Sunan Ibn Majah
Sunan Ibn Majah 3510
حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ بْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ دِينَارٍ، عَنْ عُرْوَةَ بْنِ عَامِرٍ، عَنْ عُبَيْدِ بْنِ رِفَاعَةَ الزُّرَقِيِّ، قَالَ قَالَتْ أَسْمَاءُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ بَنِي جَعْفَرٍ تُصِيبُهُمُ الْعَيْنُ فَأَسْتَرْقِي لَهُمْ قَالَ " نَعَمْ فَلَوْ كَانَ شَىْءٌ سَابَقَ الْقَدَرَ سَبَقَتْهُ الْعَيْنُ " .
Unreviewed translation. All hadiths in this collection are available in five languages. Titles and introductions may remain in Arabic.
Abū Bakr ibn Abī Shaybah narrated to us: Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah narrated to us, from ʿAmr ibn Dīnār, from ʿUrwah ibn ʿĀmir, from ʿUbayd ibn Rifāʿah al-Zuraqī, who said: Asmāʾ said, ‘Messenger of Allah, the family of Jaʿfar are affected by the evil eye. Should I seek ruqyah for them?’ He said, ‘Yes. If anything could get ahead of the divine decree, the evil eye would get ahead of it.’
Notes and open questions — unreviewed
The conditional wording is preserved: the report says ‘if anything could’ precede the decree, and does not state that the evil eye actually overrides it. Ruqyah is retained as the term for recited supplication/treatment.
قَالَ قَالَتْ أَسْمَاءُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ بَنِي جَعْفَرٍ تُصِيبُهُمُ الْعَيْنُ فَأَسْتَرْقِي لَهُمْ قَالَ " نَعَمْ فَلَوْ كَانَ شَىْءٌ سَابَقَ الْقَدَرَ سَبَقَتْهُ الْعَيْنُ " .
The saying is explicitly counterfactual/conditional (فَلَوْ كَانَ شَىْءٌ ...); the wording does not say that the evil eye actually precedes or overrides divine decree.
Should the conditional force be kept explicit as ‘if anything could get ahead of the divine decree’?