Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

The Story Of Uwais Qarni (ra)

Rate this topic


toyibonline

Recommended Posts

(salam)

If you open any anti-Sh'ia website, you are most likely to be confronted on the very homepage with images of blood, Shi'as cutting themselves during Ashura mournings. The purpose is to generate revulsion against against Shi'ism. Anti-Shia elements generally believe they have a good weapon in the topic of self-flagellation or tatbeer. To them, it is pure heresy, and therefore a perfect way to, at least, slow down the awesome waves of Shi'ism now sweeping most Sunni lands. Like many Western Shi'as (but I am a Nigerian that has never left Nigeria), I felt embarrased whenever the topic was raised. I blamed the Pakistanis, Kashmiris and Iraqis for the "mess". There are Shia fatwas prohibiting it. So, I normally hid under those. The "knowledgeable" ones among the Sunnis would bring other Shia fatwas, equally strong, permitting it. There, the arguments became heated. Most Shias in Nigeria do the taqlid of Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, through his representative Sheikh Mohammed Nur Dass. I met the Sheikh many times during my Law School programme in Kano. We both have a personal relationship and I know well his view on the subject. In his opinion, tatbeer is utterly haram. That is our defence here.

Until sometime late on this very last Ashura day, that was my position. I even published here on ShiaChat a fatwa on the subject from the website of Ayatollah Khamenei that very day. Immediately thereafter, I read a story which radically affected my opinion of the practice. It was the story of the Sahabi Uwais Qarni (ra). It is from a Sunni source. I am not sure if the same story has been related through sound Shia chains. Nonetheless, I accept its authenticity. Uwais Qarni (ra) was a sincere Sahabi, loved by both Sunnism and Shi'ism. If anything, it bares the sheer ignorance and hypocrisy of all Sunnis who condemn tatbeer.

Could our Sunni brothers tell us what they would do if they saw a Shi'a literally breaking his teeth as a mode of mourning during Ashura? Obviously, they would try to get a video of that, put it on YouTube and thereby mock Shi'ism greatly. Apparently, Shias have never gone to the level of breaking their teeth (just imagine the pain!) to mourn Imam Husayn (as). Yet, Sunnis and Nasibis dance over tatbeer pictures! They certainly would be suprised to learn that a prominent Companion actually broke his teeth, all of them, to mourn the loss of just two teeth by Rasulullah (saww) during the Battle of Uhud. What's more, Rasulullah (saww) never condemned the act. He in fact sanctioned it by acclaiming it as a sign of true love! And Sunni ulema regard the incidents among the merits of the Companion.

THE STORY FROM THE TEXTS OF THE AHLE SUNNAH

The story is recorded in Sirat al-Halabiyyah, vol II, page 295. There was the fierce Battle of Uhud, when some Companions did what they did, leaving Rasulullah (saww) in grave danger. In the process, Rasulullah (saww) lost two teeth from enemy attacks. The news got to Uwais Qarni (ra). Out of sincere love for Rasulullah (saww), he became greatly aggrieved. To mourn the loss, he broke his own teeth, ALL OF THEM, one by one. It was really a very painful exercise. Yet, he did it. The news got to Rasulullah (saww). Rather than condemn it as the Ahle Sunnah and Nasibis would love to hear, this is the exact statement of Rasulullah (saww): "Indeed Uwais is our devoted friend". In the opinion of Rasulullah (saww), tatbeer is actually a sign of devoted friendship and love!

This statement of Rasulullah (saww) makes the act completely compatible with the Sunnah. Part of what we call the Sunnah are acts not condemned or outrightly sanctioned by Rasulullah (saww).

Uwais Qarni (ra) himself saw the act as one done out of genuine love. He even challenged King Umar on the matter:

The renowned Sunni Scholar Shiekh Farid al Din Attaar in 'Tadhkhirathul Awliya' Urdu translation page 17 and 18 writes:

"Hadhrath Uways Qarni (ra) said to Hadhrath Umar Khattab (ra): 'If you were true in friendship than why on the day when the holy teeth of the Prophet (s) were broken didn't you break your teeth in companionship? Because, it is a condition of companionship.' Then he showed his teeth all of which were broken and said 'I broke all of my teeth without seeing you (O Prophet) and in the state of Ghaybah in your companionship. I had broken one tooth but couldn't get satisfaction so kept on breaking them one by one until I had broken them all '".

Better researches here http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/azadari/en/chap9.php

From this story, it is clear that tatbeer, though not compulsory, is valid under the Shariah. I must make it very clear here that this is NOT a fatwa. It is only an opinion. And it has been written with perfect respect towards the part of the Shia ulema who regard tatbeer as un-islamic.

THE CASE OF IMAM HUSAYN (as)

A Sahabi broke all his teeth, mourning Rasulullahs (saww) loss of two teeth. Imam Husayn (as) certainly lost more than teeth. He lost his entire life and almost all his household. His children and relatives were slaughtered before his very eyes. He was sprayed with arrows and immersed in his own blood. His killers were people who were supposed to be following his guidance; people on whom his love was COMPULSORY; people who MUST send blessings upon him in all their prayers and supplications. Imam Husayn (as) was on the Truth from Allah (swt). Yet, he had to go through the pain of being beheaded ALIVE! He was still breathing, conscious when his head was severed from his body. He was severely mutilated. His blessed head was was hanged on a lance and displayed with pleasure to the Ahle Sunnah of his time - in Kufa and Damascus and beyond. These evil creatures forced tears from the blessed eyes of Rasulullah (saww).

The Ahle Sunnah of today however think, like their predecessors, that the event was nothing. After all, in their opinion, Imam Husayn (as) was only a Sh'ia Imam. Some of them even go to the extent of calling Yazeed (la) radiallaho anho. With this act, they intercede for his killing and mutilation of Imam Husayn (as) and are thus parties to everything.

[shakir 4:85]

Whoever joins himself (to another) in a good cause shall have a share of it, and whoever joins himself (to another) in an evil cause shall have the responsibility of it, and Allah controls all things.

Imam Husayn (as) is someone we must all love more than our own selves and our near kindred, being from the Ahlulbayt (as). If your parents were the victims of Karbala, would you say radiallaho anho on Yazeed (la)?

post-39454-1201358289_thumb.jpg

Edited by toyibonline
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

if Owais hadnt yet met the Prophet then he wouldnt have known what was halal or haram would he? so he'd just have acted on pure love which is why the Prophet praised him; for that love he had. The Prophet didnt condemn him because he didnt know what he was doing was wrong

i dont think we can extrapolate from this one hadith that the act itself is correct

edit: i mean to say its possible that the Prophet praised Owais' love and loyalty that led to the action, rather than the action itself

Edited by DFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Wonderful argument by DFC!

You're teling me that upon hearing that Waya (as) has obliterated his teeth with a rick, Rsaulullah (s) was not dutybound to tell the people that such actions, whilst out of love were against the Shari'ah? He just maintained his silence?

Rasulullah (s) not condemning this act, or ruling on it in any way, rather praising the individual is the greatest proof that acts in mourning for the love of Rasulullah (s) and his blessed progeny are sound in Islam. No amount of false qiyas can refute it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Ok shababs all of you who love the Prophet please go break your teeth, do this now...while youre at it please cut off your hands for love of Alamdar too.....

You're teling me that upon hearing that Waya has obliterated his teeth with a rick, Rsaulullah (s) was not dutybound to tell the people that such actions, whilst out of love were against the Shari'ah? He just maintained his silence?

No angry malang brer, that's actually not what im telling you. For purposes of discussion Im suggesting an alternative explanation. I never said the Prophet kept silent. If the action was haram then obviously the Prophet had to say so, and if he didn't then it wasn't, and if you couldn't then u shouldn't!!

Sooo...how do you know the Prophet didnt later on tell him it was wrong? you can't take a hadith in isolation to make a fiqh ruling, maybe 5 minutes later the Prophet explained to him that its haram. Maybe the next sentence where this tradition stops narrating explains that the action was wrong. Maybe the Prophet didn't want to upset Owais and make him feel rejected so he waited til later to tell him. Im not saying that happened but you can't use an isolated report to prove something . ive heard that's how wahabi kids do their fatwas they look at one hadith and find a rule from it, you need to get a full picture from all narrations concerning the incident to get the fiqh rule not just one yarrr, soo until you lot can put together a full case don't get excited cos you've got nothing at the moment

Pour example, Bilal spat at his old idol when he became a muslim and realised it was false, I haven't seen a tradition where hes directly condemned or reprimanded for this(please show me if he was), but rather his action was later made haram by the Quran telling us not to abuse the Gods of others, so Bilal wasn't personally told but rather he learnt not to do it again, through general revelation. So maybe - MAYBE cos im just discussing ideas and ting cos we're all here to learn shababs - maybe Owais wasn't personally reprimanded but rather learnt from the Quran along with everyone else that self harm is wrong.

and im not joking all of you please prove youre sincere and cut your hands off...im sorry I cant take you seriously until you do....

and no im not making qayas, youre all making qayas. heres what the hadith says "Indeed Uwais is our devoted friend". it don't mention "acts in mourning for the love of Rasulullah (s) and his blessed progeny"...so we know that Owais loved the Prophet....AND THAT'S IT! Nufing else blad

my devoted friends would probably lie for me and so on but that don't make it right for them to lie for me, even though theyd do it without thinking out of devotion. all we know is that Owais had a lot of love to do what he did. To try and derive an endorsement from the Prophet saying that seems to me to be a big EXTRAPOLATION. Again maybe the Prophet did approve of what Owais did, all im saying is you cant take it from that one sentence you need more.

but really I know you malangs LOVE azadari so why don't you go to the next level and cut your hands off...really if youre following the example of Owais as you claim I cant imagine whats stopping you....

thats if you follow Owais' example. I follow the example of Hazrat Ali who loved the Prophet more than Owais but didn't ruin his health by smashing his teeth (losing ALL your teeth is very serious, especially in those times, a person could slowly starve to death without dental care)

and another thing yehh, theres hindu men that dress up as girls and "marry" their Gods cos they love them so much; if actions that are ordinarily haram become halal when showing love for ahlul bayt then maybe we should start doing that too (astagfirallah)?? or maybe no we shouldn't because its disgusting and gay and a disgrace to the people youre meant to be showing your "love" for. TINK ABOUT IT

and i wana emphasise none of this is to be taken as disrespect of Hazrat Owais, if the action was haram then theres no blame on him because he didnt know AND he was genuinely overtaken with emotion. the only thing this teaches us about Owais is the extent to which he loved the Prophet who he hadnt even met yet that he could become so agrieved for him

Edited by DFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

DFC

can you show us any proof wherin the Prophet (s) subsequently condemned Uways for his action? Second guessing has no room in the debate forum. Show us the evidence. And please get off your high and mighty horse, 'look at me I follow Imam Ali (as) better than you malangs' you are not the judge and jury on this issue. This concept of superiority really irritates me. If we wanna mourn our slain master in this way, as an expression of grief and love for him then allow us in peace. You do your thing, we do ours how about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

(salam)

I have seen hadiths were Rasulullah (pbuh) says, ''I smell the fragrance of Jannah coming from Yemen.'' Whereby he meant Uwais (ra). And also I have seen a hadith that says; ''If you people want forgiveness, get Uwais (ra) to pray for you''.

Also when Rasul (pbuh) passed away, he ordered Imam Ali (as) to take his cloak and give it to Uwais (ra).

Don't doubt the power of love.

Edited by M4L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Agha malang (do [Edited Out] use agha? i didnt know dat!). i dont understand how u can be typing if youve cut your hands off. this leads me to believe you still have your hands, is this correct?

can you show us any proof wherin the Prophet (s) subsequently condemned Uways for his action?

no not really - but i already told you that. the Quran forbids self harm and thats enough for me, if you wana distinguish matam and exempt it from that prohibition then its down to you to bring the evidence. to exempt something from a general rule you need a specific statement relating to the subject matter of the exemption. so where is extreme self harm (smashing all your teeth is HARDCORE) in azadari exempted?

can you show where the Prophet praised his ACTION (not his character) and can you show repititions of such actions from Owais or any others after this point?

and can you show where the Prophet specifically condemned Bilal for spitting at an idol? if he wasnt specifically condemned can we carry on doing it or is it enough that the Quran later told us not to do it? (and btw using the word "condemned" isnt appropriate when we're talking about someone who didnt know what they were doing was forbidden. like how sunnis say the Quran reprimanded the Prophet for making honey haram to himself, but it wasnt a reprimand because he hadnt yet been told not to do that. you cant disobey an instruction you havent been given yet. so either way Owais wasnt condemned)

Second guessing has no room in the debate forum.Show us the evidence.

get me! so show your evidences init. the one report of the Owais incident dont prove anything you lot do, you need more!

And please get off your high and mighty horse, 'look at me I follow Imam Ali (as) better than you malangs'

no no thats not what i said brother of the malang persuasion. i was asking why you havent yet shown youre serious about your azadari and cut your hands off. if youre following Owais' example then there should be nothing stopping you from showing your love for hazrat Abbas in this way. i will not be cutting my hands off because i prefer the example of Hazrat Ali's azadari to that of Owais'. if for the sake of argument, what Owais did was correct and halal, then there's nothing mutually exclusive between Alis way and Owais' way, theyre just 2 different ways of doing things - so you can cut your hands off and still be a good follower of Ali just like me right? i never wished to imply that me not following Owais made me a better shia than you, i just want to know why youre not cutting your hands off its really troubling me....

you are not the judge and jury on this issue. This concept of superiority really irritates me. If we wanna mourn our slain master in this way, as an expression of grief and love for him then allow us in peace. You do your thing, we do ours how about that?

no

we're just having a discussion why you hyping yourself up and acting like im persecuting you looool

and bare hindus come here and say the same: you do your thing and we'll do ours - but no that aint on either blad they gota convince me that gods a cow or i'll convince them God aint a cow i aint gona let the matter slide yehh cos it aint on - them doin shirk and ting goin round chattin breez bout cows out in d field MANDEM PEASANTS IN D FIELD ya get me bruv so yarr lets discuss the matter in an academic manner inshallah free from all rhetoric and trite emotivisms with the lofty aim of educating ourselves and bettering our understanding of the deen.

Please avoid use of terms that may be perceived as derogatory.

Edited by Rawshni
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

DFC

Firstly I would request that you refrain from the use of the term Paki is I find that downgrading and racist.

Now lets see what we have. We have your conjecture that maybe Uways was reprminaded agsinst my evidence that shows he wasnt. the onus is on you now to show us the evidence that Uways (ra) was condemned for this extrem,e act of self harm, one that could have led to him bleeding to death. Dont forget theer wasnt some magic ER in Madeena back in those days. The pains, bleeding, would have been far greater than a few cuts with a blade. Self harm as in suicide is haraam in the quran. Self harm that may inflict pain on the body might hurt, hell it may leave massive scars but it isnt suicide. If you have an issue with that perhaps our learned one, you could pass a Self Harm Fatwa on Porphet Yaqub (as) ho cried so much for his missing son that he went blind. Excessive - yes or no? Does Allah (swt) condemn such a dangerous act that lead to blindness? You have this stereotype of these illetirate as you would call it 'pakis' having some cut up session for the heck of it. For those that do it, it is a very personal and difficult thing to describe. It is interesting that he even the Marjaa that outlaw it do so not on the basis of Nass, rather oustside perception. So DFC you seem to have greater knowldeg of the Quran than the marjaa - nice one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 13 years later...
  • Advanced Member
On 1/26/2008 at 7:29 PM, toyibonline said:

Hadhrath Uways Qarni (رضي الله عنه) said to Hadhrath Umar Khattab (ra): 'If you were true in friendship than why on the day when the holy teeth of the Prophet (s) were broken didn't you break your teeth in companionship? Because, it is a condition of companionship.' Then he showed his teeth all of which were broken and said 'I broke all of my teeth without seeing you (O Prophet) and in the state of Ghaybah in your companionship. I had broken one tooth but couldn't get satisfaction so kept on breaking them one by one until I had broken them all '".

For anyone still reading these threads:  This event is mentioned only in 2 sunni sources, which the Shia quote. I am currently trying to read through the first source "Seerat/Sirat Al Halbiya" (apparently it is in vol 2); the second source, it is mentioned in the book "Tazkiratul  awliya", and in it, it clearly mentions that "Hazrat Umar and Imam Ali went to Yemen..." then goes onto mention how Hazrat Owais e Qarni points the question at both of them "If your friendship was true... (u would have removed ur teeth as well or done some similar act to share the pain)..." the book then goes on to say "And after seeing this both sahabas felt a tender feeling towards him. (owais) ," or " felt like weeping". the thing is, I can't find any English translation, and so I'm reading it in urdu. For anyone who knows urdu, in urdu it says "ye dekh kar dono sahabah par *riqqat* tari ho gayi", riqqat is the word used to show how they felt and its an ambiguous word. hence dual translation to English by me (lol, I could be wrong). But, it proves that one of the two books this tradition is taken from, actually mentions Umar and Ali. Hmmmm... be careful who u quote and what for. Whatever this book says, the extract I've described above is not just a question on one person, but both. I wonder if you're willing to say this tradition is false, hence making one of the two traditions that validates matam by Rasulallah SAWs on own words (which he hasn't), useless or are you willing to accept Imam Ali was being directed at and his friendship, loyalty and love for Rasulallah SAW was being questioned? 

 

 

 

(leaving the screen shots of the book where I mention this from. Tazkiratul Awliya: Second Chapter Owais e Qarni (pg11 in urdu translation)) 

Screenshot_20210916_171929.jpg

Screenshot_20210916_172129.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 1/26/2008 at 6:43 PM, Aghamalang said:

Wonderful argument by DFC!

You're teling me that upon hearing that Waya (عليه السلام) has obliterated his teeth with a rick, Rsaulullah (s) was not dutybound to tell the people that such actions, whilst out of love were against the Shari'ah? He just maintained his silence?

Rasulullah (s) not condemning this act, or ruling on it in any way, rather praising the individual is the greatest proof that acts in mourning for the love of Rasulullah (s) and his blessed progeny are sound in Islam. No amount of false qiyas can refute it.

If you suppose such exagerations are true stories, then go break all your teeth. Why don't you? Start another innovation into the religion; when Imams themselves did not perform such acts. Neither they broke their teeth, nor they flaggelated each other or their babies. But you can do it, right? But when you do it, don't tell people that you are a shia following the Imams or Maraji. Just say you are a masochist.

Edited by islamicmusic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/16/2021 at 4:58 PM, Zellali said:

I wonder if you're willing to say this tradition is false, hence making one of the two traditions that validates matam by Rasulallah SAWs on own words (which he hasn't), useless or are you willing to accept Imam Ali was being directed at and his friendship, loyalty and love for Rasulallah SAW was being questioned? 

Salam

1, The Prophet (s) probably never broke any teeth.

Some Shia sources narrate that the Prophet’s (s) teeth never broke. The following is a narration from Imam al-Baqir (a) with a reliable chain of narrators:

So we said to him (Imam al-Baqir (a)), it has been narrated to us that he (the Prophet (s)) broke his upper interior teeth? So he (Imam al Baqir (a)) said: “No, by Allah, Allah always protected him, rather it was a wound on his face.”

Shaykh al-Sadooq, Ma`ani al-Akhbar, Baab Nawaadir al-Ma`ani, page. 406, hadith no. 80

The following has been narrated by the renowned Shaykh Fadhl ibn Hassan al-Tabarsi:

Aban ibn `Uthman said: “This was told to me on his authority by as-Sabbah ibn Suyyabah. I asked him, “Were his upper interior teeth broken, as these people claim?’ He replied: `No, by Allah, Allah always protected him from all disfigurement. It was rather that he was wounded in the face.’ I asked: `What about the cave on Mount Uhud to which they claim that the Apostle of Allah fled?’ He answered: `By Allah, he did not move from his spot.’”

Source.

What has been said in those narrations seems quite probable since the history books have generally not attributed the Prophet (s) with missing teeth. The people of his time also did not identify him (s) in that way. The narration says that Allah protected him (s) from all disfigurement and this seems quite reasonable because it would help him with his duty of propagating the message of Islam. Missing teeth would likely affect the recitation of the Qur’an and this was one of his primary roles.

Quote

Owais Al-Qarni (r) Breaking His Teeth

Owais Al-Qarni (r) was a Muslim who lived during the life of Prophet Muhammad (s) and died fighting alongside Imam Ali (a) in the battle of Siffin. It is believed that that he accepted the religion of Islam during the life of the Prophet (s), despite never having the opportunity to meet him (s), due to the fact that he lived in Yemen, far away from Madinah. He is highly respected for this and for being a loyal companion of Imam Ali (a) during the last few years of his life.

Many promoters of extreme self-flagellation narrate that when Uwais (r) heard the news that the Prophet (s) had lost some teeth in the battle of Uhud; he picked up a rock and broke all his teeth out of love for the Prophet (s). He was in Yemen when this occurred whilst Uhud is near the city of Madinah. An example from blood shedding promotional material.

They narrate this incident from two books written by Sunni authors. The first is ‘Seerat al-Halabiyya’ by Imam al-Halabi. The book was written about a thousand years after the event is supposed to have occurred. The second is ‘Tadhkirat al-Awliya’ by the Sufi poet Farid al-Deen Attar (d.616-627H). We do not know of any Shia books at all that report this event. It is interesting to note that promoters of blood shedding cite the two Sunni sources in an attempt to convince Shias of their claim.

In regards to this incident we contend that: 1, It is almost certainly not authentic. 2, The two sources that it has been quoted from have been misrepresented. 3, Even if we imagined the event to be authentic, it cannot be used as a justification for extreme self-flagellation. The following is a list of reasons to justify these assertions:

1, The Prophet (s) probably never broke any teeth.

Some Shia sources narrate that the Prophet’s (s) teeth never broke. The following is a narration from Imam al-Baqir (a) with a reliable chain of narrators:

So we said to him (Imam al-Baqir (a)), it has been narrated to us that he (the Prophet (s)) broke his upper interior teeth? So he (Imam al Baqir (a)) said: “No, by Allah, Allah always protected him, rather it was a wound on his face.”

Shaykh al-Sadooq, Ma`ani al-Akhbar, Baab Nawaadir al-Ma`ani, page. 406, hadith no. 80

The following has been narrated by the renowned Shaykh Fadhl ibn Hassan al-Tabarsi:

Aban ibn `Uthman said: “This was told to me on his authority by as-Sabbah ibn Suyyabah. I asked him, “Were his upper interior teeth broken, as these people claim?’ He replied: `No, by Allah, Allah always protected him from all disfigurement. It was rather that he was wounded in the face.’ I asked: `What about the cave on Mount Uhud to which they claim that the Apostle of Allah fled?’ He answered: `By Allah, he did not move from his spot.’”

Source.

What has been said in those narrations seems quite probable since the history books have generally not attributed the Prophet (s) with missing teeth. The people of his time also did not identify him (s) in that way. The narration says that Allah protected him (s) from all disfigurement and this seems quite reasonable because it would help him with his duty of propagating the message of Islam. Missing teeth would likely affect the recitation of the Qur’an and this was one of his primary roles.

2, The opinion of Shia scholars on the authenticity of this incident.

The following question was sent to the offices of some of the well known Shia scholars:

In our community a lot of people quote the incident of Owais al-Qarni breaking his teeth after he heard that the prophet had broken one tooth.

Is this event authentic?

The response of the office of Ayatullah Sadiq Shirazi:

As per history the incident is not authentic.

The evidence.

In that email (click on the link) the representative of Ayatullah Sadiq Shirazi (who is one of a small minority of contemporary maraja who actively support blood flagellation) hints that the story of Rabab (r) the wife of Imam Hussain (s) is evidence for some of these blood rituals. We must point out that there are differing accounts of what she (r) did. Some accounts say that she (r) stayed in Karbala at the grave of Imam Hussain (a) and did not return to Madinah (contradicting what he has written). We also do not think that the account given by the official can be described as an act of empathy or sympathy (for the Imam (a)) without any other supporting evidence. It would most likely have been an act of grief and mourning rather than an act of empathy. Nevertheless the act that he attributes to her is not comparable to the blood flagellation rituals.

The response of the office of Ayatullah Makarem Shirazi to the above mentioned question:

It has been said that, when he heard that the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) had broken a tooth, his tooth began to hurt, or his tooth broke by itself, not voluntarily.

