Bu makale son birkaç yüzyıldan günümüze kadar gizli kaldığı tespit edilen bir tefsire dikkatleri çekerek eseri ve müfessirini tanıtmayı hedeflemektedir. Döneminin meşhur dil ve kıraat âlimi olan Ebû Nasr Ahmed b. Muhammed b. Hamdân el-Haddâdî (ö. 400/1010’dan sonra) tefsire giriş mahiyetinde yazdığı el-Medḫal li ‛ilmi Kitâbillâhi Teâlâ adlı eserinde tefsirinden övgüyle söz etmiş ve esere el-Muvaḍḍiḥ li ‛ilmi’lḲur’ân adını verdiğini belirtilmiştir. Bugün yayın dünyasında el-Muvaḍḍiḥ fi’t-tefsîr adıyla basılmış bir eser büyük bir hata sonucu olarak Haddâdî’ye nispet edilmekte, bu kitap üzerinden müfessirin tefsir metoduna yönelik çalışmalar yapılmaktadır. Sözü edilen çalışmanın Haddâdî’ye ait olmadığı yolunda Arap dünyasında bazı tartışmalar başlatılmış; ancak bir sonuca bağlanmamıştır. Makalede kayıp tefsir hakkında yayınlanmış bu haberler de değerlendirilecektir. Gerçekte tefsir, ülkemizde ve Kastamonu Yazma Eser Kütüphanesi’nde biri eksik, diğeri tam olmak üzere iki nüsha halinde bulunmaktadır. Rivayet tefsirlerinin genel özelliklerini taşıyan bu muhtasar tefsir, alanına katkı sağlamak üzere tarafımızdan yayına hazırlanmaktadır.

 This article aims to put forth the exegete’s method of exegesis on the basis of al-Muwaḍḍiḥ lī ‛ilm al-Qur’ān which is a brief commentary written by Abū Naṣr Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Ḥamdān al-Ḥaddādī (d. 400/ after 1010). Al-Ḥaddādī, who is a scholar of qirāʿah, tafsīr and Arabic philology, authored significant works in qirāʿah and tafsīr. Al-Ḥaddādī, who was known as sheikh al-qurrā in his period, departed from Ḥaddāda, his place of birth, and migrated to Samarkand which was esteemed as a center of Islamic sciences under the governance of Karakhanids; and he stayed there for a long time. He gained knowledge from the scholars of his period on qirāʿah, tafsīr, Arabic language and hadith. However, he came to the fore in the science of qirāʼat. He was the sheikh of the reciters in Samarkand. He went to Baghdad, Basra and Nishapur for his education and took lessons from scholars such as Abdullah b. Ḥasan al-Naḥḥās (d. 368/979), Abū al-Qāsim al-Ḍarīr (d. 401/1012), Abū Saʿīd al-Sīrāfī (d. 368/979), Abū ‘Amr al-Azdī (d. 345/956) and Abu Bakr b. Mihrān (d. 381/992). The sources mention about three works of the author. Two of them are commentaries and the other one is about qirāʼat. The works al-Muwaḍḍiḥ lī ‛ilm al-Qur’ān, as an exegesis, and alMadkhal lī ‛ilm tafsīr Kitāb Allāh Taʿālā, as an introduction to exegesis, were published in Damascus in 1988. The author’s book titled Kitāb al-ghunya fī al-qirāʿāt have not survived to the present day. Although al-Muwaḍḍiḥ lī ‛ilm al-Qur’ān, which was also investigated by al-Dāwūdī, is related to al-Ḥaddādī, it does not belong to him. In fact, it is thought that this book belongs to a person who wrote the poems al-Ḥaddādī included in his commentary. Unfortunately, this mistake, which was initiated by al-Dāwūdī, has continued; and al-Ḥaddādī’s tafsīr method has been studied based on this book. The original of the work is registered in the Kastamonu Manuscript Library in two different names and copies under the name al-Itqān fī maʿānī al-Qur’ān and Tafsīr. The copy recorded with the name of Tafsīr is until the end of the Surah al-Anʿām and is in one volume. The other copy is a complete musḥāf exegesis from Surah al-Fātiḥa to al-Nās. The fact that the two copies have been maintained in Turkey suggests the possibility that it was read in Ottoman madrasas. In our opinion, this is a sufficient reason to reveal and reprint the work. In addition, the fact that the work was translated into Persian by order of Sultan Ibrahīm Ghaznavid (d. 492/1099) emphasizes its reputation and supports the idea of being used today. The century that al-Ḥaddādī lived was a quite early period in terms of tafsīr science. This situation makes his commentary important in terms of showing the characteristics of the tafsīr activities of the period. Al-Muwaḍḍiḥ is a concise commentary and has the general characteristics of commentaries which are described as tafsīr al-riwāyah. The exegete included other relevant and explanatory verses while commenting on the verses. He used the hadiths of the Prophet (saw), the words of the Companions and Successors among the exegesis sources. He applied istishhād with poetry in many places. From time to time, he dealt with the subjects of ‘ulūm al-Qur’ān such as asbab alnuzūl and naskh. He included information about the recitation and linguistic analyzes in the commentary, and generally avoided the narrations of the Isrāiliyyāt type. While starting the commentary of a ṣūrah, he dealt with the name of the ṣūrah, its being Makkī or Madanī, and the number of verses in the chapter. He paid attention to establishing a link between successive chapters. At some places, he was content with a literal translation and did not show in the text the verse for which he did not need interpretation. His exegesis is similar to Tanwīr al-miqbās min tafsīr Ibn ʿAbbās in which the narrations of Ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/687-88) were collected. One of the stylistic features of al-Ḥaddādī is that he establishes a link between the end of a ṣūrah and the ṣūrah that begins after it, and draws attention to the coherence in the Musḥāf order. In the article, it was aimed to show the method of the exegete on a full chapter by translating the Ṣūrah al-Nabaʾ. Our next thing to do on the work will be to prepare and publish the text in Arabic with a partial investigation.