fill the breach and discharge me of my responsibility.

The Work I Undertook:

Allah blessed me with something that had not been available to those who had previously attended to this tafsīr: I obtained manuscript (A), which had remained in the possession of the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—and under his supervision and care until his death. On the whole, it is more reliable than manuscript (B), which formed the basis of every edition. When I began this work, the goal I diligently pursued was to publish the tafsīr exactly as the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—had written it, without alteration, substitution, addition, or omission. Accordingly, I proceeded as follows:

First: Transcribing the tafsīr as it stands. This entailed reproducing the verses being explained exactly as the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—had written them. When he cited verses in full, I reproduced them in full, just as he had done. When he cited only part of them and wrote, “and so forth through the rest of the account,” I retained that form. Where the two manuscripts differ, I apply the principles of collation that I shall explain later, by Allah’s leave. In transcribing the text, I observed the following:

1. I arranged the text properly, dividing its discourse and sections in accordance with their meanings. I strove not to split a continuous passage between two separate paragraphs and to begin the explanation of each verse or group of verses on a new line.

2. I numbered the verses being explained at the beginning of their explanation. This was not done by the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—but I considered it important because it makes the locations of the verses easy to identify.

3. I corrected certain obvious spelling errors that would not have escaped the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—but were merely slips of the pen.

I was careful not to intervene in or amend the tafsīr in any way except in three cases:

The first is when an error occurs in a Quranic verse. In that case, I reproduce the correct wording without retaining the error. On occasion, however, the shaykh’s pen inadvertently strayed to verses from another surah—or from the same surah but from a different passage—after which he explained the verses he had written. In such cases, I reproduce the correct wording of the verses, retain the explanation as it stands, and indicate in the margin what I have done.

The second is when the error is obvious and could not possibly have been accepted by the author—may Allah have mercy upon him. In that case, I insert the amendment that I consider correct and indicate in the margin the error or slip of the pen found in the original.

The third is when the amendment is slight, such as correcting a pronoun: for example, where he writes “the Creator of the two” although the correct wording is “its Creator,” or vice versa; or where he uses the feminine form of “which” although the masculine is required, and similar instances. In such cases, I correct the wording and, on a few occasions, indicate what I have done. This is particularly appropriate since the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him—“wrote swiftly, in a fine script, and without spectacles, but on a sound basis” (1). His principal concern was with meanings. He therefore wrote in a letter to Shaykh Abd Allah ibn Aqīl—may Allah preserve him—“Good spelling and allowing the writing to flow with the meanings take precedence over attention to fine handwriting, for the latter is of little importance compared with good composition” (2).

Second: Collation

For the sake of clarity, I shall explain what I did in a series of points:

First, I adopted manuscript (A) as my base text for several reasons:

The first is that most of it is in the handwriting of the shaykh—may Allah have mercy upon him.

The second is that it was the manuscript that remained in the shaykh’s possession—may Allah have mercy upon him—until his death.