Using that very wording, our position on this matter and all that pertains to it is three-fold: to acknowledge it, to let it stand exactly as it has come, and to entrust its meaning to the truthful, infallible speaker who uttered it.

Ibn ʿAdī said: Muḥammad ibn Hārūn ibn Ḥassān narrated to us; Ṣāliḥ ibn Ayyūb narrated to us; Ḥabīb ibn Abī Ḥabīb narrated to us; he said, Mālik related to me and said:

‘It is our Lord’s command that descends, whereas He Himself is everlasting and never departs.’

Ṣāliḥ added, ‘I mentioned this to Yaḥyā ibn Bukayr and he said, “Excellent, by Allah, but I never heard it from Mālik.”’

I say: I do not know who Ṣāliḥ is, while Ḥabīb is well known. What is reliably preserved from Mālik—through the narration of al-Walīd ibn Muslim—is that when he was asked about the hadiths dealing with the divine attributes, he replied, ‘Let them pass as they have come, without interpretation.’

Hence, should Ḥabīb’s report prove authentic, the Imām would have two statements on the issue.

Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥīm ibn al-Barqī reported to us; ʿAmr ibn Abī Salamah narrated to us; ʿAmr ibn Ḥassān narrated:

Abū Khulaid said to Mālik, ‘Abū ʿAbd Allāh, the people of Damascus recite “Ibrāhām” (1).’

He replied, ‘The people of Damascus know more about eating watermelon than they do about Qurʾānic recitation (2).’

Abū Khulaid responded, ‘They claim it is the reading of ʿUthmān.’

Mālik said, ‘Here is the mushaf of ʿUthmān in my possession.’

He had it brought; when it was opened, it read “Ibrāhām,” just as the people of Damascus had said.

I say: The consonantal script of the mushaf accommodates both readings, yet the reading adopted by the majority is more eloquent and therefore preferable.