Allah Speaks in Letters and Sounds
Opinions on the nature of Allah’s divine speech differ significantly among the various theological groups.[1] Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama’ah affirm that Allah speaks in letters and sounds whenever He wills, without delving into the specifics of how this occurs.[2] This belief is based on the clear and apparent meanings of the Qur’an and Sunnah.[3] They maintain that Allah’s spoken words are uncreated despite not being eternal,[4] as anything that directly emanates from Allah’s uncreated essence is also uncreated.[5] This understanding aligns with the words of the Prophet (peace be upon him):
أعوذ بكلمات الله التامات من شر ما خلق
I seek refuge in the perfect words of Allah from the evil of what He created. (Saheeh Muslim, Book 035, Number 6542)
Islam prohibits the unconditional[6] seeking of refuge in creation, as illustrated in the hadith, since protection from all forms of created evil is a capability unique to Allah alone.[7] It is universally acknowledged that “words” inherently consist of letters—an uncontroversial and widely accepted understanding.
The Jahmiyyah and Mu’tazilites famously contended that Allah’s Speech is created. In contrast, the Ash‘aris and Maturidis attempted what they perceived as a middle path by affirming that Allah’s Divine Speech is uncreated yet denying that it consists of letters and sounds. Instead, they asserted that Allah’s Speech is Kalam Nafsi—an internal, eternal attribute of meaning within His Self.
The famous grammarian, Ibn Ajrum (723 A.H.), defines speech as:
الكَلَامُ: هُوَ اللَّفْظُ، المُرَكَّبُ، المُفِيدُ بِالوَضْعِ. وَأَقْسَامُهُ ثَلَاثَةٌ: اسْمٌ، وَفِعْلٌ، وَحَرْفٌ جَاءَ لِمَعْنًى
“Speech (al-Kalam) is defined as an utterance that is structured and conveys meaning according to linguistic convention. It is divided into three categories: noun (ism), verb (fi‘l), and letter (ḥarf) that conveys meaning.”
This is not to deny that there is a notion of inner speech (e.g., 12:77). However, in such cases, there is always an indicator (qarinah) within the immediate or broader context that clarifies the speech is internal. Absent such an indicator, the default understanding of speech is its conventional sense: audible and composed of letters.
The Prophet (peace be upon him) clearly distinguished between the two kinds of speeches, when he said:
إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَعَالَى تَجَاوَزَ عَنْ أُمَّتِي كُلَّ شَىْءٍ حَدَّثَتْ بِهِ أَنْفُسَهَا مَا لَمْ تَكَلَّمْ بِهِ أَوْ تَعْمَلْ
Indeed, Allah the Exalted has overlooked for my community everything their souls speak to them,[8] as long as they do not speak it aloud or act upon it. [Sunan Al-Nasa’i]
The Kalam Nafsi Doctrine (KND) and the Violation of Consensus:
A significant challenge proponents of Kalam Nafsi Doctrine (KND) face is its clear historical association with Ibn Kullab. This stands in contrast to the positions of Imam Ahmad and the Mu‘tazilites, who, despite their theological disagreements, both acknowledged—at the time of their disputes—that speech inherently consists of letters and sounds, long before the emergence of KND as a formal doctrine.
Al-Sijizzi (444 A.H.) said in his Risala:
اعلموا، أرشدنا الله وإياكم، أنه لم يكن خلاف بين الخلق على اختلاف نحلهم، من أول الزمان إلى الوقت الذي ظهر فيه ابن كلاب، والقلانسي، والأشعري، وأقرانهم… من أن الكلام لا يكون إلا حرفا وصوت
“Know, may Allah guide us and you, that there was no disagreement among people of varying beliefs, from the beginning of time until the emergence of Ibn Kullab, Al-Qalanisi, Al-Ash’ari, and their peers…that speech exists only as letters and sounds.”
He also said:
رَكِبوا مُكابَرَةَ العِيانِ ,وخَرَقوا الإِجماعَ المُنْعَقِدَ بين الكافَّة: المُسْلم والكافِر«(١٨) بلْ»ألجَأهم الضِّيقُ مِمَّا دخَلَ عليهم في مقالَتهم إلى أنْ قالوا: الأخرَسُ متكَلِّمٌ، وكذلك السَّاكتُ والنائمُ، ولهم في حال الخَرَس والسُّكوت والنَّوم كلامٌ هم متكلِّمونَ به، ثمَّ أفصَحوا بأنَّ الخرَسَ والسُّكوتَ والآفات المانعة من النّطق لَيْسَتْ بأضْداد الكلام
“They have adopted an obstinate denial of the obvious and have violated the unanimous consensus held by all, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. Indeed, they were driven by the difficulties arising from their own claims to the point where they said that a mute person is a speaker, as are the silent and the sleeping. According to them, in the state of muteness, silence, and sleep, there is speech by which they are speaking. Then, they further claimed that muteness, silence, and afflictions preventing speech are not opposites of speech.”[9]
He continued:
وهذه مقالةٌ تُبَيِّنُ فضيحةَ قائلها في ظاهِرها من غير رَدٍّ عليه، ومَن عُلِمَ منه خَرْقُ إجماع الكافّة، ومخالفَةُ كلّ عَقْليّ وسَمْعيّ قبلَه لم يُناظَرْ، بل يُجانَبُ وَيُقْمَعُ
“This is a statement whose absurdity is evident on its surface without the need for refutation. Anyone known to have broken the consensus of all and opposed every rationale and transmitted source before them is not to be debated, but rather avoided and subdued.”
Ibnul Jawzi (597 A.H.), who was critical of Ahlus Sunnah, said in Sayd Al-Khatir:
وقد علم كل ذي عقل أن القائل: ﴿إِنْ هَذَا إِلَّا قَوْلُ الْبَشَرِ﴾ [المدثر: ٢٥]: إنما أشار إلى ما سمعه، ولا يختلف أولو الألباب وأهل الفهم للخطاب أن قوله: ﴿وَإِنَّهُ﴾ كناية عن القرآن، وقوله: ﴿نَزَلَ بِهِ﴾: كناية أيضًا عنه، وقوله: ﴿وَهَذَا كِتَابٌ﴾: إشارة إلى حاضر، وهذا أمر مستقيم، لم يختلف فيه أحد من القدماء في زمن الرسول ﷺ والصحابة رضوان الله عليهم. ثم دس الشيطان دسائس البدع، فقال قوم: هذا المشار إليه مخلوق! فثبت الإمام أحمد ثبوتًا لم يثبته غيره على دفع هذا القول، لئلا يتطرق إلى القرآن ما يمحو بعض تعظيمه في النفوس، ويخرجه عن الإضافة إلى الله، ورأى أن ابتداع ما لم يقل فيه لا يجوز استعماله، فقال: كيف أقول ما لم يقل؟! ثم لم يختلف الناس في غير ذلك إلى أن نشأ علي بن إسماعيل الأشعري، فقال مرة بقول المعتزلة، ثم عنَّ له٢، فادعى أن الكلام صفة قائمة بالنفس٣! فأوجبت دعواه هذه أن ما عندنا مخلوق
“It is known to every person of reason that the one who said, “This is nothing but the word of a human” [Al-Muddathir: 25] was only referring to what he had heard. Those of discernment and understanding in communication agree that “Indeed, it” refers to the Qur’an, “brought down by him” is also a reference to it, and “this is a Book” points to something present. This is a clear and straightforward matter on which none of the early generations in the time of the Messenger ﷺ and his companions, may Allah be pleased with them, disagreed.
Then Satan introduced the seeds of innovation, leading some to claim that this very thing being referred to is created. Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, took a firm stance against this assertion, more resolute than anyone else, to prevent anything that might diminish the reverence of the Qur’an in people’s hearts or detach it from being attributed to Allah Almighty. He considered it impermissible to adopt innovations that had no precedent, saying, “How can I say something that has not been said?
Thereafter, people remained in agreement until the emergence of Ali ibn Isma’il al-Ash’ari, who initially adopted the position of the Mu’tazilites but later changed his view, asserting that speech is an attribute existing within the self. This claim of his necessitated that what we possess is created.”
Ibn Qudamah (620 A.H.) said in Al-Munadhara fil Qur’an:
وَلم تزل هَذِه الْأَخْبَار وَهَذِه اللَّفْظَة متداولة منقولة بَين النَّاس لَا ينكرها مُنكر وَلَا يخْتَلف فِيهَا أحد إِلَى ان جَاءَ الْأَشْعَرِيّ فأنكرها وَخَالف الْخلق كلهم مسلمهم وكافرهم... وَمن الْعجب أَن إمَامهمْ الَّذِي أنشأ هَذِه الْبِدْعَة رجل لم يعرف بدين وَلَا ورع وَلَا شَيْء من عُلُوم الشَّرِيعَة الْبَتَّةَ وَلَا ينْسب إِلَيْهِ من الْعلم إِلَّا علم الْكَلَام المذموم وهم يعترفون بِأَنَّهُ أَقَامَ على الاعتزال أَرْبَعِينَ عَاما ثمَّ أظهر الرُّجُوع عَنهُ فَلم يظْهر مِنْهُ بعد التَّوْبَة سوى هَذِه الْبِدْعَة فَكيف تصور فِي عُقُولهمْ أَن الله لَا يوفق لمعْرِفَة الْحق إِلَّا عدوه وَلَا يَجْعَل الْهدى إِلَّا مَعَ من لَيْسَ لَهُ فِي علم الاسلام نصيب وَلَا فِي الدّين حَظّ ثمَّ إِن هَذِه الْبِدْعَة مَعَ ظُهُور فَسَادهَا وَزِيَادَة قبحها قد انتشرت انتشارا كثيرا وَظَهَرت ظهورا عَظِيما وأظنها آخر الْبدع وأخبثها وَعَلَيْهَا تقوم السَّاعَة وَأَنَّهَا لَا تزداد إِلَّا كَثْرَة وانتشارا
“These reports and expressions were continually circulated and transmitted among people without any objection or dispute until Al-Ash’ari came and rejected them, opposing all of humanity, both Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
It is astonishing that the founder of this innovation was a man not known for piety, devoutness, or any knowledge of the Sharia sciences whatsoever, with his only area of expertise being the condemned discipline of Kalam. Even his followers acknowledge that he adhered to the Mu’tazilite creed for forty years before publicly renouncing it, yet after his repentance, he introduced nothing but this very innovation. How, then, could they imagine that Allah would guide to the truth only through His adversary or that He would place guidance in the hands of one who possesses no knowledge or share in the sciences of Islam?
