Was the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم affected by Black Magic?
The muʿawwidhatayn (Surah Falaq and Surah Nass) are said to have been revealed in order to dispel
the magic spell that a certain man named Labid bin A'saam had cast on the
Prophet Muhammad[1]. Labid bin A'saam according to many accounts, managed
briefly to bewitch the Prophet Muhammad, leaving him in a catatonic state. He
was unable to function until God provided the text of surah 113, Al-Falaq,
which was used, according to the account, in order to counteract the effects of
the magic spell. Although nominally a Muslim[2] Labid belongs to the
small group of Jews who, according to the Muslim reports, converted to Islam in
order to subvert it, or to cause physical damage to its leading figures during
the time of the Prophet and the first caliphs. These include such figures as
Ibn Al-Sayyad, 'Abdallah bin Al-Saba' and Ka'b Al-Ahbar, who are occasionally
the objects of conspiracy theories in Christian literature as well. Labid was
the one to innovate the doctrine of the creation of the Qur'an and was first
formulated by him, and was passed on to his nephew Talut (i.e. Shaul,
apparently a converted Jew) to the forefathers of the Mu'tazila sect[3].
Although the story of Labid is historical, it rarely appears in the modern
biographies of the Prophet nor is he mentioned in the list of the companions
even though other admittedly bad Muslims (like 'Abdallah bin Ubayy and Ibn
Sayyad) are listed. The verses of the Qur'anic passage in sum 113 (verses 1-5)
in question read as follows:
"I seek refuge in the Lord of daybreakFrom the evil of that which He createdAnd from the evil of darkness when it settlesAnd from the evil of the females who blows on knotsAnd from the evil of an envier when he envies.
This surah and the following final surah have been controversial
in Islam; some early copies of the Qur'an did not include them as part of the
authoritative text (like the codex of Ibn Mas'ud)[4]. The language and grammatical style of the sura are difficult[5], and
can be explained only by twisting the rules of Arabic grammar as is done for
the purpose of an incantation[6].
However, much though the grammar pained the commentators, it was
the story of Labid al-Yahudi and his bewitching of the Prophet Muhammad which
made them the most uncomfortable. The idea that the Seal of the Prophets, the
infallible Messenger of God, could be treated in this manner, even for a short
time, was unacceptable to the majority of scholars.
➨ SCHOLAR'S WHO BELIEVED THAT THE ACCOUNT OF LABID BIN ASAM ACTUALLY OCCURED:
Since the story about Labid is one which developed over a long
period of time, we should deal with it chronologically, tracing it through the
centuries as the commentators grappled with it and sought to overcome the
difficulties inherent therein for the Muslim. One of the earliest such
commentators is
➢Muqatil bin Sulayman (d. 150/762), and he bring this account in
full:
[in giving the reasons for the revelation of the last two suras of the Qur'an] ... and was this [because] Labid bin A'sam bin Malik, or it is said, Ibn A'sam al-Yahudi, bewitched the Prophet with eleven knots on a string (watar) and placed it in a well in which there were seven stones, by means of a spathe of a [male] palm tree that the Prophet would lean against. The bewitchment spread through him [the Prophet] and it intensified for three days until he was very sick, and the women [his wives] became anxious [for him], and the suras of taking refuge [= the two suras being discussed] were revealed. As the Prophet was sleeping, he saw as if there were two angels who came to him, and one of them was [sitting] at his head, and the other at his feet. One of them said to his companion: 'What ails him?' and the companion said: 'Enchantment'. He said: 'Who enchanted him?', and the other said: 'Labid bin A'sam al-Yahudi'. 'By what [means]?' 'By [means] of a husk of palm'. 'Where [is it]?' 'In the well of so-and-so'. 'And what is the cure?' 'Remove the water from the well, and take out the husk of palm and burn it, and the knots will break, each knot at the reading of the mu'awwidhatayn [the verses of taking refuge, the last two suras of the Qur'an], and that will heal him'. When the Prophet woke up, he sent Ali Ibn Abi Talib to the well, and the magical device was removed, and he brought it, and burned that husk.
Then the angel Gabriel revealed the verses, and the Prophet was
healed and the news was brought to the women[7].
Many other early commentators mention this story in detail.
➢ Abu 'Ubayda (d. 210/825), the famed philologist who was himself of Jewish descent, does not mention this in the extant version of his Majiz al-Qur'an, though his version is quoted by Fakhr Al-Din Al- Razi in his commentary.
➢ Al-Farra' (d. 207/822) knows even less than al-Tustari; he does not mention that the Jews are the guilty party, and only says that the Prophet suffered for an undefined length of time, then had a vision of two angels[9].
➢ Abu 'Ubayda (d. 210/825), the famed philologist who was himself of Jewish descent, does not mention this in the extant version of his Majiz al-Qur'an, though his version is quoted by Fakhr Al-Din Al- Razi in his commentary.
➢ Sahl bin Abdallah al-Tustari (d. 283/896) gives a much shorter version of Muqatil's tradition, but adds a few details. He says that the name of the well in which the device was placed was one which belonged to Banu Bayda' However, he does not discuss the effects of the magic on the Prophet, nor does he mention the Prophet's vision of the two angels[8].
A number of the hadith and biographical works include this story,
including Al-Bukhari, who cites the most serious charge: the Prophet was
sexually unable to approach his wives[10] Early biographers, including Ibn
Hisham, also mention the story[11]. Al-Bayhaqi relates a number of accounts,
although usually without any hint of the impotence motif[12].
However, by the time the story reaches the Shi'i commentator ➢Al-Furat bin Ibrahim al-Kufi (lived third/ninth centuries -874/-941) it has
become much more elaborate:
Labid bin A'sam Al-Yahudi and Umm 'Abdallah Al-Yahudiyya bewitched the Messenger of God with a knot of silk (! qazz) red, green and yellow, and tied it for him [the Prophet] with eleven knots, and then placed it on a spathe of palm- he said in other words, the husks of almond (?)- and then he put it in the well of a wadi in Medina in the stepping-stone of the well beneath the ra'ufa, meaning the outer stone[16]. The Prophet went for three [days] without eating, drinking, hearing or seeing anything or going to women [for sexual intercourse]. Then Gabriel came down to him, and brought down with him the mu'awwidhatayn, and said to him: 'O Muhammad, what is the matter with you?' He said: 'I do not know; I am as you see!' And then he said: 'Umm "Abdallah and Labid bin A'sam bewitched you', and he informed him of the magical device's location.
Thereupon the Prophet recited the verses of the suras, and the
binding cords of the magic fell off[13]. Then the Prophet sent for Labid and
remonstrated with him, and afterwards cursed him, saying that he would not
leave this world in good health {saliman). Shortly thereafter, his hand was cut
off for some minor offence, and then he dies[14].
Qur'anic material about the magicians ability to deny sexual
pleasure is documented, when in connection with the teachings of the enigmatic
angels Harut and Marut it is said 'so they learn from them the means by which
they separate man and wife' (2:102). While the commentators do not give many
details on this verse, one may well assume that this sort of magic provides the
basis for the story of Labid Al-Yahudi[15]. Thus, for a magician to manifest
the ability to deny the Prophet this power is evidence of great power, and an
issue with which later commentators felt very uncomfortable. The Prophet does
not come off looking very impressive here: he cannot perform any of the normal
functions and he does not know what has happened to him to boot. The Muslim
reader is left with mixed feelings at the end of the story, for the punishment
that Labid receives for this heinous act is not very great (though it is far
greater than any meted out in earlier versions in which nothing is mentioned
about the aftermath).
Other commentators mention the issue of sexual domination by the
magician as well. ➢Al-Samarqandi (d. 375/985) in one of the two versions that he
quotes, follows Muqatil in a shortened form which adds nothing to our
discussion. However, in a second tradition he introduced new elements. He
writes: Labid bin A'sam made a puppet (lu'ba) of the Prophet, and he [Muhammad]
was taken from A'isha and the Messenger of God was made impotent (afhala), and
then he placed on the puppet eleven knots and threw it in a well and threw a
stone upon it. He [Muhammad] suffered from this terribly. The two angels then
come to give the Prophet their advice, which he heeds, as in Muqatil's version[16].
➢Al-Mawardi (d. 450/1058) adds that it was not a single person that
accomplished the feat, but a group (qawm). Other than that, he used Muqatil's
story[17].
