An explanation of the most important books of tafsir, and the difference between "Tafsir Ibn Jarir" and "Tafsir Ibn Kathir."

The Shaykh : As for books of tafsir, I believe that the field of tafsir books actually needs a new service. This is because the books we recommend reading and circulating are merely basic references for the authors in this noble science, the science of interpreting the Noble Qur'an. The best book in this field is "Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari," followed by "Tafsir Ibn Kathir al-Dimashqi," with a significant difference between them in two respects:
The first respect is that "Ibn Jarir al-Tabari" composed his book following the method of the hadith scholars who narrate every report with a connected chain of transmission back to its source, whether the source is the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), a Companion, a Successor, or someone of a lower rank. They narrate all these reports, and he narrates these reports with a connected chain from him to the source. However, this method is only beneficial to the people of knowledge. In fact, I say this frankly: it is only some of the people of knowledge who possess knowledge of all the sciences, and especially the science of hadith in terms of terminology, critique, and vindication, who benefit from "Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari." This is because they are able to study these reports in light of the science of hadith. Otherwise, we find that many later scholars transmit hadiths that Ibn Jarir mentioned in his "Tafsir" with their chains, but they delete the chain and restrict themselves to mentioning only the text. In that case, the responsibility falls upon the one who transmitted the hadith and deleted the chain, whereas the responsibility is absent from "Ibn Jarir" because he mentioned the chain along with the text. It is as if he is saying—and this is a known matter among hadith scholars—that if a hadith scholar presents a hadith with its chain, his conscience is cleared and his responsibility regarding this hadith is lifted, even if it is weak, denounced, or fabricated. So when some later scholars delete the chain and present only the text, it means that they have cut off the means for the reader to be able to know the chain of this hadith, if he is a person of knowledge. This is Ibn Jarir's method in his "Tafsir."
As for "Ibn Kathir," he followed the path of the hadith scholars by deleting the chains for the sake of brevity, and this is more suitable for the general public. However, in most cases—and I do not say in all cases—when he deletes the chain, he mentions a summary of the chain regarding its authenticity, weakness, or fabrication. Although he sometimes, also, to lift the responsibility from himself, presents the chain that "Ibn Jarir" or "Ibn Abi Hatim" or others who used to narrate the transmitted tafsir with chains had presented. Then "Ibn Kathir" distinguishes himself from "Ibn Jarir" with another feature, which is that he looked into the tafsirs composed by those who came after "Ibn Jarir." So he takes from all these tafsirs what is closest to the truth, closest to the Arabic language, and closest to his comprehensive knowledge of the biography of the Messenger (peace be upon him) and his Sunnah. Therefore, by this consideration and looking at these two characteristics, "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (may Allah have mercy on him) is more beneficial for the general public than "Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari." But the matter is as I said: each of these two tafsirs needs a new composition that combines the benefits of both, in a style that the people of the present era can understand, based on the fact that we were commanded to speak to people according to the capacity of their minds.
"Tafsir Ibn Kathir" has been abridged, as far as I know, into two abridgments, but this abridgment is not suitable for the general public. It needs a new composition and writing in a phrase that corresponds to the style of composition and writing in the present era.
And this is sufficient, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds.