Black Magic affect on the Prophet Muhammad?

[khushal]

It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said: A spell was put on the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) until he imagined that he had done a thing when he had not done it. One day he made du’aa’ then he said: “Do you know that Allaah has shown me in what lies my cure? Two men came to me and one of them sat at my head and the other at my feet. One of them said to the other, ‘What is ailing the man?’ He said: ‘He has been bewitched.’ He said: “Who has bewitched him?’ He said: ‘Labeed ibn al-A’sam.’ He said, ‘With what?’ He said: ‘With a comb, the hair that is stuck to it, and the skin of pollen of a male date palm. He said: ‘Where is it?’ He said, ‘In the well of Dharwaan.’” The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) went out to the well, then he came back and said to ‘Aa’ishah when he came back: “Its date palms are like the heads of devils.” I said: “Did you take it out?” He said: “No. Allaah has healed me, and I feared that that might bring evil upon the people.” Then the well was filled in.



From what I am reading, Some are claiming that this Hadith is weak.It is claimed that Hanafi Jurist Abu Mansur Al Maturidi as well as Jaasas and Malaki Jurist Qadi Iyad ibn Musa claimed it was weak.

Any input?
@Iblis
[MENTION=1772]BarakzaiAbdali[/MENTION]
@Shamlawar

I mention those 3 because they input on religion but anyone else I failed to mention please input.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I didn't study this issue. I have no idea.

[کیش]

I know this hadith. It is from Sahih Bukhari, and is Sahih. Any jurist who says otherwise are wrong.

Edit

What makes a hadith Sahih is that a compiler like Muhammad Ibn Ismail (Bukhari) was able to confirm the chain of narrators from Aisha to the person who told him about the hadith. Bukhari was also able to gather the characteristics of the all the transmitters.

Sahih Bukhari and Muslim only contain Sahih hadiths. Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, ibn Nasai, ibn Majah and Musnad Ahmed also have Sahih hadiths in their respective books. But they also have hadiths that are Hasan or Dai'f. Meaning a missing narrator in most cases.

[khushal]

I know this hadith. It is from Sahih Bukhari, and is Sahih. Any jurist who says otherwise are wrong.

Edit

What makes a hadith Sahih is that a compiler like Muhammad Ibn Ismail (Bukhari) was able to confirm the chain of narrators from Aisha to the person who told him about the hadith. Bukhari was also able to gather the characteristics of the all the transmitters.

Sahih Bukhari and Muslim only contain Sahih hadiths. Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, ibn Nasai, ibn Majah and Musnad Ahmed also have Sahih hadiths in their respective books. But they also have hadiths that are Hasan or Dai'f. Meaning a missing narrator in most cases.

They claim that this Quran ayat contradicts it:
Quran 17:47
We are most knowing of how they listen to it when they listen to you and [of] when they are in private conversation, when the wrongdoers say, "You follow not but a man affected by magic."

The ones who say that he was AFFECTED by magic are the wrongdoers.

[maneatinglizard]

Sounds like the arguments of Atabek Shukurov, an Uzbek Hanafi who basically claims that all Hanafi scholars other than him and his immediate circle are closet-Shafis who rejected "pure Hanafi" usul to essentially fit in with the cool kids (i.e. Shafis and Hanbalis). Using that argument as a base, he goes on to reject many Hanafi (and Sunni in general) positions in favor of ones that are more palatable to Western kuffar (like the punishment for adultery or permissibility of interest). He's basically no different from the typical modernist or hadith-rejector, except he paints his revisionism and hadith rejection with a veil of "traditional Hanafism."

There's a book that attempts to clarify this issue, and appears to specifically refute some of Shukorov's arguments:

Clarity Amidst Confusion - A Clarification of the Hadith Which Describes the Effect of Magic on the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ by M. Jamili

Unfortunately, I haven't read the book myself, nor am I familiar with the author, but it seems like he works on this site:

Fiqh Answers Fiqh Answers

And I couldn't find anything objectionable in it (though I just looked through it really quickly).

