Subject and Theme

Link for Urdu version:

CHAPTER AL FALAQ: Introduction, Urdu

The circumstances in which these two surahs were revealed in Makkah al-Mu’azzamah were such that, as soon as the call to Islam began, it seemed as though the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had put his hand into a beehive. As his message spread, the opposition of the Quraysh disbelievers grew correspondingly fierce. As long as they retained hope that they might somehow strike a bargain with him, or cajole him into abandoning this mission, their hostility remained somewhat tempered. But once the Prophet ﷺ made it utterly clear to them that he would never compromise with them on matters of faith—and Surah Al-Kafirun plainly declared that he would not worship what they worshipped, nor would they worship what he worshipped, that his way was separate from theirs—the disbelievers’ enmity reached its peak. This was especially true within families whose members (men or women, boys or girls) had embraced Islam; the hearts of their relatives burned constantly with rage against the Prophet ﷺ. He was being cursed in house after house. Secret plots were being hatched to kill him under cover of night so that Banu Hashim would not discover the killer and seek revenge. Sorcery was being practiced against him so that he might either die, fall gravely ill, or lose his sanity. Devils among both jinn and men spread everywhere, attempting to plant doubts in people’s hearts against him and against the faith and the Qur’an he brought, so that people would grow suspicious and flee from him. The fire of envy also burned in many hearts, for they could not bear to see anyone’s lamp lit except their own or that of someone from their own tribe. As an example, Abu Jahl himself explained the reason for his extreme opposition to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: he said that there had been a rivalry between his clan and Banu Abd Manaf (the Prophet’s ﷺ clan)—if they fed people, so did we; if they gave people mounts, so did we; if they gave gifts, so did we—until they and we became equal in honor and standing. Now they say one of them is a prophet to whom revelation descends from heaven. How could they possibly compete in that arena? By God, he swore, he would never believe in him nor accept him as true.

In these circumstances, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was commanded to say: I seek refuge with the Lord of the daybreak, from the evil of all creation, from the evil of the darkness of night, from the evil of sorcerers and sorceresses, and from the evil of the envious. And to say: I seek refuge with the Lord of mankind, the King of mankind, and the God of mankind, from the evil of every whispering tempter who returns again and again to cast doubts into people’s hearts, whether from among the devils of the jinn or the devils of mankind.

This is similar to what Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) said when Pharaoh expressed his intention to kill him before the full court:

“Indeed, I have sought refuge in my Lord and your Lord from every arrogant tyrant who does not believe in the Day of Reckoning.” — Qur’an, Surah Al-Mu’min (Ghafir): 27

“And indeed I have sought refuge in my Lord and your Lord, lest you stone me.” — Qur’an, Surah Ad-Dukhan: 20

On both occasions, these noble messengers of Allah faced powerful enemies possessing vast resources, means, and strength, while they themselves had no material power with which to confront them. And on both occasions, they dismissed the threats, dangerous schemes, and hostile machinations of their enemies by declaring that they had taken refuge in the Lord of the universe against them. Clearly, only one who is certain that his Lord’s power is the greatest power—before which all worldly powers are nothing, and that whoever attains His protection can be harmed by no one—can display such resolve and steadfastness. Only such a person can say: I will never retreat from proclaiming the truth; do whatever you wish, I have no concern for it, because I have taken refuge in the Lord of you, me, and the entire universe.

The Qur’anic Status of Al-Mu’awwidhatayn

The discussion above should suffice. However, since the books of Hadith and Tafsir contain three issues regarding these surahs that could raise doubts in people’s hearts, we consider it necessary to clarify them as well.

The first issue worthy of attention is whether it is established with absolute certainty that these two surahs are Qur’anic surahs, or whether there is room for doubt about this. This question arises because it has been reported in numerous narrations from a Companion of such exalted standing as Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him) that he did not consider these two surahs to be surahs of the Qur’an and had removed them from his personal copy (mushaf). Hadith scholars including Imam Ahmad, Bazzar, Tabarani, Ibn Mardawayh, Abu Ya’la, Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Humaydi, Abu Nu’aym, Ibn Hibban, and others have transmitted this report from Ibn Mas’ud (RA) through various chains, most of which are authentic. These narrations state not only that he removed these surahs from his mushaf, but also that he used to say: “Do not mix into the Qur’an things that are not part of the Qur’an. These two are not included in the Qur’an. They were merely an instruction given to the Prophet ﷺ to seek refuge with Allah using these words.” Some narrations add that he did not recite these surahs in prayer.

