Dought and clear, - Marrying a Christian woman without a wali (guardian) or witnesses

I wanted to take a second wife, and because it is difficult to
convince my first wife and my community about this wish, and to avoid
breaking up my marriage and causing trouble to my family from my first
wife, I could find no solution more suitable then marrying a Christian
woman who I had got to know in a foreign country. My marriage to her
was done as follows:I informed her of my wish to marry her, and she
agreed to be my wife. But she did not have any guardian, because her
father is Christian and would never accept her marrying a Muslim, and
he does not care about her anyway. So she gaveherself to me in
marriage without a wali(guardian), and I followed the view that it is
permissible for a previously married woman to give herself in
marriage. Because wemet in a foreign country, where I do not know
anyone who could witness the marriage, I followed theview that the
testimony of two witnesses to the marriage can be replaced by an
announcement, becausethe purpose served is the same. So I contactedtwo
sincere friends by phone and informed them of this marriage, so that
announcement of the marriage could be done, and I informedothers after
that. I also gave her a mahr (dowry) and informed her that this mahr
is her right as a wife. The mahr was in the form ofa gold ring. I told
her that this marriage was witnessed by Allah and that she was like a
wife to me, and she had to be sincere to me as a wife and not commit
any sin. She agreed to marriage on the basis ofthese conditions, and
we got married and lived as husband and wife. Nevertheless I fear
Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and I am afraid that
everything I have done may be invalid and subject to the ruling on
zina (adultery or fornication). Recently I have been faced with some
problems in my work and with my first wife, and I am afraid that Allah
is punishing me. Yet I do not think there is anything wrongwith my
second marriage; she is Christian and has sacrificed a great deal. She
has given up many of the rights that she has over me, and she
understands my situation. She agreed to be my wife and she obeys me in
what I haveasked of her. I hope thatthere is nothing wrong with this
second marriage of mine, even though I know that it goes against the
conditions of marriage on which there is scholarly consensus, but I
followed the opinions of respectable scholars. What is your opinion?
Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
It is not permissible for aMuslim to follow whatever he wants of
opinions, even if they were stated by some of the scholars, because by
doing that he is following his whims anddesires and is not following
the laws of Allah.
Rather what he must do – if he is able to – is to follow the most
correct opinion which is supported by shar'i evidence. If he is not
able to weigh up which of the opinions is most correct, then he should
ask someone whose knowledge and religiouscommitment he trusts, and
follow the advice hegives him.
Secondly:
For marriage to be valid,it is stipulated that the wali (guardian) of
the woman be present, and it is not permissible for the woman to do
the marriage contract for herself, because the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no (valid) marriage except
with a wali." Narrated by Abu Dawood, 2085; classed as saheeh by
al-Albaani inIrwa' al-Ghaleel, 1839. And he (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) also said: "Any woman who gets married without the
permission of her wali, her marriage is invalid, her marriage is
invalid, her marriage is invalid." Narrated by Ahmad, 24417; Abu
Dawood, 2083; at-Tirmidhi, 1102; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani
inSaheeh Abi Dawood.
In that regard it makes no difference whether the woman is a virgin or
previously married.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
One of the conditions of the marriage contract being valid is that it
should be done by the wali (guardian), whether the woman is a virgin
or previously married, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) said: "There is no (valid) marriage except with a
wali." End quote.
Majmoo' Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 21/39
If her father did not agree to this marriage because he did not
wanther to marry a Muslim, then guardianship passes to the next
closestof her guardians, such asher brother, then her paternal uncle.
If all of them refuse, the head ofthe Islamic Centre in her city can
give her in marriage; if that is not applicable, then the imam of the
Jaami' mosque may do that.
The majority of scholars are of the view that the marriage contract is
not valid except in the presence of two witnesses to the marriage
contract, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) said: "There is no (valid) marriage except in the presence of the
wali andtwo witnesses of good character." Narrated by al-Bayhaqi,
14086; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani inSaheeh al-Jaami', 13515.
Some of the scholars stipulated that the marriage must be announced
publicly in order for it to be valid. According to these scholars, the
announcement must come before consummation of the marriage. Telling
two men about it does not constitute a public announcement.
Based on that, the marriage contract that you did is not valid, and
you should not be intimate with her until after a new marriage
contract which is done correctly, in accordance with the conditions
stipulated in sharee'ah.
The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked
about a Muslim who marries a Christian woman without the permission of
her guardian. They replied:
The marriage contract is not valid unless it is done in the presence
of the wali and two witnesses of good character. It is not permissible
for the woman to do the marriage contract for herself, because the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no
(valid) marriage except in the presence of the wali and two witnesses
of good character." And he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
said: "A woman cannot give another woman in marriage, and a woman
cannot give herself in marriage." Based on that, the marriage contract
mentioned in the question is not valid,and it must be done again with
the wali of the woman.
A kitaabi (i.e., Jewish or Christian) woman may be given in marriage
by her father. If he is not present or he is present but refuses, the
closest of her male relatives on her father's side may give her in
marriage. If they are not present, or they are present but refuse, the
Muslim qaadi (judge) may give her in marriage; if there is no Muslim
qaadi, then the head of the local Islamic centre may give her in
marriage, because the shar'i evidence from the Qur'an and Sunnah
indicates that. End quote.
Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa'imah, 18/180-181
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked
about a man who married an Australian Christian girl in London, and
the wife gave herself in marriage without the presence of a wali.
There was no mention of the value of the mahr (dowry) in the marriage
contract, and itwas not attended by anywitnesses apart from a Muslim
man and a Christian woman who was the mother of the bride. In the
wedding party there were some Christian girls and friends of the
bride, along with the Christian registrar. Four years later, the wife
became Muslim and she has two children from him. She isasking about
the validityof her marriage contract; if it is not valid,then how can
it be madevalid?
He replied: With regard to the marriage contract that you describe, it
is not valid, because the wali and two witnesses were not present. The
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no
marriage except in the presence of the wali andtwo witnesses of good
character." With regard to not stating the mahr in the marriage
contract,that does not affect anything.
The way to correct it is to bring her wali to the registrar to do the
marriage contract for her to the husband mentioned, after obtaining
her approval and consent. This should also be attended by two
witnesses of good character. If she does not have a wali, then herwali
is the shar'i judge; she should give him permission to do her marriage
contract. Thereis no sin on them for what has passed, and their
children are legitimate and it is correct to call them aftertheir
father, if they believed that the marriage contract was valid, because
this comesunder the heading of a marriage that was thought to be
legitimate. End quote
Fataawa wa Rasaa'il Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem, 10/68
And Allah knows best.

Dought and clear, - Water spilling onto one’s clothes and body from a vessel that had been licked by a dog

I have a friend who putsa bowl of water in the shop so that the dog
candrink from it. One time, after the dog had drunk, this vessel was
tipped over and the water came out of it, and I was afraid that it had
got onto my clothesor my body, because it contained the saliva of the
dog that had drunk from it.
What should I do if this water touches my clothes or my body? Should I
wash the place it gets onto seven times?
Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) differed concerning the
najaasah (impurity) of dogs and there are several opinions.
It says inal-Mawsoo'ah al-Fiqhiyyah(40/79):
The fuqaha' differed concerning dogs with regard to whether they are
pure or impure.
The Shaafa'is and Hanbalis are of the view that dogs are impure in and
of themselves.
The Hanafis are of the view that dogs are not impure in and of
themselves, rather their leftover (food or water) and wetness are
impure.
The Maalikis are of the view that dogs are pure in and of themselves,
because they say that the basic principle concerning all things is
that they are pure, and all living beings, even dogs, are pure, and so
are their sweat, tears, mucus and saliva.
They also said: The fuqaha' differed concerning the impurity of a
vessel that has been licked by a dog. The majority of fuqaha' are of
the view that if a dog licks a vessel, it makes it impure.
The Maalikis and some ofthe Hanafis are of the view that the licking
of adog does not make the vessel impure. End quote.
Ibn 'Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) attributed the viewthat
dogs are impure to the majority of the scholars among the Sahaabah and
Taabi'een.
