and uvulas. Whoever says otherwise and imagines that Allah spoke through the reciter’s tongue, or that the speech subsisting in His Essence has these characteristics of separation and joining, drawing together and spacing apart, has thereby judged it to have been brought into being. For coming together and separating are evidence that the world was brought into being, and these are characteristics of instruments. End of quotation.

I say: What Ibn Aqīl said here is less erroneous than what al-Barzabīnī said, for the latter plainly contradicts the revealed texts, scholarly consensus, and reason. The revealed texts and scholarly consensus establish that anyone who deliberately utters ordinary human speech during prayer, not for the benefit of the prayer and knowing that it is forbidden, invalidates his prayer by consensus—contrary to what Judge Ya‘qūb stated. Whenever he intends Quranic recitation by his words, his prayer is not invalidated, by consensus. If he intends both recitation and addressing someone, there is disagreement. The apparent position of Ahmad’s school is that his prayer is not invalidated, as is also the position of al-Shāfi‘ī and others. Another view holds that it is invalidated, as maintained by Abū Hanīfa and others. What they related from the Companions is evidence against them.

For the words spoken by ‘Alī ibn Abī Tālib:

“So be patient. Indeed, Allah’s promise is true. And do not let those who lack certainty unsettle you.”

are Allah’s speech. ‘Alī did not intend to say to the Khārijite, “Do not let the Khārijites unsettle you.” Rather, he intended to let him hear the verse and to show that he was acting upon it: remaining patient and not allowing those who lacked certainty to unsettle him.

Ibn Mas‘ūd, while in Kūfa, said to them:

“Enter Egypt, Allah willing, in safety.”

It is well known that Misr (Egypt), without nunation, denotes the city of that name, which was not in Kūfa. Ibn Mas‘ūd was in Kūfa. It is therefore clear that he intended to recite the verse and also intended