Even if we suppose that the speakers of the language used the words wāhid and ahad (“one”) to refer to this, it would not be permissible to say that the word wāhid in their language applies exclusively to it. For, as we have explained, the word wāhid and its derivatives are widely known and commonly used in the language for what these people regard as a divisible body, which, in their view, is not “one.” Thus, the designation “one” as they understand it is absent from the language; even supposing it occurred, such usage would be rare.

The predominant and familiar usage in the language is that the term “one” encompasses what does not count as “one” in their terminology. Accordingly, it is impermissible to cite the words of Allah, