the second volume. He did not disclose this alteration, and it is evident from the style that it was not the shaykh’s, for he provided some grammatical analyses and lexical meanings before stating the overall meaning. Curiously, on page (449), he made a minor alteration by placing one word before another and noted that change in the margin, yet he failed to mention his far greater intervention of adding three pages.
-
While explaining verses (50, 51) of Surah al-Hajj, the pen of the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—inadvertently jumped ahead to verse 56, conflating the two verses with that verse. He thus wrote: “Those who believe and do righteous deeds will be in Gardens of Bliss, while those who disbelieve and deny Our signs will have a humiliating punishment.” He then explained the verse in accordance with what he had written. Al-Najjār therefore proceeded to alter the explanation and make a lengthy addition amounting in total to approximately a page and a half (1), without indicating any part of this revision.
-
Another remarkable addition concerns the statement of Allah, exalted is He: “Neither heaven nor earth wept over them, nor were they granted respite,” from verse (29) of Surah al-Dukhān. Shaykh Abd al-Rahmān al-Sa‘dī—may Allah have mercy upon him—cited it as supporting evidence while explaining verse (41) of Surah al-Mu’minūn. It appears, however, that al-Najjār thought it belonged to the same surah, so he supplied an explanation of his own and attributed it to the shaykh, without commenting or clarifying that these were his own words. This addition occupies approximately one page (2).
Curiously, he would sometimes place marginal comments upon his own additions as though they were comments upon the words of the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him (3).
The Fourth Observation:
Marginal Notes and Critiques:
Al-Najjār criticized the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—at numerous places in the tafsīr and inserted marginal notes containing those criticisms. He thereby “exceeded his task and overstepped his proper bounds. He proceeded to comment upon this valuable tafsīr with opinions that were far removed from what is correct and departed from the truth in its clearest sense. In doing so, he marred the book, wronged its author, deceived its readers, and led the younger generation astray. He also objected to the author and rejected his statements on the basis of opinions of his own in which he was not guided to truth or correctness. He had no right to do so, nor was it his task to object to the author’s choices. His task was merely to critically establish and correct the text” (4).
“The criticisms at the beginning of the book consist of minor objections to a phrase, a word, or something similar. Those found in the middle and latter parts, however, are grave objections involving distortion of Allah’s words, excess concerning the prophets—may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon them—disparagement of scholars, and lies attributed to them” (5).
In most of his comments, he adopted an accusatory tone toward the shaykh and his style. Among the expressions demonstrating this are: “The wording is awkward, as you can see” (6); “The wording is ambiguous and requires clarification” (7); “There is some disorder in the wording; it would be clearer to say” (8); and “The wording is obscure, as you can see” (9).