their inner state—regarding the fact that speech consists only of letters and sounds, composed and coherently arranged, though languages differ.

The early thinkers who discussed rational matters expressed this meaning, saying: ‘Speech consists of ordered letters and distinct sounds.’ They—meaning the scholars of Arabic—said: ‘Speech consists of nouns, verbs, and meaningful particles. Examples of nouns are Zayd and ‘Amr; examples of verbs are jā’a (he came) and dhahaba (he went); and examples of meaningful particles are hal (an interrogative particle), bal (rather), qad (a particle indicating completion or possibility), and the like.’

Thus, there is consensus among rational people that speech consists of letters and sounds. When Ibn Kullāb and his peers emerged and attempted to refute the Mu‘tazilīs through unaided reason, they were unfamiliar with the foundations of the Sunnah and the position of the early generations. Nor did they cite the reports transmitted on this subject as evidence, claiming that these were reports that were not mass-transmitted and did not establish knowledge.

The Mu‘tazilīs compelled them to agree that there was consensus that speech consists of letters and sounds and involves succession and composition; that, in the observable realm, this occurs only through motion and rest; and that it must consist of parts and portions. Something of this nature cannot be an attribute of the essence of Allah Most High, because the essence of the True One cannot be described in terms of conjunction and separation, whole and part, or motion and rest. An attribute of the essence is subject to the same principles as the essence itself.

They said:

From this argument, it is therefore known that the speech attributed to Allah Most High is a creation of His