Moreover, despite this innovation’s evident corruption and increased repulsiveness, it has spread widely and prominently. I believe it to be the final and most malicious of innovations, upon which the end of times will occur, and it will only continue to grow and proliferate…”
Ibn Taymiyyah (728 A.H.) said in Al-Tis’eeniyyah:
وهو أن الأمة إذا اختلفت في مسألة على قولين: لم يكن لمن بعدهم إحداث قول ثالث، فإذا لم يكن في صدر الأمة إلّا قول السلف وقول المعتزلة، تعين أن يكون الحق في أحد القولين، ومن المعلوم بالشرع والعقل أن قول المعتزلة باطل للوجوه الكثيرة منها :أن من تأمل كلام أهل الإجماع، وما نقل عن الأنبياء بالتواتر، علم بالاضطرار أنهم [إذا] وصفوا الله بالكلام وصفوه بأنه هو يتكلم، لا أن الكلام يكون مخلوقًا له كالسماء والأرض وما فيهما، كما يقولون: كلام الله مثل أسماء الله، ويعلم باضطرار أن إضافة القول والكلام إلى الله ليس كإضافة الخلق إليه، وأن باب «قال» عند الأنبياء والمؤمنين غير باب «خلق»، وبطلان قول المعتزلة له موضع غير هذا، وإذا كان باطلًا، وقولهم -أيضًا- باطل، تعين صحة مذهب السلف يؤكد هذا. وهو أن السلف والمعتزلة جميعًا اتفقوا على أن كلام الله ليس هو مجرد هذا المعنى الَّذي تثبتونه أنتم، بل الَّذي سمته المعتزلة كلام الله وقالوا: إنه مخلوق، وافقهم السلف على أنَّه كلام الله، لكن قالوا: إنه غير مخلوق، وأنتم تقولون: إنه ليس بكلام الله، فكان قولك خرقًا لإجماع السلف والمعتزلة، وذلك خرق لإجماع الأمة جميعها، إذ لم يكن في عصر السلف إلّا هذان القائلان، ولم يكن في ذلك الزمان من يقول: إن القرآن الَّذي قالت المعتزلة: إنه مخلوق ليس هو كلام الله
“The principle here is that if the Ummah is divided over a matter with two established opinions, those who come later are not permitted to introduce a third view. Thus, if, during the earliest generations, the only positions were those of the Salaf and the Mu’tazilites, it necessarily follows that the truth must lie in one of these two views. It is known both by Islamic law and reason that the Mu’tazilite position is invalid for numerous reasons, including the following:
Anyone who reflects on the statements of those backed by consensus and on the teachings relayed from the prophets with undeniable transmission will know necessarily that when they described Allah’s speech, they described it as Allah Himself speaking, not as speech being a creation of His, like the heavens, earth, or all that is within them. As they say, “Allah’s speech is like Allah’s names,” and it is known necessarily that attributing speech and words to Allah differs from attributing created things to Him. Among prophets and believers, the concept of “He said” is distinct from “He created.” The invalidity of the Mu’tazilite view is demonstrated in contexts beyond this, and if their view is indeed invalid—as it is—and their statement also invalid, it confirms the correctness of the Salaf’s position.
Furthermore, both the Salaf and the Mu’tazilites agreed that Allah’s Speech is not merely the abstract meaning that you claim. Rather, what the Mu’tazilites called Allah’s Speech and considered created was also acknowledged by the Salaf as Allah’s Speech, though they held that it was uncreated. You, however, deny that it is Allah’s Speech, thereby violating the consensus of both the Salaf and the Mu’tazilites. This, in turn, constitutes a violation of the consensus of the entire Ummah, as in the era of the Salaf, there were only these two opinions. At that time, no one claimed that the Qur’an, which the Mu’tazilites labeled as created, was not the Speech of Allah.”
Scholars Who Affirmed Sounds/Letters for Allah:
Below is a collection of statements from classical scholars affirming the position of Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama’ah. Readers are encouraged to examine these statements to better understand the scholars’ arguments and reasoning. Careful readers will also note that some quotes include statements from Ash‘aris—or figures considered Ash‘aris by some—highlighting particular points for consideration.
Ibn Mas’ud (32 A.H.) said:
إذا تكلَّمَ الله بالوحْيِ سَمِعَ صوتَهُ أهلُ السَّماءِ، فَيَخِرِّونَ سُجْدًا ﴿حَتَّى إِذَا فُزِّعَ عَنْ قُلُوبِهِمْ﴾ قال: سُكِّنَ عنْ قُلُوبِهم -نادى أهلُ السَّماءِ: ﴿مَاذَا قَالَ رَبُّكُمْ؟ قَالُوا: الْحَقَّ ...﴾ قال: كَذا وكَذا
When Allah speaks through revelation, the inhabitants of the heavens hear His sound and fall down in prostration. “Until when the fear is lifted from their hearts” [Saba’: 23], it is said, their hearts are calmed. Then the inhabitants of the heavens call out, “What has your Lord said?” They answer, “The truth...” [Saba’: 23], and so on.[10]
Abdullah b. Idris (192 A.H.):
From page 158, narration no. 161, of Mukhtasar Al-Uluww:
قال أبو حاتم الرازي: حدثنا الحسن بن الصباح قال: سئل عبد الله بن إدريس فقيل له: إن قبلنا قومًا يقولون: القرآن مخلوق. قال: من النصاري؟ قيل: لا، قال: فمن اليهود؟ قيل: لا، قال: من المجوس؟ قيل: لا، قال: ممن؟ قيل: من المسلمين. قال: ما هم بمسلمين، ثم قال: بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم، فالله لا يكون مخلوقا، والرحمن لا يكون مخلوقا، والرحيم لا يكون مخلوقا، هؤلاء زنادقة
Abu Haatim Al Raazi – Al Hassan bin Al-Sabbaah said that Abdullah bin Idris asked, and it was said to him, “We met people who said that the Qur’an is created.” He asked, “From the Christians?” They said no. He asked, “From the Jews?” They said no. He asked, “From the Magians?” They said no. He asked, “From who then?” They said from the Muslims. He said, “They are not Muslims.” Then he went on to say, “Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem. Allah is not created; Al-Rahman is not created; and Al-Raheem is not created. These people are heretics.”[11]
Notice how he clearly and unequivocally affirmed that the actual words “Al-Rahman” and “Al-Raheem” are uncreated. He did not state that “Al-Rahman” and “Al-Raheem” are merely expressions or representations of Allah’s eternal Speech.
Abu Ya'qoob Yusuf bin Yahya Al-Buwayti (d. 231 A.H.):
He was the companion of Imam ash-Shafi’i, and Al-Lalaka’ee (418 A.H.) relays in his Sharh ‘Itiqad Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama’ah that he said:
إنما خلق الله كل شيء بكن ، فإن كانت كن مخلوقة فمخلوق خلق مخلوقا
“Allah created everything with “Kun.” If “Kun” were created, then a creation created a creation.”
Imam al-Lalakaa'ee right after comments stating:
وهذا معنى ما يعبرون عنه العلماء اليوم : إن هذا كن الأول كان مخلوقا ، فهو مخلوق بكن أخرى .فهذا يؤدي إلى ما لا يتناهى ، وهو قول مستحيل
“And this is the meaning of what scholars today are expressing: If this first “Kun” were created, then it creates another “Kun” and this would go on ad infinitum, and this is impossible.”
Abu Ja’far Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Nufayl (234 A.H.):
From page 196, narration no. 242, of Mukhtasar Al-Uluww:
قال ابن أبي حاتم: حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ بْنِ مهران: سمعت أبا جعفر عبد الله بن محمد بن نفيل يقول:
من قال: «أن القرآن مخلوق، فهو كافر، فقيل له: يا أبا جعفر، الكفر كفران: كفر نعمة، وكفر بالرب عز وجل؟ قال: لا، بل كفر بالرب، ما تقول فيمن يقول»اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ، اللَّهُ الصمد«مخلوق؟ أليس كافرًا هو؟
Ibn Abi Haatim – Ali bin Al-Hussain bin Mihran – Aba Ja’far Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Nufayl said: “Whoever said that the Qur’an is created is a kafir.” It was said to him, “Kufr is of two types: 1) Kufr Ni’ma 2) Kufr in the Lord All Mighty.” He said, “No, it is kufr in the Lord. What do you say about he who says Allahu Ahad, Allahu Al-Samad is created? Isn’t he a kafir?” (Sheikh Al-Albani comments: Its isnaad is Saheeh.)
Abdullah bin Nufayl explicitly affirms that the actual words “Allahu Ahad” and “Allahu Al-Samad” are uncreated. He does not assert that “Allahu Ahad” and “Allahu Al-Samad” are merely expressions or representations of Allah’s uncreated Speech.
Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal (241 A.H.):
The renowned Dr. Ramadan Al-Buti acknowledged that Imam Ahmad's stance was not in agreement with the Ash‘ari position on Kalam Nafsi. He stated in his Kubra Al-Yaqeeniyyat Al-Kawniyyah (p. 126):
إذا تأملت فيما ذكرناه ، أدركت النقطة الخلافية بين المعتزلة وأهل السنة والجماعة ، وهي : أن هنالك معنى لألفاظ القرآن يتكون منه الأمر والنهي والإخبار المتوجه للناس وهو قديم. فما اسم هذا المعنى ؟ المعتزلة : اسمه العلم إذا كان إخباراً ، والإرادة إن كان أمراً أو نهياً … الجمهور : اسمه الكلام النفسي ، وهو صفة زائدة على كل من العلم والإرادة ، قائمة بذاته تعالى .أما الكلام الذي هو اللفظ ، فاتفقوا على أنه مخلوق وعلى أنه غير قائم بذاته سبحانه ، باستثناء أحمد بن حنبل وبعض أتباعه
“If you reflect on what we have mentioned, you will perceive the key point of contention between the Mu’tazilites and Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah. The issue is whether there is a meaning within the words of the Qur’an that consists of commands, prohibitions, and statements directed at people and which is eternal. What is the name of this meaning?
The Mu’tazilites: They call it “knowledge” if it pertains to statements and “will” if it pertains to commands or prohibitions.
The mainstream view: They call it kalam nafsi (inner speech), which is an attribute distinct from both knowledge and will and exists in the Divine essence.
As for kalam in the form of spoken words, they agree that it is created and does not subsist in His essence, Exalted is He, with the exception Ahmad b. Hanbal and some of his followers.”
