the opposite. As for attributing this position to al-Ash'arī and those who agree with him, this misrepresents them. In their view, Allah’s speech has neither a whole nor parts, and it is therefore inadmissible to ask whether some of it is superior to the rest. For him, degrees of superiority within it are impossible just as likeness is impossible. It cannot be described as having either mutually alike or mutually superior parts, since such relations require two things.

However, on his view, this question is conceivable with respect to multiple attributes, such as knowledge and power: which is superior? If he did say, “The Lord’s attributes do not differ in excellence, because the superiority of one implies that the other falls short of it,” this answer would apply only to these multiple attributes, not to speech itself. Moreover, this attribution to al-Ash'arī of a denial of degrees of superiority among the attributes has not been properly established. Al-Ash'arī did not say that the attributes do not differ in excellence; rather, attributing this to him is an error. What he does say is that speech admits neither degrees of superiority nor likeness because, in his view, it is one—not for the reason mentioned.

As for the multiple attributes, he explicitly stated that they are not mutually alike. His position is that the Essence is not like the attributes, nor is each attribute like the others. Thus, he does not affirm likeness among the meanings he regards as eternal. How, then, can anything entailing their likeness be asserted on the basis of his principles? If he refrains from applying the term “degrees of superiority,” this is like his refraining from applying the terms “likeness” and “mutual distinctness.” In short, anyone who reports that he denied degrees of superiority and affirmed likeness has erred.