➢ Al-Wahidi (d. 468/1075) embellishes the story even further,
adding new elements:
A Jewish youth served the Messenger of God, and the Jews came to him [the youth], and continued [to harass] him, until he took the combing hairs [the Prophet's hair that had fallen out during the combing process] and some teeth of his comb, and gave them to the Jews, whereupon they bewitched him with them [the hair]. The one who was in charge of this was Labid b. A'sam al-Yahudi, then he concealed it in a well belonging to Banu Zurayq called Dharwan, and the Messenger of God sickened and his hair fell out. He would think that he went into his women, when he did not go into them. The two angels then come in a vision, give Muhammad the expected advice, and three messengers of the Prophet, 'Ali, Al-Zubayr bin Al-'Awwam, and 'Ammar bin Yasir go to the well and draw out the water, which was like diluted henna (ka-annahu nuqa'atu al-hinna) in other words, very thick, so that nothing could be seen inside). They find the spathe with eleven knots tied, the comb, the hair, and the string with a needle stuck in it.[18]
➢ Al-Baghawi (d. 516/1122) quotes Al-Wahidi in one of the two
versions that he brings. In the other, he does not mention Labid at all, rather
an unnamed Jewish man. The main point of this very short story is that the
Prophet suffers and then is released[19].
➢ Al-Naysaburi combines several traditions, but rejects the idea of
sexual impotency of the Prophet, but again he allows that some of the limbs of
the Prophet were out of his control for a time[20].
➢ Ibn Al-Jawzi (d. 597/1200) quotes the mistake about the place
name; otherwise he holds to Al-Wahidi[21].
➢ Muhyi Al-Din Ibn Al-'Arabi (d. 638/1240) also continues this
mistake, and though he words the tradition differently, he adds no new
content[22]. Neither He nor Fakhr Al-Din Al-Razi (d. 604/1207) sees fit to reject
the story, although they do not emphasize it either. Al-Razi is one of the
first to introduce the 'daughters of Labid', presumably to get the story more
in line with the verse, as was already noted above, and takes this opportunity
to speak about magic in general[23].
➢ Al-Qurtubi (d. 671/1272), knows the stories about this episode
which are in Al-Bukhari (quoted in his Sahih), and does not comment on whether
he thinks that the event really happened, though he permits himself an
extensive discussion on magic[24]. He does, however, mention a totally new
tradition about Jewish women bewitching the Prophet, with our exact
story-line[25].
➢ Ibn Kathir (d. 774/1374) does not comment on the story; he simply
confines himself to quoting Al-Bukhari and Al-Thalabi[26]. This is to be
expected in light of the fact that the idea of the Prophet's bewitchment
clearly did not find favor with Ibn Kathir's master, Ibn Taymiyya (d.
728/1328), who ignored it altogether in his own commentary[27].
⇛ SCHOLARS WHO REJECTED THE NARRATION OF BEWITCHMENT OF THE PROPHET:
⇒ Several problematic points about this early version of the story
need to be addressed. Most notably it has absolutely no connection with the
verses of the Qur'an with which it has been associated. One notices this
immediately upon reading the verses. Even the one verse that might conceivably
be connected to Muqatil's account, that which speaks of 'women blowing on
knots' (113:4) receives no mention in the story. No women are involved except
these wives of the Prophet himself, and they are obviously not malevolent[8].
Scholars see other difficulties in the story. For example, though the surah is
universally declared to have been revealed during the Meccan period of the
Prophet's life (before the immigration to Medina in 622), the milieu is
obviously Medinan[9]. There were no Jews to speak of in Mecca, no palm
trees, and not very many wells. The Prophet's numerous wives also date from the
Medinan period of his ministry; He only had two wives (A'isha and Sawda) when
he came to Medina, and 'A'isha was a very young girl and previous to them, only
Khadija.
➢ Imam Abu Mansur al-Māturidī (d. 944/333 AH), a
renowned scholar from the fourth Islamic century and the founder of
Māturidī ʿAqīda (theological School), denied the notion that the
Prophet (ﷺ) was affected by black magic at all and rejected this
hadith. He also said the reason for the revelation (Asbāb al-Nuzūl) of
‘Surah Al-Falaq’ (The Daybreak) and ‘Surah Al-Naas’ (Mankind), which are two
portions of the Quran which some claim refer to the Prophet (ﷺ) being affected by magical forces, was not as a result of
magic at all but instead he emphasised that the two chapters were revealed
whilst the Prophet (ﷺ) was merely on a journey[28].
➢ Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas al-Razi al-Hanafi was a
prominent Hanafi jurist from the fourth century, one of the most respected
scholars in the field of Uŝūl (epistemic principles), and the
grand-teacher of Abul Hasan al Quduri, who wrote the most famous and most
commonly used primer in Hanafi jurisprudence, ‘Mukhtasar al-Quduri’.
He not only rejected this hadith but stated “the ignorant of the Hashawis (anthropomorphists,
those who believe that God is a form or body bound by space) narrated this
hadith without knowing it was fabricated[29].
➢ The Mu’tazilite scholar Al-Zamakhshari (538 AH) gives this
explanation:
“al-Naffathat are women or persons or groups of magicians who fix their desires in strings and blow and spit on them by extreme blowing together with saliva. And there is no real effect through this (lā tā’thīr lidalika) unless when something harmful thing is eaten.[..] But God, almighty and great, acts with this on the path of testing to distinguish those who are fixed on the truth of the gracious civilized people from those of the ignorant barbaric masses.”[30]
Another example is the early Mu'tazilite judge ➢Abū Bakr al-'Asamm
(220 AH) who explains the verse in a way which is very similar to the modernist
Muhammad Ali whereby the verse is not seen as relating to witchcraft but only
to bad influence:
“The female blowers [of inspirations] are those who incline (yamilna) the opinions of men (āra’ al-Rijāl), they divert them (ya’rifnahum) of their [original] intentions and make them turn towards (yaruddunahum ilā) the opinions (of the blowers) in order to change (ya’bur) the determination and opinions in one’s resolution (bil- ‘Uqad). And this change towards dissolving [one’s opinion] is through the blowing [of thoughts], and indeed the tyrannizing behaviour (al-’āduh jartu) is that man dissolves [someone’s] resolution by blowing [other thoughts] into it.”[31]
➢ Al-Māturidī (333 AH) mentions that al-’Asamm believed the
bewitching of the Prophet is not possible (lā yajūz) and so he rejected
(fataraktuhu) the traditions that claim this[32]. The reason for rejecting
these traditions by the Mu’tazilah is explained by the famous Mu’tazilite ‘Abd
al-Jabbār (1025 CE) who says these reports are completely false (bātil) because according
to the Qur’ān God has protected the Prophet against mankind (ya’simuka min
al-Nāss, Q. 5:67), that sorcerers never succeed (lā yuflihu al-Sāhir, Q.
20:69), and that these reports lead to the slander of prophethood (yufadī ilā
al-Qadh fī al-Nabuwwah) which does damage (al-Darūr) to all the prophets as
this would mean these sorcerers would have the power to control their souls,
and this, according to ‘Abd al-Jabbār, is certainly not possible[33].
➢ The famous early Maturidī Hanafī jurist Abū Bakr al-Jassās (370
AH) says sorcery and magic is just deception and trickery and has no true
existence in reality. If magic was true, he asks, why don’t the magicians
remove kings, steal their wealth and rule the world? But no, he says, the only
place we see magicians is in the marketplaces, they are poor and this proves
their magic isn’t real as they would have improved their lives through
magic[34].
A number of other early commentators do not mention this story.
For example, two early Shi'i commentators, ➢ "Ali Al-Qummi (d. c. 307/919)
and Muhammad Al-'Ayyashi (d. 320/932) are silent. This is a tendency which is
strong among the Shi'a. Among the early Sunnis, in addition to the
aforementioned Abu 'Ubayda, Ibn Jarir Al Tabari, Ahmad bin Shu'ayb Al-Nasa'i
(d. 303/915-16), the collector of the hadith collection, did not include this
account[20], nor did the Sufi Al-Qushayri (d.465/1072)[35], Hud bin Muhkam
al-Hawwari (d.c.third/tenth century)[36], nor did the greatest Qur'anic
commentator, ➢ Muhammad bin Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310/922)[37]. Of all of these the
real puzzler is al-Tabari. In all likelihood Abu 'Ubayda did write about the
subject, but his writings have come down to us only in the form quoted by Fakhr
al-Din al-Razi. Al-Nasa'i, al-Qushayri and al-Hawwari only wrote partial
commentaries, while the Shi'ites were influenced by the rationalistic school of
the Mu'tazila. The reason for al-Tabari's omission of this tradition from his
compendium, which is quite remarkable since he makes a rule of at least
mentioning almost all the exegetical traditions current in Iraq at his time,
remains a question which cannot be answered. Probably, he too, like a number of
later commentators was protective of the honour of the Prophet, and considered
the story beneath note.
