The Jahmite Ash'aris: The Qur'an Present With Us is 'Muhdath' Meaning (To Them) Created - Ibn

Battah's (d. 387H) Refutation of the Jahmites of Old With A Clarification of the Doubts of
Contemporary Jahmite Ash'aris Regarding What is 'Muhdath

Introduction

This article is a continuation of a series of articles related to some doubts propagated by the
Jahmites of today posing as followers of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari. Their intent is to cause
confusion regarding the subject of Allaah's actions tied to His will and power, which they
themselves deny on the basis that they would constitute events, occurrences (hawaadith) in
Alaah's Essence, and thus according to Aristotle's "al-Maqoolaat al-Ashar" (the Ten
Categories) Allaah would be rendered a body (jism). And so they have brought some doubts
regarding ambiguous terms such as "Muhdath" (of recent occurrence), such doubts that
actually originated with the Jahmites on the subject of the Qur'an. They wrongly attempt to
apply such doubts to the creed of Ahl us-Sunnah that Allaah has actions tied to His will and
that He speaks as and when He wills and that none of His speech is created. Their confusion
lies in their not grasping the usage and implementation of these terms (haadith, hadeeth,
muhdath), and in particular the true meaning of the various statements from the Salaf that
have used in the course of this doubt - and we will quote these very statements in the course
of this article.

It would be a good idea to read articles first to get some background into the subject:

 A Reply to the Doubt of the Jahmite Ash'aris Regarding What is 'Muhdath' and What
is 'Makhlooq' - Which Is The Very Doubt of Jahm bin Safwaan - And Their Attempt
To Negate Allaah's Actions By Way Of It - read article here.
 Did the Salaf Believe 'The Qur'an Came into Existence From Non-Existence' -
Confuting the Doubt of the Jahmite Ash'aris And an Illustration of Their Ignorance
and Deception Regarding 'Muhdath', 'Haadith', 'Hudooth' and Allaah's Actions Tied
To His Will read article here.

Background Points

Before proceeding to the text and translation of Ibn Battah's words, it is necessary that a few
important points be made as background to this issue:

 Ibn Battah has been preceded in the explanation from him that follows by Imaam
Ahmad (d. 241H), who also explained this in his book "ar-Radd alal-Jahmiyyah" in
the course of refuting the attachment of the Jahmiyyah to the verse:

‫ُّم ْحدَثٍ َّربِ ِهم َّمن ِذ ْكرٍ مِن يَأْتِي ِهم َما‬

"Comes not unto them an admonition (dhikr) from their Lord as a recent
revelation (Muhdath)..." (Al-Anbiya 21:2), and inshaa'Allaah we can document that
in a separate article.

 Prior to the Kullaabiyyah, followers of Ibn Kullaab (d. 240H) and Abu al-Hasan al-
Ash'ari (d. 324H), there were only two views. The saying of the Jahmiyyah and
 Mu'tazilah that this Qur'an present with us, in letter and word, is created. And the
saying of the Salaf that it is not created but Allaah's speech uncreated, which He spoke
in reality, and no matter how it is found, conveyed through recitation, heard,
memorized, written, it is all Allaah's speech, meaning the words, not the voice, or ink,
or paper, but the words conveyed. The dispute between them was concerning this
Qur'an that is present with us, in letter and word, in all these ways. And every faction
was agreed the definition of Kalaam (speech) is that it is comprised of both word
(lafdh) and meaning (ma'naa) together, and is letter and voice - there was no
difference in this matter between any of the various factions - none whatsoever. Then
Ibn Kullaab came along and he innovated the the false "Kalaam Nafsee" doctrine, and
broke the Ijmaa' that existed previously concerning "Kalaam". We have documented
this in previous articles, from ash-Shahrastani (himself an Ash'ari) - see the middle of
this article where the quote from "Nihaayat ul-Aqdaam" of ash-Shahrastani appears.
And it was from Ibn Kullaab's innovation of the doctrine of "Kalaam Nafsee" that the
saying of the Ash'arites was derived that we have two Qur'ans, not one! One of them is
uncreated, and the other is created! And due to the absurdity of their saying, they
dislike that the reality of their belief and saying should be propagated about them, and
this trait of theirs is well over 800 years old. Go here to this article and see Ibn
Qudaamah breaking it down very well about them.
 The saying of the Ash'arites is that this Qur'an that we have present with us, in its
letter and word is created. And we are not speaking here of the ink, paper and the
voice of the reciter as that is clearly understood to be created, since all the actions of
the servants are created. However, we are speaking about the words (that are written,
memorized, recited, heard). Regarding this, the Ash'arites believe as did the Jahmites
and Mu'tazilah, that they are created. However, the Ash'arites are the most adept in
deceiving the people and in concealing the reality of their saying. And we have shown
from their own books and their own scholars what proves that their saying is no
different to the saying of the Mu'tazilah in reality. But as the truth is manifest to one
who looks at the reality of the position of the Salaf, the Ash'arites of today realize this,
and the shrewd ones amongst them are very adept in using chicanery to hide the reality
of their own saying. We will dedicate a separate article to this to show how this is
done by the likes of G.F. Haddad.

See this article from Ibn Qudaamah (here) on the Ash'aris believing in two Qur'ans,
then these articles: From the Haashiyah of al-Bayjuri (d. 1276H), here and also here,
from Fakhr ud-Din ar-Razi (d. 606H) here, from Muhammad Sa'eed Ramadan al-Buti
(contemporary), here, from Imaam al-Juwaynee (d. 478H), here. Finally, to see the
actual view of the Salaf see this article here from Ibn Jareer at-Tabari (d. 310H).