As for his specific arguments, Abu Bakr al-Jassas was influenced by Mu`tazilis, and appears to represent those leanings on this matter, not the Sunni Hanafi position. Abu Mansur al-Maturidi, however, does seem to accept this hadith, and even used it as evidence for the true Prophethood of Rasulullah (Salla Allahu Alayhi wa Salam). You can read more about in this thread:

Some Thoughts on ‘Ĥanafī Principles of Testing Ĥadīth' | Ahlus Sunnah Forum

This also deals with the issue pretty clearly (though note that while it's writer is an extremist Wahabi who has said some very objectionable things, here his treatment seems to be fair):

The "Hanafi Stance" Regarding The Black Magic Spell Cast on the Prophet | Refuting Modernist "Hanafis" - Academia.edu

The fact that Imam Tahawi accepts this hadith should be evidence enough really. Among the early Hanafis, he is probably most well known for his expertise in hadith, so if there was really an issue in the matn of the hadith (what this argument boils down to, as the sanad is definitely fine) from a Hanafi perspective, you would've expected him to mention something about it. al-Ayni was also a great expert on hadith among Hanafis (he wrote one of the best commentaries on Sahih Bukhari), and not only did he not entertain any possibility of weakness in the hadith, but he outright called those who reject it heretics (mulhideen).

You can find an explanation of the verse here:

https://ia902707.us.archive.org/2/it...iUsmaniRah.pdf (starting on page 510)

[toughpashtun]

I am not an authority on religion , but will share what I know about this.

The event of the Prophet Muhammad(S.A.W) being affected with black magic is a very well known fact. I did not know which Hadith this event is described in , but as 'Kesh' said that it appears in Sahih Bukhari so there can be no doubt about its authenticity.
Most of us here are not experts in Islamic sciences so we should refrain from declaring Ahadith as authentic , unauthentic and commenting on whether or not it conflicts with Quranic ayaat or not.We are not qualified to do that. Its best to consult reliable and learned Ulama for these matters.

[khushal]

Sounds like the arguments of Atabek Shukurov, an Uzbek Hanafi who basically claims that all Hanafi scholars other than him and his immediate circle are closet-Shafis who rejected "pure Hanafi" usul to essentially fit in with the cool kids (i.e. Shafis and Hanbalis). Using that argument as a base, he goes on to reject many Hanafi (and Sunni in general) positions in favor of ones that are more palatable to Western kuffar (like the punishment for adultery or permissibility of interest). He's basically no different from the typical modernist or hadith-rejector, except he paints his revisionism and hadith rejection with a veil of "traditional Hanafism."

There's a book that attempts to clarify this issue, and appears to specifically refute some of Shukorov's arguments:

Clarity Amidst Confusion - A Clarification of the Hadith Which Describes the Effect of Magic on the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ by M. Jamili

Unfortunately, I haven't read the book myself, nor am I familiar with the author, but it seems like he works on this site:

Fiqh Answers Fiqh Answers

And I couldn't find anything objectionable in it (though I just looked through it really quickly).

As for his specific arguments, Abu Bakr al-Jassas was influenced by Mu`tazilis, and appears to represent those leanings on this matter, not the Sunni Hanafi position. Abu Mansur al-Maturidi, however, does seem to accept this hadith, and even used it as evidence for the true Prophethood of Rasulullah (Salla Allahu Alayhi wa Salam). You can read more about in this thread:

Some Thoughts on ‘Ĥanafī Principles of Testing Ĥadīth' | Ahlus Sunnah Forum

This also deals with the issue pretty clearly (though note that while it's writer is an extremist Wahabi who has said some very objectionable things, here his treatment seems to be fair):

The "Hanafi Stance" Regarding The Black Magic Spell Cast on the Prophet | Refuting Modernist "Hanafis" - Academia.edu

The fact that Imam Tahawi accepts this hadith should be evidence enough really. Among the early Hanafis, he is probably most well known for his expertise in hadith, so if there was really an issue in the matn of the hadith (what this argument boils down to, as the sanad is definitely fine) from a Hanafi perspective, you would've expected him to mention something about it. al-Ayni was also a great expert on hadith among Hanafis (he wrote one of the best commentaries on Sahih Bukhari), and not only did he not entertain any possibility of weakness in the hadith, but he outright called those who reject it heretics (mulhideen).