These narrations gave opponents of Islam an opportunity to raise doubts about the Qur’an, suggesting—God forbid—that the Book is not protected from corruption, since if two surahs are, according to a Companion like Ibn Mas’ud, later additions, who knows what other deletions and additions might have occurred within it. To deflect this criticism, Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani and Qadi Iyad, among others, interpreted this to mean that Ibn Mas’ud did not deny the Qur’anic status of Al-Mu’awwidhatayn, but only refused to record them in the mushaf, since in his view only what the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had explicitly authorized to be written should be included in the mushaf, and news of such authorization had not reached Ibn Mas’ud. However, this interpretation is not correct, because it is established through authentic chains that Ibn Mas’ud (RA) did indeed deny that these were Qur’anic surahs. Some other scholars, such as Imam Nawawi, Imam Ibn Hazm, and Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi, have outright declared this entire report to be false and baseless, claiming Ibn Mas’ud never said any such thing. But rejecting well-established historical facts without evidence is not a sound scholarly method.

The question now is: what is the correct response to the criticism of the Qur’an arising from these narrations attributed to Ibn Mas’ud (RA)? There are several answers to this question, which we present in sequence:

(1) Hafiz Bazzar, after recording these narrations from Ibn Mas’ud (RA) in his Musnad, writes that he was entirely alone in holding this view—no other Companion supported his position on this matter.

(2) By unanimous agreement of all the Companions, the copies of the Qur’an that the third Caliph, Sayyiduna Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him), had compiled and officially dispatched to the centers of the Islamic world on behalf of the Islamic Caliphate contained these two surahs.

(3) From the blessed era of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ until today, the entire Muslim world has reached consensus (ijma) on a single mushaf that contains these two surahs. The lone opinion of Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (RA), despite his great stature, carries no weight against this immense consensus.

(4) It is established through the most authentic and reliable hadiths from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ that he himself recited these surahs in prayer, instructed others to recite them, and taught them to people as surahs of the Qur’an. Consider the following hadiths as examples:

We have already cited above, on the authority of Muslim, Ahmad, Tirmidhi, and Nasa’i, the narration of Hazrat Uqbah ibn Amir (RA) that the Prophet ﷺ told him regarding Surah Al-Falaq and Surah An-Nas that these verses had been revealed to him that very night. A narration of Nasa’i from Uqbah (RA) ibn Amir states that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ recited these two surahs in the Fajr prayer. Ibn Hibban narrates from the same Uqbah (RA) that the Prophet ﷺ told him: “If possible, do not let the recitation of these two surahs be missed from your prayers.” Sa’id ibn Mansur narrates from Hazrat Mu’adh (RA) ibn Jabal that the Prophet ﷺ recited these two surahs in the Fajr prayer. Imam Ahmad brings, with an authentic chain in his Musnad, a narration from another Companion that the Prophet ﷺ told him: “When you pray, recite these two surahs in it.” In Musnad Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and Nasa’i, there is a narration from Uqbah (RA) ibn Amir that the Prophet ﷺ asked him: “Shall I not teach you two surahs that are among the best of those that people recite?” He said: “Certainly, O Messenger of Allah.” Thereupon the Prophet ﷺ taught him these very Mu’awwidhatayn. Then when the prayer began, the Prophet ﷺ recited these same two surahs in it as well. And after the prayer, when he passed by him, he said: “O Uqbah, how did you find that?” After this he instructed him to recite these surahs whenever he was about to sleep and upon waking. In Musnad Ahmad, Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, and Nasa’i, there is a narration from Uqbah (RA) ibn Amir that the Prophet ﷺ urged him to recite the Mu’awwidhat (i.e., Qul huwa Allahu Ahad and Al-Mu’awwidhatayn) after every prayer. Nasa’i, Ibn Mardawayh, and Hakim also narrate from Uqbah (RA) ibn Amir that once the Prophet ﷺ was riding, and he was walking alongside holding the Prophet’s foot. He said: “Teach me Surah Hud or Surah Yusuf.” The Prophet ﷺ replied: “There is nothing more beneficial for a servant in the sight of Allah than saying ‘Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbil-Falaq.’” The narration of Abdullah ibn Abis al-Juhani, transmitted by Nasa’i, Bayhaqi, Baghawi, and Ibn Sa’d, states that the Prophet ﷺ said to him: “Ibn Abis, shall I not tell you which are the best things by which those who seek refuge have sought Allah’s protection?” He said: “Certainly, O Messenger of Allah.” He replied: “Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbil-Falaq and Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbin-Nas—these two surahs.” Ibn Mardawayh narrates from Hazrat Umm Salamah that the surahs most beloved to Allah are Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbil-Falaq and Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbin-Nas.

Here a question arises: how did Hazrat Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (RA) come to hold this mistaken view that these two are not surahs of the Qur’an? We find the answer by combining two narrations. One is the narration that Hazrat Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (RA) used to say this was merely an instruction given to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ to seek refuge with Allah in this manner. The other is the narration—transmitted through several chains by Imam Bukhari in Sahih al-Bukhari, by Imam Ahmad in his Musnad, by Abu Nu’aym in al-Mustakhraj, and by Nasa’i in his Sunan, with slight verbal variations, via Zirr ibn Hubaysh—from Hazrat Ubayy ibn Ka’b (RA), who held a distinguished position among the Companions in knowledge of the Qur’an. Zirr ibn Hubaysh relates that he said to Ubayy’s brother: “Your brother Abdullah ibn Mas’ud says such and such. What do you say about his statement?” He replied: “I asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ about this. He said: ‘It was said to me: Say (Qul), so I said: Say. So we likewise say it as the Prophet ﷺ used to say it.’” In Imam Ahmad’s narration, Ubayy’s words are: “I bear witness that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ told me that Gabriel (peace be upon him) said to him ‘Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbil-Falaq,’ so he said likewise, and he said ‘Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbin-Nas,’ so he said likewise. Therefore we too say it just as the Prophet ﷺ did.”

Reflecting on these two narrations, it becomes clear that Hazrat Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (RA), seeing the word “Qul” (Say) in both surahs, mistakenly assumed that the Prophet ﷺ had simply been commanded to say “A’udhu bi-Rabbil-Falaq” and “A’udhu bi-Rabbin-Nas” (i.e., that “Qul” was merely an instruction, not part of the revealed text itself). However, he did not feel the need to ask the Prophet ﷺ about this. Hazrat Ubayy ibn Ka’b (RA), on the other hand, had this same question arise in his mind, and he asked the Prophet ﷺ about it directly. The Prophet ﷺ explained that since Gabriel (peace be upon him) had said “Qul,” he likewise said “Qul.” Understand it this way: if someone is meant to be given a command, and told “Say: I seek refuge,” he would not, in carrying out that command, say “Say: I seek refuge”—rather, he would drop the word “Say” and simply say “I seek refuge.” But if the message is given to him not to keep for himself but to convey to others, then he would convey the exact wording of the message to people without omitting anything from it, as he would not be authorized to do so. Thus, the fact that both these surahs begin with the word “Qul” is clear proof that this is revealed speech (kalam-e-wahy) which the Prophet ﷺ was obligated to convey in the very words in which it had reached him. It was not merely a command given to the Prophet ﷺ. Besides these two surahs, there are 330 other verses in the Qur’an that begin with the word “Qul” (Say). In all of these, the presence of “Qul” is a sign that this is revealed speech, which it was the Prophet’s ﷺ duty to convey in the exact words in which it was revealed to him. Otherwise, if “Qul” were merely a command in every instance, the Prophet ﷺ would have dropped that word and simply stated what he was commanded to say, and it would not have been recorded in the Qur’an; rather, the Prophet ﷺ would have been content to simply fulfill the command by saying what he was told to say, without it forming part of the Qur’anic text.

If one reflects carefully on this point, one can well understand how inappropriate it is to consider the Companions infallible and to raise an uproar of “disrespecting the Companions” the moment any error is attributed to them. Here we see that even a Companion of such exalted rank as Hazrat Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (RA) made such a significant error regarding two surahs of the Qur’an. If such an error could occur even from a Companion of this magnitude, then errors are certainly possible from others as well. We can conduct scholarly investigation into such matters, and if a Companion’s statement or statements are found to be incorrect, we may say so. However, it would be a grave injustice for anyone to go beyond simply identifying an error as incorrect and instead direct slander or scorn at the Companions. Regarding these very Mu’awwidhatayn, commentators and hadith scholars have indeed called Ibn Mas’ud’s (RA) opinion mistaken, but none has dared to say that by denying these two surahs of the Qur’an he became—God forbid—a disbeliever.

The Effect of Sorcery Upon the Prophet ﷺ

The second issue that arises in connection with these surahs is this: according to certain narrations, sorcery was performed against the Prophet ﷺ, and as a result he fell ill, and to remove this effect, Gabriel (peace be upon him) came and instructed him to recite these surahs. Many rationalists, both ancient and modern, have objected to this, arguing that if these narrations are accepted, the entire Shari’ah becomes suspect. For if sorcery could affect the Prophet—and according to these narrations it did—then we cannot be certain how much his opponents may have caused him to say or do under the influence of sorcery, nor how much of his teaching came from Allah and how much came under the influence of sorcery. Not only this, but they say that once this is accepted as true, one cannot even rule out that the Prophet was incited toward the claim of prophethood through sorcery itself, and that in his confusion he mistakenly believed an angel had come to him. Their argument also includes the claim that these hadiths contradict the Qur’an itself. For in the Qur’an, the accusation of the disbelievers is recorded that the Prophet is a mas’hoor—that is, a man affected by sorcery (Yaqulu-zh-Zalimuna in tattabi’una illa rajulam mas’hura — Surah Bani Isra’il/Al-Isra: 47)—and yet these hadiths confirm the disbelievers’ accusation that the Prophet was indeed affected by sorcery.

To investigate this matter, it is first necessary to examine whether it is, in fact, established through reliable historical narrations that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was affected by sorcery. And if so, what was it, and to what extent? After this, one must examine whether the objections raised actually apply to what is established by history.

It was an extraordinary mark of integrity among the Muslim scholars of the earliest generations that they made no attempt to distort history according to their own opinions or preconceptions, or to conceal facts; rather, they transmitted whatever was historically established, exactly as it was, to later generations, without concern for how anyone inclined to draw the opposite conclusions might misuse this material that they themselves had compiled. Now, if something is established through highly authentic and numerous historical sources, it is not appropriate for any honest scholar to deny that history simply because accepting it might, in his view, lead to certain undesirable conclusions—nor is it appropriate to speculate and stretch what is established by history beyond its actual bounds. Rather, his task is to accept history as history, and then examine what it actually proves and what it does not.

As far as historical authenticity is concerned, the event of sorcery affecting the Prophet ﷺ is established with absolute certainty; if it could be disproven through scholarly criticism, then no historical event in the world could be proven true. This has been transmitted from Hazrat Aishah (RA), Hazrat Zayd ibn Arqam (RA), and Hazrat Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA) by hadith scholars including Bukhari, Muslim, Nasa’i, Ibn Majah, Imam Ahmad, Abd al-Razzaq, Humaydi, Bayhaqi, Tabarani, Ibn Sa’d, Ibn Mardawayh, Ibn Abi Shaybah, Hakim, Abd ibn Humayd, and others, through so many different and numerous chains that its core content reaches the level of tawatur (mass transmission), even though each individual narration by itself is a solitary report (khabar-e-wahid). We compile the details that appear across these narrations into a single coherent account here:

After the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, when the Prophet ﷺ returned to Madinah, in Muharram 7 AH a delegation of Jews came from Khaybar to Madinah and met a well-known sorcerer named Labid ibn al-A’sam, who belonged to the Ansari tribe of Banu Zurayq. They said to him: “You know what Muhammad ﷺ has done to us. We have tried hard to work sorcery against him but achieved no success. Now we have come to you, because you are a greater sorcerer than us. Here are three gold coins—take them and cast a powerful spell on Muhammad ﷺ.” At that time, the Prophet ﷺ had a Jewish boy serving him. Colluding with this boy, they obtained a piece of the Prophet’s ﷺ comb containing some of his blessed hair. Sorcery was performed using this hair and the teeth of the comb. Some narrations state that Labid ibn al-A’sam performed the sorcery himself, while others state that his sisters were greater sorceresses than him, and he had them perform it. In either case, the sorcery was placed inside the spathe (sheath) of a male date palm spadix, and Labid buried it under a stone at the bottom of a well belonging to Banu Zurayq called Dharwan (or Dhi Arwan).

The effect of this sorcery on the Prophet ﷺ took a full year to manifest; in the second six months some change in mood began to be felt, the last forty days were severe, and the final three days were especially severe. But the greatest effect it had upon the Prophet ﷺ was simply this: he would feel that he was wasting away; he would think he had done something when he had not; he would think he had gone to one of his wives when he had not; and at times he doubted his own eyesight, thinking he had seen something when he had not. All these effects remained confined to his own person, so much so that others did not even realize what he was going through. As for his prophethood, no disruption whatsoever occurred in his duties as a result of it. There is no narration suggesting that during this period he forgot any verse of the Qur’an, or recited any verse incorrectly, or that any change occurred in his teachings during his gatherings, sermons, or addresses, or that he ever presented something as revelation that had not actually been revealed to him, or that he missed a prayer while believing he had performed it. Had anything like that occurred—God forbid—it would have caused a great uproar, and the entire Arabian peninsula would have learned that a Prophet whom no power could defeat had been overcome by a sorcerer’s spell. But his prophetic office remained entirely unaffected by this; only in his personal life did he feel its effects and was troubled by them.

