4.4 - The Difference in the Name of the Authorized King

We mentioned that there is disagreement between some copies about the name of the Ayyubid king for whom the Leave was written. Some manuscripts indicate that Sheikh Muhyiddin wrote it to the Just King, al-Malik al-ʿAādil, Abu Baker ibn Ayoub, who died in 615 AH, while most of them refer to his son Shihab al-Din Ghazi, who died in 645 AH, according to most sources, but some historians determine his death in 642 AH, and some says he died in 639 AH, and that he left three male children. This seems to be more accurate, but the problem is that Sheikh Muhyiddin did not mention any meeting with King Shihab al-Din Ghazi, the king of Meyafariqîn, who is other than King Ghazi ibn Salah al-Din, who died in 613 AH, and who met the Sheikh in Aleppo and had a great respect to him, as mentioned in the Meccan Revelations (III.472). In the Meccan Revelations also (IV.225), the Sheikh mentioned some of his encounters with the Just King, the father of King Shihab al-Din Ghazi, but this Leave could not have been written for him because he died in 615 AH, before writing the Leave clearly dated in Damascus in 632 AH, in which many books were written after this king died.

However, all these problems can easily be resolved if we know that the Sheikh undoubtedly knew King Shihab al-Din before he took over the kingdom, after the death of his father, especially since he mentions in the fourth volume of the Meccan Revelations, on the same page mentioned above, that he was present with the Just King, Abu Bakr ibn Ayoub, in Meyafariqîn, and he saw him joking with his children and playing with them to make them laugh, and he said that he considered this as one of his virtues, which made him glorified in his eye, and he thanked him for that. This means that Sheikh Muhyiddin knew King Shihab al-Din Ghazi before he took over and became the king, when the sheikh was in Damascus at that time, so he could not meet him because of the many wars that were raging between the Ayyubid. Therefore, this king wrote to Sheikh Muhyiddin asking him to authorize him by correspondence, which is the meaning of the "instidʿâʾ" mentioned by the Sheikh in this Leave, and this does not mean summoning to attend or meet, as iy might be understood.

King Shihab al-Din Ghazi took over Meyafariqîn in 617 AH, and the Sheikh was then in Aleppo, but then he settled in Damascus after 620 AH, which was ruled by King al-Ashraf Musa, son of the Just King Seif al-Din Ahmed. Sheikh Muhyiddin did not mention any meeting with him during his tenure in Damascus, until this king died in 635 AH. Moreover, the Leave states that the Sheikh wrote it to the king and his children, while King Musa did not have any male children. Therefore, it cannot be correct what the late Professor Michel Chodkiewicz said in the Journal of Islamic Studies, issue 76 of 1992 that "the king to whom the Leave was written in reality to King al-Ashraf Musa, son of the Just King Seif al-Din Ahmed, because he was in Damascus, and he loved the scholars and the righteous."

In fact, all this disagreement will be easily resolved if we examine closely what Sheikh Muhyiddin said in his introduction: "In his call (instidʿâʾ), he had asked me to mention what I could remember of the names of my sheikhs and some of my narrations and the titles of my works. Hence, I have answered his call ...". This means that the honorable king, Shihab al-Din Ghazi, "called" upon him to write this Leave, by correspondence, because he was undoubtedly knew him while he was in Aleppo or Meyafariqîn, which were under his father's the Just King, and when he took over and could not meet Sheikh Muhyiddin, he called upon him to write by correspondence. It is well known that this distinguished king was one of the most pious scholars, who loved the people of Allah, and he was the first to celebrate the Prophet's birthday, as quoted by Ibn Kathir and others. The "calling" here does not mean to summon, but a request to send the Leave.

The meaning of "Leave: ijazah" is derived from "tajawwuj", i.e. one is passing his narrations to the authorized person. In the terminology: the sheikh may pass on permission to the seeker to narrate after him and to assign to his account. This is usually done by uttering a statement that include the word "ijazah: Leave" or some of its derivations. Therefore, the Sheikh confirmed that by saying: "and I have uttered this Leave when I was writing these lines at the beginning of Muharram in 632 (AH) in the protected Damascus," which confirms that this was in correspondence, because he did not use the style of direct speech, and did not say "I authorize you". The Leave is originally the oral permission of the sheikh to the seeker to narrate some of his books, which he have written or received from sheikhs by reading, hearing, letting or otherwise. Writing the Leave is only for confirmation and documentation. Since this Leave was not an actual meeting between the two parties, the Sheikh confirmed that he had uttered the statement, and he therefore used the third pronoun, also when he prayed to the king and said, "may Allah benefit us and him with knowledge, and make us and him amongst those people". And Allah knows best.

Moreover, what confirms that this Leave was not given directly between him and the king is that the Sheikh passed it on to this king and his children and "to those who have realized my Leave", "on the condition considered amongst the people of this matter", namely honesty and sincerity in transferring and narrating. For this reason, Sheikh Muhammad ibn Caesar says in his commentary, as stated in the Dhahiriya copy 4679: "We have accepted his Leave, for he said at the beginning of the book that he authorized all those who realized his Leave." Hence, we also say that we have accepted this Leave, and we ask Almighty Allah to make us worthy of holding it.