ߞߎ߬ߙߣߊ߬ ߞߟߊߒߞߋ ߞߘߐ ߟߎ߬ ߘߟߊߡߌߘߊ - ߊ߲߬ߞߌ߬ߟߋ߬ߞߊ߲ ߘߟߊߡߌߘߊ - ߞߓ. ߥߊ߬ߟߌ߯ߘ ߓߊߟߌߤߊߛ߭ ߊ.ߟߑߊ߳ߺߊߡߑߙߌ߮ ߓߟߏ߫ - ߊ߬ ߓߊ߯ߙߊ ߦߋ߫ ߛߋ߲߬ߠߊ߫. * - ߘߟߊߡߌߘߊ ߟߎ߫ ߦߌ߬ߘߊ߬ߥߟߊ
فَأَخۡرَجَ لَهُمۡ عِجۡلٗا جَسَدٗا لَّهُۥ خُوَارٞ فَقَالُواْ هَٰذَآ إِلَٰهُكُمۡ وَإِلَٰهُ مُوسَىٰ فَنَسِيَ
﴾88﴿ Then he brought out for them a calf—a ˹mere˺ body of a lowing sound[154]—and they[155] said: “This is your god, and the god of Mūsā, but he forgot.”[156]
[154] There is scholarly consensus that the calf was a jasad (body), but disagreement on whether it possessed life. Many exegetes, including Ibn al-Anbārī (as cited by Ibn al-Jawzī), al-Sijistānī, al-Zajjāj, Ibn al-Jawzī, Ibn ʿAṭiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah, and Ibn ʿĀshūr, believe that the calf had no soul—it was a lifeless form that produced sound either by the wind passing through it or by illusion.
[155] The pronoun in “they said” (qālū) is interpreted by some as referring
specifically to the Sāmirī and those who followed him in the calf worship—this view is supported by al-Wāḥidī, al-Rasʿanī, al-Qurṭubī, al-Khāzin, and al-Shawkānī. Others, including al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Kathīr, opine that it refers more broadly to the people of Moses (عليه السلام) who fell into calf worship.
[156] Implying that Moses (عليه السلام) forgot “his god” in that spot, left it behind (cf. al-Tafsīr al-Muyassar, al-Tafsīr al-Mukhtaṣar), and had gone in search of it elsewhere (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Wāḥidī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Qāsimī).
It was also said that the meaning is: Moses (عليه السلام) forgot to inform you that this ˹calf˺ is his god. Other interpretations have likewise been reported (cf. Ibn al-Jawzī).
[155] The pronoun in “they said” (qālū) is interpreted by some as referring
specifically to the Sāmirī and those who followed him in the calf worship—this view is supported by al-Wāḥidī, al-Rasʿanī, al-Qurṭubī, al-Khāzin, and al-Shawkānī. Others, including al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Kathīr, opine that it refers more broadly to the people of Moses (عليه السلام) who fell into calf worship.
[156] Implying that Moses (عليه السلام) forgot “his god” in that spot, left it behind (cf. al-Tafsīr al-Muyassar, al-Tafsīr al-Mukhtaṣar), and had gone in search of it elsewhere (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Wāḥidī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Qāsimī).
It was also said that the meaning is: Moses (عليه السلام) forgot to inform you that this ˹calf˺ is his god. Other interpretations have likewise been reported (cf. Ibn al-Jawzī).
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
أَفَلَا يَرَوۡنَ أَلَّا يَرۡجِعُ إِلَيۡهِمۡ قَوۡلٗا وَلَا يَمۡلِكُ لَهُمۡ ضَرّٗا وَلَا نَفۡعٗا
﴾89﴿ Did they not see that it could neither speak back to them[157] nor had any power to harm or benefit them in any way?[158]
[157] “The people of Mūsā took up ˹as idol˺ when he was gone – ˹made˺ from their jewellery – a calf, a ˹mere˺ body of a lowing sound. Did they not ˹just˺ see that he would not talk to them, nor guide them to the way! They took up ˹worshipping˺ him; they were ˹truly˺ wrongdoers!” (7: 148)
[158] Could they not see that it did not possess the basic characteristics for which people take gods—no power to benefit or harm, no speech, no guidance, no awareness? (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Māwardī, Ibn Kathīr).
This outlandish shift of Faith raises a fundamental question: How could the people of Moses (عليه السلام)—rational, morally responsible individuals—so abruptly abandon the true religion and revert to calf-worship, a practice whose falsehood is self-evident? Scholars address this with layered insight:
1. Cognitive simplicity and gullibility: Not all members of the community were of equal discernment. al-Shirbīnī and others suggest that such behaviour is not inconceivable among the intellectually uncritical—al-bulah—who are easily swayed by spectacle or suggestion. This view narrows the scope of culpability and highlights the internal diversity of the community’s understanding.
2. Deceptive theological expectation: Ibn ʿĀshūr notes that the people had repeatedly heard Moses (عليه السلام) declare, “God is with you” or “before you.” Over time, this reinforced in them an expectation of Divine manifestation. When the Sāmirī presented a golden calf accompanied by a sound, this fit—albeit superficially—their constructed notion of a god. Their latent longing to physically encounter the Divine made them vulnerable to suggestion masquerading as fulfilment.
3. Visual and auditory illusion: Also according to Ibn ʿĀshūr, the idol’s form—familiar yet now enhanced with lowing and metallic splendour—seduced their senses. It wasn’t just a return to a known symbol but a perceived enhanced version of a divine image, which they irrationally thought must be more real, more potent.
4. Socio-historical conditioning: al-Rāzī compellingly argues that their psychological readiness for relapse was the product of centuries of servitude under Pharaoh’s idolatrous system. This prolonged oppression had corrupted their moral fibre, weakened their resilience, and made them susceptible to leadership vacuums and cultural regression. So, when Moses (عليه السلام) withdrew—even briefly—the vacuum exposed the fragility of their faith, leading to collapse at the first challenge.
[158] Could they not see that it did not possess the basic characteristics for which people take gods—no power to benefit or harm, no speech, no guidance, no awareness? (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Māwardī, Ibn Kathīr).
This outlandish shift of Faith raises a fundamental question: How could the people of Moses (عليه السلام)—rational, morally responsible individuals—so abruptly abandon the true religion and revert to calf-worship, a practice whose falsehood is self-evident? Scholars address this with layered insight:
1. Cognitive simplicity and gullibility: Not all members of the community were of equal discernment. al-Shirbīnī and others suggest that such behaviour is not inconceivable among the intellectually uncritical—al-bulah—who are easily swayed by spectacle or suggestion. This view narrows the scope of culpability and highlights the internal diversity of the community’s understanding.
2. Deceptive theological expectation: Ibn ʿĀshūr notes that the people had repeatedly heard Moses (عليه السلام) declare, “God is with you” or “before you.” Over time, this reinforced in them an expectation of Divine manifestation. When the Sāmirī presented a golden calf accompanied by a sound, this fit—albeit superficially—their constructed notion of a god. Their latent longing to physically encounter the Divine made them vulnerable to suggestion masquerading as fulfilment.
3. Visual and auditory illusion: Also according to Ibn ʿĀshūr, the idol’s form—familiar yet now enhanced with lowing and metallic splendour—seduced their senses. It wasn’t just a return to a known symbol but a perceived enhanced version of a divine image, which they irrationally thought must be more real, more potent.
4. Socio-historical conditioning: al-Rāzī compellingly argues that their psychological readiness for relapse was the product of centuries of servitude under Pharaoh’s idolatrous system. This prolonged oppression had corrupted their moral fibre, weakened their resilience, and made them susceptible to leadership vacuums and cultural regression. So, when Moses (عليه السلام) withdrew—even briefly—the vacuum exposed the fragility of their faith, leading to collapse at the first challenge.
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
وَلَقَدۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ هَٰرُونُ مِن قَبۡلُ يَٰقَوۡمِ إِنَّمَا فُتِنتُم بِهِۦۖ وَإِنَّ رَبَّكُمُ ٱلرَّحۡمَٰنُ فَٱتَّبِعُونِي وَأَطِيعُوٓاْ أَمۡرِي
﴾90﴿ And indeed, Hārūn had said to them aforetime: “O my people! You have but been tested by it; verily your Lord is the Most Merciful[159]—so follow me and obey my command.”