He said (may Allah have mercy on him): The scholars differed with
regard to acting upon the apparent meaning of this hadeeth [about the
licking of a dog, as we shall see below], and they also differed about
what we shall mention, by Allah's leave. Most of the scholars among
the Sahaabah and Taabi'een, and those who came after them of the
fuqaha' of the Muslims, said that a vessel should be washed seven
times with water if it is licked by a dog.
End quote fromat-Tamheed, 18/269
He also said (may Allah have mercy on him): The fuqaha' also differed
concerning the leftover (food or water) of a dog or any water or food
licked by a dog. The view of Maalik, which is the final view of his
madhhab, is that the leftovers of a dog are taahir (pure) and a vessel
licked by a dog should be washed seven times on the basis that it is
mustahabb to do so, but not obligatory.
Abu Haneefah and his companions, ath-Thawri and al-Layth ibn Sa'd said
that the leftovers of a dog are najis (impure),and they did not
specify a number of times for washing (the vessel). They said: Rather
he should wash it until he thinks it most likely that the impurity has
been removed, whether that is one time or more.
Al-Awzaa'i said that the leftovers of the dog in the vessel are najis
(impure), but inal-Mustaqni'it says that they are not impure.
Thegarment should be washed if the dog's saliva gets on it, and the
meat of game (caught bythe dog) should be washed to remove the dog's
saliva.
Ash-Shaafa'i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Abu 'Ubayd, Abu
Thawr and at-Tabarisaid: The leftovers of a dog are najis (impure) and
the vessel should be washed seven times, the first of which should be
with dust or soil. This is the view of the majority of the
literalists.
Dawood said: The leftovers of a dog are taahir (pure) and the vessel
should be washed seven times, as an obligation, if the dog licked the
vessel. Regardless of whether the vessel contained water or something
other than water, it is taahir (pure), but one should wash the vessel
seven times. However, one may do wudoo' with the water that was
licked, and the food and drink that were licked may be consumed.
Abu 'Umar said: Those (scholars) who were of the view that dogs are
not najis (impure) say that their leftovers are taahir (pure) but the
vessel should be washed seven times if the dog licked it. In their
opinionthis is so as to follow the instructions in the hadeeth to wash
that which remains pure, andit is limited to this case. Those who are
of the view that dogs are najis (impure) and that their leftovers are
najis, and also said that the vessel must be washed seven times if the
dog licks it, say that the hadeeth specifies seven times to purify
this impurity, which is different from other types of impurity.
Ash-Shaafa'i and his companions said that dogs and pigs are najis
(impure) whether alive or dead, and there is nothing among living
beings that is najis apartfrom these two. He said: All parts of the
dog (are impure), by analogy with its tongue…
End quote fromat-Tamheed(18/269)
The correct scholarly view is that all parts of the dog are najis,
including its saliva and hair, because the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) said: "The way to purify the vessel of one
of you, if a dog licks it, isto wash it seven times, the first of
which should be with dust (or soil)." Narrated by Muslim.
Al-Khattaabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:What we learn from
this hadeeth is that dogs are najis (impure) in and of themselves; if
they were not najis, he would not have instructed us to purify the
vessel if it is licked by a dog. Purification is basically prescribed
to remove major or minor ritual impurity (ghusl and wudoo') or wash
off impure substances. The rulings on ritual impurity cannot apply
tovessels, thus it is known that the aim here is to remove an impure
substance. Once it is proven that the dog's tongue, with which it
drinks the water, is najis (impure) and it is obligatory to purify the
water from that, it is known that all the parts (of the dog) are
impure, like its tongue. So if any part of its body touches one, it
must be purified. It also clearly shows that purification cannot be
done with less than seven washings, and that rubbing it once with dust
or soil is obligatory.
It is obvious that the reason for using dust is to achieve a thorough
purification. This highlights the high degree of the dog's impurity.
Therefore, other means of purification, such as potash and the like
[used as cleansing substances], that are very effective in
purification, may also beused in place of dust or soil.
