al-Zāghūnī—explicitly assert that Ahmad’s position is that the Quran is eternal and consists of letters and sounds. Yet Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the other three imams never said this or argued in its defense. Rather, these men and other followers of the four imams were unfamiliar with their positions on certain issues.

Those who supposed that the position of Ibn Kullāb and his followers represented the position of the early generations and their affirmation that the Quran is uncreated were the ones who began to say:

“The view that some of Allah’s speech is superior to other parts is consistent only with the position of the people of innovation—the Jahmiyyah and the Mu‘tazilah.”

Various groups among the imams’ followers likewise came to say this, as we shall show by citing statements from some followers of Mālik and al-Shāfi‘ī. They did not know that none of the early generations had held this position. Rather, they rejected this principle of Ibn Kullāb, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal and others instructed people to shun the Kullābiyyah on account of it. Even al-Hārith al-Muhāsibī was shunned because he was an associate of Ibn Kullāb and had agreed with him on this principle. It was subsequently reported, however, that he retracted that view. Ahmad used to warn against the Kullābiyyah.

A dispute over this principle also arose between Abū Bakr ibn Khuzaymah, known as the Imam of Imams, and some of his associates, because they held Ibn Kullāb’s position. Al-Hākim Abū Abd Allāh al-Naysābūrī related their account in The History of Nishapur.

A detailed discussion of this principle belongs elsewhere. Here we have merely drawn attention to the underlying grounds through which the true nature of these positions can be understood.