and they would not eat a single one of our dates except as guests or by purchase. Now that Allah has granted us honour through Islam, do they want to eat our dates? They shall not eat even one date!’ Sa'd spat on the document and tore it up.” The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, approved of what he did. He did not say, “These are letters, so it is impermissible to treat them disrespectfully or spit on them.” Likewise, the early generations disapproved of erasing the Quran with one’s foot, but did not disapprove of erasing human speech.
As for someone saying, “Letters are eternal,” or “The letters of the alphabet are eternal”: if he means letters as a kind, this is correct. If, however, he means an individual letter, he is mistaken, for it has a beginning and an end and is preceded by something else. Whatever is like this can only have come into being.
Moreover, the term “letters” is ambiguous. It may refer to the spoken, audible letters that constitute speech, to written letters, or to letters imagined in the mind. Everyone agrees that sound cannot be speech without letters. Whether letters can constitute speech without sound, however, is disputed. A “letter” may mean a discrete segment of sound, or only the endpoint of a sound. “Letters” may also mean the ink, or the shape assumed by the ink.
The letters that Allah spoke are uncreated. When they are written in a copy of the Quran, it is said, “Allah’s speech written in this copy of the Quran is uncreated.” As for the actual voices of His servants, they are created. The ink is created, and the shape of the ink is created. Thus, the ink is created in both its substance and its form, while Allah’s speech written in ink is uncreated. Among Allah’s speech are