...the Lone One’s statement: ‘It is but the word of a human’ and condemned him to Saqar [Hellfire]. Thus, they declared it openly, based on knowledge and the realization that it is uncreated. Proof lies with the one who possesses knowledge of a matter, not with the one who is heedless of it and has little insight into it. Yet, these people [the Neutralists] clung to the restraint of those with insight and paid no heed to the statement of those who deduced [the truth] and recognized its origin. So we said to them: ‘If the cowardice of those whom you cite as proof stemmed from a lack of insight, then these [other scholars] were bold and spoke out based on insight. They were the leading figures of the people and the most insightful regarding the foundations of the religion and its branches, to the extent that they declared those who say [the Quran] is created to be disbelievers, without any doubt or suspicion regarding their disbelief.’
I say: Once the reason for the discourse of the People of the Sunnah (Ahl al-Sunnah) regarding the Quran—and that it is uncreated—has become clear to you, do not be deceived by the words of al-Shawkani in his Tafsir when he discusses this momentous issue. He says regarding the words of Allah, the Exalted: {[No] mention comes to them anew from their Lord...} [Al-Anbiya: 2]: ‘Adhering to the fringes of neutrality (al-waqf) and delegating the knowledge of that to its Knower is the ideal path; in it lies safety and escape from declaring groups of Allah’s servants to be disbelievers, and the matter belongs to Allah, the Glorified.’
Likewise, do not pay heed to the comment of al-Dhahabi in his Siyar (12/177) on the statement of Ahmad ibn Salih (may Allah have mercy upon him) when he was asked about one who says: ‘The Quran is the Speech of Allah,’ but does not say ‘created’ nor ‘uncreated.’ He replied: ‘This person is a doubter, and the doubter is a disbeliever.’
Al-Dhahabi said: ‘Rather, this person is simply silent. One who remains silent out of scrupulousness (tawarru‘) is not to be attributed a position. However, one who remains silent out of doubt, disparaging the Salaf, then such a person is an innovator (mubtadi‘).’
I say: What scrupulousness (wara‘) is there in failing to be firm on a matter for which the Book and the Sunnah have provided evidence...
الوحيد قوله: إنه قول البشر وأصلاه عليه سقر، فصرَّحوا به على علم ومعرفة أنه غير مخلوق، والحجة بالعارف بالشيء، لا بالغافل عنه القليلِ البصر به، فتعلَّق هؤلاء فيه بإمساك أهل البصر ولم يلتفتوا إلى قول من استنبطه وعرف أصله، فقلنا لهم: إن يك جبن هؤلاء الذين احتججتم بهم من قلَّة بصر، فقد اجترأ هؤلاء، وصرَّحوا ببصر، وكانوا من أعلام الناس وأهل البصر بأصول الدين وفروعه حتى أكفروا من قال: مخلوق، غير شاكين في كفرهم ولا مرتابين فيهم. اهـ
قلت: فإذا تبين لك سبب كلام أهل السنة في القرآن وأنه غير مخلوق فلا تغترَّ بكلام الشوكاني في «تفسيره» وهو يتكلم عن هذه المسألة العظيمة، فيقول عند قوله تعالى: ﴿مَا يَأْتِيهِم مِّن ذِكْرٍ مِّن رَّبِّهِم مُّحْدَثٍ﴾ [الأنبياء: ٢]: (والتمسك بأذيال الوقف، وإرجاع علم ذلك إلى عالمه هو الطريقة المثلى، وفيه السلامة والخلوص من تكفير طوائف من عباد الله، والأمر لله سبحانه). اهـ
وكذا لا تلفت إلى تعليق الذهبي في «سيره» (١٧٧/١٢) على قول أحمد بن صالح رحمه الله لما سئل عمن قال: القرآن كلام الله، ولا يقول:
مخلوق، ولا غير مخلوق؟ فقال: هذا شاكٌّ، والشَّاكُّ كافر.
فقال الذهبي: بل هذا ساكت، ومن سكت تورُّعًا لا ينسب إليه قول، ومن سكت شاكًّا مزريا على السلف، فهذا مبتدع. اهـ
قلت: وأيُّ ورع في ترك الجزم على مسألة دلَّ عليها الكتاب والسنة،
