Rebuttling Heresies @ On The Speech of Allah and the Logical Fallacy of Kalaam Nafsi of Ash’ari Theology

Bidi answers says this

The meaning of the phrase “Qu’aan is not created”
When Ahlu-s-Sunnah, the AsħˆAriyys and the Ĥanafiyys, say that the “Qu’aan is not created” they are referring to Aļļaah’s eternal attribute of speech that is not sound or letters. In other words, the Speech that the book of the Qur’aan refers to.

The saying of Ahlu-s-Sunnah is that the words and letters in the printed copies of the Qu’raan refer to Aļļaah’s eternal kalaam, and tell us in Arabic what He said eternally without letters, sounds or words. It is therefore correct to say that “the Qur’aan is not created,” because the word “qur’aan” actually refers to what Aļļaah tells us, and His speech is not created. It is not correct, however, to say that the words, letters, and sounds associated with the book are not created, because words and letters need a creator, and because the Arabic language, the language of the book, is a creation.

Haafidh at-Tabari blasts all of this kalam into smickerins with the following

القول في القرآن وأنه كلام الله فأول ما نبدأ بالقول فيه من ذلك عندنا : القرآن كلام الله وتنزيله ؛ إذ كان من معاني توحيده ، فالصواب من القول في ذلك عندنا أنه : كلام الله غير مخلوق كيف كتب وحيث تلي وفي أي موضع قرئ ، في السماء وجد ، وفي الأرض حيث حفظ ، في اللوح المحفوظ كان مكتوبا ، وفي ألواح صبيان الكتاتيب مرسوما ، في حجر نقش ، أو في ورق خط ، أو في القلب حفظ ، وبلسان لفظ ، فمن قال غير ذلك أو ادعى أن قرآنا في الأرض أو في السماء سوى القرآن الذي نتلوه بألسنتنا ونكتبه في مصاحفنا ، أو اعتقد غير ذلك بقلبه ، أو أضمره في نفسه ، أو قاله بلسانه دائنا به ، فهو بالله كافر ، حلال الدم ، بريء من الله ، والله منه بريء ، بقول الله عز وجل : ( بل هو قرآن مجيد في لوح محفوظ (1) ) ، وقال وقوله الحق – عز وجل – : ( وإن أحد من المشركين استجارك فأجره حتى يسمع كلام الله (2) ) . فأخبر ، جل ثناؤه ، أنه في اللوح المحفوظ مكتوب ، وأنه من لسان محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم مسموع ، وهو قرآن واحد من محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم مسموع ، في اللوح المحفوظ مكتوب ، وكذلك هو في الصدور محفوظ ، وبألسن الشيوخ والشباب متلو . قال أبو جعفر : فمن روى عنا ، أو حكى عنا ، أو تقول علينا ، فادعى أنا قلنا غير ذلك فعليه لعنة الله وغضبه ، ولعنة اللاعنين والملائكة والناس أجمعين ، لا قبل الله له صرفا ولا عدلا ، وهتك ستره ، وفضحه على رءوس الأشهاد يوم لا ينفع الظالمين معذرتهم ، ولهم اللعنة ولهم سوء الدار

القول في القرآن وأنه كلام الله
Chapter: What is said about the Qur’an that it is indeed the Speech of Allah

To begin with, we start off with the saying of that which is with us that

“The Qur’an is the Speech of Allah and is revelation from Him, since it is from the Attributes of His Oneness (tawheed), indeed the correctness from our speech in that which is with us of which we conclude is ‘the Speech of Allah is not created in how it is written and in where it is and in whatever place it is recited, whether above the heavens in its location (law al-mahfoodh), or on the earth where it is preserved, or in the Preserved Tablet (al-Lawh al-Mahfoodh) were it was inscribed, or on a tablet (board, panel) where the youth in primary schools trace it on, or engraved on stone, or if it is written on paper, or if it is preserved in the hearts, whether it is spoken of on the tongue.