 The reason for the Ash'arites (and the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah and
Maturidiyyah) holding that this Qur'an we have with us, recited, heard, memorized,
written, in letter and word, is created is because they reject that Allaah has Sifaat
Fi'liyyah, meaning actions that are tied to His will and power (also called af'aal
ikhtiyaariyyah). In this, they simply followed the creed of the Kullaabiyyah, and it is
upon this basis that they are lead to the view that Allaah cannot have instances of
speech that are other than each other, or which are tied to His will and power, as this
would necessitate events, occurrences (hawaadith), meaning actions, and according to
Aristotle's Maqoolaat (which is what their entire understanding of Tawheed revolves
around and is evaluated upon), actions are from the incidental attributes (a'raad) of
bodies (ajsaam). To understand more about this read this article. In rejecting that
 Allaah has actions tied to His will and power, all of the Mutakallimoon (Jahmiyyah,
Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah) have opposed the Book of
Allaah, the Sunnah of His Messenger, the Ijmaa of the Sahaabah, and of the entirety of
the Salaf, and have instead agreed with the necessities arising from the metaphysical
language, terminology and classifications of the atheist Philosophers, which they have
made to be the foundation for establishing the very veracity of the religion itself,
namely, in their intellectual proof of "hudooth ul-ajsaam". All of these Mutakallimoon
hold that the Qur'an we have present with us is created, upon this foundation and
basis, they are all agreed upon that.
 And you need to pay very good attention to this last matter that has just preceded . The
reason for all of the Mutakallimoon deviating on the issue of Allaah's attributes, to
varying degrees, is that they made the foundation of their religion to be this
intellectual proof for demonstrating the universe is created, using the language and
terminology of the atheist Philosophers themselves and this is the ilm ul-kalaam that
the Imaams such as Maalik and Ahmad and ash-Shaafi'ee condemned. And when
these people used this language and terminology to devise what is in fact a corrupt and
false proof in the first place, all their language regarding Allaah and His Attributes
could not be divorced from it, and thus Tawheed became nothing but purifying Allaah
of a'raad (incidental attributes) and hawaadith (events, occurrences). And the Ilm ul-
Kalaam of these people is not what is also referred often by them as "Kalaam" which
is used to refer sound reasoning and argument and speech on issues of creed. They
confuse between the two in order to defend that devious ilm ul-kalaam which is the
base and foundation of their creed in reality. Thus, they will say, "Hey, Imaam Ahmad
indulged in Kalaam when he refuted the Jahmiyyah" deceptively portraying to people
through this that their particular Ilm ul-Kalaam, which is the Tawheed of al-Jawhar
wal-'Arad, the Tawheed of Aristotle's Maqoolaat, is legitimate, when it was in fact the
"Kalaam" condemned by all the Imaams of the Salaf!

Ibn Battah and the Doubts of the Jahmiyyah

Ibn Battah al-Ukbaree (d. 387H) wrote in his book al-Ibaanah al-Kubraa (ar-Radd 'alal-
Jahmiyyah 2/184-186), regarding a doubt of the Jahmiyyah used to argue that this Qur'an
present with us, recited, heard, memorized, written, in letter and word, is created and not the
uncreated speech of Allaahh.
Translation and Notes

Ibn Battah said:

Then the Jahmite, when his proof regarding what he claimed is invalidated, he claimed
another matter, so he said: "I find a verse in the Book which indicates that the Qur'an is
created." So it was said to him: "Which verse is this?" He said: |"The saying of Allaah, the
Mighty and Majestic:
‫ُّم ْحدَثٍ َّر ِب ِهم َّمن ِذ ْكرٍ مِن يَأْتِي ِهم َما‬
Comes not unto them an admonition (a chapter of the Qur'an) from their Lord as a
recent revelation... (Al-Anbiya 21:2)

Do you not see that every Muhdath is makhlooq (created)?"

The Salaf made takfir of the Jahmiyyah for their saying that the Qur'an is created, because this
means that the knowledge (ilm) of Allaah is makhlooq, or of recent occurrence (Muhdath),
since the Qur'an is from Allaah's knowledge.

And in addition - although the Jahmiyyah did not intend this - their use of the verse above
also implied that Allaah became "mutakallim" (one who speaks) after he was not
"mutakallim", meaning His attribute of speech is "Muhdath" (of recent occurrence, acquiring
it after not having it), but the Jahmiyyah did not affirm the attribute of speech for Allaah to
begin with, and they did not intend this particular argument. However, the use of the
ambiguous word "Muhdath" gave the presumption of this meaning.

In this regard there are numerous statements from the Salaf clarifying this affair.

Al-Bayhaqi in his "al-Asmaa was-Sifaat" brings the statement of al-Wakee bin al-Jarraah
(1/609):

‫كفر فقد محدث القرآن أن زعم ومن محدث القرآن أن زعم فقد مخلوق القرآن أن زعم من‬
Whoever claimed the Qur'an is makhlooq (created) has claimed that the Qur'an is
Muhdath (of recent occurrence in the knowledge of Allaah) and whoever claimed the Qur'an
is Muhdath has disbelieved.

And Imaam adh-Dhahabi, in his "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" (p. 152) brings the narration of
Muhammad al-Marwazi who said:

I heard al-Haarith bin Umayr, and he was with Fudayl bin Iyaad, saying:
‫زنديق فهو هللا علم من ليس أنه زعم ومن كفر فقد محدث القرآن أن زعم من‬

Whoever claimed that the Qur'an is Muhdath (of recent occurrence in the knowledge of
Allaah) has disbelieved, and whoever claimed that it is not from the knowledge of Allaah is a
zindeeq (heretic).

And Fudayl said: You have spoken the truth.

And Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani brings a number of narrations in this regard, in Fath ul-Bari in the
sharh of "Kitaab ut-Tawheed" from al-Bukhari's Saheeh:
 ‫يعلمه وسلم عليه هللا صلى النبي عند محدث انه المراد وانما قال هللا عند ال الخلق عند محدث قال حماد بن نعيم طريق ومن‬
‫كان انه ال متكلما يزل لم ألنه بمحدث ليس هللا كالم آخر موضع في وقال عالما يزل فلم سبحانه هللا واما يعلمه ال كان ان بعد‬
‫فتكلموا كالما لهم أحدث حتى يتكلمون ال كانوا الخلق ألن بخلقه هللا شبه فقد ذلك زعم فمن لنفسه كالما أحدث حتى يتكلم ال‬
‫به‬
And from the route of Nu'aym bin Hammaad who said: "Of recent occurrence with the
creation, not with Allaah." He (Nu'aym) said: "The intent is that it is of recent occurrence to
the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) who came to know it after he did not know it. As for
Allaah, the Sublime, then He never ceased to be knowing (aalim)."

And he said in another place: "Allaah's speech is not of recent occurrence (meaning that He
did not acquire speech after not having it), because He has never ceased to be one who speaks
(mutakallim). It is not [the case] that he did not used to speak until He brought about speech
in Himself (i.e. after not having the attribute of speech). So whoever claimed this has
resembled Allaah to His creation, because the creation do not speak until He brings forth (the
capability of) speech for them so that they then speak by way of it.

And Imaam Ahmad said in his "ar-Radd alal-Jahmiyyah" responding to the same doubt
brought by the Jahmites, at the end of the rebuttal of the Jahmites on this point:

So we found the evidence from the saying of Allaah: "Comes not unto them an
admonition (a chapter of the Qur'an) from their Lord as a recent revelation... (Al-
Anbiya 21:2)" [meaning] to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), because the Prophet
(sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not used to know, so Allaah taught him, and when Allaah
taught him, then that became "Muhdath" (of recent occurrence in knowledge) to the Prophet
(sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

And there occurs in Imaam al-Bukhaaree's "Khalq Af'aal il-Ibaad" (p. 23), the answer to the
use of the Jahmites of the same verse:

Which translates:
 As for their distortion {of the verse]: "Comes not unto them an admonition (a chapter
of the Qur'an) from their Lord as a recent revelation..." (Al-Anbiya 21:2), then it is of
recent [revelation] to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), and his companions when
Allaah taught that which was not known [previously].

From the above narrations - and as will come clear through what is yet to come of the
response of Ibn Battah to the Jahmites - it is clear that the saying of the Jahmites that the
Qur'an is "Muhdath" and "makhlooq" and their use of this particular verse to argue for their
falsehood - implies the two following beliefs:

 The first: That Allaah's knowledge is of recent origin - since the Qur'an is Allaah's
knowledge and whoever claimed what is in the Qur'an is created has claimed that
Allaah's knowledge is created (makhlooq), and thus of recent origin (haadith,
muhdath) - and this was the argument of Imaam Ahmad against the Jahmites, so he
made binding upon the Jahmites that they speak with kufr through this claim of theirs.
 The second: Even though the Jahmites do not hold this view, since they do not affirm
"Kalaam" as an attribute for Allaah at all, nevertheless, the argument they adduce from
the verse in question and the saying that the Qur'an is "Muhdath" implies that Allaah's
attribute of Kalaam is of recent origin, meaning that He became mutakallim (one who
speaks) after not being one who speaks (mutakallim). And Imaam Ahmad spoke
against the likes of Dawud al-Ashbahani (adh-Dhaahiree) who said "the Qur'an is
muhdath" since it implies this particular saying that Allaah spoke (takallama) after not
being one who speaks (mutakallim), this being the saying of the Karraamiyah,
meaning that the quality of speech is of recent occurrence, that he acquired speech
after not having speech.

And Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah also provides clarification on this matter in Sharh
Hadeeth in-Nuzool (p. 405-407):

‫ يقولون وكذلك‬: ‫ الحديث أحسن وهو حديث هو وكالمه وقدرته بمشيئته يتكلم إنه‬. ‫حديثا ويسمى باتفاقهم بمخلوق وليس‬
‫ وحادثا‬. ‫ لهم قولين على ؟ محدثا يسمى وهل‬. ‫ المنفصل المخلوق على إال المحدث لفظ يطلق ال أنه عادته من كان ومن‬-
‫ال وكانوا هللا رحمه أحمد اإلمام محنة في القرآن في تناظروا الذين المتناظرين عند المشهور هو االصطالح هذا كان كما‬
‫ المنفصل المخلوق إال معنى للمحدث يعرفون‬- ‫من بل محدث القرآن يقال أن السنة أهل عند يجوز ال االصطالح هذا فعلى‬
‫ مخلوق إنه قال فقد محدث إنه قال‬. ‫فظن ; بذلك تكلم أنه إليه كتب لما " داود " على اإلطالق هذا أحمد اإلمام أنكر ولهذا‬
‫ السنة أئمة فأنكره هذا أراد أنه االصطالح بهذا يتكلمون الذين‬. ‫متفقون أصحابه وأئمة هو بل قصده هذا يكن لم نفسه وداود‬
‫البخاري قول وهو السلف أئمة من واحد غير قول هو ; بنفسه قائم أنه مقصوده كان وإنما مخلوق غير هللا كالم أن على‬
‫ وغيره‬. ‫هللا كالم أن على ومتفقون منفصل بمخلوق ليس أنه على متفقون فإنهم ; " لفظي " السنة أهل بين ذلك في والنزاع‬
‫ السنة أئمة وكان بذاته قائم‬: ‫بن وعثمان خزيمة وابن وأمثاله المبارك وابن وأمثاله وداود وأمثاله والبخاري وأمثاله كأحمد‬
‫وأول ; قديم القرآن أن منهم أحد يقل ولم ; وقدرته بمشيئته يتكلم هللا أن على متفقين ; وغيرهم شيبة أبي وابن الدارمي سعيد‬
‫ كالب ابن هو ذلك قال أنه عنه شهر من‬. ‫كان لكونه المحاسبي الحارث بهجر وأمر الكالبية من يحذر " أحمد اإلمام " وكان‬
‫ منهم‬. ‫ يقول كان وأنه كالب ابن قول عن القرآن في رجع أنه الحارث عن قيل وقد‬: ‫ بصوت يتكلم هللا إن‬. ‫ذلك ذكر وممن‬
‫ " التصوف لمذهب التعرف " كتاب في الكالباذي عنه‬.

This translates as:

And likewise they say: Indeed He (Allaah) speaks with His Will (mashee'ah) and Power
(qudrah), and His speech (Kalaam) is "hadeeth" and it is the best of "hadeeth", and it is not
created by the unanimous agreement, yet it is called "hadeeth" and "haadith". But can it be
called "Muhdath"? There are two sayings for them. He whose habit was not to apply the
word "Muhdath" except to a created entity, separate (from Allaah's Essence) - just as this
particular usage was well-known amongst those debaters who debated regarding the Qu'ran in
the trial of Imaam Ahmad (rahimahullaah) and they did not used to know of any meaning for
"al-muhdath" except "the created entity, separate (from Allaah's Essence)" - then based upon
this usage, it is not permissible with Ahl us-Sunnah for it to be said, "The Qur'an is muhdath".
Rather, the one who said it is "Muhdath" then he has said it is "makhlooq". For this reason,
Imaam Ahmad rejected this application (of the word "Muhdath") from Dawud (adh-
Dhaahiree), when it was written to him (Ahmad) that he (Dawud) spoke with that.

And those who spoke with this usage thought that he (Dawud) meant this (meaning) so the
Imaams of the Sunnah showed rejection against it. But this was not the intent of Dawud
himself. Rather, he and the leading scholars of his associates were agreed that the speech of
Allaah is uncreated. His intent was that it (the Speech) is established by with His Self.

And this is the saying of more than one from the Imaams of the Salaf, and it is the saying of
al-Bukhari and others. And the dispute concerning that between Ahl us-Sunnah is one of
wording only. For they are all agreed that it (the speech) is not a created (entity) separate
(from Allaah's essence), and they are agreed that Allaah's Speech is established with His
Essence. The Imaams of the Sunnah like Ahmad and his likes, al-Bukhari and his likes,
Dawud and his likes, Ibn al-Mubaarak and his likes, Ibn Khuzaimah and his likes, Uthman bin
Sa'eed ad-Darimee, and Ibn Abee Shaybah and others besides them were all unanimously
agreed that Allaah speaks with His will and power, and not a single one of them said that the
Qur'an is "qadeem" (eternal). The first one from whom it became well-known that he said this
was Ibn Kullaab. And Imaam Ahmad used to warn from the Kullaabiyyah and ordered the
boycott of al-Haarith al-Muhaasibee due to him being from amongst them. And it has been
said that al-Haarith turned back from the saying of Ibn Kullaab on the Qur'an and that he used
to say that Allaah speaks with a voice. From those who mentioned that is al-Kalaabaadhee in
the book, "At-Ta'arruf Li Madhhab at-Tasawwuf".

And Ibn Taymiyyah also said, clarifying this matter further, as occurs in Majmoo' al-
Fataawaa (6/160-162), in discussing Abu Ya'laa's interpretation of one of Imaam Ahmad's
statements, whilst noting that there were some Hanbalis, who ascribed themselves to Imaam
Ahmad who had some Kullaabi influences:

‫القاضي قول وأما‬: ‫بحدوثه قول هذا إن‬، ‫بجوابين عنه فيجيبون‬

‫أحدهما‬: ‫حديثًا يسمى أن محدثًا يسمى أال‬، ‫المنفصل المخلوق هو المحدث إذ‬، ‫حديثًا هللا سماه فقد الحديث وأما‬، ‫قول وهذا‬
‫الكرامية‬، ‫الحديث أهل وأكثر‬، ‫والحنبلية‬.

‫والثاني‬: ‫محدثًا يسمى أنه‬، ‫قوله في كما‬: ‫بمخلوق وليس ُّم ْحدَثٍ َّر ِب ِهم َّمن ِذ ْكرٍ ِمن‬. ‫الفقهاء من كثير قول وهذا‬، ‫الحديث وأهل‬
‫والكالم‬، ‫ذلك إنكار أحمد عن المنقول لكن المذهب صاحب األصبهاني علي بن كداود‬، ‫أصحابنا قولي ألحد به يحتج وقد‬.

