The response is as follows:

As for the claim that the ink used in writing is eternal, we know of no recognized person who has held it, nor have we seen it in any author’s work, whether among the followers of Abū Hanīfah, Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, or Ahmad. Rather, we have seen works by several authors among the followers of Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and Ahmad rejecting the claim that ink is eternal and declaring false the reports attributing this view to them. Some of their statements indicate that the written copy of the Quran contains an eternal letter distinct from the ink.

Some of them say that it is manifest in the written copy without inhering in it, while others say that it inheres in it. Some of their statements imply that this is the form—the letter’s shape and appearance—not its material substance, namely its ink. This view, too, is false, just as the claim that any human vocal sounds are eternal is false. The latter view has been held by some followers of Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and Ahmad, although the majority of the followers of these imams reject it. Imam Ahmad and the majority of his followers have made many well-known statements rejecting this view.

There is no doubt that anyone who says that people’s voices are eternal is a fabricator and an innovator, subject to the same judgment as others of his kind. Likewise, anyone who says that this Quran is not Allah’s speech is a fabricator and an innovator, subject to the same judgment as others of his kind.

And whoever says that the Arabic Quran is not Allah’s speech, but rather that part of it is the speech of