And whoever says other than that or claims that the Qur’an that is in the earth or the heavens differs from the Qur’an in which we recite with our tongues and write in our musaahif (copies of the Quran), or he believes other than that in his heart or he conceals it within himself, or he speaks of it with his tongue and accounts with it, then he is a disbeliever in Allah, his blood is permissible, he is clear and free from Allah, and Allah is free and clear from him, for Allah Honored and Exalted be He said

{ بل هو قرآن مجيد في لوح محفوظ }
“Nay! This is a Glorious Quran. (Inscribed) in the Preserved Tablet”

And He said a correct saying, Honored and Exalted be He

{ وإن أحد من المشركين استجارك فأجره حتى يسمع كلام الله }
“And if anyone one of the mushrikoon seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that they may hear the Word of Allah (the Quran)”

Indeed Exalted and Praised is He, informed that indeed it (the Qur’an) is in the Preserved Tablet which was written, and it was heard upon the tongue of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم , and it is a single Qur’an from Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم which was heard. It (the Qur’an) was written in the Preserved Tablet, and likewise it is in the revealed preservation (that which is memorized), and it is with the tongues of the shuyookh (people of knowledge and old age) and the youth in their recital (of it)

Abu J’afar said “whoever narrates from us or relates from us or speaks on our authority and claims that we say other than this then may the curse and anger of Allah be upon him and may the curses of the accursed and the Angels, and of men altogether (be on him).Then Allah won’t accept from him anything of that which he spends or gives justice to, and degradation covers him, and on the day in which he will be fully exposed and which the oppressor’s excuse will avail them not, then on them be the curses and a terrible abode.

observe, oh heretics, the ayaah of your Lord who said

{ وإن أحد من المشركين استجارك فأجره حتى يسمع كلام الله }
“And if anyone one of the mushrikoon seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that they may hear the Word of Allah (the Quran)”

Allah is instructing Muhammad alaihi salatu salaam to recite the quraan.

The ash’aris beleive that our recital is created. When we recite for example ya ayuhall-adhina amanu (in arabic), then each letter is emergent and did not exist before it, thus created. Therefore the Asharis have heretically cornered themselves to two stances that they must concede to logically if they do not wish to accept our sunni stance. I must note, both stances are kufr
1. If Muhammad alaihi salatu wa salaam’s recital of the qur’an was emergent and therefore created, then that means Allah called His kalaam created BECAUSE after Allah commanded Muhammad to recite, He the Most High, offered the reasoning of
“So that they hear the Word of Allah (hatta yasma’u kalaamullah)”
Therefore, in the long run, they would have to accept that Allah’s actual kalaam is created BASED on this very ayaah, or that Allah lied to us when He said “So that they may hear the kalaam of Allah”
thats the first stance.
2. If they find themselves needing to escape from the implications of the first stance i.e. kufr, then the only other stance that they can adopt while still not being “wahhabi” is that the speech of Muhammad alaihi salatu wa sallaam is uncreated and thus shares this Divine Attribute with Allah. That might not be bad for sufis though as they pretty much associated Muhammad with a number of other Divine Attributes specific to Allah alone lol.
But wait, we are still in ash’arism, which means if Muhammad’s kalaam is identical’s to Allah, then that means Muhammad’s kalaam is kalaam nafsi as well, therefore he is not speaking to his companions through his mouth with sounds and letters, he is doing it with his “Kalam Nafsi” and “making” them understand His “Kalaam Nafsi” just as Allah made Musa understand His Kalaam Nafsi.

anyways, back to the statement of Haafidh at-Tabari, the one whom they claim to respect and hold dea, and even slander him by saying he was of them.

He clearly states that the Qur’an is the Qur’an and it does not matter one bit in the mode o its preservation and he lists a number of examples and there is no such thing as a Qur’an and then an “expression” of the Qur’an, and then he concludes with the clear “sareeh” sunnah that whoever beleives in other than this, and us (salafi/athari) then they are disbeleivers in Allah and reviles and curses them.