Ahmad b. Hanbal’s son, Abdullah (290 A.H.), states in his Sunnah:
سَأَلْتُ أَبِي رحمه الله عَنْ قَوْمٍ، يَقُولُونَ: لَمَّا كَلَّمَ اللَّهُ عليه السلام مُوسَى لَمْ يَتَكَلَّمْ بِصَوْتٍ فَقَالَ أَبِي: «بَلَى إِنَّ رَبَّكَ عز وجل تَكَلَّمَ بِصَوْتٍ هَذِهِ الْأَحَادِيثُ نَرْوِيهَا كَمَا جَاءَتْ»
“I asked my father (may Allah have mercy on him) about a group of people who say that when Allah, Exalted is He, spoke to Musa (Allah’s peace be upon him), He did not speak with a sound. My father replied, "Indeed, your Lord, Exalted is He, spoke with a sound. We transmit these hadiths just as they have been conveyed."”
And Al-Khallal relays in his Sunnah:
وقال حنبل: وسمعت أبا عبد الله قال: وكلم الله موسى تكليما، ثم قال تعالى يؤكد كلامه كرامة منه لموسى، ثم قال تعالى يؤكد كلامه "تكليما" (النساء: ١٦٤) فأثبت الكلام لموسى كرامة منه، وقال عز وجل: يتكلم الله يوم القيامة؟ قال: نعم، فمن يخاصم بين الخلائق إلا الله عز وجل؟ يكلم عبده ويسأله، الله محدث لم يزل يأمر بما يشاء ويحكم، وليس كمثله عدل ولا مثل كيف شاء وأتى شاء
“Hanbal reported: “I heard Abu Abdullah say, ‘And Allah spoke to Musa takleema,’ then he added, ‘Allah confirmed His speech as an honor to Musa,’ and emphasized by saying ‘takleema’ [An-Nisa’: 164]. Thus, He affirmed His speech to Musa as an honor to him.” He also said, “Will Allah speak on the Day of Resurrection?” Abu Abdullah replied, “Yes, for who will judge among the creation except Allah Almighty? He will speak to His servant and question him. Allah is the Creator, eternally commanding and decreeing as He wills, and there is nothing comparable to Him— He acts as He wills and decrees as He wishes.”
Al-Khallal also reports that Imam Ahmad was asked:
أهل الجنة ينظرون إلى ربهم عز وجل ويتكلمون ويكلمهم؟ قال: نعم، ينظرون وينظرون إليه، ويكلمهم ويكلمونه كيف شاء وإذا شاء
“Will the people of Paradise look upon their Lord, Mighty, and Majestic, and will they speak to Him, and He to them?” He replied, “Yes, they will look upon Him and He will look upon them, and He will speak to them, and they will speak to Him, as He wills and whenever He wills.”
In his book Ar-Radd ‘ala Al-Zanadiqa wal-Jahmiyyah,[12] Imam Ahmad said:
قلنا لهم: أنكرتم ذلك؟ فقالوا: إن الله لا يتكلم ولا يكلم! إنما كون شيئا يعبر عن الله خلق صوتا فسمع، وعموا أن الكلام لا يكون إلا من جوف ولسان وشفتين، فقلنا لهم: فهل يكون يكون "بصوت"؟ فقالوا: لا. فقلنا: "إذ قال ربك للملائكة إني خالق بشرا من طين" (ص: 71)، فقالوا: إن الله لا يتكلم بهذا، إن الله لا يتكلم بهذا. قال الإمام أحمد رحمه الله: فمن زعم ذلك فقد زعم أن الله لم يكلم موسى تكليما، وقد قال الله عز وجل: "ولما جاء موسى لميقاتنا وكلمه ربه" (الأعراف: 143)، وقال: "قال ياموسى إني اصطفيتك على الناس برسالاتي وبكلامي" (الأعراف: 144)
“We asked them: ‘Do you deny this?’ They responded, ‘Allah does not speak, nor does He address anyone! Rather, He created something that expresses His will—He created a sound, which was heard.’ They disregarded the fact that speech necessarily involves a vocal tract, tongue, and lips. So, we asked them, ‘Is there any sound?’ They replied, ‘No.’ We said, ‘[Remember] when your Lord said to the angels, “I am creating a human being from clay”’ (Surah Sad, 71). They responded, ‘Allah does not speak in this way. Allah does not speak in this manner.’ Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, then said: ‘Whoever claims this is essentially claiming that Allah did not speak directly to Musa, though Allah, exalted is He, says, “And when Musa came at Our appointed time, and his Lord spoke to him” (Surah Al-A’raf, 143), and [also] “He said, ‘O Musa, I have chosen you over the people with My messages and My words’” (Surah Al-A’raf, 144).”
And:
وقلنا للجهمية: من القائل يوم القيامة: ﴿يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَهَيْنِ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ﴾ [المائدة: ١١٦] .أليس الله هو القائل؟ قالوا: فَيُكوِّن الله شيئًا فيُعَبِّر عن الله، كما كَوَّن شيئًا فعَبَّر لموسى. قلنا: فمن القائل: ﴿فَلَنَسْأَلَنَّ الَّذِينَ أُرْسِلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَنَسْأَلَنَّ الْمُرْسَلِينَ، فَلَنَقُصَّنَّ عَلَيْهِمْ بِعِلْمٍ﴾ [الأعراف: ٦، ٧] .أليس الله هو الذي يسأل؟ قالوا: هذا كله إنما يكون شيئًا، فيعبر عن الله. قلنا: قد أعظمتم على الله الفرية، حين زعمتم أنه لا يتكلم فشبهتموه بالأصنام التي تعبد من دون الله؛ لأن الأصنام لا تتكلم
“We said to the Jahmiyya: Who will be the one who says on the Day of Judgment, “O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah?’” (Qur’an 5:116)? Is it not Allah who says this?
They replied: Allah creates something that expresses on His behalf, just as He created something to speak on His behalf to Musa.
We then asked: Who will be the one who says, “Then We will surely question those to whom [a message] was sent, and We will surely question the messengers. Then We will relate to them with knowledge” (Qur’an 7:6-7)? Is it not Allah who is doing the questioning?
They answered: All of this will be something created that expresses on behalf of Allah.
We replied: You have committed a grave falsehood against Allah when you claim that He does not speak, thus likening Him to idols worshipped besides Allah—since idols do not speak.”
Abdul Wahhab al-Warraq (251 A.H.):
Al-Khallal in his Sunnah relays:
وأنبأنا أبو بكر المروزي: سمعت أبا عبد الله وقيل له: إن عبد الوهاب قد تكلم وقال: من زعم أن الله كلم موسى بلا صوت فهو جهمي عدو الله وعدو الإسلام - فتبسم أبو عبد الله وقال (ما أحسن ما قال! عافاه الله!) .
“Abu Bakr al-Marwazi informed us, saying: I heard Abu Abdullah (Ahmad ibn Hanbal) being told, ‘Abd al-Wahhab has spoken, saying: “Whoever claims that Allah spoke to Musa without a sound is a Jahmi, an enemy of Allah and an enemy of Islam.”’ Abu Abdullah smiled and said, ‘How excellently he has spoken! May Allah grant him well-being!’”
Imam Al-Bukhari (256 A.H.):
Imam al-Bukhari in his Khalq Af'aalul 'Ibaad:
وأما الفعل من المفعول ؛ فالفعل إنما هو إحداث الشيء ، والمفعول هو الحدث ، لقوله : ﴿ خلق السماوات والأرض ﴾ ، فالسموات والأرض مفعوله ، وكل شيء سوى الله بصفاته فهو مفعول ، فتخليق السماوات: فعله ، لأنه لا يمكن أن تقوم سماء بنفسها من غير فعل الفاعل ، وإنما تنسب السماء إليه لحال فعله ، ففعله من ربوبيته حيث يقول : ﴿ كُنْ فَيَكُونُ ﴾ والـ(كن) منه : صفته ، وهو الموصوف به ، لذلك قال : رب السماوات ، ورب الأشياء
As for the act and effect, the act is creating or generating the thing, while the effect is that which is created or generated. Allah says, “He created the heavens and the earth.” The heavens and earth are His effects, and everything, except for Allah with His attributes, are effects. The creation of the heavens is His action, for heaven by itself couldn’t exist without a subject taking action. Moreover, the heaven (the cause of it) is attributed to Him once He’s acted. His Lordly act is when He says, “Kun and it is,” and the “Kun” from Him is His attribute and is described by it. For that reason He said: “The Lord of the Heavens,” “The Lord of all things.”
Notice how he explicitly stated that Kun (Be) is, specifically, a divine attribute. In other instances, he attributes the view that Kun is created to the Jahmiyyah:
اختلف الناس في الفاعل والفعل والمفعول، فقالت القدرية: الأفاعيل كلها من البشر، وقالت الجبرية: الأفاعيل كلها من الله، وقالت الجهمية: الفعل والمفعول واحد، ولذلك قالوا (كن) مخلوق، وقال السلف: التخليق فعل الله وأفاعيلنا مخلوقة ، ففعل الله صفة الله والمفعول من سواه من المخلوقات
“People have differed regarding the subject, the act, and the object of the act. The Qadariyya said all actions are from human beings. The Jabriyya said all actions are from Allah. The Jahmiyya said the act and the object are one and the same; therefore, they claimed that the command “Kun” is itself created. The early generations (Salaf) stated creation is the act of Allah, and our actions are created. Thus, Allah’s act is an attribute of Allah, while the object of the act is anything other than Him among the created beings.”
He also said:
وفي هذا دليل أن صوت الله لا يشبه أصوات الخلق، لأن صوت الله يسمع من بعد كما يسمع من قرب، وأن الملائكة يصعقون من صوته، فإذا نادتهم الملائكة لم يصعقوا، وقال: فَلَا تَجْعَلُوا لِلَّهِ أَندَادًا (البقرة: ٢٢) فليس لصفة الله ند، ولا مثل، ولا يوجد شيء من صفاته في المخلوقين
“This provides evidence that Allah’s sound is unlike the sounds of creation, for Allah’s sound can be heard both from a distance and up close. The angels are struck with awe by His sound, yet when they call each other, they are not overwhelmed. Allah has said: ‘So do not attribute equals to Allah’ (Surah al-Baqarah, 22), for none of Allah’s attributes have an equal, nor a likeness, nor is anything of His attributes found within created beings.”
Ibn Abi Asim (287 A.H.):
In his Sunnah, He has a chapter heading entitled:
باب: ذكر الكلام والصوت والشخص وغير ذلك
“Chapter: On Speech, Sound, Person, and Related Matters”
Therein, he relays ahadith (e.g., Sunan Al-Nasai, Book 7, Hadith 1), demonstrating that Allah speaks with a sound.
Ibn Surayj (306 A.H.) said:
وإثبات الكلام بالحرف والصوت وباللغات، وبالكلمات وبالسور، وكلامه تعالى لجبريل والملائكة، ولملك الأرحام وللرحم، ولملك الموت ولرضوان ولمالك، ولآدم ولموسى ولمحمد ﷺ، وللشهداء وللمؤمنين عند الحساب وفي الجنة، ونزول القرآن إلى سماء الدنيا
“Affirming (that Allah’s) Speech consists of letters, sound, languages, words, and Surahs, and His Speech to Jibreel, the angels, the Angel of the Womb, the womb itself, the Angel of Death, Ridwan (the keeper of Paradise), Malik (the keeper of Hell), Adam, Musa, Muhammad (peace be upon him), the martyrs, and the believers during the reckoning and in Paradise, as well as the descent of the Qur’an to the lowest heaven.”[13]
Imam Al-Tabari (310 A.H.) said in his Sareeh as-Sunnah:
فَأَوَّلُ مَا نَبْدَأُ بِالْقَوْلِ فِيهِ مِنْ ذَلِكَ عِنْدَنَا: الْقُرْآنُ كَلَامُ اللَّهِ وَتَنْزِيلُهُ؛ إِذْ كَانَ مِنْ مَعَانِي تَوْحِيدِهِ، فَالصَّوَابُ مِنَ الْقَوْلِ فِي ذَلِكَ عِنْدَنَا أَنَّهُ: كَلَامُ اللَّهِ غَيْرُ مَخْلُوقٍ كَيْفَ كُتِبَ وَحَيْثُ تُلِيَ وَفِي أَيِّ مَوْضِعٍ قُرِئَ، فِي السَّمَاءِ وُجِدَ، وَفِي الْأَرْضِ حَيْثُ حُفِظَ، فِي اللَّوْحِ الْمَحْفُوظِ كَانَ مَكْتُوبًا، وَفِي أَلْوَاحِ صِبْيَانِ الْكَتَاتِيبِ مَرْسُومًا، فِي حَجَرٍ نُقِشَ، أَوْ فِي وَرِقٍ خُطَّ، أَوْ فِي الْقَلْبِ حُفِظَ، وَبِلِسَانٍ لُفِظَ، فَمَنْ قَالَ غَيْرَ ذَلِكَ أَوِ ادَّعَى أَنَّ قُرْآنًا فِي الْأَرْضِ أَوْ فِي السَّمَاءِ سِوَى الْقُرْآنِ الَّذِي نَتْلُوهُ بِأَلْسِنَتِنَا وَنَكْتُبُهُ فِي مَصَاحِفِنَا، أَوِ اعْتَقَدَ غَيْرَ ذَلِكَ بِقَلْبِهِ، أَوْ أَضْمَرَهُ فِي نَفْسِهِ، أَوْ قَالَهُ بِلِسَانِهِ دَائِنًا بِهِ، فَهُوَ بِاللَّهِ كَافِرٌ، حَلَالُ الدَّمِ، بَرِيءٌ مِنَ اللَّهِ، وَاللَّهُ مِنْهُ بَرِيءٌ، بِقَوْلِ اللَّهِ ﷿: ﴿بَلْ هُوَ قُرْآنٌ مَجِيدٌ فِي لَوْحٍ مَحْفُوظٍ﴾ [البروج: ٢٢]، وَقَالَ وَقَوْلُهُ الْحَقُّ ﷿: ﴿وَإِنْ أَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ اسْتَجَارَكَ فَأَجِرْهُ حَتَّى يَسْمَعَ كَلَامَ اللَّهِ﴾ [التوبة: ٦]
١٣ - فَأَخْبَرَ، جَلَّ ثَنَاؤُهُ، أَنَّهُ فِي اللَّوْحِ الْمَحْفُوظِ مَكْتُوبٌ، وَأَنَّهُ مِنْ لِسَانِ مُحَمَّدٍ ﷺ مَسْمُوعٌ، وَهُوَ قُرْآنٌ وَاحِدٌ مِنْ مُحَمَّدٍ ﷺ مَسْمُوعٌ، فِي اللَّوْحِ الْمَحْفُوظِ مَكْتُوبٌ، وَكَذَلِكَ هُوَ فِي الصُّدُورِ مَحْفُوظٌ، وَبِأَلْسُنِ الشُّيُوخِ وَالشَّبَابِ مَتْلُوٌّ
“The first thing we will say regarding this is that according to us, the Quran is the Speech of Allah and His revelation since it is among the significances of His Oneness. The correct view among the [various] statements about that, according to us, is that the Speech of Allah is not created regardless of how it is written, wherever it is recited, and whichever place it is read; [whether] found in the heaven, or memorized on earth, or written in the Preserved Tablet, drawn on the small writing tablets of children, etched on stone, hand drawn on a sheet of paper, memorized in the heart, or uttered with the tongue. Whoever says something else or claims that there is a Quran on earth or in heaven other than the Quran which we recite with our tongues or that we write in our Mushafs, or a person believes something else in his heart, or he conceals it in himself or says it with his tongue while believing in it, then he is a disbeliever whose blood is permissible; he is free from Allah and Allah is free from him, due to His statement, the Most Mighty and Exalted:
“Rather it is a Glorious Quran in a Preserved Tablet.” [Al-Burooj, 22]
And He, the Most Mighty and Exalted, said, and His words are the Truth:
“And if anyone of the polytheists seek refuge, then grant it until he hears the Speech of Allah.” [At-Tawbah: 6]
So He, may His praise be exalted, informed (us) that it (i.e., the Quran) is written in the Preserved Tablet and that it can be heard from the tongue of Muhammad (may Allah’s praise and peace be upon him)- and that the Quran heard from Muhammad (may Allah’s praise and peace be upon him) and that is written in the Preserved Tablet is one single Quran; likewise it is that which is memorized in the hearts and recited with the the tongues of the young and old.”
He also said in his Qu’ranic commentary:
وَأَمَّا قَوْلُهُ: ﴿وَكَلَّمَ اللَّهُ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا﴾ [النساء: ١٦٤] فَإِنَّهُ يَعْنِي بِذَلِكَ جَلَّ ثَنَاؤُهُ: وَخَاطَبَ اللَّهُ بِكَلَامِهِ مُوسَى خِطَابًا. وَقَدْ: حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ حُمَيْدٍ، قَالَ: ثنا يَحْيَى بْنُ وَاضِحٍ، قَالَ: ثنا نُوحُ بْنُ أَبِي مَرْيَمَ، وَسُئِلَ: «كَيْفَ كَلَّمَ اللَّهُ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا؟ فَقَالَ: مُشَافَهَةً
As for His statement, “And Allah spoke to Musa takleema” (Surah al-Nisa, 164), it means that Allah, exalted be His praise, addressed Musa with His speech directly. It has been narrated to us by Ibn Humayd, who said: Yahya ibn Wadih told us, saying: Nuh ibn Abi Maryam said, and he was asked, “How did Allah speak to Musa takleema?” He replied, “Face-to-face.”
Abul Hasan Al-Ash’ari (324 A.H.) lays out a detailed argument Al-Ibanah, which is worth reading in full:
واعلموا -رحمكم الله - أن قول الجهمية: إن كلام الله مخلوق، يلزمهم به أن يكون الله لم يزل كالأصنام التي لا تنطق ولا تتكلم لو كان لم يزل غير متكلم، لأن الله يخبر عن إبراهيم عليه السلام؛ أنه قال لقومه لما قالوا [له]: ﴿أَأَنْتَ فَعَلْتَ هَذَا بِآلِهَتِنَا يَاإِبْرَاهِيمُ (٦٢) قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَذَا فَاسْأَلُوهُمْ إِنْ كَانُوا يَنْطِقُونَ (٦٣)﴾ فاحتج عليهم بأن الأصنام إذا لم تكن ناطقة متكلمة لم تكن آلهة، وأن الله لا يكون غير ناطق ولا متكلم. فلما كانت الأصنام التي لا يستحيل أن يحييها الله وينطقها لاتكون آلهة، فكيف يجوز أن يكون من يستحيل عليه الكلام في قدمه إلهًا
…
دليل آخر: وقد قال الله تعالى مخبرًا عن نفسه [أنه] يقول: ﴿لِمَنِ الْمُلْكُ الْيَوْمَ﴾ وجاءت الرواية أنه يقول هذا القول فلا يَرُدُ عليه أحد شيئًا فيقول: ﴿لِلَّهِ الْوَاحِدِ الْقَهَّارِ﴾ (٤). فإذا كان عز وجل قائلًا مع فناء الأشياء إذ لا إنسان ولا ملك ولا حي ولا جان ولا حجر [ولا شجر] ولامدر، فقد صح أن كلام الله عز وجل خارج عن الخلق، لأنه يوجد ولا شيء من المخلوقات موجودة
دليل آخر: وقد قال الله عز وجل: ﴿وَكَلَّمَ اللَّهُ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا﴾ والتكليم هو المشافهة بالكلام، ولا يجوز أن يكون كلام المتكلم حالًا في غيره، مخلوقًا في شيء سواه، كما لا يجوز ذلك في العلم
دليل آخر: وقال الله عز وجل: ﴿قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ (١) اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ (٢) لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ (٣) وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ (٤)﴾ فكيف يكون القرآن مخلوقًا واسم الله في القرآن، وهذا يوجب أن تكون أسماء الله مخلوقة، ولو كانت أسماؤه مخلوقة، لكانت وحدانيته مخلوقة، وكذلك علمه، وقدرته، تعالى الله عن ذلك علوًا كبيرًا
...
دليل آخر: وقد قال الله تعالى ﴿شَهِدَ اللَّهُ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ وَالْمَلَائِكَةُ وَأُولُو الْعِلْمِ قَائِمًا بِالْقِسْطِ﴾ ولابد أن يكون شهد بهذه الشهادة وسمعها من نفسه، لأنه إن كان سمعها من مخلوق فليست بشهادة له، وإذا كانت شهادة له وقد شهد بها فلا تخلو أن يكون شهد بها قبل كون المخلوقات، أو بعد كون المخلوقات. فإن كان شهد بها بعد كون المخلوقات، فلم تكن شهادة لنفسه بالإلهية قبل الخلق
...
ويجب عليهم إذا زعموا أن كلام الله لموسى خلقه في شجرة، أن يكون من سمع كلام الله عز وجل من مَلَك أو نبي أتى به من عند الله أفضل مرتبة من سماع الكلام من موسى، لأنهم سمعوه من نبي ولم يسمعه موسى من الله عز وجل، وإنما سمعه من شجرة. وأن يزعموا أن اليهودي إذا سمع كلام الله من نبي عليه السلام أفضل مرتبة في هذا المعنى من موسى بن عمران لأن اليهودي سمعه من نبي من أنبياء الله، وموسى سمعه مخلوقًا في شجرة. [ولو كان مخلوقًا في شجرة] لم يكن مُكَلِّمًا لموسى عليه السلام من وراء حجاب، لأن من حضر الشجرة من الجن والإنس قد سمعوا الكلام من ذلك المكان، وكان سبيل موسى وغيره في ذلك سواء في أنه ليس كلام [الله له] من وراء حجاب
“And know—may Allah have mercy upon you—that the Jahmiyya claim that the Speech of Allah is created. This claim implies that if Allah had always been without Speech, He would be like the lifeless idols that cannot speak. For Allah recounts how Ibrahim, peace be upon him, responded to his people when they asked him: “Did you do this to our gods, O Ibrahim?” He replied, “Rather, the largest one of them did it, so ask them if they can speak.” Ibrahim thus argued against them, showing that if idols cannot speak or articulate, they cannot be Allah's; likewise, Allah must not be without Speech or articulation. So, if lifeless idols—despite the possibility that Allah could grant them life and speech—cannot be considered gods, then how could one regard as God an entity that, from eternity, lacks the capacity for speech?
Another proof: Allah, may He be exalted, informs us that He says, “To whom does dominion belong today?” The report says that He speaks these words, and none responds to Him, so He Himself answers, “To Allah, the One, the Conqueror.” Thus, He speaks while all things are perished: no human, angel, living being, jinn, stone, or tree remains. This establishes that Allah’s Speech is beyond creation, as it exists when none of creation exists.
Another proof: Allah Almighty says, “And Allah spoke directly to Musa.” Direct communication (taklīm) implies face-to-face verbal expression. It is not permissible that the speech of a speaker be embodied in something else nor created within anything other than himself, just as knowledge cannot be.
Another proof: Allah Almighty says, “Say: He is Allah, the One, the Eternal. He neither begets nor is begotten, nor is there anything like unto Him.” How, then, could the Qur’an be created when the name of Allah is mentioned within it? This implies that Allah’s names would also be created. If His names were created, then His oneness, knowledge, and power would likewise be created—an idea far removed from the truth of Allah.
Another proof: Allah Almighty states, “Allah bears witness that there is no Allah but He, and so do the angels and those possessed of knowledge, upholding justice.” Surely, He must have borne witness to this and heard it from Himself. If He had heard it from a created being, it would not constitute witness for Himself. Since it is a witness for Himself, He must have borne it either before or after the creation of beings. If He bore it only after the creation of beings, then it would not be a self-declaration of His divinity prior to creation.
If they assert that Allah’s speech to Musa was created in a tree,[14] then it would follow that anyone hearing Allah’s speech conveyed by an angel or prophet would hold a superior status to Musa since they would hear it directly from a prophet, while Musa would only have heard it from a tree. It would also imply that a Jew hearing Allah’s words from a prophet would hold a higher rank in this respect than Musa, son of Imran since the Jew would be hearing it directly from a prophet, whereas Musa would have heard it from a creation in the tree. If Allah’s speech were indeed created in the tree, it would not constitute direct speech to Musa from behind a veil. All those present, human and jinn, would have heard the speech from that location, making Musa no different from others in that he did not hear the speech of Allah from behind a veil.”
Al-Ajurri (360 A.H.) said in his Ash-Sharee’ah:
وَكَذَا مَنْ قَالَ: إِنَّ هَذَا الْقُرْآنَ الَّذِي يَقْرَءُوهُ النَّاسُ، وَهُوَ فِي الْمَصَاحِفِ حِكَايَةٌ لِمَا فِي اللَّوْحِ الْمَحْفُوظِ، فَهَذَا قَوْلٌ مُنْكَرٌ، يُنْكِرُهُ الْعُلَمَاءُ يُقَالُ لِقَائِلِ هَذِهِ الْمَقَالَةِ الْقُرْآنُ يُكَذِّبُكَ، وَيَرُدُّ قَوْلَكَ، وَالسُّنَّةُ تُكَذِّبُكَ وَتَرُدُّ قَوْلَكَ قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: ﴿وَإِنْ أَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ اسْتَجَارَكَ فَأَجِرْهُ حَتَّى يَسْمَعَ كَلَامَ اللَّهِ﴾ [التوبة: ٦] فَأَخْبَرَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: إِنَّهُ إِنَّمَا يَسْمَعُ النَّاسُ كَلَامَ اللَّهِ، وَلَمْ يَقُلْ: حِكَايَةَ كَلَامِ اللَّهِ، وَقَالَ تَعَالَى: ﴿وَإِذَا قُرِئَ الْقُرْآنُ فَاسْتَمِعُوا لَهُ وَأَنْصِتُوا لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ﴾ [الأعراف: ٢٠٤] فَأَخْبَرَ أَنَّ السَّامِعَ إِنَّمَا يَسْمَعُ الْقُرْآنَ، وَلَمْ يَقُلْ: حِكَايَةَ الْقُرْآنِ. وَقَالَ تَعَالَى: ﴿إِنَّ هَذَا الْقُرْآنَ يَهْدِي لِلَّتِي هِيَ أَقُومُ﴾ [الإسراء: ٩]، وَقَالَ تَعَالَى: ﴿وَإِذْ صَرَفْنَا إِلَيْكَ نَفَرًا مِنَ الْجِنِّ يَسْتَمِعُونَ الْقُرْآنَ فَلَمَّا حَضَرُوهُ قَالُوا أَنْصِتُوا فَلَمَّا قُضِيَ وَلَّوْا إِلَى قَوْمِهِمْ مُنْذِرِينَ، قَالُوا: يَا قَوْمَنَا إِنَّا سَمِعْنَا كِتَابًا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ بَعْدِ مُوسَى مُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ، يَهْدِي إِلَى الْحَقِّ، وَإِلَى طَرِيقٍ مُسْتَقِيمٍ﴾ [الأحقاف: ٣٠] وَقَالَ تَعَالَى: ﴿قُلْ أُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ أَنَّهُ اسْتَمَعَ نَفَرٌ مِنَ الْجِنِّ، فَقَالُوا: إِنَّا سَمِعْنَا قُرْآنًا عَجَبًا يَهْدِي إِلَى الرُّشْدِ فَآمَنَّا بِهِ﴾ [الجن: ١] وَلَمْ يَقُلْ يَسْتَمِعُونَ حِكَايَةَ الْقُرْآنِ وَلَا قَالَتِ الْجِنُّ: إِنَّا سَمِعْنَا حِكَايَةَ الْقُرْآنِ، كَمَا قَالَ مَنِ ابْتَدَعَ بِدْعَةَ ضَلَالَةٍ، وَأَتَى بِخِلَافِ الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ وَبِخِلَافِ قَوْلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ
“Similarly, those who claim that the Qur’an recited by people and written in the mushafs is merely a representation of what is in the Preserved Tablet hold a rejected view, which scholars denounce. It is said to the one who makes such a claim, “The Qur’an refutes you, and it contradicts your statement, and the Sunnah refutes you and contradicts your statement.” Allah the Exalted said, “If any of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the speech of Allah” (Surah al-Tawbah, 6). Allah has informed us that what people hear is the speech of Allah, and He did not say, “a representation of the speech of Allah.” He also said, “When the Qur’an is recited, listen to it and be silent that you may receive mercy” (Surah al-A’raf, 204), indicating that what is heard is the Qur’an itself, not a representation of it.
Moreover, Allah the Exalted said, “Indeed, this Qur’an guides to that which is most upright” (Surah al-Isra, 9), and He said, “And [mention] when We directed to you a few of the jinn, listening to the Qur’an. And when they attended it, they said, ‘Listen quietly.’ And when it was concluded, they went back to their people as warners. They said, ‘O our people, indeed we have heard a Book revealed after Musa, confirming what was before it, guiding to the truth and to a straight path’” (Surah al-Ahqaf, 29-30). He also said, “Say, ‘It has been revealed to me that a group of the jinn listened and said, ‘Indeed, we have heard a wondrous Qur’an. It guides to righteousness, so we have believed in it’” (Surah al-Jinn, 1-2).
Allah did not say that they were listening to a representation of the Qur’an, nor did the jinn say, “We have heard a representation of the Qur’an.” Such assertions are contrary to the Book, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the believers and are innovations in misguidance.”
Al-Lalaka’ee (418 A.H.) said in his Sharh I’tiqad Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama’ah:
في سياق ما دل من الآيات، وما روي عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، والصحابة والتابعين، على أن القرآن تكلم الله به على الحقيقة، وأنه أنزله على محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأنه يدعو الناس إليه، وأنه أمره أن يتحدى به، وأن يدعو الناس إليه، وأنه القرآن على الحقيقة. متلو في المحاريب مكتوب في المصاحف محفوظ في صدور الرجال، ليس بحكاية ولا عبارة عن قرآن. واحد غير مخلوق وغير مجعول ومربوب بل هو صفة من صفات ذاته لم يزل به متكلما. ومن قال غير هذا فهو كافر ضال مضل مبتدع مخالف للسنّة والجماعة
“In the context of the meanings indicated by the verses, and what has been reported from the Prophet (peace be upon him), the Sahabah, and the Tabi’un, it is affirmed that the Qur’an is truly the word of Allah, revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him), calling people to it. Allah commanded him to challenge people with it and to invite them to it, as it is indeed the true Qur’an—recited in prayer niches, written in manuscripts, and preserved in the hearts of men. It is not a mere imitation or representation of the Qur’an. It is one, uncreated, unmade, and ungoverned, but rather an attribute of His essence, with which He has always spoken. Whoever claims otherwise is an unbeliever, deviant, misguiding, an innovator opposing the Sunnah and the consensus of the community.”
Al-Wahidi (468 A.H.), who was an Ash’ari, said in Al-Tafseer Al-Baseet:
﴿وَكَلَّمَ اللَّهُ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا﴾ أي مخاطبة من غير وسيطة، وتأكيد ﴿وَكَلَّمَ﴾ بالمصدر يدل على تحقيق الكلام، وأنه سمع كلام الله تعالى؛ لأن أفعال المجاز لا تؤكد بذكر المصادر، لا يقال: أراد الحائط أن يسقط إرادة. وهذا رد على من يقول: إن الله خلق كلامًا في محل فسمع موسى ذلك الكلام؛ لأنه حينئذ لا يكون كلام الله (٤).
قال أحمد بن يحيى: لو جاءت ﴿وَكَلَّمَ اللَّهُ﴾ مجردة لاحتمل ما قلنا وما قالوا، فلمَّا جاءت ﴿تَكْلِيمًا﴾ خرج الشك الذي كان يدخل في الكلام وبطل الاحتمال للشيئين
“And Allah spoke to Musa takleema” means that Allah addressed him without any intermediary, and the emphasis added by the term “wa-kallama” confirms the reality of the speech, showing that Musa indeed heard the Speech of Allah Almighty. Figurative expressions are not intensified with such reinforcement; for example, one would not say, “the wall intended to fall with intention.” This serves as a refutation against those who claim that Allah created a speech in a particular place, and Musa heard that speech—because, in that case, it would not truly be Allah’s speech.
Ahmad ibn Yahya commented, “If the phrase “And Allah spoke” had come on its own, it could allow for multiple interpretations, but with “takleema” included, it removes any doubt and invalidates alternative interpretations.”
Al-Sam’ani (489 A.H.) said in his Qur’anic commentary quoting Al-Farra’ (207 A.H.):
﴿ورسلا لم نقصصهم عَلَيْك وكلم الله مُوسَى تكليما﴾ إِنَّمَا كَلمه بِنَفسِهِ من غير وَاسِطَة، وَلَا وَحي، وَفِيه دَلِيل على من قَالَ: إِن الله خلق كلَاما فِي الشَّجَرَة؛ فَسَمعهُ مُوسَى؛ وَذَلِكَ لِأَنَّهُ قَالَ: ﴿وكلم الله مُوسَى تكليما﴾
…
قَالَ ثَعْلَب: وَهَذَا دَلِيل من قَول الْفراء أَنه مَا كَانَ يَقُول بِخلق الْقُرْآن .فَإِن قَالَ قَائِل: بِأَيّ شئ عرف مُوسَى أَنه كَلَام الله؟ قيل: بتعريف الله - تَعَالَى - إِيَّاه، وإنزال آيَة عرف مُوسَى بِتِلْكَ الْآيَة أَنه كَلَام الله - تَعَالَى -، وَهَذَا مَذْهَب أهل السّنة أَنه سمع كَلَام الله حَقِيقَة، بِلَا كَيفَ
“And messengers We have mentioned to you before, and some We have not, and Allah spoke to Musa takleema” means that Allah spoke to Musa Himself, without any intermediary or form of revelation. This phrase provides evidence against those who claim that Allah created speech in the tree, which Musa then heard, as it is stated explicitly: “And Allah spoke to Musa takleema.”
Tha‘lab said that this is also evidence from al-Farra’s view, who did not hold that the Qur’an was created. If one were to ask, “How did Musa know that it was the speech of Allah?” it is answered that Allah Almighty made it known to him, revealing a sign by which Musa recognized it as the Speech of Allah. This is the view of Ahl al-Sunnah: Musa truly heard the Speech of Allah, in reality, without asking how.”
Al-Baghawi (516 A.H.) said in his Qur’anic commentary:
«﴿وَرُسُلًا لَمْ نَقْصُصْهُمْ عَلَيْكَ وَكَلَّمَ اللَّهُ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا﴾ قَالَ الْفَرَّاءُ: الْعَرَبُ تُسَمِّي مَا يُوصَلُ إِلَى الْإِنْسَانِ كَلَامًا بِأَيِّ طَرِيقِ وَصَلَ، وَلَكِنْ لَا تُحَقِّقُهُ بِالْمَصْدَرِ، فَإِذَا حُقِّقَ
“And [We sent] messengers of whom We have not related to you, and Allah spoke to Musa takleema” (Surah al-Nisa, 164). Al-Farra’ said: “The Arabs call anything conveyed to a person’ speech,’ regardless of the means by which it reaches him. However, they do not affirm it with a verbal noun (masdar) unless it is actual, direct speech.”
Al-Asbahani (535 A.H.) said in his Al-Hujjah fi Bayan Al-Mahajjah:
فصل الدَّلِيل عَلَى أَن الْقُرْآن منزل. وَهُوَ مَا يقرأه الْقَارئ خلافًا لمن يَقُول كَلَام الله لَيْسَ بمنزل، وَلَا حرف، وَلَا صَوت
فإن قيل : المتكلم بحرف وصوت يحتاج إلى أدوات الكلام، فقل: عدم أداه الكلام لا يمنع من ثبوت الكلام، كما أن عدم آله العلم لا يمنع من ثبوت العلم
دليل أهل السنة : قوله تعالى : «وإن أحد من المشركين استجارك فأجره حتى يسمع كلام الله» (التوبة : ٦) والمسموع إنما هو الحرف والصوت، لأن المعنى لا يسمع بلا فهم. يقال في اللغة: سمعت الكلام وفهمت المعنى، فقيل : «حتى يسمع»؛ لأنه حرف وصوت
“The proof that the Qur’an is revealed and that it is what is recited, in contrast to the claim of those who say that Allah’s Speech is not revealed and without letter or sound.
If it is said, “One who speaks with letters and sounds requires tools for speech,” then the response is: The absence of such tools does not prevent the existence of speech, just as the lack of instruments for knowledge does not prevent the existence of knowledge.
The proof of Ahlus Sunnah is the saying of Allah: “And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the word of Allah” (Al-Tawbah: 6). That which is heard is indeed letters and sounds, as meaning cannot be heard without understanding. In the language, it is said, “I heard the speech and understood the meaning,” so it was said “so that he may hear,” for it consists of letters and sounds.”
Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani (561 A.H.) said in Al-Ghunya:
ونعتقد أن القرآن حروف مفهومة وأصوات مسموعة، لأن بها يصر الأخرس والسالك متكلماً، فمن جحد ذلك كابر حسه وعميت بصيرته
“We believe that the Qur’an consists of comprehensible letters and audible sounds, as it is through these that the mute and the seeker are rendered as speakers. Whoever denies this contradicts their own senses and blinds their insight.”
Al-Qurtubi (671 A.H.), who Ash’aris claim to belong to their camp, said in his Qur’anic commentary:
«وَكَلَّمَ اللَّهُ مُوسى تَكْلِيمًا»«تَكْلِيمًا» مَصْدَرٌ مَعْنَاهُ التَّأْكِيدُ، يَدُلُّ عَلَى بُطْلَانِ مَنْ يَقُولُ : خَلَقَ لِنَفْسِهِ كَلَامًا فِي شَجَرَةٍ فَسَمِعَهُ مُوسَى، بَلْ هُوَ الْكَلَامُ الْحَقِيقِيُّ الَّذِي يَكُونُ بِهِ الْمُتَكَلِّمُ مُتَكَلِّمًا. قَالَ النَّحَّاسُ: وَأَجْمَعَ النَّحْوِيُّونَ عَلَى أَنَّكَ إِذَا أَكَّدْتَ الْفِعْلَ بِالْمَصْدَرِ لَمْ يَكُنْ مَجَازًا، وَأَنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ فِي قَوْلِ الشَّاعِرِ:امْتَلَأَ الْحَوْضُ وَقَالَ قَطْنِي
أَنْ يَقُولَ: قَالَ قَوْلًا، فَكَذَا لَمَّا قَالَ:«تَكْلِيمًا» وَجَبَ أَنْ يَكُونَ كَلَامًا عَلَى الْحَقِيقَةِ مِنَ الْكَلَامِ الَّذِي يُعْقَلُ
“And Allah spoke to Musa takleema.” The word “takleema” here is a verbal noun (masdar) that serves as an intensifier, emphasizing the truth and reality of the speech, and refuting those who claim that Allah created speech within a tree, which Musa then heard. Rather, it was true speech, by which the speaker is genuinely a speaker. Al-Nahhas stated: “Grammarians agree that if an action is intensified by its verbal noun, it cannot be metaphorical. It would not be permissible, for example, in the poet’s line: ‘The basin filled and said, “Enough!”’ to say ‘he said a saying.’ Therefore, when it says ‘takleema,’ it must signify real speech, of a kind that is truly understood as such.”
Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani (852 A.H.), who is claimed by Ash’aris to belong to their camp, said in Fathul Bari:
(قَوْلُهُ بَابُ مَا جَاءَ فِي قَوْلِهِ عز وجل وكلم الله مُوسَى تكليما)
…
قَالَ الْأَئِمَّةُ هَذِهِ الْآيَةُ أَقْوَى مَا وَرَدَ فِي الرَّدِّ عَلَى الْمُعْتَزِلَةِ قَالَ النَّحَّاسُ أَجْمَعَ النَّحْوِيُّونَ عَلَى أَنَّ الْفِعْلَ إِذَا أُكِّدَ بِالْمَصْدَرِ لَمْ يَكُنْ مَجَازًا فَإِذَا قَالَ تَكْلِيمًا وَجَبَ أَنْ يَكُونَ كَلَامًا عَلَى الْحَقِيقَةِ الَّتِي تُعْقَلُ وَأَجَابَ بَعْضُهُمْ بِأَنَّهُ كَلَامٌ عَلَى الْحَقِيقَةِ لَكِنَّ مَحَلَّ الْخِلَافِ هَلْ سَمِعَهُ مُوسَى مِنَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى حَقِيقَةً أَوْ مِنَ الشَّجَرَةِ فَالتَّأْكِيدُ رَفَعُ الْمَجَازَ عَنْ كَوْنِهِ غَيْرَ كَلَامٍ أَمَّا الْمُتَكَلِّمُ بِهِ فَمَسْكُوتٌ عَنْهُ وَرُدَّ بِأَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ مِنْ مُرَاعَاةِ الْمُحَدَّثِ عَنْهُ فَهُوَ لِرَفْعِ الْمَجَازِ عَنِ النِّسْبَةِ لِأَنَّهُ قَدْ نُسِبَ الْكَلَامُ فِيهَا إِلَى اللَّهِ فَهُوَ الْمُتَكَلِّمُ حَقِيقَةً وَيُؤَكِّدُهُ قَوْلُهُ فِي سُورَة الْأَعْرَاف اني اصطفيتك عَن النَّاس برسالاتي وبكلامي وَأَجْمَعَ السَّلَفُ وَالْخَلَفُ مِنْ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ وَغَيْرِهِمْ عَلَى أَنَّ كَلَّمَ هُنَا مِنَ الْكَلَامِ وَنَقَلَ الْكَشَّافُ عَنْ بِدَعِ بَعْضِ التَّفَاسِيرِ أَنَّهُ مِنَ الْكَلْمِ بِمَعْنَى الْجُرْحِ وَهُوَ مَرْدُودٌ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ الْمَذْكُورِ قَالَ بن التِّينِ اخْتَلَفَ الْمُتَكَلِّمُونَ فِي سَمَاعِ كَلَامِ اللَّهِ فَقَالَ الْأَشْعَرِيُّ كَلَامُ اللَّهِ الْقَائِمُ بِذَاتِهِ يُسْمَعُ عِنْدَ تِلَاوَةِ كُلِّ تَالٍ وَقِرَاءَةِ كُلِّ قَارِئٍ وَقَالَ الْبَاقِلَّانِيُّ إِنَّمَا تُسْمَعُ التِّلَاوَةُ دُونَ الْمَتْلُوِّ وَالْقِرَاءَةُ دُونَ الْمَقْرُوءِ…وَأَوْرَدَ الْبُخَارِيُّ فِي كِتَابِ خَلْقِ أَفْعَالِ الْعِبَادِ أَنَّ خَالِدَ بْنَ عَبْدِ الله الْقَسرِي قَالَ اني مضحي بِالْجَعْدِ بْنِ دِرْهَمٍ فَإِنَّهُ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّ اللَّهَ لَمْ يَتَّخِذْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ خَلِيلًا وَلَمْ يُكَلِّمْ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا وَتَقَدَّمَ فِي أَوَّلِ التَّوْحِيدِ أَنَّ سَلْمَ بْنَ أَحَوْزَ قَتَلَ جَهْمَ بْنَ صَفْوَانَ لِأَنَّهُ أَنْكَرَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ كَلَّمَ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا
“His (Al-Bukhari) saying, “Chapter on what has been said regarding His statement, the Almighty: ‘And Allah spoke directly to Musa takleema’”…
The scholars have commented that this ayah is among the strongest proofs used against the Mu’tazilites. Al-Nahhas mentioned that grammarians unanimously agree that when a verb is emphasized with a verbal noun, it cannot be interpreted figuratively. Thus, when the term “directly” (takleema) is used, it confirms that it refers to real speech in its true and comprehensible form.