[159] That is, your Lord is the Most Merciful—He it is Who shows you mercy and bestows upon you His manifest and hidden favours—not the calf that you are worshipping (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Saʿdī).
Given that this sura—along with those immediately before and after it, namely Maryam and al-Anbiyā’—was revealed at roughly the same time during the early Makkan phase of the Prophetic mission (cf. the ḥadīth of ʿAbdullāh Ibn Masʿūd (h) cited in the Introduction above), and considering how central the theme of Divine mercy was to the fledgling yet sorely tested Muslim community, the invocation of this Most Beautiful Divine Name—the Most Merciful—at this point is likely an intentional intertextual echo of the preceding sura. Maryam, in particular, employs the Name al-Raḥmān with marked frequency and rhetorical force, weaving mercy into the very fabric of its message. Indeed, such intertextual resonances are found throughout this sura and its immediate neighbours, as we shall explore in their proper places.
Further, Abū Ḥayyān opines that he mentioned the Attribute of Mercy to signal that if they repented, God would accept them—and as a reminder that God, the Most Merciful, had delivered them from Pharaoh at a time when the calf had not yet existed.
Given that this sura—along with those immediately before and after it, namely Maryam and al-Anbiyā’—was revealed at roughly the same time during the early Makkan phase of the Prophetic mission (cf. the ḥadīth of ʿAbdullāh Ibn Masʿūd (h) cited in the Introduction above), and considering how central the theme of Divine mercy was to the fledgling yet sorely tested Muslim community, the invocation of this Most Beautiful Divine Name—the Most Merciful—at this point is likely an intentional intertextual echo of the preceding sura. Maryam, in particular, employs the Name al-Raḥmān with marked frequency and rhetorical force, weaving mercy into the very fabric of its message. Indeed, such intertextual resonances are found throughout this sura and its immediate neighbours, as we shall explore in their proper places.
Further, Abū Ḥayyān opines that he mentioned the Attribute of Mercy to signal that if they repented, God would accept them—and as a reminder that God, the Most Merciful, had delivered them from Pharaoh at a time when the calf had not yet existed.
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
قَالُواْ لَن نَّبۡرَحَ عَلَيۡهِ عَٰكِفِينَ حَتَّىٰ يَرۡجِعَ إِلَيۡنَا مُوسَىٰ
[160] They were simply unshakable: ʿukūf refers to turning attentively toward something and remaining in close attachment to it as an act of veneration. The root ʿakafa denotes the idea of confinement or remaining bound to something (cf. al-Sijistānī, Gharīb al-Qur’ān; Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs al-Lughah; al-Rāghib, al-Mufradāt; al-Kafawī, al-Kulliyyāt).
[161] That is: until Moses (عليه السلام) returns to us from the Mount, that we may hear his word concerning the calf—or behold what he shall do about it (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, Ibn Kathīr).
[161] That is: until Moses (عليه السلام) returns to us from the Mount, that we may hear his word concerning the calf—or behold what he shall do about it (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, Ibn Kathīr).
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
قَالَ يَٰهَٰرُونُ مَا مَنَعَكَ إِذۡ رَأَيۡتَهُمۡ ضَلُّوٓاْ
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
أَلَّا تَتَّبِعَنِۖ أَفَعَصَيۡتَ أَمۡرِي
[162] Some exegetes understood “… that you should not follow after me?” to mean: why did you not join me and inform me of what had happened? Others explained it as: why did you not separate yourself from them, fight them, or denounce them more forcefully. Moses (عليه السلام) believed that Aaron’s (عليه السلام) withdrawal might have served as a stronger rebuke than merely advising them, especially as he was beloved and held in esteem by the people (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Wāḥidī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Alūsī, Ibn al-Jawzī).