Another logical fallacy of this argument is that whether a person says:

الحمد لله رب العالمين


Praise be to the Lord of the worlds

He is reciting the Quran, because the Quran at the end only reflects God’s eternal speech subsisting in His essence.

In the prayer if a person recites al-Fatiha in English his prayer is valid.

This is because if the actual qu’ran is nothing but the product of His kalam nafsi, that means it has no sounds or letters. Hell, it has no distinguishing features at all, its just becomes one big blob of a telepathic message that can only be “inspired” by whom He wills. That as well means there is no language of the Qur’an, it is a heap of message that is free of any import or meaning and only has meaning when it is applied to creational spheres, like language, letters our sounds.


A Reply to Ibn Ajibah al-Jahmi

the jahmi heretic Ibn Ajibah claims the following

Another thing most salafis/wahhabis are unaware of is that Ibn Taymiyya beleived that Allah’s speech was a product of His omnipotence [qudra] and will [irada], therefore, based on Ibn Taymiyya reasoning, Allahs speech is created (because qudra is linked with contingently possible things) and subsisting within Allah’s Entity.

The Mu’taazila said that the Qur’an is created and in this world, not a part of Allah. Ibn Taymiyya basically said that the Qur’an is created and subsisting within Allah’s Entity

Note also that Ibn Taymiyyah claimed there was a difference between contigent [haadith] and created [makhluq], which is false


The only thing that is false is your crippled logic and inference in applying your weak theories to established realities and known facts about the Sunni creed.

the entire sum total of your argument is based on the premise that something that is haadith is by default makhluq.

Again Ibn Ajibah states

Who is closer to the Mu’tazila: the one who believes in kalam nafsi that is eternal, or the one who believes Allah’s speech is a product of His will, thus being created/contingent/emergent? In this respect, the only difference between the Mu’tazila and those who believe like Ibn Taymiyya is that the Mu’tazila believed the Qur’an is created and not a part of Allah (because He is not created) whereas the Taymites believed it is created and subsisting within Allah’s entity. Qadim al-Naw’ Haadith al-Aahad anyone?

You have lied upon Shaykhul-Islam because he, nor any of the ahlu-sunnah, believe it is created and in fact you insinuated that he believes it is created, a slander against him.

However, the greatest lunacy is how you insinuated this under the banner that the implementation of His will equals something created. that represents a whole can of worms for your heretic madhaab because His attribute of being al-Khaaliq, is to create. Hence when He wills to create, we do not call the implementation of His creating “something that is created” rather the end result of His implementation to create i.e. the thing that is being created, is what is called “created”. However, under your false asl, you as well must accept that His sifaat fi’iliyyah, in this case, Creating, is itself something created, which is again, kufr, but as usual, you have been struck with Aristotlitis

Related to the salaf, there are several issues:

1- If they believed that God’s kalima does not happen by his will, then they had to believe that Jesus was eternal. however, you and I know that they did not believe such. If you believe that Jesus was created by the word of God, then he was created in “eternity” since according to your belief, any word that God spoke happened in eternity and without God’s will. It is another belief that they vehemently rejected.

2- The Salaf had a rule of not accepting something as fact unless it was in the book of God or the authentic hadeeth or was proven as reality. This does not apply to the theory of Haadith means created.

3- the theory contradicts itself. Here is how:

God created Adam. the product of the creation is haadith and therefore Adam is created. However, it is not only Adam that is haadith, it was also the action of creating him by God. That action happened by God’s will who cuold have decided to create or not create. So, you will have to believe that not only Adam was created, but God’s action of creating Adam was also created and that is simply nonsense. If you want to believe that Adam was created in eternity, then again you get an eternal Adam, and worse, the oxymoron pre eternal Iblis.

