this stand is
not correct, for according to sound evidence, it is confirmed that Ibn
Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) had denied that these were
Surahs of the Qur'an. Some other scholars, for instance, Imam Nawawi,
Imam Ibn Hazm and Imam Fakhr-ud-din Razi, regard this as a pure lie
and falsehood that Ibn Mas'ud had asserted any such thing. But to
reject genuine historical facts without sound evidence is
unscientific.
Now, the question is: How can the blame that attaches to the Qur'an
because of these traditions of Ibn Mas'ud correctly refuted? This
question has several answers which we shall give below in sequence:
1. Hafiz Bazzar after relating these traditions of Ibn Mas'ud in his
Musnad, has written that he is solitary and isolated in his this
opinion; no one from among the Companions has supported this view.
2. The copies of the Qur'an which the third Caliph, Hadrat Uthman (may
Allah be pleased with him), had got compiled by the consensus of the
Companions and which he had sent from the Islamic Caliphate officially
to the centers of the world of Islam contained both these Surahs.
3. The Mushaf which, since the sacred time of the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace) till today, has the seal of consensus of the entire
world of Islam, contains both these Surahs. The solitary opinion of
only Abdullah bin Mas'ud, in spite of his high rank, has no weight
against this great consensus.
4. It is confirmed by sound and reliable ahadith from the Holy Prophet
(upon whom be peace) that he not only recited these Surahs in the
Prayer himself but instructed others also to recite them, and taught
them to the people as the Surahs of the Qur'an. Consider, for
instance, the following ahadith:
We have cited on the authority of Muslim, Ahmad, Tirmidhi and Nasai
the tradition of Hadrat Uqbah bin Amir that the Holy Prophet told him
about Surah Al-Falaq and Surah An- Nas, saying that those verses had
been revealed to him that night. A tradition in Nasai from Uqbah bin
Amir is to the effect that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
recited both these Surahs in the Morning Prayer. Imam Ahmad on sound
authority has related in his Musnad the tradition from a Companion
that the Holy Prophet said to him, "When you perform the Prayer,
recite both these Surahs in it." In Musnad Ahmad, Abu Daud and Nasai
this tradition of Uqbah bin Amir has been related: "The Holy Prophet
said to him: Should I not teach you two such Surahs as are among the
best Surahs that the people recite? He said: Do teach me, O Messenger
of Allah. Thereupon the Holy Prophet taught him the Mu'awwidhatayn.
Then the Prayer began and the Holy Prophet recited the same two Surahs
in it also, and when after the Prayer the Holy Prophet passed by him,
he said to him, 'O Uqbah, how did you like it?' Then he instructed him
to the effect: When you go to bed, and when you get up from bed,
recite these Surahs." In Musnad Ahmad, Abu Da'ud, Tirmidhi and Nasa'i
there is a tradition from Uqbah bin Amir, saying that the Holy Prophet
exhorted him to recite the Mu'awwidhat (i.e. Qul Huwa Allahu ahad and
the Mu'awwidhatayn) after every Prayer. Nasai, Ibn Marduyah and Hakim
have related this tradition also from Uqbah bin Amir: "Once the Holy
Prophet was riding on a conveyance and I was walking along with him
with my hand placed on his sacred foot. I said: Kindly teach me Surah
Hud or Surah Yusuf. He replied: In the sight of Allah there is nothing
more beneficial for the servant than Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq." A
tradition from Abdullah bin Abid al-Juhani has been related by Nasai,
Baihaqi and Ibn Sad, saying that the Holy Prophet said to him: "Ibn
Abid, should I not tell you what are the best things out of the means
by which the seekers of refuge have sought refuge with Allah? I
submitted: Do teach me, O Messenger of Allah. He replied: Qul a'udhu
bi-Rabbil- falaqand Qul a-udhu bi Rabbin-nas - both these Surahs." Ibn
Marduyah had related from Hadrat Umm Salamah: "The Surahs best liked
by Allah are: Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and Qul a'udhu
bi-Rabbin-nas."
Here, the question arises: what caused Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud the
misunderstanding that these two are not Surahs of the Qur'an? We get
the answer to it when we combine two traditions: first, that Hadrat
Abdullah bin Mas'ud asserted that this was only a command which the
Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) was given to teach him the method of
seeking refuge with Allah; second, the tradition which Imam Bukhari
has related in his Sahih, Imam Ahmad in his Musnad, Hafiz Abu Bakr al-
Humaidi in his Musnad, Abu Nu'aim in his Al-Mustakhraj and Nasai in
his Sunan, with different chains of transmitters, on the authority of
Zirr bin Hubaish, with a slight variation in wording from Hadrat Ubayy
bin Kab, who held a distinguished place among the Companions on the
basis of his knowledge of the Qur'an. Zirr bin Hubaish states: "I said
to Hadrat Ubayy: Your brother, Abdullah bin Mas'ud, says these things.
What do you say about this view? He replied: I had questioned the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) about this. He said to me: I was told to
say 'qul', so I said 'qul'. Therefore, we too say the same as the Holy
Prophet said." In the tradition related by Imam Ahmad, Hadrat Ubayy's
words are to the effect: "I bear witness that the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace) told me that Gabriel (peace be on him) had told him to
say:Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq; therefore, he recited likewise, and
Gabriel asked him to say: Qul a'udhu bi- Rabbin-nas; therefore he too
said likewise. Hence, we too say as the Holy Prophet said." A little
consideration of these two traditions will show that the word qul
(say) in the two Surahs caused Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud the
misunderstanding that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had been
commanded to say: A'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and A'udhu bi-Rabbin-nas. But
he did not feel any need to question the Holy Prophet about it. In the
mind of Hadrat Ubbay bin Kab also a question arose about his and he
put it before the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet replied: "Since
Gabriel (peace be on him) had said qul, so I too say qul." Let us put
it like this. If somebody is commanded and asked: "Say, I seek
refuge", he will not carry out the command, saying: "Say, I seek
refuge", but he will drop the work "say" and say: "I seek refuge." On
the contrary, if the messenger of a superior officer conveys to
somebody the message in these words: "Say, I seek refuge", and this
command is given to him not only for his own person but to be conveyed
to others, he will convey the words of the message verbatim to the
people, and will not have the permission to drop anything from the
text of the message. Thus, the fact that these two Surahs begin with
the word qul is a clear proof that it is Divine Word, which the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) was bound to convey verbatim. It was not
merely a command given to him for his person. Besides these two
Surahs, there are 330 other verses in the Qur'an which begin with the
word qul(say). The presence of qul in all these is a proof that it is
Divine Wprd. which was obligatory for the Holy Prophet to convey
verbatim; otherwise if qul everywhere had meant a command, the Holy
Prophet would have dropped it and said only that which he was
commanded to say, and it would not have been recorded in the Qur'an,
but, on the contrary, he would have remained content with saying only
what he was commanded to say.
Here, if one considers this, one can understand fully well how
unreasonable it is to regard the Companions as infallible and to make
the clamor that a Companion has been defamed as soon as one hears a
saying or doing of his being described as wrong. Here, one can clearly
see what a blunder happened to be committed by an illustrious
Companion like Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud about two Surahs of the
Qur'an. If such an error could be committed by an eminent Companion
like him, others also might commit an error. We can examine it in the
scientific way, and describe it as wrong if a thing said or done by a
Companion is proved to be wrong. But wicked indeed would be the person
who went beyond describing a wrong act as wrong and started reproving
and finding fault with the Companions of the Holy Prophet of Allah.
Concerning the Mu'awwidhatayn the commentators and traditionists have
described the opinion of Ibn Mas'ud as wrong, but no one has dared to
say that by denying these two Surahs of the Qur'an, he had, God
forbid, become a disbeliever.
Question of Holy Prophet's being affected by Magic
The second thing that has arisen in respect of these two Surahs is
that, according to traditions, magic had been worked on the Holy
Prophet, and he had fallen ill under its effect, and Gabriel (peace be
on him) had instructed him to repeat these Surahs to remove the charm.
This has been objected to by many rationalists of both ancient and
modern times. They say that if these traditions are accepted, the
whole Shari'ahbecomes doubtful. For if the Prophet could be charmed,
and according to these traditions he was charmed, one cannot say what
the Prophet might have been made to say and do under the influence of
magic by his opponents, and what in his teaching may be Divine and
what the result of magic. Not only this: they also allege that if this
is accepted as true, it might well be that the Prophet might have been
prompted to make the claim to Prophethood through magic and the
Prophet by misunderstanding might have thought that an angel had come
to him. They also argue that these traditions clash with the Qur'an.
The Qur'an mentions the accusation of the disbelievers who said that
the Prophet was bewitched (Bani Isra'il:47), but these traditions
confirm the accusation of the disbelievers that the Prophet had
actually been charmed and bewitched.
For a proper investigation of this question it is necessary that one
should first see whether it is established by authentic historical
evidence that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had actually been
affected by magic, and if so, what it was and to what extent. Then it
should be seen whether the objections raised against what is
established historically do actually apply to it or not.
The Muslim scholars of the earliest period were truly honest and
upright in that they did not try to corrupt history or conceal facts
according to their own ideas, concepts and assumptions. They conveyed
intact to the later generations whatever was confirmed historically,
and did not at all care how the material supplied by them could be
used by the one who was bent upon drawing perverse conclusions from
the facts. Now, if something stands confirmed by authentic and
historical means, it is neither right for an honest and right-minded
person that he should deny history on the ground that in case he
accepted it, it would lead to these evil results according to his
thinking, nor it is right that he should add to and stretch beyond its
genuine limits by conjecture and speculation whatever is established
historically. Instead, he should accept history as history and then
see what is actually proved by it and what is not.
As far as the historical aspect is concerned, the incident of the Holy
Prophet's being affected by magic is absolutely confirmed, and if it
can be refuted by scientific criticism, then no historical event of
the world can be proved right and genuine. It has been related by
Bukhari, Muslim, Nasai, Ibn Majah, Imam Ahmad, Abdur Razzaq, Humaidi,
Baihaqi, Tabarani, Ibn Sad, Ibn Mardayah, Ibn Abi Shaibah, Hakim, Abd
bin Humaid and other traditionists on the authority of Hadrat Aishah,
Hadrat Zaid bin Arqam and Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas, through so many
different and numerous channels that forgery is out of the question.
Although each tradition by itself is an isolated report (khabar
wahid), we give it below as a connected event from the details
provided by the traditions.
After the peace treaty of Hudaibiyah when the Holy Prophet (upon whom
be peace) returned to Madinah, a deputation of the Jews of Khaibar
visited Madinah in Muharram, A.H. 7 and met a famous magician, Labid
bin Asam, who belonged to the Ansar tribe of Bani Zurayq. They said to
him: "You know how Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings)
has treated us. We have tried our best to bewitch him but have not
succeeded. Now we have come to you because you are a more skilled
magician. Here are three gold coins, accept these and cast a powerful
magic spell on Muhammad." In those days the Holy Prophet had a Jewish
boy as his attendant. Through him they obtained a piece of the Holy
Prophet's comb with some hair stuck to it. Magic was worked on the
same hair and the teeth of the comb. According to some traditions,
magic was worked by Labid bin Asam himself, according to others, his
sisters were more skilled than him and he got the spell cast through
them. Whatever be the case, Labid placed this spell in the spathe of a
male date-tree and his it under a stone at the bottom of Dharwan or
Dhi Arwan, the well of Bani Zurayq. The spell took one whole year to
have effect upon the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace). In the latter
half of the year the Holy Prophet started feeling as if was unwell.
The last forty days became hard on him, of which the last three days
were even harder. But its maximum effect on him was that he way
melting away from within. He thought he had done a thing whereas, in
fact, he had not done it: he thought he had visited his wives whereas
he had not visited them; and sometimes he would doubt having seen
something whereas, in fact, he had not seen it. All these effects were
confined to his own person; so much so that the other people could not
notice what state he was passing through. As for his being a Prophet,
no change occurred in the performance of his duties. There is no
tradition to say that he might have forgotten some verses of the
Qur'an in those days, or might have recited a verse wrongly, or a
change might have occurred in the assemblies and in his counsels and
sermons, or he might have presented a discourse as Revelation which
may not have been revealed to him, or he might have missed a Prayer
and thought that he had performed it. God forbid, if any such thing
had happened, it would have caused a clamor and the whole of Arabia
would have known that a magician had overpowered the one whom no power
had been able to overpower. But the Holy Prophet's position as a
Prophet remained wholly unaffected by it. Only in his personal life he
remained worried on account of it. At last, one day when he was in the
house of Hadrat Aishah, he prayed to Allah to be restored to full
health. In the meantime he fell asleep or drowsed and on waking he
said to Hadrat Aishah: "My Lord has told me what I had asked of Him."
Hadrat Aishah asked what it was. He replied: "Two men (i.e. two angels
in human guise) came to me. One sat near my head and the other near my
feet. The first asked: what has happened to him? The other replied:
Magic has been worked on him. The first asked: who has worked it? He
replied: Labid bin Asam. He asked: In what is it contained? He
replied: In the comb and hair covered in the spathe of a male
date-tree. He asked: where is it? He replied: under a stone at the
bottom of Dhi Arwan (or Dharwan), the well of Bani Zurayq. He asked:
what should be done about it? He replied: the well should be emptied
and it should be taken out from under the stone. The Holy Prophet then
sent Hadrat Ali, Hadrat Ammar bin Yasir and Hadrat Zubair: They were
also joined by Jubair bin Iyas az-Zurqi (two men from Bani Zurayq).
Later the Holy Prophet also arrived at the well along with some
Companions. The water was taken out and the spathe recovered. There
they found that beside the comb and hair there was a cord with eleven
knots on it and a wax image with needles pricked into it. Gabriel
(peace be on him) came and told him to repeat the Mu'awwidhatayn. As
he repeated verse after verse, a know was loosened and a needle taken
out every time, till on finishing the last words all the knots were
loosened and all the needles removed, and he was entirely freed from
the charm. After this he called Labid and questioned him. He confessed
his guilt and the Holy Prophet let him go, for he never avenged
himself on anyone for any harm done to his person. He even declined to
talk about it to others, saying that Allah had restored him to health;
therefore he did not like that he should incite the people against
anyone.
This is the story of the magic worked on the Holy Prophet. There if
nothing in it which might run counter to his office of Prophethood. In
his personal capacity if any injury could be inflicted on him as it
happened in the Battle of Uhud, if he could fall from his horse and be
hurt as is confirmed by the Hadith, if he could be stung by a scorpion
as has been mentioned in some Traditions and none of these negates the
protection promised him by Allah in his capacity as a Prophet, he
could also fall ill under the influence of magic in his personal
capacity. That a Prophet can be affected by magic is also confirmed by
the Qur'an. In Surah Al- A'raf it has been said about the magicians of
Pharaoh that when they confronted the Prophet Moses, they bewitched
the eyes of thousands of people who had assembled to witness the
encounter (v. 116). In Surah Ta Ha it has been said that not only the
common people but the Prophet Moses too felt that the cords and staffs
that they cast were running towards them like so many snakes, and this
filled Moses' heart with fear. Thereupon Allah revealed to him: "Don't
fear for you will come out victorious. Cast down you staff." (vv.
66-69). As for the objection that this then confirms the accusation of
the disbelievers of Makkah that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
was a bewitched man, its answer is that the disbelievers did not call
him a bewitched man in the sense that he had fallen ill under that
effect of magic cast by somebody, but in the sense that some magician
has, God forbid, made him mad, and he had made claim to Prophethood
and was telling the people tales of Hell and Heaven in his same
madness. Now, obviously this objection does not at all apply to a
matter about which history confirms that the magic spell had affected
only the person of Muhammad (upon whom be peace) and not the
Prophethood of Muhammad (upon whom be peace), which remained wholly
unaffected by it.
In this connection, another thing worthy of mention is that the people
who regard magic as a kind of superstition hold this view only because
the effect of magic cannot be explained scientifically. But there are
many things in the world which one experiences and observes but one
cannot explain scientifically how they happen. If we cannot give any
such explanation it does not become necessary that we should deny the
thing itself which we cannot explain. Magic, in fact, is a
psychological phenomenon which can affect the body through the mind
just as physical things affect the mind through the body. Fear, for
instance, is a psychological phenomenon, but it affects the body: the
hair stand on end and the body shudders. Magic does not; in fact,
change the reality, but under its influence man's mind and senses
start feeling as if reality had changed. The staffs and the cords that
the magicians had thrown towards the Prophet Moses, had not actually
become snakes, but the eyes of the multitude of people were so
bewitched that everybody felt they were snakes; even the senses of the
Prophet Moses could not remain unaffected by the magic spell.
Likewise, in Al-Baqarah: 102, it has been said that in Babylon people
learnt such magic from Harut and Marut as could cause division between
husband and wife. This too was a psychological phenomenon. Obviously,
if the people did not find it efficacious by experience they could not
become its customers. No doubt, it is correct that just like the
bullet of the rifle and the bomb from the aircraft, magic too cannot
have effect without Allah's permission, but it would be mere
stubbornness to deny a thing which has been experienced and observed
by man for thousands for years.