You can find an explanation of the verse here:

https://ia902707.us.archive.org/2/it...iUsmaniRah.pdf (starting on page 510)

I never heard of Shukorov but most of the links you posted argues about what Qeela means and how Al Muturadi used it but no one actually talks about the Ayat 17:47 which not only contradicts it but also says that believing in the AFFECTS of magic is haram.
Also the argument for labeling someone Mutazilla does not automatically make him wrong. If a Hindu says 2+2=4 does not make his claim wrong because he is hindu.

From what I have read, I know the Salafis accept this Hadith but they reject the practice of "Tawiz" which is similar to Magic and say the practice is Shirk. Why label one magic as shirk but not the other one?

[کیش]

I don't see a contradiction. The Great Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessing to him) is the best creation of the All Mighty Lord. Better than anything and everything from the universe/multiverse.

But when he was alive, he was bound to the rules of the Earth. People made him happy or sad. Allies or enemies. Answered the call of nature and in this case bewitched.

If we look at the narrator, it was Aisha his wife. This hadith is only reported by her and not his other wives or companions. Which means it was a small and isolated incident and quickly healed by those two angels.

Secondly, if you read any hadith, you should always pay attention on the wording. It says the Prophet (peace and blessings to him) imagined he has done something which he did not. It doesn't mention, preaching or in the state of receiving Quranic verses.

The verse 17:47 mentions the hypocrites saying you follow someone affected by magic. In 23 years of Prophethood, their was only this one time of the Great Prophet (peace and blessings to him) being affected by magic and that too for a short time and did not involve proselytizing.

This incident does not change anything. It should not be case aside as weak because it is Sahih and the transmitters are accounted for.

[کیش]

There is another Sahih Bukhari hadith people bring up saying there is a contradiction.

Narrated by Abdullah ibn Umar (RA): Once the Prophet led us in the 'Isha' prayer during the last days of his life and after finishing it (the prayer) (with Taslim) he said: "Do you realize (the importance of) this night?" Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night." -- Sahih Bukhari (1.116)

People will say this contradicts the Quranic verses about Gog and Magog

He said: ‘That (wealth, authority and power) in which my Lord has established me is better (than your tribute). So help me with strength (of men), I will erect between you and them a barrier.

Give me pieces (blocks) of iron,’ then, when he had filled up the gap between the two mountain-cliffs, he said, ‘Blow,’ till when he had made it (red as) fire, he said, ‘Bring me molten copper to pour over it.’

So they [Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj] were made powerless to scale it or dig through it.

(Dhu’l-Qarnayn) said: ‘This is a mercy from my Lord, but when the Promise of my Lord comes, He shall level it down to the ground. And the Promise of my Lord is ever true.’”

Surah Kahf 18:93-98

There is no contradiction as the Prophet (peace be upon him) clearly says surface and not the unseen or beneath a barrier. Just brought this up as an example.

[khushal]

I don't see a contradiction. The Great Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessing to him) is the best creation of the All Mighty Lord. Better than anything and everything from the universe/multiverse.

But when he was alive, he was bound to the rules of the Earth. People made him happy or sad. Allies or enemies. Answered the call of nature and in this case bewitched.

If we look at the narrator, it was Aisha his wife. This hadith is only reported by her and not his other wives or companions. Which means it was a small and isolated incident and quickly healed by those two angels.

Secondly, if you read any hadith, you should always pay attention on the wording. It says the Prophet (peace and blessings to him) imagined he has done something which he did not. It doesn't mention, preaching or in the state of receiving Quranic verses.

The verse 17:47 mentions the hypocrites saying you follow someone affected by magic. In 23 years of Prophethood, their was only this one time of the Great Prophet (peace and blessings to him) being affected by magic and that too for a short time and did not involve proselytizing.

This incident does not change anything. It should not be case aside as weak because it is Sahih and the transmitters are accounted for.

