He Himself, that is wilful denial of the obvious.”

This was the first argument they put to Imam Ahmad during the ordeal. When al-Muʿtasim told them, “Debate with him,” ʿAbd al-Rahmān ibn Ishāq said to him, “Abū ʿAbd Allāh, what do you say about the Quran”—or he said, “about Allah’s speech”—meaning, “Is it Allah Himself or other than Him?”

Ahmad replied, “What do you say about Allah’s knowledge? Is it Allah Himself or other than Him?” Ahmad thus countered his argument by invoking Allah’s knowledge, and ʿAbd al-Rahmān fell silent. This illustrates Abū ʿAbd Allāh’s skill in debate—may Allah have mercy on him.

When an innovator has built his doctrine upon a corrupt premise, presenting the truth you hold at the outset will prompt him to dispute it because of the specious argument lodged in his mind. Thus, when an opponent in debate claims to possess the truth, one should begin by dismantling his position. Once he has been defeated and seeks the truth, give it to him. Otherwise, as long as he believes the opposite of the truth, the truth will not enter his heart. It is like a tablet inscribed with falsehood: first erase it, then write the truth upon it.

These people intended to argue in support of their innovation, so Imam Ahmad—may Allah have mercy on him—presented counterarguments and refutations that invalidated it. In his refutation of the Jahmiyyah, Imam Ahmad addressed this argument and explained that revelation does not use the term “other,” either affirmatively or negatively. Accordingly, no binding conclusion follows as to whether it falls within the term “other” in the Lawgiver’s speech or not; thus there is no scriptural proof that it is created.

Furthermore, it is an ambiguous term: “other” may mean something separate from a thing, or it may mean something that is not that thing itself.