and the emir had asked only about the name Mu‘tazila. Those present objected to him, saying:

“You are mistaken.”

In the course of my remarks, I also said:

“I know every innovation that has arisen in Islam, who first introduced it, and what led to its introduction.”

Moreover, what al-Shahrastānī mentioned concerning the name mutakallimūn is incorrect. The speculative theologians were known by this name before they disputed the question of speech. They used to say of Wāsil ibn ‘Atā’, “He is a speculative theologian,” and describe him as versed in speculative theology, even though people had not yet disagreed over the question of speech.

Others and I said:

“It was Wāsil ibn ‘Atā’”—not ‘Atā’ ibn Wāsil, as the objector had stated.

I said:

“Wāsil did not come after the death of ‘Amr ibn ‘Ubayd; rather, he was his contemporary.”

It is reported that Wāsil once delivered an address, whereupon ‘Amr ibn ‘Ubayd said:

“If a prophet were sent, he would not speak any better than this.”

His eloquence is well known. It is even said that he had a speech impediment and carefully avoided the letter rā, to the point that, when he was told:

“The emir has ordered that a well be dug,”

he said:

“The chief has commanded that a well be dug on the highway.”

When the discussion reached what al-Ash‘arī had said, the leading shaykh among them said:

“There is no doubt that Imam Ahmad is an imam of great stature and one of the foremost imams of Islam. Yet some people who affiliated themselves with him introduced innovations.”