[163] That is: Did you disobey my command to succeed me among my people, to set things right, and not to follow the path of the corruptors? (cf. Ibn Kathīr, al-Saʿdī, al-Shinqīṭī): “And We appointed for Moses thirty nights and We completed them with ten; so the appointment of his Lord was forty nights complete. Mūsā (عليه السلام) said to his brother Hārūn: ‘Assume my role among my people; set aright ˹their affairs˺ and do not follow the path of the corruptors.’” (7: 142)
[163] That is: Did you disobey my command to succeed me among my people, to set things right, and not to follow the path of the corruptors? (cf. Ibn Kathīr, al-Saʿdī, al-Shinqīṭī): “And We appointed for Moses thirty nights and We completed them with ten; so the appointment of his Lord was forty nights complete. Mūsā (عليه السلام) said to his brother Hārūn: ‘Assume my role among my people; set aright ˹their affairs˺ and do not follow the path of the corruptors.’” (7: 142)
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
قَالَ يَبۡنَؤُمَّ لَا تَأۡخُذۡ بِلِحۡيَتِي وَلَا بِرَأۡسِيٓۖ إِنِّي خَشِيتُ أَن تَقُولَ فَرَّقۡتَ بَيۡنَ بَنِيٓ إِسۡرَٰٓءِيلَ وَلَمۡ تَرۡقُبۡ قَوۡلِي
﴾94﴿ He said: “O son of my mother! Lay not hold upon my beard nor upon my head.[164] Verily, I feared that you would say, ‘You have caused division among the Children of Israel[165] and have not observed my word.’”
[164] “When Moses returned – enraged and exasperated – he said: ‘Awful indeed what you superseded me with after I was gone! Did you seek to hasten your Lord’s decree?’ He threw down the tablets, seized his brother’s head tugging it towards him. He ˹Hārūn˺ said: ‘Son of my mother! The folks thought little of me and they almost killed me! Do not then let the enemies rejoice on my account and do not count me among the wrongdoers!’” (7: 150)
[165] Aaron (عليه السلام) feared that leaving the people to follow Moses (عليه السلام) might divide the Children of Israel—some following him, others staying behind with the calf—possibly leading to conflict. He also feared being blamed for abandoning them without a leader, which could cause disunity (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Saʿdī).
This exchange highlights a key principle: safeguarding the core foundations of faith takes precedence over preserving lesser, secondary matters. The soundness of belief is the very basis of communal cohesion and the source of all collective good. Moses (عليه السلام) was aware that Aaron’s duty, in principle, was to leave the people and join him, even if that might lead to division. But Aaron (عليه السلام), fearing that such action would fragment the community or provoke unrest, chose to stay. Still, the message here is that the sanctity and authority of the religion are upheld by maintaining its essential principles without compromise—for it is through that uncompromising stance that the Law retains its influence and is rightly practised (cf. Ibn ʿĀshūr).
[165] Aaron (عليه السلام) feared that leaving the people to follow Moses (عليه السلام) might divide the Children of Israel—some following him, others staying behind with the calf—possibly leading to conflict. He also feared being blamed for abandoning them without a leader, which could cause disunity (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Saʿdī).
This exchange highlights a key principle: safeguarding the core foundations of faith takes precedence over preserving lesser, secondary matters. The soundness of belief is the very basis of communal cohesion and the source of all collective good. Moses (عليه السلام) was aware that Aaron’s duty, in principle, was to leave the people and join him, even if that might lead to division. But Aaron (عليه السلام), fearing that such action would fragment the community or provoke unrest, chose to stay. Still, the message here is that the sanctity and authority of the religion are upheld by maintaining its essential principles without compromise—for it is through that uncompromising stance that the Law retains its influence and is rightly practised (cf. Ibn ʿĀshūr).
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
قَالَ فَمَا خَطۡبُكَ يَٰسَٰمِرِيُّ
[166] Moses’ reproach of the Sāmirī—coming immediately after resolving the matter with Aaron (عليه السلام)—signals the beginning of a new phase of reckoning (cf. Abū al-Suʿūd). The use of direct address (“O Sāmirī”) and the abrupt interrogative structure heighten the dramatic tension and mark a decisive shift in both scene and speaker focus.