➢ Al-Tusi, the Shi'i scholar (d. 460/1067), is the first commentator to
recognize the danger that this story presents to several dogmatic issues
connected with the Prophet. He says:
It is not possible that the Prophet was bewitched like certain ignorant street-preachers (al-qussas al-juhala) say, because one who describes him as bewitched, his mind is confused and God denies this in his Word: 'And the evil-doers say you are just following a bewitched man' (17:47). But it is possible that one of the Jews tried to do this and could not, and God informed his Prophet of what he did so that he took what he had made out of the water[38].
➢ Al-Tabrisi (d. 548/1153) quotes Al-Wahidi's tradition, adding on a
direct quote from Al Tusi: "such a thing is not possible where the Prophet
is concerned.[39]
➢ Al-Nasafi (d. 701/1301) totally ignored this tradition. However,
he does not detail his reasons[40].
➢ Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), who ignored it altogether in his own
commentary[41].
➢ Al-Qummi (d. 1125/1713) repeats the same Shi'i traditions, adding
that 'it is not possible that the Jew or his daughters, according to what is
related, exerted themselves in this[42].
➢ Modernist Sunni commentators, however, more than make up for this
admission by writing extremely negative remarks about the story Al-Qasimi (d.
1333/1914) demonstrates discomfort with this story, in adding a long warning to
it in which he enumerates all the reasons why one should reject it[43].
Al-Maraghi also finds it impossible that the Prophet could be assailed in this
manner, although he admits that the accounts are well documented according to
the fashion of hadith criticism[44] Makhluf ignores the story altogether[45].
Most contemporary commentators are extremely hostile in their
comments on the story. For example, Maghiyya (writing c. 1970), after telling
the story briefly, says that it must be rejected on both legal and rational
grounds, citing Muhammad Abduh[46]. For Muhammad Hijazi (c. 1968), the whole
episode was one made up by the Jews so that people would doubt the Prophet[47].
The fundamentalist Sayyid Qutb (d. 1386/1966) rejects it with
increasing contempt, saying: These transmissions are in opposition to the basis
of prophetic infallibility in action and in proclamation [of the divine
message], and are not compatible with the belief that every action of his [the
Prophet's] actions, and every utterance of his utterances is Sunna and Sharia,
just like it conflicts with the denial of the Qur'an that the Messenger is
bewitched[48].
In addition, the Jews are said to have envied the Prophet's sexual
powers: The Prophet was given the power of sixty some youths [for sexual
intercourse] and thus the Jews envied him, and God most high said:
'Do people envy on the basis of what God has given them from His bounty?' [Qur'an 4; 54] ... the Messenger of God was given the power of forty in sexual intercourse.[49]
➢The Jews' bewitching the Prophet and causing his impotence results
directly from their sexual envy.
⇰ Conclusion:
1)The Surah is universally accepted as Meccan but the narration here referred to as the reason for revelation of the fore mentioned Surah is Madenian. Hence there is no connection between the two.
2) The verses in the Surah mentions "protection from the women who bewitches." But there is no mention of any other women in this story except the wives of the Prophet. (Later sources introduce the daughters of Labid bin Assam to get the story in line with the revelation).
3) The Prophet was not affected by any magic. Its a
concocted narration because it goes against many verses of Quran where Allah has promised explicitly to protect His Messenger from Evil and has also promised failure of Magicians. The Mutazilites were
correct in their approach towards this tradition which was later adopted by many Hanafi Maturidi and Shiite Mutazila scholars and
also by the traditionalist Ibn Taymiyya.
[1] The Book of Medicine, bab 49–50, no. 5765–66 (Al-Bukhari 1997,
364–366).
