An early report says that Abu al-Darda may Allah be pleased with him spoke about an approaching fitna and was asked by a man from al-Sukun what would become of their swords. Abu al-Darda replied that he feared that if the man carried his swords into that fitna, his eye would be injured and his tooth broken. The report says that the man later attended Siffin, where both injuries occurred, and afterward remarked that one of Abu al-Darda's predictions would have been enough for him. Al-Fasawi preserves an early form and al-Lalaka'i includes the same core among Abu al-Darda's karamat, but the evidence is essentially one route family and contains a Hariz/Jarir textual variant.
Abu al-Darda then gave a striking warning about that man's future. The report says that he feared that, if the man brought his swords into the fitna, his eye would be injured and his tooth would be broken. The wording is presented as a foretelling or firasah connected with a specific person's participation in the coming conflict.
The narration then gives the later outcome. The man is reported to have attended the Battle of Siffin, where his eye was injured and his tooth was broken. Afterward, he is said to have remarked, “May Allah forgive Abu al-Darda; one would have been enough for me.” In the report's own structure, the earlier warning and the later double injury are deliberately placed together as prediction and fulfillment.
Ya'qub al-Fasawi preserves an earlier form of this story through Abu al-Yaman from Hariz from Ghaylan ibn Ma'shar from Abu Qutayla. Al-Lalaka'i preserves the same core account and includes it among the karamat of Abu al-Darda and Salman. The narrator material gives plausible support to Ghaylan ibn Ma'shar and identifies Abu Qutayla as Marthad ibn Wada'a, although his precise Companion status is disputed.
Important source cautions remain. Al-Fasawi's route reads Hariz in one position, while some transcriptions of al-Lalaka'i show Jarir. More importantly, the checked al-Fasawi and al-Lalaka'i forms substantially belong to the same Ghaylan-Abu Qutayla route family, and Task 1 did not locate a strong independent second chain. The report is therefore stronger than an anonymous weak anecdote but does not reach the level of high-confidence authentication.
The safest public conclusion is that classical Sunni sources preserve a report in which Abu al-Darda warned a man from al-Sukun that entering the coming fitna would result in an injured eye and broken tooth, and the same report later places both injuries at Siffin. It should be presented as a medium-confidence reported foretelling or karamah, not as revelation, and the supplied person code and source-level uncertainty must remain unchanged.
Conclusion
Classical Sunni sources preserve a report that Abu al-Darda foretold an eye injury and broken tooth for a man who would enter the coming fitna, followed by a report that both occurred at Siffin. The coherent early route and classical karamah reception support inclusion with caution, while the single-route dependency and textual variant keep the confidence at medium.