God has cursed the women who tattoo and the women who have themselves tattooed, the women who pluck hairs from their faces and who make spaces between their teeth for beauty, changing what God has created. When a woman came and told him she had heard he had cursed such and such he asked why he should not curse those whom God’s messenger had cursed and those who were mentioned in God’s Book. She told him she had read it from cover to cover and had not found in it what he had been saying, to which he replied that if she had read it she would have found it, and asked her whether she had not read, “What the apostle has brought you accept, and what he has forbidden you refrain from.” (Qur’an, 59, 7). On her replying that she had, he said he had forbidden what he had been talking about.(Bukhari and Muslim.)
The Prohibition of Artificial Alteration
This narration from Mishkat al-Masabih 4431 establishes the severe prohibition against altering Allah's natural creation. The curse mentioned indicates the gravity of these actions, placing them among major sins. Tattooing, plucking facial hair, and filing teeth for cosmetic purposes all constitute tampering with Allah's perfect design.
Scholarly Interpretation of the Curse
Classical scholars explain that the curse applies to both the practitioner and the client, emphasizing collective responsibility in sin. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani notes this demonstrates that assisting in sin carries its own punishment.
Imam al-Nawawi clarifies that the prohibition applies specifically to unnecessary alteration for mere beautification, while medical necessity or removing actual disfigurement remains permissible.
Qur'anic Foundation of Prophetic Prohibitions
The companion's reference to Surah al-Hashr (59:7) establishes the binding nature of Prophetic prohibitions. Scholars like Ibn Kathir explain that this verse makes the Sunnah a legislative source equal to Qur'anic commands in authority.
Al-Qurtubi emphasizes that this incident demonstrates how the Sahaba understood the Quran and Sunnah as complementary sources of legislation.
Exceptions and Contemporary Applications
Traditional scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah make exceptions for medical necessity, such as removing facial hair causing genuine distress, while maintaining the general prohibition.
Modern scholars extend this ruling to contemporary practices like cosmetic surgery, distinguishing between necessary reconstruction and vain alteration.