ٍْ ‫النيسابوري يحيى بن محمد كتاب جاءني عنه هللا فرج ال األصبهاني؟ علي بن داود َم‬، ‫أن‬
‫المروذي قال‬: ‫هللا عبد أبو قال‬: ‫ن‬
‫األصبهاني داود‬، ‫كذبًا قال‬: ‫محدث القرآن إن‬، ‫السنة كتاب في الرواية هذه الخالل بكر أبو وذكر‬، ‫أحمد بن هللا عبد وقال‬:
‫فقال أبي على داود استأذن‬: ‫قلبه هللا ود جبر ال داود؟ هذا؟ من‬، ‫قبره هللا ود َ َّود‬، ‫دودًا فمات‬
َّ ‫ ُم‬.

‫المقصود خالف توهم قد واإلطالقات‬، ‫فيقال‬: ‫بقولك أردت إن‬: ‫الجهمية يقوله كما هللا عن منفصل مخلوق أنه محدث‬،
‫والمعتزلة‬، ‫نقوله ال باطل فهذا والنجارية‬، ‫بقولك أردت وإن‬: ‫بمشيئته به هللا تكلم كالم إنه‬، ‫كان وإن بعينه به يتكلم لم أن بعد‬
‫ذلك قبل بغيره تكلم قد‬، ‫بذلك نقول فإنا شاء إذا متكل ًما يزل لم أنه مع‬. ‫والسنة الكتاب عليه دل الذي وهو‬، ‫السلف قول وهو‬،
‫الحديث وأهل‬، ‫واألشعرية الكُالبيَّة اآلخر القول ابتدع وإنما‬، ‫قوالن لهم القول هذا أهل ولكن‬:
‫أحدهما‬: ‫متكل ًما يكن لم أن بعد تكلم أنه‬، ‫قادرا كان وإن‬ ً ‫الكالم على‬، ‫واألرض السموات خلق أنه كما‬، ‫خلقهما يكن لم أن بعد‬،
‫قادرا كان وإن‬
ً ‫على‬ ‫الخلق‬. ‫وهذا‬ ‫قول‬ ‫امية‬‫َر‬
َّ ‫ك‬ ‫ال‬ ‫وغيرهم‬ ‫يقول ممن‬: ‫الحوادث ت َ ُحلُّه إنه‬، ‫تحله تك لم أن بعد‬، ‫قال من وقول‬:
‫القول هذا يحتمل محدث إنه‬، ‫إليه يتوجه أحمد وإنكار‬.

‫والثاني‬: ‫شاء إذا يتكلم متكل ًما يزل لم أنه‬، ‫الحديث أهل من يقوله من يقوله الذي هو وهذا‬.

‫يقولون قد القول هذا وأصحاب‬: ‫قديم كالمه إن‬، ‫ ُمحدَث وال بحادث ليس وأنه‬، ‫شاء إذا يتكلم يزل لم إذ الكالم؛ نوع فيريدون‬،
‫شاء إذا به يتكلم العيني الكالم كان وإن‬، ‫قال ومن‬: ‫الحوادث ذاته تحل ليست‬، ‫المعنى هذا به يريد فقد‬، ‫يحدث لم أنه على بناء‬
‫ذاته كيفية في الكالم نوع‬.

‫أصوله في حامد بن هللا عبد أبو وقال‬: ‫يتكلم هللا أن والتصديق به اإليمان يجب ومما‬، ‫في متكل ًما يزل لم وأنه قديم كالمه وأن‬
‫موصوفًا بذلك أوقاته كل‬، ‫محدث غير قديم وكالمه‬، ‫والقدرة كالعلم‬، ‫لم متكلم صفة الكالم يكون أن المذهب على يجىء وقد‬
‫بذلك موصوفًا يزل‬، ‫شاء وإذا شاء كلما ومتكل ًما‬، ‫نقول وال‬: ‫حال في ومتكلم حال في ساكت إنه‬، ‫الكالم حدوث حين من‬.

‫وصفناه ما على متكل ًما إثباته على والدليل‬: ‫هللا كتاب‬، ‫نبيه وسنة‬، ‫الحق أهل وإجماع‬، ‫وغيرهم المعتزلة الضالل طائفة إال‬
‫المتكلمين من‬، ‫متكل ًما هللا يكون أن أبوا فإنهم‬، ‫والسنة الكتاب أدلة بعض وذكر‬.

Which translates:

As for the saying of al-Qaadee (Abu Ya'laa): "This is speaking with its 'hudooth'
(occurrence)" - [referring to Allaah's Speech] - then they reply to it with two answers:

The first of them: That it is not called "Muhdath" but it is called "hadeeth", since the
Muhdath is the created entity, separate (from Allaah's Essence). As for the the "hadeeth", then
Allaah has called it (the Qur'an) "hadeeth". And this is the saying of the Karraamiyyah, the
majority of Ahl ul-Hadeeth and the Hanbalis.

The second: That it is called "Muhdath", as occurs in His saying, "... [Comes not unto them]
an admonition (a chapter of the Qur'an) from their Lord as a recent revelation... (Al-
Anbiya 21:2), but it is not created (makhlooq). And this is the saying of many of the Jurists,
the people of hadeeth and of Kalaam, such as Dawud bin Alee al-Asbahaanee (adh-
Dhaahiree) who is from the madhhab, however what is narrated from Ahmad is to reject this,
and it can be used as proof [in favour] of one of the two sayings of our associates.

