A scholar of the time...

A scholar of the time, Abdur Rahman Ibn Mehdi, wrote to Shafei and asked him to write a booklet that could help him understand Quran, ascertain truthfulness of traditions, and find out what is current and what is obsolete in Quran and Sunna. Now if we stop here and think about the reason for writing of this collection, it becomes clear that it was not written to understand the Doctrines of Fiqh.

Rather the requestor needed some explanations for understanding Quran and Traditions and some of the terminology used therein. This collection has primarily satisfied this demand. A submission to those who insist that Al-Risala is a treatise on the subject of “Doctrines of Fiqh” and is the first work on this subject, first of all the under discussion treasure does not have a feel of a book. That is either the author did not fully focus on the subject or he did not have full command on the topic.

However, it is not proper to make such comments about an intellectual like Shafei. Anyway the writing we have in front of us can be more appropriately labeled as a very long letter. Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, while quoting Hafiz Ibn Abdul Ber, has written the same thing. It goes like this: Ali Ibn Madini says, “I asked Muhammad Ibn Idris Shafei to respond to Abdur Rahman Ibn Mahdi’s letter as he was anxiously waiting for a reply”.

Shafei did the needful and here it is, Al-Risala.[^2] In addition, another fact that cannot be ignored is that this writing that is being portrayed as a book was not actually written by Shafei. Rather it is a collection of his dictations. Ahmad Muhammad Shakir writes: It appears to be more likely that Shafei was speaking and Rabii Ibn Suleman was writing.

The proof lies in sentence number 337 that quotes the scribe, Rabii Ibn Suleman, “When he would recite an aya from Quran, he would leave it incomplete for brevity”.[^3] Then in several instances “Shafei said” is written. It further supports the argument that the concentration, seriousness, creativity and diligence required of a scholar for writing on such a subject are missing. So it does not appear to be a unique contribution by the learned scholar.

He does not draw any boundaries around his thoughts and does not adopt a style appropriate for conveying true understanding of the subject. The result is that at every step it appears that either he is solving a puzzle in the Commentary (Tafseer) or trying to get to the bottom of a tradition to extract some idea.