I researched a master’s thesis in the Department of Arabic Language / College of Education for Human Sciences, University of Basra - (Explanation of the Mournings of Souls by Al-Aini d. 855 AH and Ibn Kamal Pasha d. 940 AH, a balancing study)
By the student (Asmaa Jumaa Salman Hassan), the thesis dealt with explaining the value of these two commentaries and the merit of their authors in the science of morphology, which scholars neglected to mention, as they were not known and their scientific efforts and effects were not known. Since there were few studies on these two personalities, I wanted this study to be a new mission. The nature of the material that was available to me required that the research be based on an introduction, three chapters, and a conclusion. As for the introduction: I mentioned in it a brief translation of Ibn Masoud and his book Al-Marah, Al-Aini and his explanation (Mallah Al-Lawah fi Sharh Marah Al-Marah), Ibn Kamal Pasha and his explanation (Al-Falah Sharh Al-Marah) and Mufhum. Budget. In the first chapter, I dealt with: the general approach of the commentators, and it was in two sections: the first section I talked about Al-Aini’s approach, and the second section about the approach of Ibn Kamal Pasha, with a comparison between the two commentators’ approaches at the end of the chapter. In the second chapter, I studied: the doctrine of the two commentators, their opinions, and their responses to the work. The third chapter is devoted to the morphological evidence of the two commentators and the methods of employing them. Then I followed that with a conclusion: I mentioned the most important results that I reached in this research.
The letter concluded, as Ibn Kamal Pasha declared belonging to the Basra school, while Al-Aini did not declare that. Yes, there is a preponderance of the Basrians over the Kufans in most of the opinions and responses that he referred to, and this does not mean that the commentator is a Basraist, as he may extend Basra or Kufic opinions without Expressing a position on it, but following the evidence in favor of an opinion or rejecting it.
