And this is true when they state it in general terms. Some of them, however, said: “This is my utterance, my recitation, or my voice; therefore, my utterance, my recitation, or my voice is uncreated.” Thus they went astray, just as others had. Had they been rightly guided, they would have known that when we say, “This is Allah’s speech,” we are not referring to what distinguishes one reciter from another. For it is known that what is heard from every reciter is Allah’s speech, while it is also known that one reciter’s voice is not another’s. What is heard is therefore one and the same insofar as it is Allah’s speech, but differs insofar as the reciters’ voices differ. It is Allah’s speech by virtue of the reality that remains the same, not by virtue of the differing circumstances of the reciters.

This is because what is intended by speech is its wording and meaning, and its wording consists of the recited letters in their ordered arrangement. Even if letters are segmented sounds, or the endpoints of segmented sounds, they constitute speech by virtue of their particular form of segmentation and composition, not by virtue of the vocal material shared by all who produce sounds. Thus, whatever speech contains of eloquence, clarity, fine composition and arrangement, perfection of meaning, and other such qualities belongs to the one who spoke its wording and meaning; it does not belong merely to the qualities of the person who conveyed and delivered it.

As for the statement: “Anyone who says that the doctrine of Jahm ibn Safwān is the doctrine of al-Ashʿarī, or is close to it, or identical to it, is ignorant of the doctrines of both groups; for the Jahmiyyah