—those who hold that the act of creation is distinct from what is created, who are the majority, do not say that the act of creation is created.

Whoever holds that acts, volitions, or perceptions subsisting in Him arise anew does not say that these are created. For if there is an act of creation, a Creator, and something created, the act of creation is not included in what is created.

Thus, those who say, “Allah’s speech subsists in His Essence,” agree that Allah’s speech is uncreated. Beyond this, however, they disagree, holding several different views:

Is it a single meaning, or five meanings, eternally existent without beginning, as Ibn Kullāb and al-Ash‘arī maintain?

Or is it letters and sounds that are eternal, without beginning, and have always existed, as is reported of Ibn Sālim and a group of others?

Or should it instead be said that it consists of letters and sounds that arise in His Essence after He had not been speaking, as Ibn Karrām and a group of others maintain?

Or should it be said that He has always spoken whenever He wills, and that, whenever He wills, He speaks with an audible voice and with letters, as is reported of the scholars of hadith and the leading scholars?

The point here is that none of them calls anything subsisting in His Essence created, whether it arises anew or is eternal.

This makes clear Abd al-Azīz’s argument against Bishr. Bishr was one of the leading figures of the Jahmiyya, who deny the divine attributes. In his view, no attribute subsists in the Essence of Allah Most High—neither action