[2] His 'conversion' is described
in Muhammad bin Sa'd, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-kubra, ed. Muhammad 'Abd al-Qadir
"Ata" (Beirut 1990), II, 152. Here the Jews claim that they have
already tried to bewitch the Prophet several times, but were unable to do so.
[3] Ibn Manzur, Mukhtasar Ta'rikh
Madinat Dimashq, ed. Ruhiyya Nahhas (Beirut 1989), VI, 51 [this section is
apparently very abridged in the original of Ibn 'Asakir and could not be traced
further there]; only one of the connecting personalities between Labid and the
Mu'tazila could be traced (Labid to Talut to Aban bin Sim'an to Ja'd bin
Dirham, about whom Ibn Hajar, Lisan Al-mizan [Beirut 1987], II, 133-4 [no.
1948].
[4] A. Jeffery, Materials for
the History of the Text of the Qur'an (Leyden 1938), introduction; and see EP
(Leyden I960-) s.v. 'Kur'an' (A. Welch), section 3b 'Variant Readings'.
[5] See A. Rippin, 'Qur'an
78/24: A Study in Arabic Lexicography', Journal of Semitic Studies 28 (1983),
315-20 where he discusses the difficulties of the root gh-s-q; and also William
Worrell, 'The Case of Muhammad', Journal of the American Oriental Society 48
(1928), 136-46.
[6] As usual, the most cogent
grammatical explanation is in al-Zamakhshari, al- Kashshaf 'an haqa'iq
Al-Tanzil (Beirut n.d.), IV, 820-22.
[7] Muqatil bin Sulayman,
Tafsir, ed. Mahmud Shihata (Cairo 1983), IV, 923-4. Another early source
describes him as a member of Banu Qurayza: Ahmad bin Yusuf Al-Baladhuri, Ansab
Al-Ashraf, ed. Muhammad Hamidullah (Cairo 1959), I, 285.
[8] Sahl bin 'Abdallah
Al-Tustari, Tafsir Al-Qur'an Al-'Azim (Cairo n.d.), 131.
[9] Yahya bin Ziyad
Al-Farra', Ma'ani Al -Qur'an (Cairo 1970), III, 301.
[10] Al-Bukhari, Sahih (Beirut
n.d.), IV, 20-21; and see the commentaries in Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani (d.
852/1448-9), Fath Al-Bari fi sharah Sahih Al-Bukhari (Beirut n.d.), X, 221-2,
226-332; Mahmud bin Ahmad Al-'Ayni (d. 855/1451-2), 'Umdat Al-Qari (Beirut
n.d.), XXI, 279-82; and Ahmad bin Muhammad Al-Qastalanl (d. 923/1517), Irshad
Al-Sari (Baghdad n.d.), VIII, 404-8; and for a good selection of the
traditions: Marwiyyat Al-Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal fi Al-Tafsir (Riyad 1994), IV,
424-5; and Abu Ya'la, Musnad (Damascus
1985), VIII, 290-1.
[11] Lecker, 'Bewitching
of the Prophet', 563.
[12] Al-Bayhaqi, Dala'il
Al-Nubuwwa, ed. 'Abd al-Muti Qa'laji (Beirut 1985), VI, 248; VII, 92-4; and see
also Al-Salihi Al-Shaml, Subul Al-hudd wa-l-rashdd, III, 410-15; X, 56-7.
[13] For the process here: T.M.
Johnstone, 'Knots and Curses', Arabian Studies 3 (1970), 79-84; and see
Al-Dhahabi, Siyar A'lam Al-Nubala, V, 349 where the nightly practice of the
Prophet is describes in this regard.
[14] Al-Furat bin Ibrahim
Al-Kufi, Tafsir, ed. Muhammad Al-Kazim (Tehran 1990), 619-20; and Muhammad
al-Baqir al-Majlisi, Bihar Al-Anwar (Beirut 1983), XVII, 366-7.
[15] Muqatil, Tafsir, I,
127.
[16] Nasr bin Muhammad
Al-Samarqandi, Tafsir (Bahr al-'Ulum), ed. Muhammad Mu'awwad (Beirut 1993),
III, 526-7; and other versions of this simply say "ukhida 'an
al-nisa".. meaning he was taken from the women', Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat,
II, 153.
