a group who said: ‘He does not speak again after having spoken, for that would make His speech newly originated.’”

He said:

“This is another deceptive contrivance, casting grit into more than one eye in matters of religion. Abū Bakr ibn Khuzaymah became alert to it. At that time, Naysābūr had a house of transmitted reports toward which the dānāt were extended, for which mounts were saddled, and from which knowledge was brought. What, then, must you think of gatherings from which al-Thaqafī and al-Sibghī were excluded, despite their learning in hadith and jurisprudence, their truthfulness, scrupulous piety, and eloquence! Lineage and standing cannot conceal the taint of speculative theology and istimām toward its adherents. Ibn Khuzaymah was in one house, Muhammad ibn Ishāq in another, and Abū Hāmid al-Arsharqī in another.”

He said:

“That imam, Abū Bakr, sprang into action against this trial. He continued loudly exposing its ugliness and writing works refuting it, like someone warning of an approaching army, until