4- What did the Salaf believe the Qur’an said? That every SHAYI= stand alone entity, that is other than God is created. If something is stand alone then it is created, and if not, then it is an attribute (actions or descriptions) to an entity that stands alone. So, Adam is stand alone entity and he is created. The act of creating him is not stand alone. Therefore it is an attribute of the creator, even though that it occurred upon God’s will and in a point of time. Speech, is never standing alone. That is because it is always with the speaker, with the listener or carried on means of communication. Therefore the term of speech being created does not apply, since it is always inseparable from the speaker.

Brother Hasan, Ibn Taimiyyah believed that attributes and the one who has them are inseparable and indivisible. He also believed that the attributes of action are eternal, but that God can act them in and out of the confines of time and space. When would God act in time and space? when it involves actions related to his creation.


Disinfecting Jahmi Rhetoric

a letter from Imam-i Rabbani Mujaddid-i alf-i Thani Shaikh Ahmad Faruqi a mujtahid of the science of Kalam, written to Khwaja Ubaidullah and Khwaja Abdullah, sons of his master Muhammad Baqi Billah:

Another sifat-i thubutiyya of Allahu ta’ala is His attribute Kalam. His attribute kalam, that is, His word, is an elementary word; He is the speaker of that one word from eternity in the past to eternity in the future. All the commands, all the prohibitions, all that is communicated, all the questions, all the requests are in that one word. All the books and pages that He has sent are of that one elementary word. The Torah has originated from it. And the Qur’an, too, has originated from it.

[Another sifat-i thubutiyya of Allahu ta’ala is His attribute Takwin. That is, He is creative]. All that He created, all that He made are of one deed, of one making; all His creations, from His first creation to eternity, are created through that one deed. The ayat, “We made everything in the twinkling of an eye,” 54:50 shows this fact. His giving life and taking life are through that one deed. His creating and annihilating, too, are of that one deed. There are not various attachments to His deed, either. Perhaps, with one attachment He creates all the things in the beginnings and in the ends, each coming about in its own time. Since the mind cannot understand His deed, it cannot comprehend the attachments of the deed. The mind does not have access to that realm. Even Abul-Hasan Ashari, one of the savants of Ahl as-sunnat, being unable to understand the deed of Allahu ta’ala, said that His attribute Takwin, that is, His creating, was of a recent occurrence. That is, he said that His making each thing happens when He makes it. However, all the deeds that have been done in process of time are the works, appearances of that deed in the eternal past. They are not the deed itself. So, of the great men of tasawwuf, those who say, “We see His deeds, we have attained to the Tajalli-yi afal,” are wrong. They presume that they see the deed of Allahu ta’ala in everything. However, those manifestations, appearances are not the deed itself, but they are its works. For, since Allahu ta’ala cannot be seen, His deed cannot be seen, felt, thought of or understood by the mind, either. His deed and all His attributes are eternal. They are not of a recent occurrence. With Him they always exist. His deed is called Takwin; it does not go in the mirror of creatures, nor is it seen there.

An Ash’ari Commentary

Have you noticed how he claims that Abul-Hasan Ashari in relation to the deed of Takwin had said that His making each thing happens when He makes it. This should not be confused with the beleif of whether Allah acts in sequence that you are asking the big question on. I do not beleive that the salaf or even Imam Hanbal had ever said that Allah acts in a sequence. It is like claiming Allah improves, alters and changes Himself, with ilham or wahi, like He can create Himself and not only that but over and over again…

Wouldn’t that be akin to Aristolean logic regarding the Universe having no origin without beginning but its individual occurrences and particulars are emergent (hâdith) and created?

__________________________________________________ _____________________

Our Response (Sunni Commentary)
This is the essence and foundation upon which the ash’ari belief of an incapable speaking deity (who they describe Allah as) is predicated on. IN other words, this is the reason for their belief


“All what God said is one word”. So what about the Aya that says that the sea will dry before we completed God’s words. How did this word explain that the Torah and Qur’an differ significantly at times.

2- He says that creation is one creation and everything comes from it. However, he is not free, because still, it will have to have occurred in eternity and be coexistent with God. This sheikh goes further to say that the statement that you quoted about sheikh Ashaari was wrong. Imam Ashaari, at least recognized that the creation cannot exist in eternity. He fell into self contradiction which is much better than this follower of his who, in order to prevent self contradiction, he falls into a major error.

3- He mentioned two actions, speech and creation. God has a third action, Destruction. Did God destroy us in eternity? Are we non existent? or are we a dream? or are we God? Sadly, those were statements uttered by some people who adopted this ideology, and their history and writings prove it. (that is the theory of tawheed al-wujoodiyyah being that we don’t exist and that Allah is dreaming or thinking of everything because we are not really real, but only figments of Allah’s imagination)

4- The Salaf believed, as Imam Ashaari did, that God created Adam in a sequence after He created Iblis. They never claimed that they both were created as one thing and at one point. The Salaf will also say that God talked to Moses when He talked to Moses. So, This is the contradiction of imam Ashaari. If he believed that God created us at a moment of each of our creation, then He could talk to us at a moment of talking to us. This is all sequence. Why because something happens before and after in a sequence, even though the before and after cannot be assumed to be the time and space that we know.

Secondly, action in a sequence does not mean evolution. Why? because the attributes that describe God and His abilities and all are eternal, unchanging. His actions, however, happen in a sequence without adding nor subtracting from the perfection of God.

5- No. Aristotle said that the universe is eternal and it’s occurrences are features of the eternal being that is the universe. Ibn Sina accepted it and therefore he proposed that the universe is coexistent with God. The Ashaaris and Mutazila accepted the creator and went about how to differentiate between the eternal creator and the non eternal universe. They posited the theory of hudooth, that goes like this:

Since the universe is not eternal and has hudooth, then hudooth is a feature of a created being and therefore God cannot have hudooth.


The person who translated this or used this ayaah as proof has played deception

they quote the ayaah in suratul-Qamar as
“And we made everything with a twinkling of an eye”

the correct translation, and hence, its meaning, is

“And our Commandment” is but one, with a twinkling of an eye”

A Big difference in its connotation

the people who used this ayaah must have been on drugs or the translator played deception to his muqalids. The more correct translation, being the second one, is what leads to a more correct meaning because the ayaa states His Amr, and not the creation. The ayaah is pointing to that which relates to the creation, the Amr, and not the creation itself.

Don’t take my word for It

Haafidh Ibn Katheer blasts the Jahmi argument down the window when he says in his tafseer

﴿وَمَآ أَمْرُنَآ إِلاَّ وَحِدَةٌ كَلَمْحٍ بِالْبَصَرِ ﴾  

(And Our commandment is but one as the twinkling of an eye.)

This is information about the execution of His will in His creation, just as He informed us the execution of His decree in them,

﴿وَمَآ أَمْرُنَآ إِلاَّ وَحِدَةٌ﴾

(And Our commandment is but one) meaning, `We only command a thing once, without needing to repeat the command; and whatever We command comes to existence faster than the blinking of an eye without any delay, not even for an instant.’

Therefore, to the Ash’aris, Ibn Katheer is a kaafir for beleiving that His Amr can “come into existence”

the point being, the meaning of the ayaah is about the fact that the moment of His Amr, it takes place, and it takes place in a point of our time thus signifying that His Sifaat fi’iliyyah, specifically, to create or to speak or to command, is not a “single deed” as this wretched heretic implied for Allah.

Furthermore, Ibn Katheer affirms another reality implicitly in his stated words above

he stated
“Whatever We command comes into existence faster than the blinking of an eye”

In other words, He has affirmed the fact that His “Amr” was not existent before, and then BAAM it comes into existence, and therefore it is muhdaath. Therefore the “AMR” of Allah is created to them along with His kalaam and along with His Khalq.