as a matter of self-evident knowledge. Those who held them were driven to them only by the previously mentioned principles that entailed these objectionable consequences. If the necessary consequence does not hold, neither does that which entails it.

Likewise, concerning those among the hadith scholars, jurists, and theologians who affiliate themselves with the Sunnah and say:

“He speaks only with eternal, beginningless sounds that do not occur in succession; He has no power to speak with them, nor does He exercise any will or action in this,”

the majority of rational people say that their position, too, is self-evidently false. They were driven to it only by their belief that speech is unrelated to the speaker’s will and power, despite knowing that speech comprises letters arranged in sequence and a voice heard from the speaker.

As for those who say, “The voice heard from the reciter is eternal,” or, “Both an eternal voice and a newly originated voice are heard from him,” the falsity of this is too obvious to require discussion.

The statements of the early generations, the leading authorities, and the scholars concerning this principle are numerous and widespread. This is not the place to survey them exhaustively.

[The Quran’s Evidence Concerning Allah’s Actions]

As for the evidence in the Quran and Sunnah for this principle, it is too abundant to enumerate. Imam Ahmad and other scholars cited collections of this evidence in their refutations of the Jahmiyyah, as al-Khallāl mentioned in his Book of the Sunnah. He said:

“Al-Marwazī informed us, saying: ‘This is what Abū Abd Allāh collected from the Quran and used as evidence against the Jahmiyyah. He wrote it in his own hand, and I copied it from his manuscript.’ Al-Marwazī then cited many verses, though fewer than those cited by al-Khidr ibn Ahmad ibn Abd Allāh ibn Ahmad. In it he said: ‘I heard