Question of Reciting Charms and Amulets in Islam
The third thing that arises in connection with these Surahs is whether
recitation of charms and amulets has any place in Islam, and whether
such recitation is by itself efficacious or not. This question arises
for in many ahadith it has been reported that the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace) at the time of going to bed every night, especially
during illness, used to recite the Mu'awwidhatayn (or according to
other reports, the Mu'awwidhat, i.e. Qul Huwa-Allahu Ahad and the
Mu'awwidhatayn) thrice, blow in his hands and then rub the hands on
his body from head to foot as far as his hands could reach. During his
last illness when it was not longer possible for him to so do, Hadrat
Aishah recited these Surahs herself or by his command blew on his
hands in view of their being blessed and rubbed them on his body.
Traditions on this subject have been related in Bukhari, Muslim,
Nasai, Ibn Majah, Abu Da'ud and Mu'atta of Imam Malik through
authentic channels on the authority of Hadrat Aishah herself beside
whom no one could be better acquainted with the domestic life of the
Holy Prophet.
In this regard, one should first understand its religious aspect. In
the Hadith a lengthy tradition has been related on the authority of
Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas, at the end of which the Holy Prophet is
reported to have said: "The people of my Ummah to enter Paradise
without reckoning will be those who neither turn to treatment by
branding, nor to enchanting, nor take omens, but have trust in their
Lord." (Muslim). According to a tradition reported on the authority of
Hadrat Mughirah bin Shubah, the Holy Prophet said: "He who got himself
treated by branding, or enchanting, became independent of trust in
Allah." (Tirmidhi). Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud has reported that the
Holy Prophet disapproved of ten things one of which was recitation of
charms and amulets except by means of the Mu'awwidhatayn
orMu'awwidhat. (Abu Daud, Ahmad, Nasai, Ibn Hibban, Hakim). Some
ahadith also show that in the beginning the Holy Prophet had
altogether forbidden recitation of charms and amulets, but later he
allowed it on the condition that is should not smack of polytheism,
but one should recite and blow by means of the holy names of Allah, or
the words of the Qur'an. The words used should be understandable and
one should know that there is nothing sinful in it, and one should not
wholly rely on the recitation of charms but on Allah's will to make it
beneficial." After the explanation of the religious aspect, let us now
see what the Hadith says in this regard.
Tabarani in As-Saghir has related a tradition on the authority of
Hadrat Ali, saying: "One the Holy Prophet was stung by a scorpion
during the Prayer. When the Prayer was over, he remarked: God's curse
be on the scorpion: it neither spares a praying one, nor any other.
Then he called for water and salt, and started rubbing the place where
the scorpion had stung with salt water and reciting Qul ya
ayyuhal-kafirun,Qul Huwa Allahu ahad, Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and
Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbin-nas, along with it."
Ibn Abbas also has related a tradition to the effect: "The Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) used to recite this invocation over
Hadrat Hasan and Husain: U'idhu kuma bi-kalimat Allahit-tamati min
kulli shaitan-in wa hammati-wa min kulli ayt-in-lam nati: "I give you
in the refuge of Allah's blameless words, from every devil and
troublesome thing, and from every evil look." (Bukhari, Musnad Ahmad,
Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah).
A tradition has been related in Muslim, Muwatta, Tabarani and Hakim
about Uthman bin al-As ath-Thaqafi, with a little variation in
wording, to the effect that he complained to the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace), saying: "Since I have become a Muslim, I feel a pain
in my body, which is killing me." The Holy Prophet said: "Place your
right hand on the place where you feel the pain, then recite
Bismillahthrice, and A'udhu billahi wa qudratihi min sharri ma ajidu
wa uhadhiru ("I seek refuge with Allah and with His power from the
evil that I find and that I fear") seven times, and rub your hand." In
Muwatta there is the addition: "Uthman bin Abi al-As said: After that
my pain disappeared and now I teach the same formula to the people of
my house."
Musnad Ahmad and Tahavi contain this tradition from Talq bin Ali: "I
was stung by a scorpion in the presence of the Holy Prophet (upon whom
be peace). The Holy Prophet recited something and blew over me and
rubbed his hand on the affected place."
Muslim contains a tradition from Abu Said Khudri, which says: "Once
when the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) fell ill, Gabriel came and
asked: O Muhammad, are you ill? The Holy Prophet answered in the
affirmative. Gabriel said: I blow on you in the name of Allah from
everything which troubles you and from the evil of every soul and the
evil look of every envier. May Allah restore you to health. I blow on
you in His name." A similar tradition has been related in Musnad Ahmad
on the authority of Hadrat Ubadah bin as-Samit, which says: "The Holy
Prophet was unwell. I went to visit him and found him in great
trouble. When I re-visited him in the evening I found him quite well.
When I asked how he had become well so soon, he said: Gabriel came and
blew over me with some words. Then he recited words similar to those
reported in the above Hadith. A tradition similar to this has been
related on the authority of Hadrat Aishah also in Muslim and Musnad
Ahmad.
Imam Ahmad in his Musnad has related this tradition from Hafsah,
mother of the Faithful: "One day the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
visited me in the house and a woman, named Shifa, was sitting with me.
She used to blow on the people to cure them of blisters. The Holy
Prophet said to her: Teach Hafsah also the formula." Imam Ahmad, Abu
Daud and Nasai have related this tradition from Shifa bint Abdullah
herself, saying: "The Holy Prophet said to me: Just as you have taught
Hafsah reading and writing, so teach her blowing to cure blisters as
well."
In Muslim there is a tradition from Auf bin Malik al-Ashjal to the
effect: "We used to practise blowing to cure diseases. We asked the
Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) for his opinion in this regard. He
said: Let me know the words with which you blow over the people. There
is no harm in blowing unless it smacks of polytheism."
Muslim, Musnad Ahmad and Ibn Majah contain a tradition from Hadrat
Jabir bin Abdullah, saying: "The Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had
forbidden us blowing to cure disease. Then the people of the clan of
Hadrat Amr bin Hazm came and they said: We had a formula with which we
used to blow on the people to cure them of scorpion's sting (or
snake-bite). But you have forbidden us the practice. Then they recited
before him the words which they made use of. Thereupon the Holy
Prophet said: I do not see any harm in it, so let the one who can do
good to his brother, do him good." Another tradition from Jabir bin
Abdullah in Muslim is: "The family of Hazm had a formula to cure
snake-bite and the Holy Prophet permitted them to practise it." This
is also supported by the tradition from Hadrat Aishah, which is
contained in Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, and Ibn Majah: "The Holy Prophet
granted permission to a family of the Ansar for blowing to cure the
evils effects of biting by every poisonous creature." Traditions
resembling these have been related from Hadrat Anas also in Musnad
Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Muslim and Ibn Majah, saying that the Holy Prophet
gave permission for blowing to cure the bite by poisonous creatures,
the disease of blisters and the effects of the evil look."
Musnad Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah and Hakim have related this
tradition on the authority of Hadrat Umair, freed slave of Abi
al-Laham: "In the pre-Islamic days I had a formula with which I used
to blow over the people. I recited it before the Holy Prophet,
whereupon he told me to drop out such and such words from it, and
permitted me to blow with the rest of it."
According to Muwatta, Hadrat Abu Bakr went to the house of his
daughter, Hadrat Aishah, and found that she was unwell and a Jewish
woman was blowing over her. Thereupon he said to her: "Blow over her
by means of the Book of Allah." This shows that if the people of the
Book practise blowing by means of the verses of the Torah and the
Gospel, it is also permitted.
As for the question whether blowing for curing disease is efficacious
also, or not, its answer is that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
not only did not forbid anybody to have recourse to cure and medical
treatment but himself stated that Allah has created a cure for every
disease and exhorted his followers to use cures. He himself told the
people the remedies for certain diseases, as can be seen in theHadith
in the Kitab at-Tib (Book of Cures). But the cure can be beneficial
and useful only by Allah's command and permission, otherwise if the
cure and medical treatment were beneficial in every case, no one would
have died in hospitals. Now, if beside the cure and medical treatment,
Allah's Word and His beautiful names also are made use of, or Word and
His beautiful names also are made use of, or Allah is turned to and
invoked for help by means of His Word, Names and Attributes in a place
where no medical aid is available, it would not be against reason
except for the materialists. However, it is not right to disregard
intentionally a cure or treatment where it is available, and recourse
had only to enchanting and reciting of charms, and the people should
start a regular practice of granting amulets as a means of earning
their livelihood.
