Posts Tagged "shirbini"
The Importance of Mughni Al-Muhtaj of Khatib Ash-Shirbini: Q&A With Shaykh Taha Karan
Question:
Perhaps Maulana may inform the reason Maulana chose al-Mughni as main silibus kitab compare to other kitabs especially Kanz al-raghibin by al-Mahalli and al-Muhadhdhab by al-Shirazi.
Manhaj of Imam al-Shirbini in mughni.
The advantage of al-Mughni.
The weakness of al-Mughni and certain aspect that ustaz should cover while teaching al-mughni.
Imam al-Shirbini had quiet few ishkalat against al-Minhaj that I think more than other shurrah like Ibn Hajar and al-Ramli. Request maulana comment on it.
Maulana Taha’s answer:
While the Muhadhdhab holds many advantages on account of its lucidity and style, its major drawback is that it does not, for natural reasons of chronology, give any representation of development in the madhhab after Shirazi. The contributions of the Shaykhayn (aside from their tarjihat) as well as those of the Muhaqqiqin after the Shaykhayn do not, and naturally cannot, feature anywhere in the book.
While Mahalli’s commentary does to a certain extent cover the development of the madhhab in the time of the Shaykhayn and thereafter, the major recension, systematization and tarjih in the madhhhab would only occur a generation after him, at the hands of Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya and Shihab al-Din al-Ramli. It would be their students, in turn, who would systematically set out their tarjihat. These students were Khatib, Ibn Hajar and the younger Ramli.
The tarjihat of these three personalities by and large reflect the positions of Shaykh al-Islam and the elder Ramli. Thus even when they differ amongst themselves, the circle within which they exist is a clearly defined one. Consider the following quotation from Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi book al-Fawa’id al-Madaniyyah:
الشيخ ابن حجر يوافق شيخ الإسلام في أكثر المسائل، والرملي يوافق والده في أكثر المسائل. بل جُلُّ مخالفته للتحفة يوافق فيها والده. والخطيب الشربيني لا يكاد يخرج عن كلام شيخيه شيخ الإسلام والشهاب الرملي، لكن موافقته للشهاب الرملي أكثر من موافقته لشيخ الإسلام.
ولما سئل العلامة السيد عمر البصري عن المغني للخطيب والتحفة لابن حجر والنهاية للجمال الرملي، يعني في توافُق عباراتها: هل ذلك من وضع الحافر على الحافر أو من استمداد بعضهم من بعض، أجاب السيد عمر رحمه الله تعالى بقوله: شرح الخطيب الشربيني مجموع من خلاصة شروح المنهاج مع توشيحه بفوائد من تصانيف شيخ الإسلام زكريا. وهو متقدم على التحفة، وصاحبه في رتبة مشايخ شيخ الإسلام ابن حجر لأنه أقدم منه طبقةً… ثم قال السيد عمر: وأما شرح شيخنا الرملي فالذي يظهر لهذا الفقير من سبره أنه في الربع الأول يماشي الخطيب الشربيني ويوشِّح من التحفة ومن فوائد والده وغير ذلك، وفي الثلاثة الأرباع يماشي التحفة ويوشِّح من غيرها. انتهى ما أردت نقله من فتاوى السيد عمر البصري.
Our reasons for prescribing Mughni over the other commentaries are two. Initially Mughni was much more easily accessible due to its size and popularity with publishers. Tuhfah and Nihayah generally came with hawashi which inflates the size of the book. More importantly, however, Khatib’s literary style makes him much more suitable for a student beginning to study fiqh at a higher level. This partcular advantage of Khatib’s works was noticed early on by scholars of the madhhab. Kurdi states:
وقد رزق الخطيب رحمه الله في كتبه الحلاوة في التعبير في إيضاح العبارة كما هو مشاهَد محسوس في كلامه. ولله در العلامة محمد صالح المنتفقي العماني البصري حيث يقول في مدح إقناع الشربيني:
يا وحشة الغـمِّ الذي قد ذُقـتُه من جور ذا الزمن المكشر بيني
يا حدة الفهم اكْمُلي وتزايَـدِي يا نعمة العلم المبشَّر بيني
قد فزت بالإقناع بل سمَّيْتـُه الـ إشباعَ شرح العالم الشربيني
Since Khatib’s tarjihat will almost invariably coincide with those of Ibn Hajar and Ramli, there is no real weakness to speak of in this regard. Weakness, if any, would pertain not to representation of the madhhab, but in the citation of ahadith. Unlike Nawawi, later authors in the madhhab, even those renowned as muhaddithin, tend not to apply the same stringent conditions in citing ahadith.
The ishkalat which Khatib routinely raises against the Minhaj are useful in that in trains the student in the critical assessment of a matn’s representation of the madhhab. The other two commentaries do it as well, just not as routinely and systematically as Khatib does.
It would be useful if the teacher kept a copy of Qaradaghi’s al-Manhal al-Naddakh fi Ikhtilaf al-Ashyakh by his side while teaching Mughni. This book lists instances of difference between Ibn Hajar, Ramli and Khatib.
Recent Comments