an essence devoid of knowledge and power. When they say that these attributes are additional to the essence, they do not mean that they are additional to an essence devoid of knowledge and power—except for those among them who say that He has an attribute, namely knowledge, which makes Him knowing. These are the ones who affirm states.

Most of those who affirm the attributes deny states.

As for those who deny the attributes, they acknowledge the predications—namely, that He is knowing and powerful—but dispute the affirmation of attributes. They also differ among themselves over whether states are to be affirmed. Yet the predications they affirm cannot mean merely our judgment that He is knowing and powerful, our belief in this, or our statements about Him—that is, describing Him in words. For such a description or judgment would be false unless it corresponded to what it asserted. Thus, His being living, knowing, and powerful is not merely a judgment to that effect, a statement about Him, or a verbal description of Him. Nor is it the essence itself that is knowing and powerful, for the essence’s being living, knowing, and powerful is not identical with the essence itself. It must therefore be the attribute.

The leading Mu'tazilites acknowledge this. Yet they vilify those who affirm the attributes without accurately establishing their position. Instead, they report it in terms that convey a false meaning—either because they have not understood what those scholars say, because they have imputed to them implications they supposed necessarily followed from their position, or because of some bias that produces the division condemned by Allah and His Messenger.

[Abū al-Husayn al-Basrī’s discussion in Uyūn al-Adillah]

Consider, in this connection, what Abū al-Husayn al-Basrī, the foremost of the later Mu'tazilites, wrote. In his book Uyūn al-Adillah, he says:

“Chapter on the assertion that Allah alone is eternal. In our view, none is eternal except Allah. Some, however, have affirmed more than