Many people in this regard argue from Hadrat Abu Said Khudri's
tradition which has been related in Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Musnad
Ahmad, Abu Daud and Ibn Majah, and it is supported also by a tradition
related in Bukhari on the authority of Ibn Abbas. According to it the
Holy Prophet sent some of his Companions including Hadrat Abu Said
Khudri on an expedition. They halted on the way at the settlement of
an Arabian tribe and demanded hospitality from the people, but they
refused to extend any hospitality. In the meantime the chief of the
tribe was stung by a scorpion and the people came to the travelers to
ask if they had any medicine or formula by which their chief could be
cured. Hadrat Abu Said said: "Yes, we do have, but since you have
refused us hospitality, we would not treat him unless you promised us
to give us something." They promised to give them a flock of goats
(according to some traditions, 30 goats), and Hadrat Abu Said went and
started reciting Surah Al-Fatihah and rubbing his saliva on the
affected place. Consequently, the chief felt relieved of the effect of
the poison and the people of the tribe gave them the goats as
promised. But the Companions said to one another; "Let us not make any
use of the goats until we have asked the Holy Prophet about it", for
they were not sure whether it was permissible to accept any reward for
what they had done. So they came before the Holy Prophet and related
what had happened. The Holy Prophet smiled and said: "How did you know
that Surah Al-Fatihah could also be used for curing such troubles?
Take the goats and allocate my share also in it."
But before one used this Hadith for permission to adopt a regular
profession of granting amulets and reciting charms, one should keep in
view the conditions under which Hadrat Abu Said Khudri had recourse to
it, and the Holy Prophet not only held it as permissible but also said
that a share for him also should be allocated so that there remained
no doubt in the minds of the Companions that such a thing was
permissible. The conditions in Arabia in those days were, as they
still are, that settlements were situated hundreds of miles apart,
there were not hotels and restaurants where a traveler could buy food
when he reached one of these after several days' journey. Under such
conditions it was considered a moral duty that when a traveler reached
a settlement the people of the place should extend hospitality to him.
Refusal on their part in many cases meant death for the travelers, and
this was looked upon as highly blameworthy among the Arabs. That is
why the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) allowed as permissible the
act of his Companions. Since the people of the tribe had refused them
hospitality, they too refused to treat their chief, and became ready
to treat him only on the condition that they should promise to give
them something in return. Then, when one of them with trust in God
recited Surah Al-Fatihah over the chief and he became well, the people
gave the promised wages and the Holy Prophet allowed that the wages be
accepted as lawful and pure. In Bukhari the tradition related on the
authority of Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas about this incident contains
the Holy Prophet's words to the effect: "Instead that you should have
acted otherwise, it was better that you recited the Book of Allah and
accepted the wages for it." He said this in order to impress the truth
that Allah's Word is superior to every other kind of enchanting and
practice of secret arts. Furthermore, the Message also was
incidentally conveyed to the Arabian tribe and its people made aware
of the blessings of the Word that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be
peace) had brought from Allah. This incident cannot be cited as a
precedent for the people who run clinic in the cities and towns for
the practice of secret arts and have adopted it as a regular
profession for earning livelihood. No precedent of it is found in the
life and practice of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) or his
Companions, their followers and the earliest Imams.
Relation between Surah Al-Fatihah and the Mu'awwidhatayn
The last thing which is note worthy with regard to the Mu'awwidhatayn
is the relation between the beginning and the end of the Qur'an.
Although the Qur'an has not been arranged chronologically, the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) arranged in the present order the verses
and Surahs revealed during 23 years on different occasions to meet
different needs and situations not by himself but by the command of
Allah Who revealed them. According to this order, the Qur'an opens
with the Surah Al-Fatihah and ends with the Mu'awwidhatayn. Now, let
us have a look at the two. In the beginning, after praising and
glorifying Allah, Who is Lord of the worlds, Kind, Merciful and Master
of the Judgment Day, the servants submits: "Lord, You alone I worship
and to You along I turn for help, and the most urgent help that I need
from You is to be guided to the Straight Way." In answer, he is given
by Allah the whole Qur'an to show him the Straight Way, which is
concluded thus: Man prays to Allah, Who is Lord of dawn, Lord of men,
King of men, Deity of men, saying: "I seek refuge only with You for
protection from every evil and mischief of every creature, and in
particular, from the evil whisperings of devils, be they from among
men or jinn, for they are the greatest obstacle in following the
Straight Way." The relation that the beginning bears with the end,
cannot remain hidden from anyone who has understanding and insight.
surah Al-Falaq and An-Nas, known as Mu'awwidhatayn (the two Surahs in
which refuge with Allah has been sought). (Tafheem-al-Quran)
To read this online: http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=114
________________________________________
Name
Although these two Surahs of the Qur'an are separate entities and are
written in the Mushaf also under separate names, yet they are so
deeply related mutually and their contents so closely resemble each
other's that they have been designated by a common name Mu'awwidhatayn
(the two Surahs in which refuge with Allah has been sought). Imam
Baihaqi in Dala'il an-Nubuwwat has written that these Surahs were
revealed together, that is why the combined name of both is
Mu'awwidhatayn. We are writing the same one Introduction to both, for
they discuss and deal with just the same matters and topics. However,
they will be explained and commented on separately below.
Period of Revelation
Hadrat Hasan Basri, 'Ikrimah, 'Ata' and Jabir bin Zaid say that these
Surahs are Makki. A tradition from Hadrat 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas also
supports the same view. However, according to another tradition from
him, it is Madani and the same view is held also by Hadrat 'Abdullah
bin Zubair and Qatadah. One of the traditions which strengthens this
second view is the Hadith which Muslim, Tirmidhi, Nasa'i and Imam
Ahmad bin Hanbal have related on the authority of Hadrat 'Uqbah bin
'Amir. He says that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peach) one day said
to him: "Do you know what kind of verses have been revealed to me
tonight? - these matchless verses are A'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and
A'udhu bi-Rabbin-nas. ThisHadith is used as an argument for these
Surahs to be Madani because Hadrat 'Uqbah bin 'Amir had become a
Muslim in Madinah after the hijrah, as related by Abu Da'ud and Nasa'i
on the basis of his own statement. Other traditions which have lent
strength to this view are those related by Ibn Sa'd, Muhiyy-us-Sunnah
Baghawi, Imam Nasafi, Imam Baihaqi, Hafiz Ibn Hajar, Hafiz Badr-uddin
'Ayni, 'Abd bin Humaid and others to the effect that these Surahs were
revealed when the Jews had worked magic on the Holy Prophet (upon whom
be peace) in Madinah and he had fallen ill under its effect. Ibn Sa'd
has related on the authority of Waqidi that this happened in A.H. 7.
On this very basis Sufyan bin Uyainah also has described these Surah
as Madani.
But as we have explained in the Introduction to Surah Al-Ikhlas, when
it is said about a certain Surah or verse that it was revealed on this
or that particular occasion, it does not necessarily mean that it was
revealed for the first time on that very occasion. Rather it sometimes
so happened that a Surah or a verse had previously been revealed, then
on the occurrence or appearance of a particular incident or situation,
the Holy Prophet's attention was drawn to it by Allah for the second
time, or even again and again. In our opinion the same also was the
case with the Mu'awwidhatayn. The subject matter of these Surahs is
explicit that these were sent down at Makkah in the first instance
when opposition to the Holy Prophet there had grown very intense.
Later, when at Madinah storms of opposition were raised by the
hypocrites, Jews and polytheists, the Holy Prophet was instructed to
recite these very Surahs, as has been mentioned in the above cited
tradition from Hadrat Uqbah bin Amir. After this, when magic was
worked on him, and his illness grew intense, Gabriel came and
instructed him by Allah's command to recite these very Surahs.
Therefore, in our opinion, the view held by the commentators who
describe both these Surahs as Makki is more reliable. Regarding them
as connected exclusively with the incident of magic is difficult, for
to this incident related only one verse (v.4), the remaining verses of
Surah al Falaq and the whole of Surah An-Nas have nothing to do with
it directly.
Theme and Subject-Matter
The conditions under which these two Surahs were sent down in Makkah
were as follows. As soon as the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
began to preach the message of Islam, it seemed as though he had
provoked all classes of the people around him. As his message spread
the opposition of the disbelieving Quraish also became more and more
intense. As long as they had any hope that they would be able to
prevent him from preaching his message by throwing some temptation in
his way, or striking some bargain with him, their hostility did not
become very active. But when the Holy Prophet disappointed them
completely that he would not effect any kind of compromise with them
in the matter of faith, and in Surah Al-Kafirun they were plainly
told: "I do not worship those who you worship nor are you worshipers
of Him Whom I worship. For you is your religion and for me is mine",
the hostility touched its extreme limits. More particularly, the
families whose members (men or women, boys or girls) had accepted
Islam, were burning with rage from within against the Holy Prophet.
