Abdal Hakim Murad - The Cambridge Companion to Islamic Theology

126 Nader El-Bizri
a ‘‘creature’’. It may thus be said that the sensible pronunciation
(lafz _
iyya) in the recitation (qira’a) of the divine words is created, while
divine speech, as what is recited (maqru’), is uncreated. God’s attributes
can thus be affirmed without being reducible to the essence or being
separate from it, and unity is not undermined by the ‘‘semblance’’ of
multiplicity. One notices here a clear departure from the Mu‘tazilite
refutation of the reality of the attributes coupled with a simultaneous
avoidance of the pitfalls of anthropomorphism. It is nonetheless still the
case that in general the Ash‘arites adhered in broad terms to the
H _
anbalite credo, while being moderately open to the use of reasoned
discussion in its defence. For the strict H _
anbalite fringe, however, God’s
words are brought forth by way of ‘‘letting them be without how’’;
namely, without speculating about what they mean whenever confusion
or dissent might arise from speculation. One has to submit to the words
in faith even where no sufficient explanation is available. Hence, the
controversies of kalam may well run the risk of bordering on heretical
innovation (bid‘a). H _
anbalites typically affirm that the Qur’an is not
created, and caution that anyone who holds that the scripture or its
utterance (lafz _
) is created will be an infidel (kafir). 2 For instance, Ibn
H _
anbal held that one could not think that there would be someone other
than God who would say to Moses, ‘‘I am your Lord.’’ 3 This is the case
given that the H _
anbalites hold that God speaks with an uncreated voice
(s _
awt) orletter(h _
arf). 4 In this regard, they reject the Ash‘arite claim that
the qur’anic lafz _
iyya (enunciation) is created. Although H _
anbalites
emphasise the literal and apparent (z _
ahir) meanings of the Qur’an, they
also stress that one must ground them by exegesis (tafsır) based on the
canonical tradition of the Prophet and his Companions. 5
According to the H _
anbalite scholar Ibn Badran, a modest form of
ratiocination in ‘‘representation’’, called tamthıl, may be used, under
restricted circumstances, in rejecting the arguments of the dialecticians
(ahl al-jadal). However, he adds that those curious about the nature of
the divine attributes should reverently recognise that such matters are
necessarily veiled from the workings of reason. In addition, no questions
like ‘‘why?’’ (lima?) or ‘‘how?’’ (kayf?) may apply in this context. When
asked about divine speech, one should reply that God spoke to Moses in
a way that befits His divine essence; hence, one must restrict one’s
answer to this: ‘‘And to Moses God spoke directly’’ (4:164). God’s speech,
what He uttered, what is written in the ‘‘Preserved Tablet’’ (al-lawh _
al-mah _
fuz _
), what is manifest in the earthly codices of the Qur’an
(al-mas _
ah _
if) and is recited by humans, all point to non-creation. Ibn
Badran adds that ‘‘whosoever believes that any of these aforementioned
Cambridge Collections Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008