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
قَالَ بَصُرۡتُ بِمَا لَمۡ يَبۡصُرُواْ بِهِۦ فَقَبَضۡتُ قَبۡضَةٗ مِّنۡ أَثَرِ ٱلرَّسُولِ فَنَبَذۡتُهَا وَكَذَٰلِكَ سَوَّلَتۡ لِي نَفۡسِي
﴾96﴿ He said: “I perceived[167] what they did not see, so I took a handful from the trace of the Messenger and cast it.[168] Thus my self made it alluring[169] to me.”
[167] Baṣurtu means both I saw and perceived; the root meaning of b-ṣ-r denotes knowledge and awareness of something (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, Ibn Kathīr, Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs al-Lughah; Ibn al-Jawzī, Tadhkirat al-Arīb). The Sāmirī’s claimed insight stood in stark contrast to the people’s ignorance.
[168] Most early exegetes maintain that the Sāmirī took dust from the trace of Gabriel’s horse, believing it had life-giving power, and cast it onto the calf (cf. al-Ṭabarī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Rāzī, al-Alūsī). Others, including al-Rāzī (in a second view), Ibn ʿĀshūr, and al-Marāghī, interpreted the “trace of the Messenger” as Moses’ Law, which the Sāmirī symbolically rejected in an act of defiance.
[169] Sawwalat, that is, it adorned or made attractive. Taswīl refers to the self’s tendency to beautify what it desires, presenting what is blameworthy in the guise of something praiseworthy (cf. Ibn Qutaybah, Gharīb al-Qur’ān; al-Sijistānī Gharīb al-Qur’ān, Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs al-Lughah; al-Iṣfahānī, al-Mufradāt).
[168] Most early exegetes maintain that the Sāmirī took dust from the trace of Gabriel’s horse, believing it had life-giving power, and cast it onto the calf (cf. al-Ṭabarī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Rāzī, al-Alūsī). Others, including al-Rāzī (in a second view), Ibn ʿĀshūr, and al-Marāghī, interpreted the “trace of the Messenger” as Moses’ Law, which the Sāmirī symbolically rejected in an act of defiance.
[169] Sawwalat, that is, it adorned or made attractive. Taswīl refers to the self’s tendency to beautify what it desires, presenting what is blameworthy in the guise of something praiseworthy (cf. Ibn Qutaybah, Gharīb al-Qur’ān; al-Sijistānī Gharīb al-Qur’ān, Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs al-Lughah; al-Iṣfahānī, al-Mufradāt).
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
قَالَ فَٱذۡهَبۡ فَإِنَّ لَكَ فِي ٱلۡحَيَوٰةِ أَن تَقُولَ لَا مِسَاسَۖ وَإِنَّ لَكَ مَوۡعِدٗا لَّن تُخۡلَفَهُۥۖ وَٱنظُرۡ إِلَىٰٓ إِلَٰهِكَ ٱلَّذِي ظَلۡتَ عَلَيۡهِ عَاكِفٗاۖ لَّنُحَرِّقَنَّهُۥ ثُمَّ لَنَنسِفَنَّهُۥ فِي ٱلۡيَمِّ نَسۡفًا
﴾97﴿ He said: “Then go! And throughout your life you shall say, ‘No touching!’[170] And indeed, you have an appointed time that you will not miss.[171] Now look at your god to whom you remained devoted—we shall surely burn it with an utter burning,[172] then scatter it in the sea with an utter scattering.”
[170] That is, that he should say: “I do not touch, nor am I touched”—so no one would touch, associate with, or approach him, and he would not touch, associate with, or approach anyone else (cf. al-Ṭabarī, al-Wāḥidī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Saʿdī).
Ibn ʿĀshūr stated: “Mūsā imposed no further punishment on the Sāmirī beyond removing him from the community—either because he was not truly of their people and therefore not subject to their laws, or because Moses (عليه السلام) had been informed that the Sāmirī would never reform, and was thus among those upon whom the word of punishment had already been decreed. So, his share of life became to say: ‘No touching!’—meaning Allah stripped him of the natural human need for companionship and replaced it with obsession, delusion, and alienation. He lived apart from people, avoided all contact, and let no one come near him. If someone approached, he would say: ‘No touching!’ fearing physical touch. That is, ‘Do not touch me, and I will not touch you.’ Or, as others interpreted, ‘Do not approach me,’ since ‘touch’ can be used figuratively for nearness—as in Allah’s saying: “and do not touch her with harm” (11: 64). This interpretation better suits the reciprocal form of the verb (‘mumāssah’). It became his constant refrain—and a dreadful condition that turned him into a figure of mockery.”