Eventually, one day while he was with Hazrat Aishah, he repeatedly prayed to Allah. In that state he fell asleep or became drowsy, and upon waking he told Hazrat Aishah that Allah had informed him of the matter he had asked about. Hazrat Aishah asked what it was. He said that two men (i.e., angels in human form) had come to him—one near his head and the other near his feet. One asked, “What is wrong with him?” The other replied, “He has been bewitched.” He asked, “Who did it?” The reply came: “Labid ibn al-A’sam.” He asked, “In what?” The reply: “In a comb and hair, inside the spathe of a male date palm spadix.” He asked, “Where is it?” The reply: “Under a stone at the bottom of the well of Dhi Arwan (or Dharwan) belonging to Banu Zurayq.” He asked, “What should now be done about it?” The reply: “The well’s water should be drawn out, and then it should be retrieved from beneath the stone.”

After this, the Prophet ﷺ sent Hazrat Ali (RA), Hazrat Ammar ibn Yasir (RA), and Hazrat Zubayr (RA). Jubayr ibn Iyas al-Zurqi and Qays ibn Mihsan al-Zurqi (RA)—two companions from Banu Zurayq—also joined them. Later the Prophet ﷺ himself went there with some Companions. The water was drawn out and the sheath was retrieved. Inside it, along with the comb and hair, was a cord with eleven knots tied in it, and a wax figure with needles stuck into it. Gabriel (peace be upon him) came and informed him to recite the Mu’awwidhatayn. So the Prophet ﷺ recited verse after verse, and with each verse a knot would loosen and a needle would be removed from the figure, until by the end all the knots had come undone and all the needles had been removed, and the Prophet ﷺ emerged from the effect of the sorcery exactly as a person who had been bound is suddenly set free. After this, he summoned Labid and questioned him. Labid confessed his crime, and the Prophet ﷺ let him go, for he never sought personal revenge for himself. Not only that, but he declined even to publicize the matter, saying: “Allah has healed me. Now I do not wish to incite people against anyone.”

This is the entire account of this sorcery. There is nothing in it that detracts from his office of prophethood. Just as he could be wounded personally, as happened at the Battle of Uhud; just as he could fall from a horse and be injured, as is established in hadith; just as a scorpion could sting him, as recorded in other hadiths—and none of these things contradicts the protection that Allah promised him in his capacity as a Prophet—so too, in his personal capacity, he could fall ill from the effect of sorcery. That a prophet can be affected by sorcery is, in fact, established by the Qur’an itself. In Surah Al-A’raf, regarding Pharaoh’s sorcerers, it is mentioned that when they came to confront Musa, they bewitched the eyes of the entire assembled crowd of thousands who had gathered to watch the contest between the two (saharu a’yunan-nas — verse 116). And in Surah Ta-Ha it is mentioned that when they threw down their staffs and ropes, not only the common people but Musa himself perceived them as snakes rushing toward him, and he became afraid, until Allah revealed to him: “Do not fear; you will surely be victorious. Throw down what is in your hand” (fa-idha hibaluhum wa ‘isiyyuhum yukhayyalu ilayhi min sihrihim annaha tas’a… qulna la takhaf innaka anta al-a’la, wa-alqi ma fi yaminik — verses 66-69).

As for the objection that this confirms the accusation of the Makkan disbelievers that they called the Prophet ﷺ a “bewitched man,” the response is that the disbelievers did not call him “bewitched” in the sense that he had fallen ill from a sorcerer’s effect, but rather in the sense that—God forbid—some sorcerer had driven him insane, and that in this insanity he had claimed prophethood and was telling tales of heaven and hell. Clearly, this objection does not apply at all to a matter in which it is historically established that the effect of the sorcery was confined solely to the person of Muhammad ﷺ, while his prophethood remained entirely unaffected by it.

It is also worth noting in this regard that those who consider sorcery to be merely a superstitious matter hold this view only because the effects of sorcery cannot be scientifically explained. But there are many things in the world that are experienced and observed, yet cannot be explained scientifically as to how they occur. Our inability to provide such an explanation does not require us to deny the existence of the thing itself that we cannot explain. Sorcery is, in reality, a psychological effect that, passing through the psyche, also affects the body, just as physical effects, passing through the body, affect the psyche. For example, fear is a psychological matter, but its effect on the body is that one’s hair stands on end and the body trembles. In reality, sorcery does not change reality itself, but a person’s psyche and senses, being affected by it, begin to perceive that reality has changed. The staffs and ropes that the sorcerers threw before Musa (peace be upon him) did not actually become snakes, but such sorcery was cast upon the eyes of the assembled thousands that everyone, including Musa himself, perceived them as snakes, and even Musa’s senses were not immune to this effect of the sorcery. Similarly, the Qur’an (Al-Baqarah, verse 102) mentions that in Babylon people used to learn from Harut and Marut a kind of sorcery that could cause separation between husband and wife. This too was a psychological effect, and clearly, if people had not found this practice effective through experience, they would not have sought it out. Undoubtedly, it is true that, just like a bullet from a gun or a bomb dropped from an airplane, sorcery’s effectiveness too is not possible without Allah’s permission; but to deny the existence of something that has been within human experience and observation for thousands of years is mere obstinacy.