Al-Marwadhi said: Abu Abdullaah (Ahmad bin Hanbal) said: "Who is [this] Dawud bin Alee
al-Asbahaanee? May Allaah not grant him relief. A book came to from Muhammad bin
Yahyaa an-Neesaabooree that Dawud al-Asbahaanee said a lie, "The Qur'an is Muhdath"."

And Abu Bakr al-Khallaal mentioned this narration in "Kitaab us-Sunnah". And Abdullaah
bin Ahmad said, "Dawud sought permission to enter upon my father and he said: "Who is
this? Dawud? May the love for Allaah not console his heart and may Allaah make his grave
worm-eaten." And so he died [with his grave] worm-eaten.

And the application of words can sometimes give the presumption of what is opposed to what
is actually intended. So it is said: If you mean by your saying, "Muhdath" that it is a created
(entity) separate from Allaah, just as the Jahmiyyah say, and the Mu'tazilah and the
Najjaariyyah (regarding Allaah's speech), then this is false and we do not say it. And if you
mean by your saying (that it is muhdath) that it is (instances) of speech (Kalaam) that Allaah
speaks with according to His will, after He did not speak with that specific instance of speech,
even though He may have spoken with other than it prior to that, and alongside [the fact] of
Him never ceasing to be one who speaks (mutakallim) whenever He wills, then we speak with
that. And this is what the Book and the Sunnah indicate, and it is the saying of the Salaf and
the Ahl ul-Hadeeth.

Indeed it was the Kullaabiyyah and Ash'ariyyah who innovated another saying, but as for the
people (holding) this saying (just mentioned previously), they have two sayings (in this
regard):

The first: That he spoke after he was not one who spoke (mutakallim), even though he may
have had the ability to speak, just like he created the heavens and the earth, after he had not
created them, even though he had the ability to create (all along). And this is the saying of the
Karraamiyyah and others who say that events, occurrences (hawaadith) can take place in His
essence after they had not taken place. Thus, the saying of the one who said, "It (Allaah's
speech) is muhdath" can carry this meaning, and the rejection of Ahmad is directed towards
this (meaning).

The second: That He never ceased to be one who speaks (mutakallim), speaking whenever
He wills, and this is what is said by whoever says it from the Ahl ul-Hadeeth.

And those who say this may also say: Indeed his speech (Kalaam) is qadeem (eternal) and that
it is not haadith or Muhdath (of recent occurrence) and what they intend here is the genus of
speech, since He has never ceased to speak whenever He wills, even if He speaks with any
specific instance of speech whenever He wills. And those who said that occurrences, events
(hawaadith) do not take place in His Essence, then they may intend this meaning by it, based
upon the genus of speech not having been of recent occurrence in the quiddity (kaifiyyah) of
His Essence.

And Abu Abdullaah bin Haamid said in his "Usool":

And that which is obligatory to have faith in and to believe in is that Allaah speaks
(yatakallam),and that His speech is eternal (qadeem), and that He has never ceased to be one
woh speak (mutakallim), in all times described with that. And His speech is qadeem (eternal)
and not Muhdath (of recent occurrence), [it being] like [HIs] knowledge (ilm) and power
(qudrah).And it may come in the madhhab that Kalaam (speech) is an attribute of the one who
speaks who never ceases to be described with that, and one who speaks every time He wills
whenever He wills, and we do not say that He is silent in one situation and speaking in
another, from the angle of [the attribute] of speech [in its genus] being of recent occurrence
[to Him]. And the evidence for Allaah being one who speaks (mutakallim) in the manner that
we have described is the Book of Allaah, the Sunnah of His Prophet, the unanimous
concensus of the people of truth - excepting [from that] the faction of misguidance from the
Mu'tazilah and others from the speculative Theologians, for they refused that Allaah should
be one who speaks...

And then he mentioned some of the proofs evidences from the Book and the Sunnah.

As for the Ash'arites then they oppose the Book, the, Sunnah and Ijmaa' that Allaah has
actions tied to His will and power and that Allaah indeed speaks as and when He wills.
Further, they do not affirm for Allaah the attribute of "Kalaam" in reality, rather they affirm
an innovated attribute never spoken of by the Salaf which they have called "Kalaam Nafsee"
plagiarizing this from Ibn Kullaab (d. 240H) and his followers, the Kullaabiyyah. And they
hold, just like the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah, that this Qur'an that is present with us, in letter
and word, recited, heard, memorized and written, is created (makhlooq). And the various
sayings we have quoted above are in relation to the Jahmites from the specific angles
mentioned, but these statements also apply to the saying of the Ash'arites who like the
Jahmiyyah believe this Qur'an in our presence is muhdath, makhlooq - and the sayings of the
Salaf quoted above - all of whom came before Ibn Kullaab (d. 240H) and before the doctrine
of "Kalaam Nafsee" was even innovated - were making takfir of the Jahmiyyah who claimed
this very Qur'an that we have with us, in letter and word, is Muhdath, makhlooq!

Important Note: Beware of the deception of these Jahmiyyah Lafdhiyyah parading under the
name of "Ash'ariyyah" today when they present their view on the Qur'an, for their view is no
different to the Lafdhiyyah who believe that the Qur'an in our presence in letter and word is
created, and they try to deceive the people by generalized speech by which they make the
people presume they agree with the Salaf, when in reality they are upon the deen of the
Jahmites of speaking with the createdness of this Qur'an present with us in letter and word,
and we will dedicate a specific article on this in addressing the statement of one of the Jahmite
Lafdhiyyah of contemporary times inshaa'Allaah.