Kiash, I'm a layman so I don't know.

According to the Hadith, The prophet(pbh) was Affected by Magic so therefore, according to the Ayat, one concludes that the wrongdoers are right. From this line of thinking, people that challenge Islam would also make claims that if the prophet(pbh) was affected by magic, then how can we know what ayat is correct and what ayat is the work of magic.

[khushal]

There is another Sahih Bukhari hadith people bring up saying there is a contradiction.

Narrated by Abdullah ibn Umar (RA): Once the Prophet led us in the 'Isha' prayer during the last days of his life and after finishing it (the prayer) (with Taslim) he said: "Do you realize (the importance of) this night?" Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night." -- Sahih Bukhari (1.116)

People will say this contradicts the Quranic verses about Gog and Magog

He said: ‘That (wealth, authority and power) in which my Lord has established me is better (than your tribute). So help me with strength (of men), I will erect between you and them a barrier.

Give me pieces (blocks) of iron,’ then, when he had filled up the gap between the two mountain-cliffs, he said, ‘Blow,’ till when he had made it (red as) fire, he said, ‘Bring me molten copper to pour over it.’

So they [Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj] were made powerless to scale it or dig through it.

(Dhu’l-Qarnayn) said: ‘This is a mercy from my Lord, but when the Promise of my Lord comes, He shall level it down to the ground. And the Promise of my Lord is ever true.’”

Surah Kahf 18:93-98

There is no contradiction as the Prophet (peace be upon him) clearly says surface and not the unseen or beneath a barrier. Just brought this up as an example.

I haven't really read too much about this or discussed it.

[کیش]

Kiash, I'm a layman so I don't know.

According to the Hadith, The prophet(pbh) was Affected by Magic so therefore, according to the Ayat, one concludes that the wrongdoers are right. From this line of thinking, people that challenge Islam would also make claims that if the prophet(pbh) was affected by magic, then how can we know what ayat is correct and what ayat is the work of magic.

If there was more instances of the Prophet (PBUH) being affected by anything they would be more hadiths about it. This was one instance, and only one narrator. There are numerous hadiths that are the same with different narrators

If you read all the hadiths, all the Prophets (PBUH) saying are consistent and their isn't any that could be out of character.

The Quran is also consistent with it's message. There isn't a verse where someone can even point to it and say this person is under magic, insane or even intoxicated.

edit [MENTION=19985]maneatinglizard[/MENTION]s also posted an informative pdf about this topic https://ia902707.us.archive.org/2/it...iUsmaniRah.pdf (starting on page 510)

[Khostai]

Magic is not real.
You dum niggahs need to grow up.

[ذو الفقار]

Magic is not real.

I agree with you. Magic is unreal. Magic cannot even effect an ordinary person much less a Prophet of God. The story about Prophet ﷺ being affected by a magic spell are all concocted fabricated tales. I have written extensively on this topic in my blog رَبَّ جِبْرِيلَ وَمِيكَائِيلَ وَإِسْرَافِيلَ أَعِذْنِي مِنْ حَرِّ النَّارِ وَعَذَابِ الْقَبْرِ: Magic
I mentioned in my intro that I am highly influenced by Allama Ahmad Said Chitrori (rahmatullah alaih). He too denied the reality of magic and said anyone who believes in it is guilty of Kufr. Regrettably, the major masalik like Deobandi, Barelwi and Ahle Hadith all believe that magic is real and that the Prophet ﷺ was affected by a magic spell from a second-rate Jewish sorcerer. They blindly follow some isolated Hadith of Bukhari and ignore the plain verdict of Holy Quraan and Sunna. Allama Ahmad Said Chitrori once challenged all the magicians and sorcerers of the world to gather and do their worst magic on him, they will not even be able to make a single hair fall off of his head! Magic is nothing but deception and illusion as illustrated in the story of the duel between Prophet Moses and the pharaonic magicians. The satanic industry of amulets and talismans is based on the doctrine of the reality of magic. The only way to shut it down is to persuade the public that magic is unreal and they are selling their Faith by hanging such idolatrous amulets to ward off from magic spells.