The Status of Ruqyah (Spiritual Healing/Incantation) in Islam

The third issue that arises in connection with these surahs is whether there is any room in Islam for ruqyah (spiritual healing through recitation), and whether ruqyah is itself effective or not. This question arises because numerous authentic hadiths mention that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, every night before sleeping, and especially during illness, would recite the Mu’awwidhatayn—or according to some narrations, the Mu’awwidhat (i.e., Qul huwa Allahu Ahad along with the Mu’awwidhatayn)—three times, blow into his own hands, and then pass them over his entire body from head to foot, wherever his hands could reach. During his final illness, when he was no longer able to do this himself, Hazrat Aishah recited these surahs (either on her own initiative or by his instruction) and, considering the blessing of his own blessed hand, took his hand and passed it over his body. These narrations are transmitted with authentic chains in Bukhari, Muslim, Nasa’i, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, and Muwatta Imam Malik, directly from Hazrat Aishah (RA) herself, who, more than anyone, was familiar with the Prophet’s ﷺ private domestic life.

In this matter, one must first properly understand the relevant point of Islamic law. In the hadiths, there is a lengthy narration from Hazrat Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA), at the end of which the Prophet ﷺ says that those among his followers who neither seek cauterization treatment, nor seek ruqyah, nor seek omens, but place their trust in their Lord, will enter Paradise without reckoning (Muslim). Hazrat Mughirah ibn Shu’bah (RA) narrates that the Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever sought treatment by cauterization or sought ruqyah has distanced himself from trust in Allah” (Tirmidhi). Hazrat Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (RA) narrates that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ disliked ten things, among which was ruqyah, except for the Mu’awwidhatayn or the Mu’awwidhat (Abu Dawud, Ahmad, Nasa’i, Ibn Hibban, Hakim). Some hadiths also indicate that initially the Prophet ﷺ had prohibited ruqyah altogether, but later permitted it on the condition that it not involve shirk (polytheism), that it be done using Allah’s pure names or His speech, that the words used be comprehensible so that it could be verified there was nothing sinful in them, and that reliance not be placed on the ruqyah itself as though it possessed inherent healing power, but rather trust be placed in Allah, who, if He wills, would make it beneficial. With this point of Islamic law clarified, let us now examine what the hadiths say on this matter:

Tabarani narrates in As-Saghir, on the authority of Hazrat Ali (RA), that the Prophet ﷺ was once stung by a scorpion during prayer. When he finished praying, he said: “May Allah’s curse be upon the scorpion—it spares neither one who is praying nor anyone else.” He then called for water and salt, and as he applied the salty water to where the scorpion had stung him, he recited Qul ya ayyuhal-kafirun, Qul huwa Allahu Ahad, Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbil-Falaq, and Qul a’udhu bi-Rabbin-Nas.

It is also narrated by Ibn Abbas that the Prophet ﷺ used to recite this prayer over Hazrat Hasan (RA) and Hazrat Husayn (RA): “U’idhu kuma bi-kalimatillahit-tammati min kulli shaytanin wa hammatin wa min kulli ’aynin lammah” — “I place you both under the protection of Allah’s perfect words, from every devil and every harmful creature, and from every evil eye” (Bukhari, Musnad Ahmad, Tirmidhi, and Ibn Majah).

Regarding Uthman ibn Abi al-As al-Thaqafi, it is narrated in Muslim, Muwatta, Tabarani, and Hakim, with slight verbal variation, that he complained to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ that since becoming Muslim he had been experiencing a pain that nearly overwhelmed him. The Prophet ﷺ told him: “Place your right hand on the place where it hurts, then say ‘Bismillah’ three times, and say seven times while passing your hand over it: ‘A’udhu billahi wa qudratihi min sharri ma ajidu wa uhadhir’ — I seek refuge in Allah and His power from the evil of what I feel and what I fear.” In Muwatta there is an addition that Uthman ibn Abi al-As said that afterward his pain went away, and he continued to teach this same thing to his household.

In Musnad Ahmad and Tahawi, Talq ibn Ali narrates that he was stung by a scorpion in the presence of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. The Prophet ﷺ recited over him, blew on him, and passed his hand over the place.