[171] The appointed time for his Punishment by God Almighty in the Hereafter (cf. al-Tafsīr al-Muyassar, al-Tafsīr al-Mukhtaṣar).
[172] al-Saʿdī writes: “The calf had become deeply embedded in the hearts of the Children of Israel. Mūsā (عليه السلام) wanted to destroy it before their eyes in such a way that it could never be restored—by burning, grinding, scattering it in the sea—so that their attachment to it would vanish along with its physical form. Leaving it intact would have been a trial for them, as human souls are strongly drawn to falsehood.”
Ibn ʿĀshūr stated: “Mūsā imposed no further punishment on the Sāmirī beyond removing him from the community—either because he was not truly of their people and therefore not subject to their laws, or because Moses (عليه السلام) had been informed that the Sāmirī would never reform, and was thus among those upon whom the word of punishment had already been decreed. So, his share of life became to say: ‘No touching!’—meaning Allah stripped him of the natural human need for companionship and replaced it with obsession, delusion, and alienation. He lived apart from people, avoided all contact, and let no one come near him. If someone approached, he would say: ‘No touching!’ fearing physical touch. That is, ‘Do not touch me, and I will not touch you.’ Or, as others interpreted, ‘Do not approach me,’ since ‘touch’ can be used figuratively for nearness—as in Allah’s saying: “and do not touch her with harm” (11: 64). This interpretation better suits the reciprocal form of the verb (‘mumāssah’). It became his constant refrain—and a dreadful condition that turned him into a figure of mockery.”
[171] The appointed time for his Punishment by God Almighty in the Hereafter (cf. al-Tafsīr al-Muyassar, al-Tafsīr al-Mukhtaṣar).
[172] al-Saʿdī writes: “The calf had become deeply embedded in the hearts of the Children of Israel. Mūsā (عليه السلام) wanted to destroy it before their eyes in such a way that it could never be restored—by burning, grinding, scattering it in the sea—so that their attachment to it would vanish along with its physical form. Leaving it intact would have been a trial for them, as human souls are strongly drawn to falsehood.”
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
إِنَّمَآ إِلَٰهُكُمُ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِي لَآ إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَۚ وَسِعَ كُلَّ شَيۡءٍ عِلۡمٗا
﴾98﴿ Your God is only Allah—there is no deity except Him. His Knowledge encompasses all things.[173]
[173] This final verse serves as a doctrinal and rhetorical climax, reaffirming absolute monotheism and the all-encompassing knowledge of Allah, in stark contrast to the lifelessness and folly of idol-worship. The emphatic declarative structure—“Your God is only Allah—there is no deity except Him”—reinforces certainty, exclusivity, and theological closure.
ߊߙߊߓߎߞߊ߲ߡߊ ߞߘߐߦߌߘߊ ߟߎ߬:
ߞߎ߬ߙߣߊ߬ ߞߟߊߒߞߋ ߞߘߐ ߟߎ߬ ߘߟߊߡߌߘߊ - ߊ߲߬ߞߌ߬ߟߋ߬ߞߊ߲ ߘߟߊߡߌߘߊ - ߞߓ. ߥߊ߬ߟߌ߯ߘ ߓߊߟߌߤߊߛ߭ ߊ.ߟߑߊ߳ߺߊߡߑߙߌ߮ ߓߟߏ߫ - ߊ߬ ߓߊ߯ߙߊ ߦߋ߫ ߛߋ߲߬ߠߊ߫. - ߘߟߊߡߌߘߊ ߟߎ߫ ߦߌ߬ߘߊ߬ߥߟߊ
ߘߟߊߡߌߘߊ߫ ߞߓ. ߥߊ߬ߟߌ߯ߘ ߓߊߟߌߤߊߛ߭ ߊ.ߟߑߊ߳ߺߊߡߑߙߌ߮ ߓߟߏ߫