This issue had already become a matter of common discussion; so when the people, alarmed, turned to their scholars for guidance, the scholars did not say, “This is an innovation that no one has ever addressed, and we are not required to tackle it.” Rather, they dispelled uncertainty with certainty, lifted confusion, removed distress, and reached unanimous agreement that the Qur’an is not created. They issued fatwas to that effect, marshalled proofs and arguments, engaged in debate and analogy, and brought forward textual evidence from the Book of Allah, such as His words: “Surely, to Him belong the creation and the command” and “Indeed, I—yes, I—am Allah; there is no deity but Me, so worship Me.”

As for the claim, “This is an innovation that people have not spoken about; do not burden yourselves with it,” people consult scholars precisely on matters of innovation, not on issues already clarified by the Sunnah and discussed by the early generations. If this had been one of those settled matters, there would have been no need for scholarly intervention.

Speech cannot be countered by silence; doubt is not cured by indecision; and innovation is not repelled merely by invoking the Sunnah. Falsehood gains strength only when you perceive it and yet refrain from answering it.

Furthermore, if abstaining from any statement about the Qur’an—so that one neither says it is created nor uncreated—were correct, what argument could we advance against those who actually do abstain? Why then have we branded them skeptics, declared them misguided, and, according to some of Ahl al-Sunnah, even pronounced them unbelievers—going so far as to excommunicate anyone who doubts their unbelief? Is the issue in their case and in ours not one and the same?

Someone might object: “Al-Thawri, Ibn ʿUyaynah, Ibn al-Mubarak, and others like them did not abstain.”