I say: The authenticity of this statement’s attribution to al-Junayd is unknown, and al-Junayd is too eminent to say such a thing. Such agitation occurs in all living creatures, both human and non-human—even beasts—and also among disbelievers and hypocrites. Moreover, agitation may arise from the sweetness of a voice and love for it, from fear and awe of it, from grief and anguish, or from anger.

Furthermore, it is well known that the voice being heard is not that voice at all. Even if a servant heard Allah’s speech as Moses son of ʿImrān heard it, hearing human voices would not stir his recollection of that. Rather, it is related that Moses felt aversion toward human beings because of Allah’s speech that had lodged in his ears. Taking pleasure in a voice is a natural disposition, with no connection whatsoever to their having heard the Lord’s voice. Moreover, no one has any recollection of that hearing except through faith. People disagree over the taking of the covenant and that hearing, but this is not the place to discuss those disagreements.

Furthermore, al-Junayd’s position on listening was to disapprove of making a deliberate effort to attend it and gather for it. In his view, whoever deliberately seeks out such listening is put to trial by it. How, then, could he explain it in this way?

Abū al-Qāsim himself mentioned this, saying: “I heard Muhammad ibn al-Husayn say: I heard al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn Jaʿfar say: I heard Abū Bakr ibn Mamshādh say: I heard al-Junayd say: ‘Listening is a trial for whoever seeks it out, and a respite for whoever happens upon it.’”