the former group affirmed two Qurans: one eternal and one created. The latter group therefore began vehemently condemning the former for affirming two Qurans.

The former group replied:

“If you maintain both that the Arabic Quran is eternal and that it is Allah’s speech, it necessarily follows that it is created, and you thereby agree with the Mutazilah. Your claim, ‘The Arabic Quran is eternal,’ is plainly impossible to sound reason. None of the early generations ever held it. We, along with every other group, reject this doctrine of yours.

“We say that you introduced it as an innovation and thereby contradicted both reason and the transmitted texts. Otherwise, how could the particular letter sīn, preceded by the particular letter bā’, be eternal and beginningless (1)? How could successive letters be eternal, and how could the sound (2) that occurred at this particular time be eternal?!

“None of the four imams or the other early authorities said this, although some later followers of Mālik, al-Shāfi'ī, and Ahmad did say it, as did Ibn Sālim and his followers (3), and a group of speculative theologians and hadith scholars. Yet none of these belonged to the early generations. Although al-Shahrastānī stated in Nihāyat al-Iqdām that this was the doctrine of the early generations and the Hanbalis, it was neither the doctrine of the early generations, nor that of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, nor that of his early followers, nor that of the majority of his followers.”

Consequently, many of those aligned with the Sālimiyya and those aligned with the Kullābiyya became embroiled in disputes and quarrels with one another—and even in strife. The root of all this was their common assertion: