Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ - Shams al‑Din al‑Dhahabi - (12/458)

Siyar Aʿlām al-NubalāʾShams al‑Din al‑Dhahabi

Nishapur, Qumis, Rayy, Hamadhan, Hulwan, Baghdad, Kufah, Basrah, Mecca, or Medina claims that I ever said, ‘My articulation of the Qur’an is created,’ he is a liar, for I never said that. All I said was: ‘The deeds of the servants are created.’ (1)

Abu Saʿīd Ḥātim ibn Aḥmad al-Kindī related: I heard Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj say, “When Muhammad ibn Ismāʿīl arrived in Nishapur, I never saw either governor or scholar for whom the people did what they did for him. They went out to meet him two—indeed, three—stages outside the city.

“Muhammad ibn Yaḥyā announced in his gathering, ‘Whoever wishes to go out tomorrow to greet Muhammad ibn Ismāʿīl, let him do so.’

“So Muhammad ibn Yaḥyā himself, together with the great majority of the scholars, went out to receive him. He took lodging in the house of the Bukhārīs. Muhammad ibn Yaḥyā then said to us, ‘Do not ask him about any questions of speculative theology. If he answers in a manner contrary to our position, a rift will open between us and him, and then every Harurite, every Rāfiḍī, every Jahmī, and every Murjiʾ in Khurasan will rejoice at our misfortune.’

“The people pressed in on Muhammad ibn Ismāʿīl until the roof and the courtyard were filled to capacity. On the second or third day, a man stood up and asked him about articulating the Qur’an.

“He replied, ‘Our actions are created, and our utterances are part of our actions.’

“A dispute then broke out among them. Some declared, ‘He has said: My articulation of the Qur’an is created,’ while others maintained, ‘He did not say that,’ until tempers flared, the people of the house gathered, and they expelled the disputants.” (2)

(1) Al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī, Tārīkh Baghdād, vol. 2, p. 32; Taqī al-Dīn al-Subkī, Ṭabaqāt al-Subkī, vol. 2, p. 230; Ibn Ḥajar, Introduction to Fatḥ al-Bārī, p. 492. (2) Al-Bukhārī, al-Karābīsī, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, and Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā al-Dhuhlī are unanimous that the Quran is the speech of Allah, in both wording and meaning. Their sole disagreement concerns the expression: “My lafz (pronunciation) of the Quran is created,” or “not created.” Aḥmad and al-Dhuhlī rejected this wording because the term lafz can refer to two distinct things: (a) the very words recited, which the servant does not produce and therefore cannot be called created; and (b) the act of reciting, which is the servant’s own deed. Declaring lafz to be created may mislead the listener into the first sense, which is erroneous, whereas denying that it is created may mislead into the second sense, which is likewise incorrect.

نَيْسَابُوْرَ وَقُومس وَالرَّيِّ وَهَمَذَان وَحلوَانَ وَبَغْدَادَ وَالكُوْفَةِ وَالبَصْرَةِ وَمَكَّةَ وَالمَدِيْنَةِ أَنِّي قُلْتُ: لَفْظِي بِالقُرْآنِ مَخْلُوْقٌ فَهُوَ كَذَّابٌ، فَإِنِّي لَمْ أَقُلْهُ إِلاَّ أَنِّي قُلْتُ: أَفْعَالُ العِبَادِ مَخْلُوْقَةٌ (١) . وَقَالَ أَبُو سَعِيْدٍ حَاتِمُ بنُ أَحْمَدَ الكِنْدِيُّ: سَمِعْتُ مُسْلِمَ بنَ الحَجَّاجِ يَقُوْلُ: لَمَّا قَدِمَ مُحَمَّدُ بنُ إِسْمَاعِيْلَ نَيْسَابُوْرَ مَا رَأَيْتُ وَالِياً وَلاَ عَالِماً فَعَلَ بِهِ أَهْلُ نَيْسَابُوْرَ مَا فعلُوا بِهِ، اسْتَقبلُوهُ مرحلَتَيْنِ وَثَلاَثَة. فَقَالَ مُحَمَّدُ بنُ يَحْيَى فِي مَجْلِسِهِ: مَنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يَسْتَقبلَ مُحَمَّدَ بنَ إِسْمَاعِيْلَ غَداً فليستقبِلْهُ. فَاسْتقبلَهُ مُحَمَّدُ بنُ يَحْيَى وَعَامَّةُ العُلَمَاءِ، فَنَزَلَ دَارَ البُخَاريّينَ، فَقَالَ لَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بنُ يَحْيَى: لاَ تسأَلُوهُ عَنْ شِيءٍ مِنَ الكَلاَمِ، فَإِنَّهُ إِنْ أَجَابَ بِخِلاَفِ مَا نَحْنُ فِيْهِ، وَقَعَ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَهُ، ثُمَّ شَمِتَ بِنَا كُلُّ حَرُورِيٍّ، وَكُلُّ رَافضيٍّ، وَكُلُّ جَهْمِيٍّ، وَكُلُّ مُرْجِئٍ بِخُرَاسَانَ. قَالَ: فَازدحمَ النَّاسُ عَلَى مُحَمَّدِ بنِ إِسْمَاعِيْلَ، حَتَّى امتلأَ السّطحُ وَالدَّارُ، فَلَمَّا كَانَ اليَوْمُ الثَّانِي أَوِ الثَّالِثِ، قَامَ إِلَيْهِ رَجُلٌ، فَسَأَلَهُ عَنِ اللَّفْظِ بِالقُرْآنِ. فَقَالَ: أَفْعَالُنَا مَخْلُوْقَةٌ، وَأَلفَاظُنَا مِنْ أَفْعَالِنَا. فَوَقَعَ بَيْنَهُمُ اخْتِلاَفٌ، فَقَالَ بَعْضُ النَّاسِ: قَالَ: لَفْظِي بِالقُرْآنِ مَخْلُوْقٌ، وَقَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ: لَمْ يَقُلْ، حَتَّى توَاثَبُوا، فَاجْتَمَعَ أَهْلُ الدَّارِ وَأَخرجُوهُم (٢) .

(١) " تاريخ بغداد " ٢ / ٣٢، و" طبقات السبكي " ٢ / ٢٣٠، و" مقدمة الفتح ": ٤٩٢. (٢) إن البخاري والكرابيسي وأحمد بن حنبل ومحمد بن يحيى الذهلي متفقون كلهم على أن القرآن كلام الله لفظه ومعناه، لا يختلفون في ذلك، كما هو واضح من أقوالهم المأثورة عنهم. لكنهم اختلفوا في قول الإنسان: لفظي بالقرآن مخلوق، أو غير مخلوق. فأنكر ذلك الامام أحمد والذهلي. لان اللفظ يراد به أمران: أحدهما الملفوظ نفسه، وهو غير مقدور للعبد، ولا فعل له فيه، والثاني التلفظ به والاداء له، وهو فعل العبد. فإطلاق الخلق على اللفظ قد يوهم المعنى الأول وهو خطأ، وإطلاق نفي الخلق عليه قد يوهم المعنى الثاني وهو =