The evidence.

3, The lack of Shia sources and the scarcity of the narration.

Not only is this event not quoted from Shia sources, it is also not found in the earlier and more famous historical works of the Sunnis. It is not found in the Seerah of Ibn Ishaq, the History of al-Tabari or the Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’d and other books.

4, The narrative in Tadhkirat al-Awliyah contradicts many established beliefs.

Farid al-Deen Attar reports the incident by stating that the Prophet (s) said to Imam Ali (a) and Umar ibn Khattab that they will someday meet Uwais (r) and they must convey his (s) greetings. During the rule of Umar, Imam Ali (a) went with Umar to a remote part of Iraq and found Uwais (r) living there. It is in this meeting that Uwais (r) told them that he had broken all of his teeth. An English translation of this narrative can be found here.

Some of the peculiarities of this narrative:

a, It contradicts other more reliable narrations (e.g. in Kitab al-Irshad) which state that Imam Ali (a) first met Uwais (r) on his way to the battle of Jamal. Whilst the narrative by Attar says that Imam Ali (a) first met him (r) during the reign of Umar ibn al-Khattab.

b, Imam Ali (a) travels with Umar and treats him with a surprising amount of reverence.

c, Uwais (r) asks Umar to describe the appearance of Prophet (s) and Umar fails to do so. Imam Ali (a) does not intervene in the conversation and does no attempt to describe the Prophet (s).

d, Uwais (r) challenges Umar with the words: “if you were firm in the friendship then why you have not broken your teeth when the prophet’s teeth were broken in the battle of mount of Ohud in Madina and this is the rule of friendship”. It is unlikely that a pious person like Uwais (r) would challenge him in that way considering that Imam Ali (a) also did not break his teeth and Uwais (r) is considered to be a follower of the Imam (a).

5, The narrative in Seerat al-Halabiyyah differs from what has been quoted.

Some promoters of blood shedding say that in volume II, page 295 of the book, the incident of Uwais (r) breaking his teeth has been narrated with the Prophet (s) responding with the following words: “Indeed Owais is our devoted friend”.

We have not been able to find this narrative (of him voluntarily breaking his teeth) in the book. Instead we found it reporting that Uwais (r) was physically present at the battle of Uhud and the following words have been quoted from him: “I swear by God that at Uhud the Holy Prophet’s (s) teeth will not be broken until my teeth are broken, the Holy Prophet’s (s) face will not receive an injury until my face receives an injury, …..”, (Volume IV, page 227).

This account contradicts what has normally been quoted by the propagandists since they assert that Uwais (r) was in Yemen when the battle was taking place. Although we also think that he was in Yemen, we must point out that Seerah al-Halabiyyah contradicts with the account that they present.

6, Other narrations do not identify Uwais (r) as being toothless.

Many historical accounts of Uwais al-Qarni (r) do not state that he was toothless. If he indeed was toothless then he would have become famous for it and it would have been mentioned by people who had encountered him.

7, The act of breaking ones teeth in this manner is haraam according to all renowned Muslim scholars.

It is unlikely that Prophet Muhammad (s) commended Uwais (r) for breaking his teeth since it is an accepted fact that such severe acts of self-harm are prohibited in Islam.

8, The fact that none of the other companions of the Prophet (s) nor the Ahlulbayt (a) performed this act after knowing that the Prophet (s) had broken his teeth. If it was a correct action to perform then many of them would also have done it.

9, The act seems unreal.

The act of breaking every single tooth in one’s mouth seems very unrealistic. The amount of pain that Uwais (r) would have had to endure means that he is very unlikely to have been able to complete the breaking of every individual tooth.

10, Uwais (r) was isolated and thus was not in a position to be corrected.

Even if we image that the event is true then we must remember that Uwais (r) was isolated and had never met the Prophet (s), and thus it is likely that he did not know the correct way to respond in this case and he should not be criticized. This would have likely been the reason why he was not criticized by the Prophet (s).

If blood flagellators think that breaking of the teeth was the correct action to perform, then we must ask them why don’t they do it now out of sympathy for the Prophet (s)?

http://tatbir.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...