End quote fromMa'aalimas-Sunan(1/93)
As-San'aani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:This hadeeth points to
several rulings:
Firstly, the dog's mouth is najis, because of the instruction to wash
anything that the dog licks and pour away the water. He said "The
purification of the vesselof one of you", because there is no washing
except in the case of ritual impurity or contamination with an impure
substance. There is no ritual impurity in this case, therefore whatis
meant is contamination with an impure substance. Pouring it away is
wasting the water; If thewater was taahir (pure), he would not have
instructed them to wasteit, because he had forbidden them to
wastewater. This clearly indicates that the dog's mouth is najis
(impure), and the rest of the dog's body is deemed to be the same, by
analogy. That is because if it is proven that the dog's saliva is
najis, and its saliva is part of its mouth, as it is the sweat of its
mouth, then its mouth is najis, because sweat is part of what comes
from the body, so the rest of its body is thesame… End quote fromSubul
as-Salaam(1/22).
Based on that, if the dogputs its tongue or its foot or any other part
of its body in the water, the water becomes najis (impure); hence the
water must be poured away and the vessel must be washed.
Thirdly:
If the water that was licked by the dog spills onto your clothes or
your body, and you are certain or think it most likely that it got
onto your clothes or your body, then you have to wash the place
affected by the impurity seven times, one of which should be with dust
or soil, or whatever may take its place of cleansing substances such
as soap, because dust may be harmful. Butif you think it most
likelythat the water did not reach your clothes or your body, then you
do not have to do anything,because the basic principle is that things
are taahir (pure), but in this case there is some doubt concerning
najaasah (impurity).
Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
With regard to lapping up (water), saliva comes out of the dog when it
does this. If the dog's saliva gets onto one's clothes or anything
else, then they should be washed seven times. But we do not say that
one of them should be with dust or soil, because thatmight be harmful.
Rather we say that instead of dust one should use soap or something
similar to remove the impurity, and that, with the seven washings, is
sufficient.
End quote fromLiqa' al-Baab al-Maftooh, no. 49
Note: it is not permissible to keep dogsexcept for a need such as
guarding or hunting. If a person keeps a dog for any other purpose, he
is sinning and every day one or two qiraats of hasanaat (good deeds)
will be detracted from his reward. And Allah knows best.

Dought and clear, - Ordaining the end of life according to Ahl as-Sunnah and the Mu‘tazilah

I have a small question that has to do with death. I have heard from
many people that each person dies at the specific time previously
ordained for him by Allah. This means that Allah has ordained a
specific time for the death of each individual, at which the angels
take his soul. Does this mean that every time a person dies, the time
has come for him to depart this world and this is the time which Allah
had previously ordained for him, even if he was killed or died as a
result of an accident? I am very confused about thismatter; can you
please explain it?
Praise be to Allah.
Allah, may He be exalted,created all people and decreed for them the
specific time at which their lives would come to an end. Allah, may He
be exalted, has informedthe angel who comes to the foetus in his
mother's womb with thedecree of how long his life will last. Then when
the time for their lives toend comes – whether they die naturally or
as aresult of illness or they are killed or die in an accident – it
cannot be brought forward or put back from the ordained time. By means
of this divine decree which does not change, people's attachment to
anything other than Allah in hopes of increasing or decreasingthat
lifespan is cut off. The one who takes goodcare of his health is not
the one who causes his lifespan to be lengthy; rather Allah, may He be
exalted, has decreed that for him. The one who kills a person has not
taken anything away from the lifespan of the one who was slain; rather
Allah, may He be exalted, decreed that from eternity, and the killer
will be broughtto account for his transgression of the limits set by
sharee'ah if he killed unlawfully.
The Mu'tazilah – who areone of the misguided groups – said that if a
person was not killed and did not die of sickness, he would live a
longer life! This is false and there is no evidencefor it in the
Qur'an or Sunnah, and it is not the opinion of any of Ahl as-Sunnah;
rather Allah has decreed the lifespan for each one of His creation and
He has decreed the means by which their lives will end. There is only
one lifespan (for each individual); it is known to Allah, may He be
exalted, and He has informed His angels of it whom He commanded
towrite the lifespan of each individual when heis in his mother's
womb.
