English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Like the commentary of al-Ṭabarī (311/923), that of Ibn Abī Ḥātim, of which an important part has survived, contains the exegetical reports of the first three centuries of Islam. The extant commentary covers from  Sūra  1 to the end of  Sūra  13 and from  Sūra  23 to the end of  Sūra  29. Ibn Abī Ḥātim’s commentary has been edited and published in ten volumes by Asʽad Muḥammad al-Ṭayyib, but for several reasons this edition cannot be considered a successful work of scholarship. In al-Ṭayyib’s edition the  isnāds  are numbered, but the editor prefers to use a naive and misleading method of numbering: on the one hand, he numbers the  isnāds  contained in the existing manuscripts of this exegesis; on the other he has tried to complete the  isnāds  of the missing part of Ibn Abī Ḥātim’s commentary by using those later works that have benefited from Ibn Abī Ḥātim’s work. Thus the original part of this exegesis is combined with its later compilations. Further, according to this edition, the latest  isnāds  is given as number 19541. Although this figure is supposed to indicate the total number of  isnāds  in the commentary, we find that there is a fundamental mistake in the numbering, especially after  isnād  no. 9061, where this  isnād  is followed by no. 8328, and the sequence continues 8329, 8330 … and so on. Nor is this the only error. We find that the order is frequently disrupted. Because of these discrepancies in the numbering of the  isnāds  we will give the page number in the footnotes concerning our own findings rather than referring to the editor’s numbering system. In addition, the large number of misreadings of text and misquoted names bears witness to the insufficiency of this edition. Despite these mistakes the publisher made no corrections in its second printing (1999), although this did include four-volume indices and  takhrīj  prepared by Kāmil ʽUwayḍa. There thus remains an urgent need for a critical edition.

Isnāds and Rijāl Expertise in the Exegesis of Ibn Abī Ḥātim (327/939)