As for Ahmad’s and the imams’ denunciation of those who say, “This Quran is created,” and “Recitation is created”; their regarding as grave the assertion, “There is no Quran in people’s hearts or in the written copies”; and the allegation made by some that whoever says this has adopted the position of the Christians and the proponents of divine indwelling—Ahmad’s and others’ denunciations of these views are numerous, widely known, and recorded in many books. This fatwa did not require establishing this principle, so there was no need to discuss it in detail, unlike the other principle. Elsewhere, we have mentioned as much of this as Allah enabled us to mention.

Were I to recount the statements of Ahmad, the leading scholars among his followers, and others refuting those who say that the servant’s utterance or voice is uncreated, or that the voice heard from the reciter is eternal, the discussion would be lengthy.

Consider Abū Nasr al-Sijzī, who wrote the well-known al-Ibānah (The Clarification). He was among the strongest proponents of the view that recitation is what is recited, that uttering the Quran is the Quran itself, and that it is uncreated. He rejected reports attributing any other view to Ahmad. Nevertheless, he said:

“If our opponents object, saying, ‘Although you say that recitation is the Quran and the speech of Allah, you do not declare that the voice heard from the reciter is Allah’s voice. Rather, you attribute it to the reciter. Since you cannot make that declaration, this indicates that it is something other than the Quran.’”

Abū Nasr said: “The answer is that, in this matter, we adhere to the apparent meaning of revelation