God, and that Muhammad was not taken up to his Lord, and that beyond the world there is nothing but sheer nonexistence, then this is false and contrary to the consensus of the early generations of the Ummah. If, however, he means that Allah is not encompassed by His creation and is not contained within existing things, this is explicitly stated in my words. Since I already affirm it, what benefit is there in restating it?

As for the statement, “He must not say that Allah’s speech consists of letters and sound subsisting in Him; rather, it is a meaning subsisting in His Essence,” this too is absent from my words, and I have never said it. Rather, saying, “The Quran consists of letters and sound subsisting in Him,” is an innovation; and saying, “It is a meaning subsisting in His Essence,” is an innovation. None of the early generations said either of these things. My words contain no innovations; rather, they affirm what the early generations unanimously agreed upon: that the Quran is Allah’s speech, uncreated.

As for the statement, “He cannot be pointed to with the fingers in a physical gesture,” this wording is not found in my words. Rather, my words reject the negative formulations introduced by the innovators, such as saying that He cannot be pointed to, for this negation too is an innovation.

If, by saying that He cannot be pointed to, the speaker means that Allah is not confined within created things, or intends other sound meanings, then this is true. But if he means that someone supplicating to Allah must not raise his hands to Him, this contradicts what has been transmitted through numerous independent reports from the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and the innate disposition Allah has instilled in His servants to raise their hands to Him in supplication. The Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—said:

“Indeed, Allah is shy to return His servant’s hands empty when he raises them.”