Some responded by saying that it is indeed real speech, but the point of contention lies in whether Musa truly heard it directly from Allah or from the tree. The emphasis, they argued, removes the figurative sense in that it confirms it as genuine speech; however, the speaker remains unstated. This was countered with the argument that it is necessary to consider the subject of the speech, as the verse attributes the speech directly to Allah, making Him the true speaker. This is further supported by His words in Surah Al-A’raf: “Indeed, I have chosen you above people through My messages and My words.” The Salaf and Tabi’un of Ahlus Sunnah, as well as others, agreed that “kallama” here indicates actual speech. Al-Kashshaf relates a heretical interpretation in some commentaries that claimed “kallama” was derived from “wound” (meaning harm), which is refuted by the consensus mentioned.
Ibn al-Tin remarked that the Mutakallimun disagreed regarding hearing the Speech of Allah. Al-Ash‘ari held that Allah’s inherent speech is heard when anyone recites, while al-Baqillani argued that what is heard is merely the recitation, not the uncreated words themselves…
Al-Bukhari noted in the book, Khalq Af’al Al-Ibad, that Khalid ibn Abdullah al-Qasri stated, “I am sacrificing Ja’d ibn Dirham, for he claims that Allah did not take Ibrahim as a close friend and did not speak to Musa directly.” It was also mentioned in the introduction to the Book of Tawhid (in Al-Bukhari’s Saheeh) that Salm ibn Ahwaz executed Jahm ibn Safwan for denying that Allah spoke directly to Musa.”
Recommended Reading:
Allah's Divine Attributes Discourse
[1] Ibn Abi Al-Izz (d. 792 A.H.) states in his commentary on Al-Tahawi’s creed:
وَقَدْ افْتَرَقَ النَّاسُ فِي مَسْأَلَةِ الْكَلَامِ عَلَى تِسْعَةِ أَقْوَالٍ: أَحَدُهَا: أَنَّ كَلَامَ اللَّهِ هُوَ مَا يَفِيضُ عَلَى النُّفُوسِ مِنْ مَعَانِي، إِمَّا مِنَ الْعَقْلِ الْفَعَّالِ عِنْدَ بَعْضِهِمْ، أَوْ مِنْ غَيْرِهِ، وَهَذَا قَوْلُ الصَّابِئَةِ وَالْمُتَفَلْسِفَةِ. وَثَانِيهَا: أَنَّهُ مَخْلُوقٌ خَلَقَهُ اللَّهُ مُنْفَصِلًا عَنْهُ، وَهَذَا قَوْلُ الْمُعْتَزِلَةِ. وَثَالِثُهَا: أَنَّهُ مَعْنًى وَاحِدٌ قَائِمٌ بِذَاتِ اللَّهِ، هُوَ الْأَمْرُ وَالنَّهْيُ وَالْخَبَرُ وَالِاسْتِخْبَارُ، وَإِنْ عُبِّرَ عَنْهُ بِالْعَرَبِيَّةِ كَانَ قُرْآنًا، وَإِنْ عُبِّرَ عَنْهُ بِالْعِبْرِيَّهِ كَانَ تَوْرَاةً، وَهَذَا قَوْلُ ابْنِ كِلَابٍ وَمَنْ وَافَقَهُ، كَالْأَشْعَرِيِّ وَغَيْرِهِ. وَرَابِعُهَا: أَنَّهُ حُرُوفٌ وَأَصْوَاتٌ أَزَلِيَّةٌ مُجْتَمِعَةٌ فِي الْأَزَلِ، وَهَذَا قَوْلُ طَائِفَةٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكَلَامِ وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْحَدِيثِ. وَخَامِسُهَا: أَنَّهُ حُرُوفٌ وَأَصْوَاتٌ، لَكِنْ تَكَلَّمَ اللَّهُ بِهَا بَعْدَ أَنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ مُتَكَلِّمًا، وَهَذَا قَوْلُ الْكَرَّامِيَّةِ وَغَيْرِهِمْ. وَسَادِسُهَا: أَنَّ كَلَامَهُ يَرْجِعُ إِلَى مَا يُحْدِثُهُ مِنْ عِلْمِهِ وَإِرَادَتِهِ الْقَائِمِ بِذَاتِهِ، وَهَذَا يَقُولُهُ صَاحِبُ الْمُعْتَبَرِ، وَيَمِيلُ إِلَيْهِ الرَّازِيُّ فِي الْمَطَالِبِ الْعَالِيَةِ. وَسَابِعُهَا: أَنَّ كَلَامَهُ يَتَضَمَّنُ مَعْنًى قَائِمًا بِذَاتِهِ هُوَ مَا خَلَقَهُ فِي غَيْرِهِ، وَهَذَا قَوْلُ أَبِي مَنْصُورٍ الْمَاتُرِيدِيِّ. وَثَامِنُهَا: أَنَّهُ مُشْتَرَكٌ بَيْنَ الْمَعْنَى الْقَدِيمِ الْقَائِمِ بِالذَّاتِ وَبَيْنَ مَا يَخْلُقُهُ فِي غَيْرِهِ مِنَ الْأَصْوَاتِ، وَهَذَا قَوْلُ أَبِي الْمَعَالِي وَمَنْ تَبِعَهُ. وَتَاسِعُهَا: أَنَّهُ تَعَالَى لَمْ يَزَلْ مُتَكَلِّمًا إِذَا شَاءَ وَمَتَى شَاءَ وَكَيْفَ شَاءَ، وَهُوَ يَتَكَلَّمُ بِهِ بِصَوْتٍ يُسْمَعُ، وَأَنَّ نَوْعَ الْكَلَامِ قَدِيمٌ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنِ الصَّوْتُ الْمُعَيَّنُ قَدِيمًا، وَهَذَا الْمَأْثُورُ عَنْ أَئِمَّةِ الْحَدِيثِ وَالسُّنَّةِ
“The debate over the nature of divine speech among scholars has produced nine distinct perspectives:
1. One view holds that Allah’s speech consists of meanings that emerge in the human soul, either through the "Active Intellect" (according to some) or by other means. This perspective is associated with the Sabeans and philosophers.
2. Another stance is that divine speech is a created phenomenon, existing separately from Allah. This view is championed by the Mu'tazilite school.
3. A third opinion argues that divine speech is a single, inherent meaning within Allah’s essence, encompassing command, prohibition, statement, and inquiry. If expressed in Arabic, it becomes the Qur'an; in Hebrew, the Torah. This view is attributed to Ibn Kullab and adopted by others, including the Ash'aris.
4. The fourth view posits that divine speech consists of eternal letters and sounds, coexisting timelessly. Some from among the Ahlul Kalam and Ahlul Hadeeth hold this view.
5. Another position associated with the Karramiyya claims that divine speech comprises letters and sounds, which Allah spoke after initially not speaking.
6. A sixth perspective suggests that divine speech reflects the knowledge and will inherent in Allah's essence, a position upheld by the author of Al-Mu'tabar and supported by al-Razi in his Al-Matālib al-ʿĀliya.
7. A related view holds that divine speech entails a meaning within Allah, realized externally in what He creates. This view is advocated by Abu Mansur al-Maturidi.
8. The eighth perspective argues for a dual nature in divine speech, encompassing both the eternal meaning within Allah and the sounds He creates externally. This is the position of al-Juwayni and his followers.
9. The final stance, based on the views of Hadith and Sunnah scholars, asserts that Allah has always been able to speak whenever, however, and to whomever He wills, with an audible sound. The essence of divine speech is eternal, though specific expressions may not be.”
[2] Thus, Ahlus Sunnah reject the notion that Allah's ability to literally speak necessitates the possession of vocal cords or other human-like physical attributes. Just as stones, food, trees, and the heavens and earth are described as literally speaking, despite our inability to comprehend the mechanism, it is even more appropriate to remain humble in acknowledging our limited understanding of Allah's power to speak. See: Sahih Muslim, Book 43, Hadith 2; Saheeh Al-Bukhari, Book 61, Hadith 88; Saheeh Al-Bukhari, Book 61, Hadith 92. Even Abul Hasan al-Ash’ari (d. 324 A.H.) affirms in Al-Ibanah that the heavens and the earth literally spoke, as mentioned in Surah 41:11.
[3] For example, the plethora of Qu’ranic verses showing Allah doing nidaa’ (e.g., 7:22, 26:10 etc.,) and nidaa’ linguistically entails a sound. It states in Lisaan Al-Arab, “Nidaa’ entails a sound” (النداء صوت).
[4] I have pointed out how there was an early difference of opinion among Ahlus Sunnah on whether Allah’s Speech is eternal in The Hanbali School's Aqeedah on Allah's Attributes. Over time, however, the view that Allah’s Speech is uncreated but not eternal emerged as the dominant position.
