disagreement among people that the first to introduce this position into Islam was Abū Muhammad ‘Abd Allāh ibn Sa‘īd ibn Kullāb al-Basrī. Abū al-Hasan al-Ash‘arī and those who supported their approach followed him in this. Both men opposed the Mu‘tazilah and agreed with Ahl al-Sunnah on the broad foundations of the Sunnah. Yet, because of shortcomings in their knowledge of the Sunnah and their acceptance of certain unsound premises from the Mu‘tazilah, some of their positions incorporated Mu‘tazilī views that led them to depart from the Sunnah, although they did not agree with the Mu‘tazilah unreservedly.

All Muslim groups rejected their position on this question—the definition of speech. Even the jurists, scholars of legal theory, and authors of works on the principles of jurisprudence in the schools of Abū Hanīfah, Mālik, al-Shāfi‘ī, and Ahmad discuss speech and its types—commands, prohibitions, and statements—including their general and specific expressions. They explain that the verbal form is included in what these terms denote according to every group within the Muslim community—its scholars of religious fundamentals, jurists, hadith scholars, and Sufis—with the sole exception of these men. How, then, can this position be attributed to scholars of religious fundamentals generally and without qualification?

Moreover, it is astonishing that Abū al-Qāsim should report the following position from scholars of religious fundamentals: “It is the meaning subsisting in the heart, namely the meaning of a command, prohibition, statement, or inquiry.” It is well known that commands, prohibitions, statements, and inquiries are types of speech. A genus is divided into its species, and its name applies to every species. Thus, when we divide animals into birds and land animals, the genus encompasses both, and its name applies to each. Accordingly, the definition and designation of speech must apply to its types: commands, prohibitions, statements