[17] Ali bin Habib Al-Mawardi,
Tafsir, ed. Khidr Muhammad Khidr (Kuwait 1982), IV, 550-51; and see also 'Izz
al-Din 'Abd al-'Aziz 'Abd al-Salam al-Sulaymi al- Dimashqi (d. 660/1261-2),
Mukhtasar tafsir al-Mawardi (Beirut 1996), III, 509-11.
[18] Ali bin Ahmad Al-Wahidi,
Asbab Al-Nuzul (Beirut 1988), 310; and see Al-Hindi, Kanz, VI, 742-43 (no
17651). In Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat, II, 151; and Abu Ya'la, Musnad, VIII, 290-91 it
says that he was bewitched such that 'he would imagine for himself that he had
done things, while having not done them'. See also Al-Humaydi, Musnad (Medina
n.d.), I, 125-7, no 259); Al-Bayhaqli, Dala'il, VII, 88; and Al-Salihi
al-Shami, Subul al-hudd, X, 57, where only a man from the Ansar (not even
specifying that he is Jewish) is mentioned.
[19] Al-Husayn bin Mas'ud
Al-Baghawi, Tafsir (Ma'alim al-Tanzil), ed. Muhammad Abdallah al-Nimr (Riyad
1992), VIII, 593-4.
[20] Al-Hasan bin Muhammad
Al-Qummi Al-Naysaburi, Tafsir ghara'ib al-Qur'an (Beirut 1996), VI, 598-9, 601.
[21] Abu Al-Faraj bin Al-Jawzi,
Zad Al-Masir fi 'Ilm Al-tafsir, ed. Muhammad 'Abd Al-Qadir 'Ata (Beirut 1990),
VIII, 332-3.
[22] Muhammad bin Abdallah bin
Al-'Arabi, Ahkam Al-Qur'an, ed. 'Ali Muhammad Al-Bijawi (Beirut n.d.), IV,
1996.
[23] Fakhr Al-Din Al-Razi,
Mafatih Al-ghayb (Al-Tafsir al-kabir) (Beirut n.d.) XXXII, 189-96. (The
introduction of Labid's daughters appears outside the exegetical field much
earlier. Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat, II, 152; and Lecker, 'Bewitching', 563).
[24] Muhammad bin Ahmad
Al-Qurtubi, Tafsir (Al-Jami' li-l-Ahkam Al-Qur'an) (Cairo n.d.), VIII, 7343-4.
[25] Ibid., 7349.
[26] Ibn Kathir, Tafsir
(Beirut 1970), VII, 420-21.
[27] Ibn Taymiyya,
Al-Tafsir Al-kabir (Beirut 1988), VII, 591-3.
[28] Abu Mansur Muhammad bin
Muhammad al-Māturidī al-Samarqandi, “Ta’wilaatu Ahli Sunnah”, (Massasah
al-Risalah, Beirut, Lebanon, 2004), Volume 3, page 162, and Volume 5, pages
543, 545.
[29] Abu
Bakr Ahmad bin Ali al-Razi al-Jassas, “Ahkam al-Quran”, (Darul Ihya turath al-Arabi,
Beirut, Lebanon, 1992), Volume 1, p. 60.
[30] Ibn ‘Umar Al-Zamaksharī, Al-Kashāf ‘an
Haqā’iq al-Tanzīl wa ‘uyūn Al-’Aqāwīl fi wujūh al-Tā’wīl (Beirut: Dār Sadr,
2010), volume 4, pp. 1834-1835.
[31] Abū Bakr al-‘Asamm,
Tafsīr Abī Bakr al-‘Asamm (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-’ilmiyyah, 2007), p. 267.
The same exegesis of this surah was also attributed to the later Mu'tazilite
Abū Muslim Isfahanī (332 AH), it is unclear to me at the moment if he adopted
Al-‘Asamm’s exegesis or that it was falsely attributed to Al-‘Asamm.
[32] Abū Mansūr
al-Māturīdī, Tā’wīlāt ‘Ahl al-Sunna (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 2005),
volume 10, p. 653. According to traditions 5430, 5432, 5433 and 6082 in the
collection of Bukhārī, the Prophet was bewitched by the Jew Labīd ibn al-A'sam
which made him feel ill and forgetful until Gabriel or two angels explained the
problem and revealed this sūrah to protect him against the black magic. See
also: al-Wāhidī al-Naysābūrī (468 AH), 'Asbāb al-Nuzūl al-Qur'ān (Beirut: Dār
al-Kutub al-'ilmiyyah, 2008), pp. 301-302.