Shaykh Ibn Abi'l-'Izz al-Hanafi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, has decreed the lifespan of
all creatures so that when the appointed time comes, it will not
bedelayed or brought forward at all. Allah, mayHe be exalted, says
(interpretation of the meaning):
"when their term is reached, neither can they delay it nor can they
advance it an hour (or a moment)"
[al-A'raaf 7:34; an-Nahl 16:61]
"And no person can ever die except by Allah's Leave and at an appointed term"
[Aal 'Imraan 3:145].
InSaheeh Muslimit is narrated that 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ood (may Allah be
pleased with him) said: Umm Habeebah, the wife of the Prophet
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and may Allah be pleased
with her) said: O Allah, allow me to enjoy the company of my husband
the Messenger of Allah, my father Abu Sufyaan and my brother
Mu'aawiyah. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
said: "You have asked Allah concerning lifespans that are already set,
days the number of which is already predetermined, and provisions that
are already ordained. Nothing will ever be brought forward before its
time and nothing will ever be delayed from its time. If you had asked
Allah to grant you refugefrom punishment in the Fire and punishment in
the grave, that would have been better."
The one who is killed has died at his appointed time. Allah, may He be
exalted, knewand decreed and ordained that one person would die
because of sickness, another would die because of being killed,
another would die as a result of the collapse of awall or building,
anotherwould die by burning or by drowning, or other causes. Allah,
may He be glorified, created life and death and He created the causes
of lifeand death.
But according to the Mu'tazilah, the one who is killed had his
lifespan cut short, and if he had not been killed he wouldhave lived
until his appointed time! So he had two lifespans. But this is a false
notion, because it is not befitting to suggest that Allah, may He be
exalted,ordained for him a time knowing that he would not live until
that time, or that He ordained two times for him, like one who is
ignorant and does not know what willhappen.
The reason why it is obligatory to carry out retaliatory punishment
(qisaas) and hold the killer accountable is because he has committed a
forbidden action and done something haraam that is the means of ending
a life.
Therefore we may understand the words ofthe Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him), "Upholding ties of kinship increases the
length of one's lifespan," as meaning that it is a means of living a
long life, and that Allah has decreed that this person would uphold
ties of kinship, and because of that he would live for this length of
time; were it not for that reason he would not live for that length of
time, but He decreed and ordained this cause and effect. By the same
token, He decreed that another person would sever ties of kinship and
would live until such-and-such a time, as we said with regard to
killing or otherwise.
End quote fromSharh al-'Aqeedah at-Tahhaawiyyah, p. 100, 101
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
said,commenting on the verse"and then has decreed a stated term (for
you to die). And there is with Him another determined term (for you to
be resurrected)" [al-An'aam 6:2]: With regard to the time when it is
ordainedthat an individual shoulddie, this is known to the angels who
write down the individual's provision, lifespan, deeds and whether he
isdoomed to Hell or destined for Paradise, as it says inas-Saheehayn,
where it is narrated that Ibn Mas'ood (may Allah be pleased with him)
said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) – who is the most truthful one – told us: "The creation of any
oneof you is put together in his mother's womb for forty days as
anutfah(sperm drop); then he becomes a 'alaqah(a piece of thick
coagulated blood) for a similar period; then he becomes like a chewed
piece of flesh (mudghah) for a similar period., then the angel is sent
to him and is instructed to write down four things. It is said: Write
down his provision, his lifespan, his deeds and whether he is doomed
(to Hell) orblessed (destined for Paradise). Then the soul is breathed
into him." This lifespan is the appointed time of death which Allah
may make known to whomever He wills among His slaves. With regard to
the other"determined term", i.e., the resurrection, no one knows it
except Him.
End quote fromMajmoo' al-Fataawa, 14/489
He (may Allah have mercy on him) was also asked about the one who is
killed: Did he die at his appointed time or did the killer cut his
life short?
He replied:
The one who is killed is like anyone else among the dead; no one dies
before his appointed time and the appointed time is not delayed for
anyone. Rather all animals and trees have their appointed lifespan and
appointed time of death which cannot be brought forward or put back.
