from His speaking to Moses, peace be upon him, when He said:

“Indeed, We have revealed to you as We revealed to Noah and the prophets after him,”

through to His words:

“And Allah spoke to Moses directly.”

He also distinguished His revelation from His speaking from behind a veil when He said:

“Except by revelation or from behind a veil.”

Likewise, He distinguished the messenger to whom He spoke from others in His words, Most High:

“Among them were those to whom Allah spoke.”

Nevertheless, these people affirm that Allah has speech consisting of a meaning subsisting in His own being, which He speaks. In this respect, they are better than those who affirm no speech for Him other than the meaning He revealed within the prophet’s soul, or the newly produced sound the prophet heard. Yet, in taking their refutation of these people too far, they claimed that nothing could possibly be Allah’s speech except what subsists in Him, and that nothing subsists in Him except meaning. Thus, they denied that letters could be Allah’s speech or that the Arabic Quran could be Allah’s speech.

Then the “fourth group” came and refuted their claim that speech is meaning alone. Some of them claimed that speech consists only of letters or sounds, and that meanings on their own are not called speech at all. This is not so. Rather, speech, without qualification, designates meanings and letters together. Either may be called speech when qualified, as when grammarians say: “Speech consists of nouns, verbs, and particles.” What is being classified here is verbal expression.

Likewise, al-Hasan al-Basrī said: “People of knowledge have always brought speaking to bear upon reflection, and reflection upon contemplation, and conversed with their hearts until they spoke.” And as stated by