[33] Al-Qādī Abī al-Hasan
‘Abd al-Jabbār bin Ahmad Al-‘Asdābādī, Tafsīr al-Qādī ‘Abd al-Jabbār
al-Mu’tazilī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 2009), pp. 366-367.
[34] Muhammad Salīh
Farfūr, The Beneficial Message & The Definitive Proof In The Study Of
Theology (al-Risālah al-Nafi'ah wal-Hujjat al-Qati'at fī 'ilm al-Tawhīd)
(translated by Wesam Charkawi, London: Azhar Academy, 2010), pp. 197-202. See
also his discussion on sihr: Abū Bakr Ahmad 'Alī al-Rāzī al-Jassās, Kitab Ahkām
al-Qur'ān (Beirut: Dâr al-Kitāb al-'Arabī, n.dt.), volume 1, pp. 41-58, chapter
Bāb al-Sihr wa Hukm al-Sāhir. For the discussion on al-Jassās being a
Mu'tazilite or Māturīdī, see Anvar M. Emon at xx below, pp. 45-46.
[35] Al-Qushayri, Lata'if
Al-isharat, ed. Ibrahim Bassayuni (Cairo 1971), VI,
353-4.
[36] Hud bin Muhkam
al-Hawwari, Tafsir kitab Allah Al-'Aziz (Beirut 1990), IV, 544.
[37] Al-Tabari, Jami Al-bayan
'an ta'wil Al-Qur'an (n.p., n.d.), XXX, 198-202.
His discussion is mostly
linguistic.
[38] Muhammad in
Al-Hasan Al-Tusi, Tafsir Al-tibyan, ed. Agha Bozorg Khan
(Najaf, 1957-65), X, 434.
[39] Al-Fadl bin Al-Hasan
Al-Tabrisi, Majma' al-bayan (Beirut 1954), XXX, 234-5.
[40] Abdallah bin Ahmad
Al-Nasafi, Tafsir Al-Qur'an al-Jalil (Tafsir al-Nasafi) (Beirut n.d.), V,
412.
[41] Ibn Taymiyya, Al-Tafsir Al-kabir (Beirut
1988), VII, 591-3
[42] Al-Mirza Muhammad
Al-Mashhadi al-Qummi, Tafsir kanz al-daqa'iq (Qummi.d.), XI, 636-7.
[43] Muhammad Jamal al-Din
al-Qasimi, Mahasin al-ta'wil, ed. Muhammad Fu'ad 'Abd al-Baqi (Cairo n.d.),
XVII, 6308-10; see also Muhammad 'Abduh's attitude in al-Manar 12 (1909-10),
697.
[44] Ahmad Mustafa Al-Maraghi,
Tafsir Al-Maraghi (Cairo 1936), XXX, 261.
[45] Husayn Muhammad Makhluf,
Safwat al-bayan li-ma'ani al-Qur'an (Beitut n.d.), II, 579-80; and so does
Muhammad 'Ali al-Bazwari, al-Ghayb wa-l-shahada (Beirut 1987), VI, 416.
[46] Muhammad Jawad
Maghiyya, al-Tafsir al-Kashif (Beirut 1970), VII, 625-6.
[47] Muhammad Mahmud Hijazi,
Tafsir Al-wadih (Cairo 1968), XXX, 97.
[48] Sayyid Qutb, Fi zilal
Al-Qur'an (Beirut 1974), VI, 4006- 9, at 4008.
[49] Al-Salihi Al-Shami, Subul
al-hudd, IX, 73 .
→ References: [1] The Prophet
Muhammad, Labid Al Yahudi and the commentaries to Surah 113 by David cook,
University of Chicago.
[2] The denial of supernatural
sorcery in classical and modern Sunni tafsīr of sūrah al-Falaq (113:4): a
reflection on underlying constructions by Shaykh Arnold Yasin Mol.
[3] Black Magic and The
Perfection of The Prophet by Shaykh Atabek Shukrov and Shaykh Sulaiman Ahmed.
