Reason for Authoring the Nukhbah and Its Commentary
One of my brethren asked me to distill for him (1) the most important points of that material, so I condensed it into a few concise pages which I entitled (2) “Nukhbat al-Fikar fi Muṣṭalaḥ Ahl al-Athar” (The Elite of Thought on the Terminology of the People of Tradition). I arranged it according to a plan I devised and a method I adopted, adding to it (3) scattered gems and supplementary benefits.
He next urged me once again (4) to prepare for it a commentary that would decipher its symbols, unlock its treasures, and clarify what might be hidden from the beginner. I acceded to his request (5), hoping thereby to be included among those who tread such paths (6).
The Author’s Method in the Commentary
Accordingly I exerted myself, in explaining it, to provide the utmost clarity and direction, drawing attention to the concealed recesses (7) of its corners (8)—for the inhabitant of the house knows best what it contains (9). It became apparent to me that presenting it (10) in the form (11) of an expanded exposition (12) would be more appropriate, and that merging it (13)
(1) The reading la-hum (“for them”) occurs in B, Z, K, and in a copy entered on the margins of J and Y; the alternative la-hu (“for him”) is absent from D and W. Al-Qari, Sharh Sharh al-Nukhba, p. 148, comments: “It is set in the singular because of the wording, although it could truly refer to one individual; another copy has la-hum, which reflects the sense of ‘some (of them)’ and may be an instance of taghlib—that is, clarification intended for him and for others.”
(2) Copy T reads wa-sammaytuha (“and I have named it”).
(3) Copy B has dammamtuhu (“I appended it”).
(4) Copy D inserts jamaʿa (“a group”).
(5) Copy T gives dhalika (“that”) in place of suʾalihi (“his question”).
(6) In the margin of D, in the author’s own hand: “Shaykh Nur al-Din Dawud has read and reviewed this treatise with me. Written by: Ibn Hajar.”
(7) Copies H, W, and Z read khafaya (“hidden matters”).
(8) Copy K reads zawaha.
(9) Copy T has bi-lladhi (“with that which”).
(10) Copies D, H, and T read iradaha (“its presentation”); in D the scribe added the letter ha to indicate a masculine pronoun.
(11) Copy D reads sabil (“path”) instead of sura (“form”).
(12) Copy T writes al-bast with the letter sad. Al-Razi states in Mukhtar al-Sihah, p. 34: “bast a thing—whether written with sin or sad—means ‘to spread it’; its conjugation follows the pattern nasara.”
(13) Copies A, J, H, and M vocalise wa-damjuha (“and its merging”) in the nominative; we adopt the accusative form attested by H, W, and K. Al-Qari, Sharh Sharh al-Nukhba, p. 151, explains that the accusative is required because the phrase is coordinated to ‘its inclusion’ (iradahu).