Just to give a small sample for now, one of them said:

The Qur'an is the kalam (speech, discourse, words) of Allah Most High in its ma'na
(meaning), alfaz (words), tarkib (syntax) and ta'bir (expression); and His kalam is among His
uncreated Attributes. To say 'created' here is an innovation of the Rafidis and Mu`tazila.

One would think this is the creed of the Salaf, however, these Ash'arites permit for it to be
said that the Qur'an we have with us is "Allaah's Speech" metaphorically and amongst the
Ash'arite Scholars are those who give a broader definition of what is "Kalaam" such as al-
Juwaynee (d. 478H), in his definition of "Kalaam", he said that Kalaam can be said to be both
the "Kalaam Nafsee" [that is uncreated to them] and the "ibaaraat" (expressions), [which are
created to them], and he quotes this as being the saying of other Ash'arites - and they permit
for it to be said that the Qur'an we have with us, the expression of that Kalaam Nafsee, is also
Allaah's Kalaam (speech), since it conveys the meaning that is uncreated and as that meaning
that is uncreated is conveyed into the hearts (to them understood by the hearts), through what
is written, recited, heard, then that can be said to be Allaah's "Kalaam", uncreated. As for the
wording (lafdh) of the Qur'an, then al-Juwaynee, in the definition of "Kalaam", incorporates
the saying of the Mu'tazilah who said that the created Qur'an (the wording that is with us) can
be said to be Allaah's Speech (just like "the House of Allaah" and "the She-Camel of Allaah")
into the standard Ash'arite "Kalaam Nafsee" doctrine. Therefore, we end up with a hybrid
definition and doctrine, through which the contemporaries hoodwink the people into thinking
they are speaking with the saying of the Salaf. And this is from their deception in trying to
conceal the reality of their saying. You would do well to read what Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdisi
said about these people and their deception over 800 years ago, and they haven't changed one
bit.

So upon this understanding, a contemporary Jahmite Lafdhiyy can come along and say what
is quoted above, pretending to be in agreement with the Salaf, while concealing nothing but
the kufr of the Jahmites, that this Qur'an present with us - alongside it being written in the
Preserved Tablet - and which originated with Allaah in the sense that Allaah spoke it with
letter and word, and Jibreel heard it in letter and word (and not just "understood" it), and then
conveyed it to Muhammad (alayhis salaam) in letter and word, that this is something created,
originating in its letter and word, not with Allaah, but from the creation, be that in the
Preserved Tablet, or Jibreel or Muhammad (alayhis salaam), but concealing this creed by
allowing it all to be referred to as Allaah's Speech, as a veil, upon this particular Mu'tazili-
Kullaabi-Ash'ari hybrid definition of "Kalaam" with some of the Ash'arite Scholars, such as
al-Juwaynee.

The reason why they need to resort to this in the 21st century when information is more
readily available to people is because the truth through the speech of the Salaf is manifest,
well-known and clear, and what is in the books of the Ash'arites of the deen of the Jahmiyyah
Lafdhiyyah is also manifest - so these people are stuck. They can't hide, conceal or abolish
their Ash'arite books, so they are forced into presenting (fraudulently) what they claim is their
view through such deception and twisting of the realities in order to protect themselves from
the scorn of all people who would not hesitate to despise them if they were to be honest and
explicate their real beliefs on this subject.

And inshaa'Allaah we will treat this in a separate article.

Ibn Battah continues:

So he misinterpreted (the matter) to the weak ones, the young (naive) ones, and the
people of stupidity and he fooled them.

So is said to him: Indeed the one who never ceased to be knowledgeable of it (i.e. the Qur'an),
then (His knowledge) is not Muhdath (of recent occurrence), for His knowledge is eternal,
just as He (Himself) is eternal, and His action (meaning knowledge of His own action) is
comprised within His knowledge. Only that is Muhdath (of recent occurrence) what He did
not used to know until He came to know it [and this is inapplicable to Allaah].

This answer of Ibn Battah is the same answer to the Jahmites who debated Imaam Ahmad
during his trial, for when they said to Imaam Ahmad "What do you say about the Qur'an?", he
said, "What do you say about Allaah's knowledge?" and he meant that the Qur'an is from
Allaah's knowledge, it comprises Allaah's knowledge, since Allaah has knowledge from
eternity of His speech and of His actions and what is in the Qur'an is Allaah's knowledge, so if
you say the Qur'an is created, then you are saying Allaah's knowledge is created and within
the Qur'an is Allaah's knowledge, His Names, His attributes.

Ibn Battah continues:

So [a person ought to] say: Indeed Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic has never ceased to
have knowledge of all of what is in the Qur'an, before He revealed the Qur'an and before
Jibreel came with it and descended with it [to] Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

And He said: "Except for Iblees. He refused, was arrogant and became amongst the
disbelievers." (al-Baqarah 2:34)

So [a person] says [in response to the Jahmite]: In Allaah's knowledge, Iblees was a disbliever
before He created him. Then he revealed [from His knowledge] what had been in His
knowledge of all things.
And He, the Mighty and Majestic, has informed us about the Qur'an, so He said, "It is but
inspiration (wahy) that has been inspired..." (An-Najm 53:4). So He negated that it is other
than wahy (revelation).

And the meaning of "Comes not unto them an admonition (dhikr) from their Lord as a
recent revelation (Muhdath)..." (Al-Anbiya 21:2), He intends: [That] it is of recent
occurrence in its knowledge, and its information (khabar), and threat and admonition to
Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). And verily He intends (in this verse): That your
knowledge O Muhammad, and your acquaintance is of recent occurrence with what has been
revealed to you of the Qur'an. And verily He intends (in this verse): That the revelation of the
Qur'an upon you brings about in you, and whoever hears it, knowledge and remembrance that
you did not used to know (previously).

