Kal m: Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition : Brill Online

https://stuiterproxy.kuleuven.be/subscriber/uid=2017/,DanaInfo=...

Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition

Kalm
, in the sense of kalm Allh the Word of God , must here be distinguished from 1) kalm meaning ilm al-kalm [q.v.], defensive apologetics, or the science of discourse (on God); and 2) kalima [q.v.] which, in the expression kalimat Allh , means a (single) divine utterance. Kalm Allh is found at least three times in the urn (II, 75, IX, 6, XLVIII, 15). God spoke to the prophets (II, 253); He spoke clearly to Moses (IV, 164, VII, 143), who had been chosen to transmit His messages and His Word (VII, 144); God does not speak to men except by revelation or from behind a veil (II, 118); but He has never spoken to the ungodly (II, 174, III, 77); and an idol made by man, such as the Golden Calf, cannot speak (VII, 148; cf. Ps. 115, 135). In the list of the most beautiful (divine) names (cf. AL-ASM AL-USN ), neither kalm nor mutakallim is found. God speaks, but the urn does not name Him as speaker. Kalm Allh , God's spokesman, is the name of Moses. Yet in the treatises on God, His existence and His attributes, God is described as mutakallim (speaking), since He possesses kalm. Two groups of questions arise: 1) on the basis of the urnic texts, kalm, Word, is attributed to God and theologians were quick to examine the question of kalm as a divine attribute ( ifa ); and 2) God having addressed His word to the prophets (II, 253), by antonomasia kalm Allh designates the urn, which gave rise to the problem of the relationship between the urn and the Word as attribute. Throughout the centuries, this was to remain one of the most controversial questions. I.Kalm, a divine attribute. This problem is directly linked to reflections and debates on the nature of the urn (created or uncreated). Did such discussions come into being, as has been frequently stated (by C. H. Becker, for example), through the wish to reply to the Christian theologians of Damascus, who proclaimed that the Logos, the Word of God, was both uncreated and creator? No doubt this influenced the way in which the problem was posed in some instances, but the urnic source of the question is no less evident. If there is a Word of God, there is therefore a divine attribute of the Word, according to the most customary process of scriptural determination (tawf). But of what sort is this attribute? And what relationship does it have to the divine Essence? a) The Mutazilites (and the jahmiyya) denied that there was an uncreated Word subsisting in God, for it cannot be established that there subsists in the soul an entity which could be called 'word' ( kalm) said the Abd al-jabbr (Mughn, vii, hal al-urn , Cairo 1380/1961, 179). The expression Word of God, which should be retained, in fact signifies that God created in contingent beings phrases and words so that He could communicate His law to men.b) The Falsifa and various related groups understood it to mean a divine, eternal Idea, a necessary emanation of the flux ( fay ) which is bound to flow from the Prime Being, is received by the separate Intellects, transmitted to men by the illumination of the single Active Intellect and is broken down into words on account of the structure of mankind's passive intellect (bi'l-uwwa).c) According to the Karrmiyya, the Word of God is not strictly speaking eternal: God becomes the agent and speaker by producing within Himself ( idth fi 'l-dht) the Act and the Word. It is therefore proper to speak of an attribute of the Essence, but one which has begun.d) The pious Forefathers and the anbalite tradition affirm the absolute eternity of the Word, subsisting in God and revealing Him, communicated as and when God wishes in His co-eternal mystery.e) Finally, the Asharites (and apparently also the Kullbiyya) affirm this same co-eternity: the kalm Allh is adm , uncreated and without beginning. But they distinguish (cf. II below) between the Word subsisting in the divine Essence, which is without speech (awl), and its expression by means of letters and sounds. In itself, kalm is not an attribute of action (ifat al-afl), like the Creation very existence of or the Decree; it is, like Will, Knowledge, Life, an attribute that is man , which adds a concept to the Essence but itself subsists within the essence by the God. Thus juwayn, after having argued at length against the Mutazilites, teaches that the Word is eternal, it is an attribute of the Essence, and has always the nature of a commandment, a prohibition, or information. Therefore it applies to things which arise within time, without itself having begun in time (cf. Irshd, text and Fr. tr., J. D. Luciani, Paris 1938, 73/120). On this point the anaf-Mturd theses differ only in minor respects from the Ashar view. No doubt in order better to underline the bil kayf of the Word of God in comparison with human speech, later treatises make the following distinction: while the unity of divine attributes is said to be dependent on the aliyyt [q.v.], meaning that which human reason, illuminated by the Law, is fitted to substantiate, the kalm attribute of Godlike Hearing, Sight and Visibilityis dependent on the samiyyt, knowledge which is available to man only ex auditu, through the teaching of the prophets. The very existence of these four attributes falls outside the scope of reason. II.The urn, Word of God. While everyone acknowledged the identification urn = kalm Allh , the various schools interpreted this according to different principles, which are outlined above. Logically, therefore, the arguments concerning the created or uncreated urn are an application of the teaching on attributes, but in fact the positions adopted on the subject of the urn took precedence and influenced developments relating to the attribute of the Word. a) the Mutazilite theory of the created urn is based on the concept of word as speech, presuming articulation and movement, which would be incompatible with pure divine immutability. All prophetic utterances, above all the urn, may be called the Word of God in that they express what God wishes to communicate to mankind; but this Word is created on the lips of prophets or reciters, or on the pages where they are recorded. In the same way, when God spoke to Moses in the burning bush, strictly speaking it was the bush which spoke, through sounds and words directly created within it by God. b) It is not easy to define to its ultimate consequences the thinking of the pious Forefathers, especially that of Ibn anbal. The affirmation that the urn is the uncreated Word of God is absolute. The definitive thinking of Ibn anbal is that the urn pertains not to the world of creation ( khal ) but to the world of commandment ( amr ). Now, nothing appertaining to amr can perish. The urn went out from God and will return to Him ( Ada , v, 313; quoted by H. Laoust, La profession de foi d'Ibn Baa, Damascus 1958, 84, n. 3); according to Ibn Baa, this applies to each word, each letter of the Book (ibid., 51/86). And anyone who asserts that the urn is created, or reserves any doubt on this subject, or simply refuses to make a pronouncement ( wuf ), is impious ( kfir ); so too is anyone who refuses to condemn such a man as an unbeliever ( takfr ). When God makes His Word appear in a body, said Ibn Taymiyya (Fatwa v, Tisniyya, Cairo 1329, 265), He does not create anything in that body; it is He Himself who speaks, as He did in the bush which revealed to Moses: I am God and there are no other gods but Me. H. Laoust has made an excellent summary of Ibn Taymiyya's thinking on this point, which is in itself an echo anbal tradition (Essai sur les doctrines sociales et politiques de Ta-d-Dn Amad B. Taimya, Cairo 1939, 171 and ref.). The attribute of the Word is subordinate to the attribute of the Will (irda). God speaks or (in opposition to the Salmiyya) ceases to speak when and how He wishes. His Word is at the same time an idea, sounds and letters organized with an end in view (mad) (H. Laoust, ibid.). It may convey information (ikhbr) or ordain a command ( insh ). In this last case, it will either bring about a creation ( takwn : e.g., the five urnic kun) or formulate a law ( tashr ). The Word is therefore multiple in its formulation. It is also hierarchically graded: the best of the sra s is the Ftia , followed by the srat al-Ikhl ; urn, Tawrt and Indjl are indeed the Word of God, but the urn is superior to the Tawrt, which itself is superior to the Indjl. Are the pronunciation (laf) and reading (tilwa) of the urn by the faithful also uncreated? The professions of faith of Ibn anbal declare that to assert that its pronunciation and reading are created, when the book is kalm Allh , is the mark of the condemned sect of the jahmiyya ( Ada I, 21, 32). Al-Barbahr makes the same assertion, adding that it is also djahm to opt for wuf , a deferment of judgment, on this precise point. But there is a anbal tradition which tends to qualifyor at least make more exactthe position of Ibn anbal. It is said that he protested vigorously against those who averred that pronunciation and reading were created; but he never adds that they were definitely uncreated. Ibn Taymiyya came to the following conclusion: those who hold that the pronunciation and reading of the urn are uncreated are in fact similar to the jahmiyya and thus to be condemned; but, also according to Ibn anbal, those who support the opposite view are guilty of blameworthy innovation ( bida ). It was Ab lib al-Makk, remarks H. Laoust (Essai ... 172, n. 2), who attributed to Ibn anbal the dogma that recitation of the urn is uncreated. Was this in fact a position of reserve (tawauf) which Ibn anbal adopted for fear that such an uncreated recitation would lead to the acceptance of ull , an infusion of divine substance in the reciter? Ibn Taymiyya avoided saying that the laf was uncreated and confined himself to asserting: The Word ( kalm) is the Word of God, and the voice (awt) is the voice of the reciter (ibid., 172), and again: When men recite the urn, or when they write it down on paper, the urn remains in reality (aat ) the Word of God. A word, in fact, can be attributed only to him who first formulated it and in no respect to him who transmits it or spreads it abroad (tr. H. Laoust, Ibn Baa , 85, note referring to Wsiiyya, 22). c) The Asharites and anafites-Mturdites preferred a compromise to this prudent tawauf. Their solution was presented, especially by the earliest scholars, as the middle way between the Mutazilites and those whom they called ashwiyya : according to the latter, the urn was uncreated, not only on the lips and in the hearts of the faithful but also in so far as it was reproduced in writing on paper; following a khabar attributed to isha, whatever lies between the two covers of the book is the Word of God (and thus uncreated). The thesis of the urn as the Word of God, eternal and uncreated, was forcefully proclaimed in the professions of faith of Ashar (Ibna, ed. Cairo 1348, 10; Malt al-Islmiyyn, ed. Cairo 1369/1950, i, 321); and also in the Waiyyat Ab anfa (article 9) and the Fih Akbar II (article 3) and III (article 16). Ashar cites the authority of Ibn anbal. Throughout the centuries, the schools remained faithful to this total affirmation. But what part of the kalm Allh is communicated by the prophets and recited or read by the faithful? Al-Ashar's professions of faith are silent on this point; yet on the other
an

1 sur 2

2/12/2009 22:00

Kal m: Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition : Brill Online

https://stuiterproxy.kuleuven.be/subscriber/uid=2017/,DanaInfo=...

hand the problem is posed in basic anaf-Mturd texts. The urn, says the Waiyyat Ab anfa (article 9), the uncreated Word of God, inspired and revealed by Him, is not He, nor other than He, but His real Attribute, written in the copies, recited by the tongues, preserved in the breasts, yet not residing there. The ink, the paper, the writing are created, for they are the work of men. The word of God on the other hand in uncreated, for the writing and the letters and the words and the verses are manifestations (dalla) of the urn for the sake of human needs. The word of God on the other hand is self-existing in His Essence, and its meaning is understood by means of these things. Whoso sayeth that the word of God is created, he is an infidel ( kfir ) regarding God ... His speech being recited or written and retained in the heart, yet never dissociated from Him (tr. Wensinck, The Muslim Creed , 127). Fih Akbar II (article 3) goes further as far as this distinction is concerned: Our pronouncing, writing and reciting the urn is created, whereas the urn itself is uncreated. What exact relationships can be established between the divine attribute of the Word and the urn, read, written or recited? A venerable tradition distinguishes between the heavenly urn, written for all eternity on the protected table ( law maf [q.v.]) and the earthly and created books. Burning one of these earthly urns would not destroy the Word of God. Certain later writers, such as al-Ful, wondered if the words which descended on the Prophet were the very words of God (those of the law al-maf) or the words spoken by the Angel. Ashar answers were usually more elaborate. In an analysis reproduced by Ibn azm, al-Billn explains that the urn is the Word of God in the sense that it is an expression (ibra) of it (see A. J. Wensinck, The Muslim creed , Cambridge 1932, 151, and EI , D. B. Macdonald, s.v. KALM and refs.). He says further: The kalm is an entity ( man ) subsisting within the soul ( im bi 'l-nafs) which sometimes expresses itself in audible sounds (Tamhd, ed. R. J. McCarthy, Baghdad-Beirut 1957, 251). This distinction led to the famous theory of the kalm al-nafs or kalm nafs, the internal word, which, as we have seen, was rejected by the Mutazilites. juwayn stresses this point forcefully (Irshd, 58-78/98-131; see also his Luma). We have a brief and clear account of it in al-Ghazl's Itid (ed. Cairo, n.d., 80). It is not true that there can be no speech without letters and sounds. Internal speech, the discourse of the soul, kalm al-nafs, is a reality. The attribute of the Word, subsisting in the divine Essence, is first and foremost this internal Word in God, which is eternal and uncreated, without future or past, without multiplication or division. It in is no way impossible that God makes it manifest ad extra by created sounds and letters. It is essentially in this that prophetic revelation resides. Contrary to the belief of the Mutazilites, it is not a matter of words created in certain bodies. It is indeed God who speaks, but through sounds and letters belonging to the world of creation which manifest and express His single and immutable shiya ... al jawharat al-tawd , ed. Cairo 1352/1934, 43). Word. Later Ashar and Mturd manuals take up these points again with greater or lesser felicity (e.g., al-Bdjr, Finally, it should be noted that if the Word of God is one attribute without multiplicity (al-Bdjr, ibid.), its manifestation through verbal words allows us to make a distinction in the urn between information and commandment as the Ancients insisted (cf. above, the anbal doctrine). In turn, commandment may be divided into prohibition, promise and threat; but these are distinctions made by reason (asm itibriyya; ibid.). d) In the modern period, Muammad Abduh emphasized the Ashar distinctions to the extent of presenting an answer which seems an attempt at a synthesis between Asharism and Mutazilism (see Rislat al-tawd , Cairo 1353, 44 ff.): the Word is an eternal attribute of the essence; the urn is the Word of God without any intermediary, but in as much as it is expressed in words that are uttered or written down, recited or read, it belongs to the world of creation. In this sense it can be said that God created the urn, but without the intervention of any creature.
1

(L. Gardet)
Bibliography
As well as references within the article, all manuals on ul al-dn and ilm al-kalm and all works in European languages devoted to these disciplines contain a chapter or some paragraphs on kalm as an attribute of God.

[Print Version: Volume IV, page 468, column 2] Citation: Gardet, L. "Kalm." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2009. Brill Online. K.U. Leuven - University Library. 02 December 2009 <http://www.brillonline.nl/subscriber/entry?entry=islam_COM-0421>
Copyright 2009 Koninklijke Brill NV. For more information please visit www.brill.nl Subscriber: K.U. Leuven - University Library

2 sur 2

2/12/2009 22:00