They were cursing him, holding secret consultations to kill him
quietly in the dark of the night so that the Bani Hashim could not
discover the murderer and take revenge; magic and charms were being
worked on him so as to cause his death, or make him fall ill, or
become mad; satans from among the men and the jinn spread on every
side so as to whisper one or another evil into the hearts of the
people against him and the Qur'an brought by him so that they became
suspicious of him and fled him. There were many people who were
burning with jealousy against him, for they could not tolerate that a
man from another family or clan than their own should flourish and
become prominent. For instance, the reason why Abu Jahl was crossing
every limit in his hostility to him has been explained by himself: "We
and the Bani Abdi Manaf (to which the Holy Prophet belonged) were
rivals of each other: they fed others, we too fed others; they
provided conveyances to the people, we too did the same; they gave
donations, we too gave donations, so much so that when they and we
have become equal in honor and nobility, they now proclaim that they
have a Prophet who is inspired from the heaven; how can we compete
with them in this field? By God, we will never acknowledge him, nor
affirm faith in him". (Ibn Hisham, vol. I, pp. 337-338).
Such were the conditions when the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
was commanded to tell the people: "I seek refuge with the Lord of the
dawn, from the evil of everything that He has created, and from the
evil of the darkness of night and from the evil of magicians, men and
women, and from the evil of the envious", and to tell them: "I seek
refuge with the Lord of mankind, the King of mankind, and the Deity of
mankind, from the evil of the whisperer, who returns over and over
again, who whispers (evil) into the hearts of men, whether he be from
among the jinn or men." This is similar to what the Prophet Moses had
been told to say when Pharaoh had expressed his design before his full
court to kill him: "I have taken refuge with my Lord and your Lord
against every arrogant person who does not believe in the Day of
Reckoning." (Al-Mu'min: 27). And: "I have taken refuge with my Lord
and your Lord lest you should assail me." (Ad- Dukhan;20).
On both occasions these illustrious Prophets of Allah were confronted
with well-equipped, resourceful and powerful enemies. On both
occasions they stood firm on their message of Truth against their
strong opponents, whereas they had no material power on the strength
of which they could fight them, and on both occasions they utterly
disregarded the threats and dangerous plans and hostile devices of the
enemy, saying: "We have taken refuge with the Lord of the universe
against you." Obviously, such firmness and steadfastness can be shown
only by the person who has the conviction that the power of His Lord
is the supreme power, that all powers of the world are insignificant
against Him, and that no one can harm the one who has taken His
refuge. Only such a one can say: "I will not give up preaching the
Word of Truth. I care the least for what you may say or do, for I have
taken refuge with my Lord and your Lord and Lord of all universe."
Question whether Mu'awwidhatayn are, or are not, Quranic
The above discussion is enough to help one understand fully the theme
and content of the two Surahs, but since three points in the books of
Hadith and commentary concerning these Surahs have been discussed,
which are likely to create doubts in the minds, it is necessary to
clear them also here.
First, whether it is absolutely established that these two Surahs are
the Qur'anic Surahs, or whether there is some doubt in this regard.
This question arose because in the traditions related from an
illustrious Companion like Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud, it has been
said that he did not regard these two Surahs as the Surahs of the
Qur'an and had eliminated these from his copy of the Mushaf. Imam
Ahmad, Bazzar, Tabarani, Ibn Marduyah, Abu Ya'la, Abdullah bin Ahmad
bin Hanbal, Humaydi, Abu Nu'aim, Ibn Hibban and other traditionists
have related this from Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud with different
chains of transmitters and mostly on sound authority. According to
these traditions, he not only eliminated these Surahs from the Mushaf
but it has also been reported that he used to say: "Do not mix up with
the Qur'an that which is not of the Qur'an. These two Surahs are not
included in the Quran. This was only a command enjoined on the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) for seeking God's refuge." In some
traditions there is also the addition that he did not recite these
Surahs in the Prayer.
On the basis of these traditions the opponents of Islam had an
opportunity to raise doubts about the Qur'an, saying that this Book,
God forbid, is not free from corruption. For when, according to a
Companion of the rank of Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud, these two Surahs
are an annexation to the Qur'an, many other additions and subtractions
also might have been made in it. To rid the Qur'an of this blame Qadi
Abu Bakr Al-Baqillani, Qadi Iyad and others took the stand that Ibn
Mas'ud was not in fact a denier of the Mu'awwidhatayn being Qur'anic
but only refused to write them in the Mushaf. For, according to him,
only that which the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had allowed,
should be written in the Mushaf, and Ibn Mas'ud did not receive the
information that the Holy Prophet had allowed this. But this stand is
not correct, for according to sound evidence, it is confirmed that Ibn
Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) had denied that these were
Surahs of the Qur'an. Some other scholars, for instance, Imam Nawawi,
Imam Ibn Hazm and Imam Fakhr-ud-din Razi, regard this as a pure lie
and falsehood that Ibn Mas'ud had asserted any such thing. But to
reject genuine historical facts without sound evidence is
unscientific.
Now, the question is: How can the blame that attaches to the Qur'an
because of these traditions of Ibn Mas'ud correctly refuted? This
question has several answers which we shall give below in sequence:
1. Hafiz Bazzar after relating these traditions of Ibn Mas'ud in his
Musnad, has written that he is solitary and isolated in his this
opinion; no one from among the Companions has supported this view.
2. The copies of the Qur'an which the third Caliph, Hadrat Uthman (may
Allah be pleased with him), had got compiled by the consensus of the
Companions and which he had sent from the Islamic Caliphate officially
to the centers of the world of Islam contained both these Surahs.
3. The Mushaf which, since the sacred time of the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace) till today, has the seal of consensus of the entire
world of Islam, contains both these Surahs. The solitary opinion of
only Abdullah bin Mas'ud, in spite of his high rank, has no weight
against this great consensus.
4. It is confirmed by sound and reliable ahadith from the Holy Prophet
(upon whom be peace) that he not only recited these Surahs in the
Prayer himself but instructed others also to recite them, and taught
them to the people as the Surahs of the Qur'an. Consider, for
instance, the following ahadith:
We have cited on the authority of Muslim, Ahmad, Tirmidhi and Nasai
the tradition of Hadrat Uqbah bin Amir that the Holy Prophet told him
about Surah Al-Falaq and Surah An- Nas, saying that those verses had
been revealed to him that night. A tradition in Nasai from Uqbah bin
Amir is to the effect that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
recited both these Surahs in the Morning Prayer. Imam Ahmad on sound
authority has related in his Musnad the tradition from a Companion
that the Holy Prophet said to him, "When you perform the Prayer,
recite both these Surahs in it." In Musnad Ahmad, Abu Daud and Nasai
this tradition of Uqbah bin Amir has been related: "The Holy Prophet
said to him: Should I not teach you two such Surahs as are among the
best Surahs that the people recite? He said: Do teach me, O Messenger
of Allah. Thereupon the Holy Prophet taught him the Mu'awwidhatayn.
Then the Prayer began and the Holy Prophet recited the same two Surahs
in it also, and when after the Prayer the Holy Prophet passed by him,
he said to him, 'O Uqbah, how did you like it?' Then he instructed him
to the effect: When you go to bed, and when you get up from bed,
recite these Surahs." In Musnad Ahmad, Abu Da'ud, Tirmidhi and Nasa'i
there is a tradition from Uqbah bin Amir, saying that the Holy Prophet
exhorted him to recite the Mu'awwidhat (i.e. Qul Huwa Allahu ahad and
the Mu'awwidhatayn) after every Prayer. Nasai, Ibn Marduyah and Hakim
have related this tradition also from Uqbah bin Amir: "Once the Holy
Prophet was riding on a conveyance and I was walking along with him
with my hand placed on his sacred foot. I said: Kindly teach me Surah
Hud or Surah Yusuf. He replied: In the sight of Allah there is nothing
more beneficial for the servant than Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq." A
tradition from Abdullah bin Abid al-Juhani has been related by Nasai,
Baihaqi and Ibn Sad, saying that the Holy Prophet said to him: "Ibn
Abid, should I not tell you what are the best things out of the means
by which the seekers of refuge have sought refuge with Allah? I
submitted: Do teach me, O Messenger of Allah. He replied: Qul a'udhu
bi-Rabbil- falaqand Qul a-udhu bi Rabbin-nas - both these Surahs." Ibn
Marduyah had related from Hadrat Umm Salamah: "The Surahs best liked
by Allah are: Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and Qul a'udhu
bi-Rabbin-nas."