[5] Ishaq b. Rahawayh (238 A.H.) said:
ليسَ بينَ أهل العِلْمِ اختلافٌ أنَّ القرآنَ كلامُ الله ليسَ بمخلوقٍ، فكيفَ يكونُ شَيْءٌ خَرَجَ من الرَّبِّ عزوجل مَخْلوقًا
“There is unanimous agreement among scholars that the Qur'an is the uncreated word of Allah. For how could something that emanates from the Lord, Exalted be He, be regarded as created?” (Shaykh Al-Judai’ states in Al-Aqeedah Al-Salafiyyah fi Kalam Rabb Al-Bariyyah, p. 248: “This narration was reported by Ibn Abi Hatim, as cited in Al-‘Uluww by Al-Dhahabi (p. 132), with an authentic chain of transmission.”)
Al-Darimi (280 A.H.) said in his Naqd:
وَإِنَّهُ لَا يُقَاسُ رُوحُ اللهِ، وَبَيْتُ اللهِ، وَعَبْدُ اللهِ، المُجَسَّمَاتُ المَخْلُوقَاتُ القَائِمَاتُ المُسْتَقِلَّاتُ بِأَنْفُسِهِنَّ اللَّائي كُنَّ بِكَلَامِ الله وَأَمْرِهِ لَمْ يَخْرُجْ شَيْءٌ مِنْهَا مِنَ الله، كَكَلَامِهِ الَّذِي خَرَجَ مِنْهُ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا المَخْلُوقَ قَائِمٌ بِنَفسِهِ وعَيْنِهِ، وحِلْيَتِهِ وَجِسْمِهِ، لا يَشُكُّ أَحَدٌ فِي شَيْءٍ مِنْهَا أَنَّهُ غَيْرُ اللهِ
“The Spirit of Allah, the House of Allah, and the Servant of Allah are created, independent entities that exist on their own, brought into being by Allah's word and command of Kun. They cannot be compared to Allah’s Speech and Command. None of these things emerged from Allah in the same way that His speech does, which proceeds directly from Him. This is because these created beings exist independently, with their own essence, distinct form, and physical presence. No one has any doubt that each of these is distinct from Allah.”
One may find several narrations from the Salaf to this effect in Al-Khallal’s (308 A.H.) Sunnah, vol. 6, pp. 17-27 (e.d. Al-Zahrani).
[6] Many scholars permitted seeking refuge in creation as long as it is restricted. See: Sultan Al-Umayri, Al-Maslak Al-Rasheed, vol. 2, pp. 106-126.
[7] Imam Al-Bukhari (256 A.H.) said in his Khalq Af’al Al-Ibad:
بَابُ مَا كَانَ النَّبِيُّ يَسْتَعِيذُ بِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ لَا بِكَلَامِ غَيْرِهِ وَقَالَ نُعَيْمٌ: «لَا يُسْتعَاذُ بِالْمَخْلُوقِ، وَلَا بِكَلَامِ الْعِبَادِ وَالْجِنِّ وَالْإِنْسِ، وَالْمَلَائِكَةِ وَفِي هَذَا دَلِيلٌ أَنَّ كَلَامَ اللَّهِ غَيْرُ مَخْلُوقٍ، وَأَنَّ سِوَاهُ مَخْلُوقٌ»
“Chapter on the Prophet's Seeking Refuge with the Words of Allah, Not with the Words of Others. Nu'aym [bin Hammad] said: "One does not seek refuge with created beings, nor with the words of servants, jinn, humans, or angels. This serves as evidence that the words of Allah are uncreated, whereas everything else is created."
Abu Bakr Al-Khallal (311 A.H.) said in his Al-Sunnah, vol. 6, p. 86:
ولا يجوز أن يقال: أعيذك بالسماء أو بالجبال أو بالأنبياء أو بالملائكة أو بالعرش أو بالأرض مما خلق الله، لا يتعوذ إلا بالله أو بكلماته
“It is not permissible to say: "I seek refuge by the heavens, or by the mountains, or by the prophets, or by the angels, or by the Throne, or by the earth, or by anything that Allah has created." One should seek refuge only in Allah or in His words.”
[8] Imam Zakaria Al-Ansari (926 A.H.), in his Fatḥ al-ʿAllām, explains this saying:
(عَنْ أُمَّتِي مَا حَدَّثَتْ) أي كلمت بقلبها
“(my community everything their souls speak to them); meaning, what they speak within their hearts.”
[9] Ibn Taymiyyah said in Majmu’ Al-Fatawa:
الكلامُ القَديمُ النَّفْسانيُّ الذي أثبتُّموه لم تُثْبِتوا ما هو؟ بل ولا تصوَّرْتُموهُ، وإثباتُ الشَّيْءِ فَرْعُ تصوّرِهِ، فمَن لم يتصوَّرْ ما يُثْبتُهُ كيفَ يجوزُ أنْ يثبتَه؟ ولهذا كانَ أبو سعيد بن كُلاّب -رأسُ هذه الطائفة وإمامُها في هذه المسألة- لا يذكُرُ في بيانِها شيئًا يُعْقَل، بل يقولُ: هو معنى يُناقِضُ السُّكوتَ والخَرَسَ، والسُّكوتُ والخرَسُ إنَّما يُتَصَوَّران إذا تُصُوِّرَ الكلامُ، فالسَّاكتُ هو السَّاكتُ عن الكلام، الأخرسُ هو العاجزُ عنه، أو الذي حصَلَتْ له آفةٌ في مَحَلِّ النُّطْقِ تَمْنَعُه عن الكلام، وحينئذ فلا يُعرَفُ السَّاكتُ والأخرَسُ حتى يُعرَفَ الكلامُ، ولا يُعرَفُ الكلامُ حتى يُعرَفَ السَّاكتُ والأخرَسُ، فتبيَّنَ أنَّهم لم يتصوَّروا ما قالوهُ، ولم يُثْبِتوهُ
"The eternal, internal speech which you have affirmed, you neither established what it is nor even conceptualized it. Affirming something is dependent on its conceptualization, so how can one affirm something they have not conceptualized? This is why Abu Sa'id Ibn Kullab—the leader of this group and its foremost authority on this matter—never articulated anything understandable regarding it. Rather, he would say: it is a meaning that contradicts silence and muteness. Silence and muteness can only be conceptualized when speech is understood. A silent person is one who refrains from speaking, and a mute person is one who is incapable of speaking or one who has some affliction in the organ of speech that prevents them from speaking. Therefore, a silent or mute person cannot be recognized unless speech is first understood, and speech cannot be understood unless the silent and mute are known. Thus, it is evident that they neither conceptualized what they claimed nor did they affirm it."
[10] Shaykh Al-Judai’ states in Al-Aqeedah Al-Salafiyyah fi Kalam Rabb Al-Bariyyah, p. 168:
حديث صحيح .أخرجه عبد الله بن أحمد في «السُّنَّة» رقم (٥٣٦) والخَلاَّل -كما في «درء التعارض» ٢/ ٣٨ - عن الإِمام أحمد: نا عبد الرحمن بن محمد المُحاربي عن الأعمش عن مسلم عن مسروق عن عبد الله به .قلت: وهذا إسناد جيد، المُحاربي ثقة جيدُ الحديث وباقي الإِسناد ثقاتٌ معروفونَ، ومسلم هو ابن صُبَيْح أبو الضُّحى .وقد أعلَّ بعضهم الإِسناد بعنعنة المُحاربي بدعوى أنَّه مدلّس، وهذا قولٌ غيرُ محقّق، وذلك لأنَّ المحاربيُّ إنَّما وصفَهُ بالتدليس ممَّن يعتمد قولُه: الإِمام أحمد، وهو إنَّما احتَجَّ لذلك بما يرويه عن معمر فإنَّه لم يسمَع منه، وهذا النوع وإن كان يُسمَّى إرسالًا إلاَّ أنَّ الكثيرَ من الأئمة كانوا يُطلقون عليه وصفَ التدليس، لأنَّ فيه مشابهةُ له من بعض الوجوه، فيغلط في فهمه كثيرٌ من متأخري الطلبة .ومنْ أقوى ما يُعَضَّدُ به الإِسناد، أنَّ الإِمام أحمدَ نفسَه احتجَّ به لمَذهبِ أهل الحق في إثبات صفةِ الصوت
“This is a Sahih hadith. It was narrated by Abdullah ibn Ahmad in As-Sunnah, no. 536 and by Al-Khallal—as mentioned in Dar’ al-Ta’arud, 2/38—from Imam Ahmad: “[It was narrated to us by] Abdur-Rahman ibn Muhammad al-Muharibi, from al-A’mash, from Muslim, from Masruq, from Abdullah.”
This is a jayyid isnad. Al-Muharibi is trustworthy and accurate in his narrations, and the remaining narrators in the chain are known reliable figures. Muslim here is Ibn Subayh, also known as Abu Ad-Duha. Some have questioned this chain due to al-Muharibi’s use of “’an” (indicating indirect narration), suggesting he was a mudallis (one who conceals the source of his narrations). However, this claim lacks precision. Al-Muharibi was described as a mudallis by authorities like Imam Ahmad, but only regarding narrations from Mu'ammar, from whom he did not hear directly. Though such indirect narrations are sometimes termed mursal, many early scholars also labeled them as tadlis due to their resemblance, which has led later students to misunderstand the term.
One of the strongest factors reinforcing the reliability of this chain is that Imam Ahmad himself used it as evidence in support of the doctrine of the people of truth regarding the affirmation of the attribute of Allah's sound.”
[11] Sheikh Al Albaani comments:
إسناده صحيح، وله إسناد آخر أشار إليه المصنف بعد، أخرجه عبد الله ابن أحمد في «السنة» «ص٨
“Its isnad is Saheeh. It has another isnaad that Abdullah ibn Ahmad collected on page 8 of his Al Sunnah.”
[12] See: The Attribution of ar-Radd 'ala al-Jahmiyyah to Imam Ahmad
[13] See Ibnul Qayyim’s Ijtima’ Al-Juyush, p. 257; also see ‘Adil Hamdan’s Al-Jami’ fi ‘Aqa’id wa-Rasa’il Ahlus Sunnah, p. 696
[14] In his Qur’anic commentary, Ar-Razi attributes this opinion to Abu Mansur Al-Maturidi:
وَقَالَ أَبُو مَنْصُورٍ الْمَاتُرِيدِيُّ: الَّذِي سَمِعَهُ مُوسَى عليه السلام أَصْوَاتٌ مُقَطَّعَةٌ وَحُرُوفٌ مُؤَلَّفَةٌ قَائِمَةٌ بِالشَّجَرَةِ فَأَمَّا الصِّفَةُ الازلية التي ليست بحرف ولا صوت فداك مَا سَمِعَهُ مُوسَى عليه السلام الْبَتَّةَ
“Abu Mansur al-Maturidi said: What Musa, peace be upon him, heard were distinct sounds and composed letters that were present within the tree. As for the eternal attribute that is neither composed of letters nor sound, that is not what Musa, peace be upon him, heard at all.”