In Muslim, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri narrates that once the Prophet ﷺ fell ill, and Gabriel came and asked: “O Muhammad, are you ill?” He said, “Yes.” Gabriel said: “Bismillahi arqika min kulli shay’in yu’dhika, min sharri kulli nafsin aw ’aynin hasid, Allahu yashfika, bismillahi arqika” — “In the name of Allah I perform ruqyah upon you, from everything that harms you, from the evil of every soul or envious eye; may Allah heal you; in His name I perform ruqyah upon you.” A similar narration is transmitted in Musnad Ahmad from Hazrat Ubadah ibn as-Samit, who said that the Prophet ﷺ was ill; he visited him and found him in severe distress, but when he returned in the evening, he found him completely well. When he asked the reason for such quick recovery, the Prophet ﷺ said that Gabriel had come and performed ruqyah on him with certain words, which he then related, similar to those in the previous hadith. A similar narration is also transmitted from Hazrat Aishah (RA) in Muslim and Musnad Ahmad.

Imam Ahmad narrates in his Musnad, on the authority of Hazrat Hafsah (RA), Mother of the Believers, that one day the Prophet ﷺ came to her and found a woman named Shifa [her actual name was Layla, but she was known as Shifa bint Abdullah; she had embraced faith before the Hijrah and belonged to the Quraysh clan of Banu Adi, the same clan to which Hazrat Umar belonged, making her a relative of Hazrat Hafsah] sitting with her, who used to treat ant-bites (or a skin ailment called namlah) through ruqyah. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Teach Hafsah that practice as well.”

In Muslim, Awf ibn Malik al-Ashja’i narrates that during the pre-Islamic period they used to practice ruqyah. They asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ his opinion on the matter. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Present to me what you used to use for ruqyah; there is no harm in ruqyah as long as it does not involve shirk.”

In Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, and Ibn Majah, Hazrat Jabir ibn Abdullah narrates that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had prohibited ruqyah. Then some members of the family of Amr ibn Hazm came and said: “We had a practice by which we treated scorpion (or snake) stings, but you have forbidden this.” They then recited to him what they used to say. The Prophet ﷺ said: “I see no harm in this; whoever among you can benefit his brother should certainly do so.” Another hadith of Jabir ibn Abdullah (RA) in Muslim states that the family of Hazm had a treatment for snakebite, and the Prophet ﷺ granted them permission for it. This is supported by a narration of Hazrat Aishah in Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, and Ibn Majah, that the Prophet ﷺ granted a family of the Ansar permission to perform ruqyah for every poisonous creature’s bite. Similar narrations are transmitted from Hazrat Anas (RA) in Musnad Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Muslim, and Ibn Majah, in which the Prophet ﷺ permitted ruqyah for the bites of poisonous creatures, for the ailment called dhubab, and for the evil eye.

Musnad Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and Hakim narrate from Hazrat Umayr, freedman of Abu al-Nahm, that during the pre-Islamic period he had a practice by which he used to perform ruqyah. He presented it to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Remove such-and-such things from it; with the rest you may perform ruqyah.”

In Muwatta it is recorded that Hazrat Abu Bakr went to the house of his daughter Hazrat Aishah and found her ill, with a Jewish woman performing ruqyah on her. He said: “Perform ruqyah by reciting from the Book of Allah.” From this it is understood that even if People of the Book perform ruqyah by reciting verses from the Torah or the Gospel, this too is permissible.

As for whether ruqyah is actually beneficial, the answer is that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ never prohibited medicine and treatment—indeed, he himself said that Allah has created a cure for every illness, so seek treatment. The Prophet ﷺ himself taught people remedies for certain ailments, as can be seen by examining the “Book of Medicine” sections in the hadith collections. However, medicine too is only beneficial by Allah’s command and permission; otherwise, if medicine and medical treatment were inherently and unconditionally effective, no one would ever die in hospitals. Now, if alongside medicine and treatment one also seeks benefit from Allah’s speech and His beautiful names, or in a place where no medical assistance is available, one turns to Allah alone and seeks help through His speech and names and attributes, this is contrary to reason only for materialists [many materialist doctors in the world have also acknowledged that prayer and turning to Allah are highly effective in the healing of patients. I myself have personally experienced this twice in my life. In 1948, when I was placed under house arrest, a few days later a stone became lodged in my bladder and I was unable to urinate for sixteen hours. I prayed to Allah that I did not wish to seek treatment from oppressors, and asked Him alone to treat me. The stone then dislodged from the urinary passage and remained dislodged for twenty years, until in 1968 it caused trouble again and had to be surgically removed. The second time, when I was arrested in 1953, both my shins had been severely afflicted with ringworm for several months, and no treatment had brought relief. After my arrest, I made the same prayer to Allah that I had made in 1948, and without any treatment or medicine, my shins became completely clear of the ringworm. To this day, that ailment has never returned.] However, it is not correct to deliberately abandon medicine and treatment where it is available, relying solely on ruqyah, nor for people to set up practices of charms and amulets and make this their livelihood.

In this matter, many people cite as evidence the narration of Hazrat Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (RA), recorded in Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Musnad Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah, also supported by a narration of Ibn Abbas (RA) in Bukhari. It states that the Prophet ﷺ sent some of his Companions, including Hazrat Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (RA), on an expedition. Along the way, they stopped at the settlement of an Arab tribe and asked the tribe to host them. They refused. Meanwhile, the tribe’s chief was stung by a scorpion, and they came to the travelers and asked: “Do you have any medicine or practice by which you could treat our chief?” Hazrat Abu Sa’id said: “Yes, we do, but since you refused to host us, we will not treat him unless you give us something in return.” They promised to give a flock of sheep (some narrations say thirty sheep), and Hazrat Abu Sa’id began reciting Surah Al-Fatihah over him, applying his saliva [most narrations do not specify that it was Hazrat Abu Sa’id who performed this act, nor do they specify that he himself was present on this expedition; but the narration in Tirmidhi specifies both points] as he recited, until eventually the effect of the scorpion sting was removed, and the tribe brought the promised sheep. But the Companions said among themselves that they should not benefit from these sheep until they had asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, not knowing whether it was permissible to take payment for this. So they came to the Prophet ﷺ and related what had happened. The Prophet ﷺ laughed and said: “How did you know that this surah could be used for ruqyah? Take the sheep, and include a share for me as well.”

However, before deriving from this hadith a justification for running practices of charms, amulets, and ruqyah, one must keep in view the circumstances of Arabia in which Hazrat Abu Sa’id al-Khudri performed this act, and which led the Prophet ﷺ not only to permit it but also to say “include a share for me as well”—so that no doubt would remain in the Companions’ hearts regarding its permissibility. The conditions in Arabia at that time, and even today, were such that one could travel fifty, a hundred, even a hundred and fifty miles from one settlement without finding another. Nor did settlements at that time have hotels, inns, or food shops where a traveler, after days of travel, could purchase provisions. Under these circumstances, it was part of the recognized code of Arab ethics that when travelers arrived at a settlement, the people of that settlement should host them. Refusal to do so often meant death for the travelers, and such conduct was considered disgraceful in Arab society. This is why the Messenger of Allah ﷺ permitted his Companions’ action: when the tribe refused them hospitality, they in turn refused to treat their chief, and agreed to treat him only on condition that they be given something in return. Then, when one of them, relying on Allah, recited Surah Al-Fatihah over the chief and he recovered, the tribe brought the agreed payment, and the Prophet ﷺ declared this payment lawful and pure. In the narration of this incident from Hazrat Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA) in Bukhari, the Prophet’s ﷺ words are: “Indeed the most rightful thing for which you could take payment is the Book of Allah”—meaning, rather than performing some other practice, it was far more proper that you took payment for reciting Allah’s Book. He said this because Allah’s speech is superior to all other forms of compensation; moreover, through this the duty of conveying the message (tabligh) was also fulfilled toward that tribe, for they came to know the blessing of this speech that the Prophet ﷺ had brought from Allah. This incident cannot be taken as a precedent for those who sit in cities and towns running practices of charms and ruqyah, making this their means of livelihood. No precedent for this can be found among the Prophet ﷺ, the Companions, the Successors, or the early scholars (salaf).

The Connection Between Surah Al-Fatihah and These Surahs

The final point worth noting regarding Al-Mu’awwidhatayn is the relationship between the beginning and end of the Qur’an. Although the Qur’an is not arranged in the order of revelation, the verses and surahs revealed over twenty-three years according to various circumstances, occasions, and needs were arranged by the Messenger of Allah ﷺ—not on his own initiative, but by the command of Allah who revealed them—into the form in which we now find it. According to this arrangement, the Qur’an begins with Surah Al-Fatihah and ends with Al-Mu’awwidhatayn. Now consider both of these for a moment. At the beginning, after praising Allah, Lord of all the worlds, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate, and the Master of the Day of Judgment, the servant says: “It is You alone we worship, and You alone we seek help from,” and the greatest help he seeks is to be guided to the straight path. In response, Allah grants him the entire Qur’an to show him the straight path, and it concludes with the servant saying to Allah—who is the Lord of the Daybreak, the Lord of mankind, the King of mankind, and the God of mankind—“I seek refuge in You alone to be protected from every temptation and evil of every creature,” because it is precisely these things that most obstruct one from following the straight path. The harmony between this conclusion and that opening cannot remain hidden from any discerning eye.