Have you not heard His saying, "And He taught you that you which you knew not..."
(Nisaa 4:113). And the Most High said, "And thus We have sent to you a Spirit
(inspiration, and a mercy) of our command. You knew not what is the Book, nor what is
Faith..." (as-Shooraa 42:52). And He said, "And thus We have sent it down as a Qur'an in
Arabic, and have explained therein in detail the warnings, in order that they may fear
Allaah, or that it may cause them to have a lesson from it." (Ta-Ha 20:113)

So He informed that the reminder of recent occurrence (adh-dhikr al-muhdath) is what is of

recent occurrence to its listeners and whoever came to know it, and upon whom it was
revealed, not that the Qur'an is "Muhdath" (of recent occurrence) with Allaah, and nor that
Allaah existed and there was no Qur'an, because the Qur'an is from the knowledge of Allaah.
So whoever claimed that the Qur'an came after, has claimed: That Allaah existed whilst He
had no ilm and no ma'rifah (knowledge) of anything that it is in the Qur'an, and that He had
no name, and had no izzah (power, might), and no attribute until He brought about the Qur'an.

What Ibn Battah has explained here is not to be confused with the saying of the Innovators,
the Kullaabiyyah and Ash'ariyyah who innovated the saying, "The Qur'an is qadeem", and
what they mean by this is not what Ibn Battah is explaining. For Ahl us-Sunnah say that the
Qur'an is from Allaah's knowledge, and Allaah has complete knowledge of what He would
reveal of His own speech. So His knowledge of it is eternal, and alongside that, He spoke it,
with letter, word and voice, and Jibreel heard it and then conveyed it as ordered - whilst
knowing all of that from eternity. So nothing of this knowledge is "Muhdath" (of recent
origin) to Allaah.

As for the Kullaabiyah, Ash'ariyyah, what they mean is that the Qur'an is synonymous with
the "Kalaam" that they define as the singular indivisible meaning present with Allaah's self
(kalaam nafsee) which is different to and distinguished from Allaah's knowledge (ilm), and
that this meaning (Kalaam Nafsee) is eternal (qadeem), which means the Qur'an is eternal
with Allaah's self, and they mean by this doctrine that Allaah never spoke the Qur'an in letter,
word and voice such that Jibreel heard it in reality and conveyed it as ordered, and they also
mean by this saying of theirs that Allaah does not speak as and when He wills - a saying that
is falsified and demolished by many revealed texts.

And much of the Ash'arite creed is of this nature, hidden under veils and veils of
sophistry in plays with words and definitions.
And this is why we are certain that 99.5% of your Ash'arites will be clueless themselves about
these realities, because much of this chicanery remains hidden to them because they do not
realize that the Ash'arite creed is mostly made up of plays with words and definitions, the aim
of which is to remain upon the saying of the Jahmites and Mu'tazilites, whilst concealing that
through such plays with words and definitions.

Ibn Battah continues:

And we do not say it (the Qur'an) is the work (fi'l) of Allaah [the saying of the Mu'tazilah,
that Allah "produced it"], and nor is it said that Allaah existed before it, but rather we say,
"Allaah has never ceased be knowing". Not "when did He know" or "how did He know".

But the Jahmiyyah confused the people and deceived them, through saying: "Is not Allaah, the
first before everything, and He existed whilst there was nothing".

However, the [true] meaning of "He existed before everything": Before the heavens, and
before the earths, and before everything created.

But as for us saying: Before His knowledge, and before His power, and before His wisdom,
and before His might, and before His pride, and before His majesty, and before His light, then
this is the speech of the zanaadiqah (heretics).

And His saying: Comes not unto them an admonition (a chapter of the Qur'an) from
their Lord as a recent revelation... (Al-Anbiya 21:2), then that is what Allaah brings about
to the Prophet, and to the Companions, and the Beleivers from His servants, and what He
brings about in them of knowledge, and what they had not (previously) heard, and what had
not come to them in a Book prior to it, or with a Messenger (prior to it).

Do you not hear His saying, the Mighty and Majestic: "And He found you astray (unaware
of the Qur'an) and guided (you)." (Ad-Duha 93:7), and also to His saying regarding what
He brings about (anew) in the hearts of the Believers of the Qur'an when they hear it, "And
when they listen to what has been sent down to the Messenger, you see their eyes
overflowing with tears because of the truth they have recognised." (Al-Ma'idah 5:83).

So He has informed us that the Qur'an, its revelation brings about for us knowledge, reminder
and fear.

So the knowledge of its revelation is of recent occurrence (Muhdath) to us [in terms of

knowledge, reminder, admonition] but not of recent occurrence (Muhdath) to our Lord,
the Mighty and Majestic [in terms of His knowledge of it and speaking it].

Closing Note

In closing, the Jahmiyyah of today, being of lesser intelligence than their predecessors of old,
and more feeble in intellect, whilst holding in reality (on account of their doctrines and
innovated principles) that this Qur'an present with us, in letter and word, is created
(makhlooq, muhdath), try to use the statements from some of the Salaf who make takfir of the
Jahmiyyah for claiming "the Qur'an is muhdath" (implying "of recent origin in Allaah's
knowledge"), and apply them to Ahl us-Sunnah who hold that "Allaah speaks as and when He
wills", which is the firmly established belief of the Salaf.