The appointed time of a thing is the end of its life; its life is the
period of time for which it will remain and its appointed time is the
end of its life. It is proven inSaheeh Muslimand elsewhere that the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "Allah
decidedthe decrees of creation fifty thousand years before He created
the heavens and the earth. And His Throne was above the water." And it
is proven inSaheeh al-Bukhaarithat the Prophet (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) said: "There was Allah and there was nothing before
Him, andHis Throne was above the water. He wrote all things in the
Book and He created the heavens and the Earth." According to another
version: "… Then He created the heavens andthe Earth." And Allah, may
He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):"when their term
is reached, neither can they delay it nor can they advance it an hour
(or a moment)" [al-A'raaf7:34]. Allah knew what would be before it
came into existence, and He decreed that. He knows that a person will
die of a stomach disease or of pleurisy, or will die as a result of a
wall or building collapsing, or by drowning or other causes, and that
anotherperson will die as a result of being killed, either by poison
or by the sword or by stoning or by other means. The fact that Allah
knows that and has decreed it, indeed the fact that He willed all
things and created all things, does not prevent praising (someone for
doing good deeds) or blaming (someone for doing bad deeds), rewarding
or punishing. Rather if the one who killed a person did so as
commanded byAllah and His Messenger – as in the case of the mujaahid
who strives in jihad for the sake of Allah – Allah will reward him for
that. But if he kills a person whom Allah and His Messenger forbade
him to kill – as in the case of bandits and aggressors – Allah will
punish him for that. And if he kills a person ina manner that is
permissible – as in the case of qisaas or retaliatory punishment –he
will neither be rewarded nor punished, unless he had a good or bad
intention in either case.
There are two types of appointed times (of death); that which is
absolute and is known to Allah, and that which is conditional. Thus we
may understand what is meant by the words of the Prophet (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him) – "Whoever would like his provision to
be expanded and his lifespan increased, let him uphold ties of
kinship." Allah commanded the angel towrite down a lifespan for him
and said: "If he upholds ties of kinship, then increase it by
such-and-such," but the angel does not know whether it will be
increased or not. However, Allah knows what the outcome will be, and
when that appointed time comes it will neither be brought forward not
put back.
If the slain person had not been killed, some of the Qadaris (those
who deny the divine decree) said that he would have lived! And some of
those who deny cause and effect said that he wouldstill have died. But
both of them are wrong, for Allah knew that he would die by being
killed. If (hypothetically speaking) He decreed something other than
what He knew would happen, this would be a decree for something that
would not happen; if it were to happen, how could it happen? This is
something that some people may or maynot know. If we assume that Allah
knew that he was not going to be killed (at that particular time), in
that case either He decreed that he is stillgoing to die at that
particular time, or He decreed that he would live until some other
time. To be certain of one of these two scenarios, which then does not
happen, is ignorance. This is like one who says, "If he does not eat
what is decreed for him of provision, either he will die or be given
some other provision"; and it is like one who says, "If this man did
not impregnate this woman,would she be barren or would some other man
impregnate her?" or, "If he did not cultivate this land, would someone
else cultivate it or wouldit remain barren, with nothing planted in
it?" or "If the one who learned the Qur'an from this man did not learn
it from him, would he have learned from someone else or not learned at
all?" And there are many similar examples.
End quote fromMajmoo' al-Fataawa, 8/516-518
And Allah knows best.

Dua to heal the afflicted by the Evil eye or other afflictions

Dua to heal the afflicted by the Evil eye or other afflictionsDua No: 358
بِاسْمِ اللهِ أَرْقِيكَ، مِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ يُؤْذِيكَ، مِنْ شَرِّ كُلِّ
نَفْسٍ أَوْ عَيْنِ حَاسِدٍ، اللهُ يَشْفِيكَ بِاسْمِ اللهِ أَرْقِيكَ
Translation
In the Name of Allah. I recite over you [for purpose of healing] from
all that troubles you, and from every harmful mischief and from the
evil of the eyes of an envier. Allah will cure you; and with the Name
of Allah, I recite over you.
Transliteration
Bismil-laahi ar-qeek, min kul-li shai'in yu'dheek, min shar-ri kul-li
naf-sin aw 'ayni kul-li ḥaa-sid, al-laah yash-feek, bismil-laahi
ar-qeek
Sources: Muslim No# 2186 ; At-Tirmidhi No# 972