disagree. A group of them maintains that the speech of the soul is the purport of the uttered speech and its meaning. Others maintain that it is a substitute for tbe uttered speech, and that the meaning of the utterance in regard to it is derived from a sense other than the situational mode. As such, it resembles the way that voluntary actions reflect the will, knowledge, and life of the doer.
At any rate, what is well established among them is that they regard the speech [al-kalam =the Word= the Qur,an] as eternal. Nevertheless, al-Fa٤il al-Qashji as‌ cribes to some the opinion that the pages and the cover of the Quean are also eter‌ nal.١ As stated earlier, those other than the Asharites scholars are in agree nt
the Qur,an was created, and that the uttered speech of God is like His primordial commands: They were created by Him and a sign among His signs. No useful pur‌ pose is attained from the theological debate on this question and from the analysis of the views regarding it, because it is outside the domain of the fundamental principles of religion (u al
and divine gnosis. However, I wish to discuss it in order to Clarify to our Asharite
brothers, who happen to constitute the majority of Muslims, that what they maintain in this connection, and regard as a necessary part of the creed, is nothing more than a speculative matter, with no basis for it in reason and revelation.
To elaborate on this last point. [it should be noted that] there is no difference of
opinion [about the fact] that the customary speech made up of the prevalent alphabeti‌ cal letters in existence is a created thing, and hence impossible to ascribe to God eter‌ nally or otherwise. The dispute is, however, over the existence of another kind of speech, whose parts have come together all at once in actuality. The Asharites attest to this kind of speech and consider it one of the attributes of the divine essence, just as it is of other beings. In contrast to the Asharites, scholars reject this and confme the divine speech to the uttered one. They maintain that its subsistence in the speaker is the same as the subsistence of the action in the doer. The sound opinion is the latter one [be‌ cause scholars do not believe in the existence of any speech other than the uttered one}.
Our argument in support of this is that a statement i& either declarative (khabariyya)
or creative (insha,iyya). As for the declarative sentences, if we were to analyze their components, we would find nine of them that are necessary in ascribing something to another or denying the ascription:

١. Words of the sentence, with their substance and forms;
٢. The meanings and signification of the words;
٣. Constructional organization of the sentence;
٤. Tht
٥. The speakers conception of the substance of the sentence and its forms;
٦. The speakers conception of the signification of the sentence, including its struc- ture and form;•
٧. The conformity, or lack thereof, between the meaning of the sentence and the actuality;
٨. The speakers knowledge about the conformity or the lack thereof, or his doubt about it; and,
٩. The speakers will to create the sentence in the actuality, which is anticipated by its premises.