Here, the question arises: what caused Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud the
misunderstanding that these two are not Surahs of the Qur'an? We get
the answer to it when we combine two traditions: first, that Hadrat
Abdullah bin Mas'ud asserted that this was only a command which the
Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) was given to teach him the method of
seeking refuge with Allah; second, the tradition which Imam Bukhari
has related in his Sahih, Imam Ahmad in his Musnad, Hafiz Abu Bakr al-
Humaidi in his Musnad, Abu Nu'aim in his Al-Mustakhraj and Nasai in
his Sunan, with different chains of transmitters, on the authority of
Zirr bin Hubaish, with a slight variation in wording from Hadrat Ubayy
bin Kab, who held a distinguished place among the Companions on the
basis of his knowledge of the Qur'an. Zirr bin Hubaish states: "I said
to Hadrat Ubayy: Your brother, Abdullah bin Mas'ud, says these things.
What do you say about this view? He replied: I had questioned the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) about this. He said to me: I was told to
say 'qul', so I said 'qul'. Therefore, we too say the same as the Holy
Prophet said." In the tradition related by Imam Ahmad, Hadrat Ubayy's
words are to the effect: "I bear witness that the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace) told me that Gabriel (peace be on him) had told him to
say:Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq; therefore, he recited likewise, and
Gabriel asked him to say: Qul a'udhu bi- Rabbin-nas; therefore he too
said likewise. Hence, we too say as the Holy Prophet said." A little
consideration of these two traditions will show that the word qul
(say) in the two Surahs caused Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud the
misunderstanding that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had been
commanded to say: A'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and A'udhu bi-Rabbin-nas. But
he did not feel any need to question the Holy Prophet about it. In the
mind of Hadrat Ubbay bin Kab also a question arose about his and he
put it before the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet replied: "Since
Gabriel (peace be on him) had said qul, so I too say qul." Let us put
it like this. If somebody is commanded and asked: "Say, I seek
refuge", he will not carry out the command, saying: "Say, I seek
refuge", but he will drop the work "say" and say: "I seek refuge." On
the contrary, if the messenger of a superior officer conveys to
somebody the message in these words: "Say, I seek refuge", and this
command is given to him not only for his own person but to be conveyed
to others, he will convey the words of the message verbatim to the
people, and will not have the permission to drop anything from the
text of the message. Thus, the fact that these two Surahs begin with
the word qul is a clear proof that it is Divine Word, which the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) was bound to convey verbatim. It was not
merely a command given to him for his person. Besides these two
Surahs, there are 330 other verses in the Qur'an which begin with the
word qul(say). The presence of qul in all these is a proof that it is
Divine Wprd. which was obligatory for the Holy Prophet to convey
verbatim; otherwise if qul everywhere had meant a command, the Holy
Prophet would have dropped it and said only that which he was
commanded to say, and it would not have been recorded in the Qur'an,
but, on the contrary, he would have remained content with saying only
what he was commanded to say.
Here, if one considers this, one can understand fully well how
unreasonable it is to regard the Companions as infallible and to make
the clamor that a Companion has been defamed as soon as one hears a
saying or doing of his being described as wrong. Here, one can clearly
see what a blunder happened to be committed by an illustrious
Companion like Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud about two Surahs of the
Qur'an. If such an error could be committed by an eminent Companion
like him, others also might commit an error. We can examine it in the
scientific way, and describe it as wrong if a thing said or done by a
Companion is proved to be wrong. But wicked indeed would be the person
who went beyond describing a wrong act as wrong and started reproving
and finding fault with the Companions of the Holy Prophet of Allah.
Concerning the Mu'awwidhatayn the commentators and traditionists have
described the opinion of Ibn Mas'ud as wrong, but no one has dared to
say that by denying these two Surahs of the Qur'an, he had, God
forbid, become a disbeliever.
Question of Holy Prophet's being affected by Magic
The second thing that has arisen in respect of these two Surahs is
that, according to traditions, magic had been worked on the Holy
Prophet, and he had fallen ill under its effect, and Gabriel (peace be
on him) had instructed him to repeat these Surahs to remove the charm.
This has been objected to by many rationalists of both ancient and
modern times. They say that if these traditions are accepted, the
whole Shari'ahbecomes doubtful. For if the Prophet could be charmed,
and according to these traditions he was charmed, one cannot say what
the Prophet might have been made to say and do under the influence of
magic by his opponents, and what in his teaching may be Divine and
what the result of magic. Not only this: they also allege that if this
is accepted as true, it might well be that the Prophet might have been
prompted to make the claim to Prophethood through magic and the
Prophet by misunderstanding might have thought that an angel had come
to him. They also argue that these traditions clash with the Qur'an.
The Qur'an mentions the accusation of the disbelievers who said that
the Prophet was bewitched (Bani Isra'il:47), but these traditions
confirm the accusation of the disbelievers that the Prophet had
actually been charmed and bewitched.
For a proper investigation of this question it is necessary that one
should first see whether it is established by authentic historical
evidence that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had actually been
affected by magic, and if so, what it was and to what extent. Then it
should be seen whether the objections raised against what is
established historically do actually apply to it or not.
The Muslim scholars of the earliest period were truly honest and
upright in that they did not try to corrupt history or conceal facts
according to their own ideas, concepts and assumptions. They conveyed
intact to the later generations whatever was confirmed historically,
and did not at all care how the material supplied by them could be
used by the one who was bent upon drawing perverse conclusions from
the facts. Now, if something stands confirmed by authentic and
historical means, it is neither right for an honest and right-minded
person that he should deny history on the ground that in case he
accepted it, it would lead to these evil results according to his
thinking, nor it is right that he should add to and stretch beyond its
genuine limits by conjecture and speculation whatever is established
historically. Instead, he should accept history as history and then
see what is actually proved by it and what is not.
As far as the historical aspect is concerned, the incident of the Holy
Prophet's being affected by magic is absolutely confirmed, and if it
can be refuted by scientific criticism, then no historical event of
the world can be proved right and genuine. It has been related by
Bukhari, Muslim, Nasai, Ibn Majah, Imam Ahmad, Abdur Razzaq, Humaidi,
Baihaqi, Tabarani, Ibn Sad, Ibn Mardayah, Ibn Abi Shaibah, Hakim, Abd
bin Humaid and other traditionists on the authority of Hadrat Aishah,
Hadrat Zaid bin Arqam and Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas, through so many
different and numerous channels that forgery is out of the question.
Although each tradition by itself is an isolated report (khabar
wahid), we give it below as a connected event from the details
provided by the traditions.
After the peace treaty of Hudaibiyah when the Holy Prophet (upon whom
be peace) returned to Madinah, a deputation of the Jews of Khaibar
visited Madinah in Muharram, A.H. 7 and met a famous magician, Labid
bin Asam, who belonged to the Ansar tribe of Bani Zurayq. They said to
him: "You know how Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings)
has treated us. We have tried our best to bewitch him but have not
succeeded. Now we have come to you because you are a more skilled
magician. Here are three gold coins, accept these and cast a powerful
magic spell on Muhammad." In those days the Holy Prophet had a Jewish
boy as his attendant. Through him they obtained a piece of the Holy
Prophet's comb with some hair stuck to it. Magic was worked on the
same hair and the teeth of the comb. According to some traditions,
magic was worked by Labid bin Asam himself, according to others, his
sisters were more skilled than him and he got the spell cast through
them. Whatever be the case, Labid placed this spell in the spathe of a
male date-tree and his it under a stone at the bottom of Dharwan or
Dhi Arwan, the well of Bani Zurayq. The spell took one whole year to
have effect upon the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace). In the latter
half of the year the Holy Prophet started feeling as if was unwell.
The last forty days became hard on him, of which the last three days
were even harder. But its maximum effect on him was that he way
melting away from within. He thought he had done a thing whereas, in
fact, he had not done it: he thought he had visited his wives whereas
he had not visited them; and sometimes he would doubt having seen
something whereas, in fact, he had not seen it. All these effects were
confined to his own person; so much so that the other people could not
notice what state he was passing through. As for his being a Prophet,
no change occurred in the performance of his duties. There is no
tradition to say that he might have forgotten some verses of the
Qur'an in those days, or might have recited a verse wrongly, or a
change might have occurred in the assemblies and in his counsels and
sermons, or he might have presented a discourse as Revelation which
may not have been revealed to him, or he might have missed a Prayer
and thought that he had performed it. God forbid, if any such thing
had happened, it would have caused a clamor and the whole of Arabia
would have known that a magician had overpowered the one whom no power
had been able to overpower. But the Holy Prophet's position as a
Prophet remained wholly unaffected by it. Only in his personal life he
remained worried on account of it. At last, one day when he was in the
house of Hadrat Aishah, he prayed to Allah to be restored to full
health. In the meantime he fell asleep or drowsed and on waking he
said to Hadrat Aishah: "My Lord has told me what I had asked of Him."
Hadrat Aishah asked what it was. He replied: "Two men (i.e. two angels
in human guise) came to me. One sat near my head and the other near my
feet. The first asked: what has happened to him? The other replied:
Magic has been worked on him. The first asked: who has worked it? He
replied: Labid bin Asam. He asked: In what is it contained? He
replied: In the comb and hair covered in the spathe of a male
date-tree. He asked: where is it? He replied: under a stone at the
bottom of Dhi Arwan (or Dharwan), the well of Bani Zurayq. He asked:
what should be done about it? He replied: the well should be emptied
and it should be taken out from under the stone. The Holy Prophet then
sent Hadrat Ali, Hadrat Ammar bin Yasir and Hadrat Zubair: They were
also joined by Jubair bin Iyas az-Zurqi (two men from Bani Zurayq).
Later the Holy Prophet also arrived at the well along with some
Companions. The water was taken out and the spathe recovered. There
they found that beside the comb and hair there was a cord with eleven
knots on it and a wax image with needles pricked into it. Gabriel
(peace be on him) came and told him to repeat the Mu'awwidhatayn. As
he repeated verse after verse, a know was loosened and a needle taken
out every time, till on finishing the last words all the knots were
loosened and all the needles removed, and he was entirely freed from
the charm. After this he called Labid and questioned him. He confessed
his guilt and the Holy Prophet let him go, for he never avenged
himself on anyone for any harm done to his person. He even declined to
talk about it to others, saying that Allah had restored him to health;
therefore he did not like that he should incite the people against
anyone.
This is the story of the magic worked on the Holy Prophet. There if
nothing in it which might run counter to his office of Prophethood. In
his personal capacity if any injury could be inflicted on him as it
happened in the Battle of Uhud, if he could fall from his horse and be
hurt as is confirmed by the Hadith, if he could be stung by a scorpion
as has been mentioned in some Traditions and none of these negates the
protection promised him by Allah in his capacity as a Prophet, he
could also fall ill under the influence of magic in his personal
capacity. That a Prophet can be affected by magic is also confirmed by
the Qur'an. In Surah Al- A'raf it has been said about the magicians of
Pharaoh that when they confronted the Prophet Moses, they bewitched
the eyes of thousands of people who had assembled to witness the
encounter (v. 116). In Surah Ta Ha it has been said that not only the
common people but the Prophet Moses too felt that the cords and staffs
that they cast were running towards them like so many snakes, and this
filled Moses' heart with fear. Thereupon Allah revealed to him: "Don't
fear for you will come out victorious. Cast down you staff." (vv.
66-69). As for the objection that this then confirms the accusation of
the disbelievers of Makkah that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
was a bewitched man, its answer is that the disbelievers did not call
him a bewitched man in the sense that he had fallen ill under that
effect of magic cast by somebody, but in the sense that some magician
has, God forbid, made him mad, and he had made claim to Prophethood
and was telling the people tales of Hell and Heaven in his same
madness. Now, obviously this objection does not at all apply to a
matter about which history confirms that the magic spell had affected
only the person of Muhammad (upon whom be peace) and not the
Prophethood of Muhammad (upon whom be peace), which remained wholly
unaffected by it.
In this connection, another thing worthy of mention is that the people
who regard magic as a kind of superstition hold this view only because
the effect of magic cannot be explained scientifically. But there are
many things in the world which one experiences and observes but one
cannot explain scientifically how they happen. If we cannot give any
such explanation it does not become necessary that we should deny the
thing itself which we cannot explain. Magic, in fact, is a
psychological phenomenon which can affect the body through the mind
just as physical things affect the mind through the body. Fear, for
instance, is a psychological phenomenon, but it affects the body: the
hair stand on end and the body shudders. Magic does not; in fact,
change the reality, but under its influence man's mind and senses
start feeling as if reality had changed. The staffs and the cords that
the magicians had thrown towards the Prophet Moses, had not actually
become snakes, but the eyes of the multitude of people were so
bewitched that everybody felt they were snakes; even the senses of the
Prophet Moses could not remain unaffected by the magic spell.
Likewise, in Al-Baqarah: 102, it has been said that in Babylon people
learnt such magic from Harut and Marut as could cause division between
husband and wife. This too was a psychological phenomenon. Obviously,
if the people did not find it efficacious by experience they could not
become its customers. No doubt, it is correct that just like the
bullet of the rifle and the bomb from the aircraft, magic too cannot
have effect without Allah's permission, but it would be mere
stubbornness to deny a thing which has been experienced and observed
by man for thousands for years.
Question of Reciting Charms and Amulets in Islam
The third thing that arises in connection with these Surahs is whether
recitation of charms and amulets has any place in Islam, and whether
such recitation is by itself efficacious or not. This question arises
for in many ahadith it has been reported that the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace) at the time of going to bed every night, especially
during illness, used to recite the Mu'awwidhatayn (or according to
other reports, the Mu'awwidhat, i.e. Qul Huwa-Allahu Ahad and the
Mu'awwidhatayn) thrice, blow in his hands and then rub the hands on
his body from head to foot as far as his hands could reach. During his
last illness when it was not longer possible for him to so do, Hadrat
Aishah recited these Surahs herself or by his command blew on his
hands in view of their being blessed and rubbed them on his body.
Traditions on this subject have been related in Bukhari, Muslim,
Nasai, Ibn Majah, Abu Da'ud and Mu'atta of Imam Malik through
authentic channels on the authority of Hadrat Aishah herself beside
whom no one could be better acquainted with the domestic life of the
Holy Prophet.
In this regard, one should first understand its religious aspect. In
the Hadith a lengthy tradition has been related on the authority of
Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas, at the end of which the Holy Prophet is
reported to have said: "The people of my Ummah to enter Paradise
without reckoning will be those who neither turn to treatment by
branding, nor to enchanting, nor take omens, but have trust in their
Lord." (Muslim). According to a tradition reported on the authority of
Hadrat Mughirah bin Shubah, the Holy Prophet said: "He who got himself
treated by branding, or enchanting, became independent of trust in
Allah." (Tirmidhi). Hadrat Abdullah bin Mas'ud has reported that the
Holy Prophet disapproved of ten things one of which was recitation of
charms and amulets except by means of the Mu'awwidhatayn
orMu'awwidhat. (Abu Daud, Ahmad, Nasai, Ibn Hibban, Hakim). Some
ahadith also show that in the beginning the Holy Prophet had
altogether forbidden recitation of charms and amulets, but later he
allowed it on the condition that is should not smack of polytheism,
but one should recite and blow by means of the holy names of Allah, or
the words of the Qur'an. The words used should be understandable and
one should know that there is nothing sinful in it, and one should not
wholly rely on the recitation of charms but on Allah's will to make it
beneficial." After the explanation of the religious aspect, let us now
see what the Hadith says in this regard.
Tabarani in As-Saghir has related a tradition on the authority of
Hadrat Ali, saying: "One the Holy Prophet was stung by a scorpion
during the Prayer. When the Prayer was over, he remarked: God's curse
be on the scorpion: it neither spares a praying one, nor any other.
Then he called for water and salt, and started rubbing the place where
the scorpion had stung with salt water and reciting Qul ya
ayyuhal-kafirun,Qul Huwa Allahu ahad, Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbil-falaq and
Qul a'udhu bi-Rabbin-nas, along with it."
Ibn Abbas also has related a tradition to the effect: "The Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) used to recite this invocation over
Hadrat Hasan and Husain: U'idhu kuma bi-kalimat Allahit-tamati min
kulli shaitan-in wa hammati-wa min kulli ayt-in-lam nati: "I give you
in the refuge of Allah's blameless words, from every devil and
troublesome thing, and from every evil look." (Bukhari, Musnad Ahmad,
Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah).
A tradition has been related in Muslim, Muwatta, Tabarani and Hakim
about Uthman bin al-As ath-Thaqafi, with a little variation in
wording, to the effect that he complained to the Holy Prophet (upon
whom be peace), saying: "Since I have become a Muslim, I feel a pain
in my body, which is killing me." The Holy Prophet said: "Place your
right hand on the place where you feel the pain, then recite
Bismillahthrice, and A'udhu billahi wa qudratihi min sharri ma ajidu
wa uhadhiru ("I seek refuge with Allah and with His power from the
evil that I find and that I fear") seven times, and rub your hand." In
Muwatta there is the addition: "Uthman bin Abi al-As said: After that
my pain disappeared and now I teach the same formula to the people of
my house."
Musnad Ahmad and Tahavi contain this tradition from Talq bin Ali: "I
was stung by a scorpion in the presence of the Holy Prophet (upon whom
be peace). The Holy Prophet recited something and blew over me and
rubbed his hand on the affected place."
Muslim contains a tradition from Abu Said Khudri, which says: "Once
when the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) fell ill, Gabriel came and
asked: O Muhammad, are you ill? The Holy Prophet answered in the
affirmative. Gabriel said: I blow on you in the name of Allah from
everything which troubles you and from the evil of every soul and the
evil look of every envier. May Allah restore you to health. I blow on
you in His name." A similar tradition has been related in Musnad Ahmad
on the authority of Hadrat Ubadah bin as-Samit, which says: "The Holy
Prophet was unwell. I went to visit him and found him in great
trouble. When I re-visited him in the evening I found him quite well.
When I asked how he had become well so soon, he said: Gabriel came and
blew over me with some words. Then he recited words similar to those
reported in the above Hadith. A tradition similar to this has been
related on the authority of Hadrat Aishah also in Muslim and Musnad
Ahmad.
Imam Ahmad in his Musnad has related this tradition from Hafsah,
mother of the Faithful: "One day the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
visited me in the house and a woman, named Shifa, was sitting with me.
She used to blow on the people to cure them of blisters. The Holy
Prophet said to her: Teach Hafsah also the formula." Imam Ahmad, Abu
Daud and Nasai have related this tradition from Shifa bint Abdullah
herself, saying: "The Holy Prophet said to me: Just as you have taught
Hafsah reading and writing, so teach her blowing to cure blisters as
well."
In Muslim there is a tradition from Auf bin Malik al-Ashjal to the
effect: "We used to practise blowing to cure diseases. We asked the
Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) for his opinion in this regard. He
said: Let me know the words with which you blow over the people. There
is no harm in blowing unless it smacks of polytheism."
Muslim, Musnad Ahmad and Ibn Majah contain a tradition from Hadrat
Jabir bin Abdullah, saying: "The Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) had
forbidden us blowing to cure disease. Then the people of the clan of
Hadrat Amr bin Hazm came and they said: We had a formula with which we
used to blow on the people to cure them of scorpion's sting (or
snake-bite). But you have forbidden us the practice. Then they recited
before him the words which they made use of. Thereupon the Holy
Prophet said: I do not see any harm in it, so let the one who can do
good to his brother, do him good." Another tradition from Jabir bin
Abdullah in Muslim is: "The family of Hazm had a formula to cure
snake-bite and the Holy Prophet permitted them to practise it." This
is also supported by the tradition from Hadrat Aishah, which is
contained in Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, and Ibn Majah: "The Holy Prophet
granted permission to a family of the Ansar for blowing to cure the
evils effects of biting by every poisonous creature." Traditions
resembling these have been related from Hadrat Anas also in Musnad
Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Muslim and Ibn Majah, saying that the Holy Prophet
gave permission for blowing to cure the bite by poisonous creatures,
the disease of blisters and the effects of the evil look."
Musnad Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah and Hakim have related this
tradition on the authority of Hadrat Umair, freed slave of Abi
al-Laham: "In the pre-Islamic days I had a formula with which I used
to blow over the people. I recited it before the Holy Prophet,
whereupon he told me to drop out such and such words from it, and
permitted me to blow with the rest of it."
According to Muwatta, Hadrat Abu Bakr went to the house of his
daughter, Hadrat Aishah, and found that she was unwell and a Jewish
woman was blowing over her. Thereupon he said to her: "Blow over her
by means of the Book of Allah." This shows that if the people of the
Book practise blowing by means of the verses of the Torah and the
Gospel, it is also permitted.
As for the question whether blowing for curing disease is efficacious
also, or not, its answer is that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace)
not only did not forbid anybody to have recourse to cure and medical
treatment but himself stated that Allah has created a cure for every
disease and exhorted his followers to use cures. He himself told the
people the remedies for certain diseases, as can be seen in theHadith
in the Kitab at-Tib (Book of Cures). But the cure can be beneficial
and useful only by Allah's command and permission, otherwise if the
cure and medical treatment were beneficial in every case, no one would
have died in hospitals. Now, if beside the cure and medical treatment,
Allah's Word and His beautiful names also are made use of, or Word and
His beautiful names also are made use of, or Allah is turned to and
invoked for help by means of His Word, Names and Attributes in a place
where no medical aid is available, it would not be against reason
except for the materialists. However, it is not right to disregard
intentionally a cure or treatment where it is available, and recourse
had only to enchanting and reciting of charms, and the people should
start a regular practice of granting amulets as a means of earning
their livelihood.
Many people in this regard argue from Hadrat Abu Said Khudri's
tradition which has been related in Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Musnad
Ahmad, Abu Daud and Ibn Majah, and it is supported also by a tradition
related in Bukhari on the authority of Ibn Abbas. According to it the
Holy Prophet sent some of his Companions including Hadrat Abu Said
Khudri on an expedition. They halted on the way at the settlement of
an Arabian tribe and demanded hospitality from the people, but they
refused to extend any hospitality. In the meantime the chief of the
tribe was stung by a scorpion and the people came to the travelers to
ask if they had any medicine or formula by which their chief could be
cured. Hadrat Abu Said said: "Yes, we do have, but since you have
refused us hospitality, we would not treat him unless you promised us
to give us something." They promised to give them a flock of goats
(according to some traditions, 30 goats), and Hadrat Abu Said went and
started reciting Surah Al-Fatihah and rubbing his saliva on the
affected place. Consequently, the chief felt relieved of the effect of
the poison and the people of the tribe gave them the goats as
promised. But the Companions said to one another; "Let us not make any
use of the goats until we have asked the Holy Prophet about it", for
they were not sure whether it was permissible to accept any reward for
what they had done. So they came before the Holy Prophet and related
what had happened. The Holy Prophet smiled and said: "How did you know
that Surah Al-Fatihah could also be used for curing such troubles?
Take the goats and allocate my share also in it."
But before one used this Hadith for permission to adopt a regular
profession of granting amulets and reciting charms, one should keep in
view the conditions under which Hadrat Abu Said Khudri had recourse to
it, and the Holy Prophet not only held it as permissible but also said
that a share for him also should be allocated so that there remained
no doubt in the minds of the Companions that such a thing was
permissible. The conditions in Arabia in those days were, as they
still are, that settlements were situated hundreds of miles apart,
there were not hotels and restaurants where a traveler could buy food
when he reached one of these after several days' journey. Under such
conditions it was considered a moral duty that when a traveler reached
a settlement the people of the place should extend hospitality to him.
Refusal on their part in many cases meant death for the travelers, and
this was looked upon as highly blameworthy among the Arabs. That is
why the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) allowed as permissible the
act of his Companions. Since the people of the tribe had refused them
hospitality, they too refused to treat their chief, and became ready
to treat him only on the condition that they should promise to give
them something in return. Then, when one of them with trust in God
recited Surah Al-Fatihah over the chief and he became well, the people
gave the promised wages and the Holy Prophet allowed that the wages be
accepted as lawful and pure. In Bukhari the tradition related on the
authority of Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas about this incident contains
the Holy Prophet's words to the effect: "Instead that you should have
acted otherwise, it was better that you recited the Book of Allah and
accepted the wages for it." He said this in order to impress the truth
that Allah's Word is superior to every other kind of enchanting and
practice of secret arts. Furthermore, the Message also was
incidentally conveyed to the Arabian tribe and its people made aware
of the blessings of the Word that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be
peace) had brought from Allah. This incident cannot be cited as a
precedent for the people who run clinic in the cities and towns for
the practice of secret arts and have adopted it as a regular
profession for earning livelihood. No precedent of it is found in the
life and practice of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) or his
Companions, their followers and the earliest Imams.
Relation between Surah Al-Fatihah and the Mu'awwidhatayn
The last thing which is note worthy with regard to the Mu'awwidhatayn
is the relation between the beginning and the end of the Qur'an.
Although the Qur'an has not been arranged chronologically, the Holy
Prophet (upon whom be peace) arranged in the present order the verses
and Surahs revealed during 23 years on different occasions to meet
different needs and situations not by himself but by the command of
Allah Who revealed them. According to this order, the Qur'an opens
with the Surah Al-Fatihah and ends with the Mu'awwidhatayn. Now, let
us have a look at the two. In the beginning, after praising and
glorifying Allah, Who is Lord of the worlds, Kind, Merciful and Master
of the Judgment Day, the servants submits: "Lord, You alone I worship
and to You along I turn for help, and the most urgent help that I need
from You is to be guided to the Straight Way." In answer, he is given
by Allah the whole Qur'an to show him the Straight Way, which is
concluded thus: Man prays to Allah, Who is Lord of dawn, Lord of men,
King of men, Deity of men, saying: "I seek refuge only with You for
protection from every evil and mischief of every creature, and in
particular, from the evil whisperings of devils, be they from among
men or jinn, for they are the greatest obstacle in following the
Straight Way." The relation that the beginning bears with the end,
cannot remain hidden from anyone who has understanding and insight.
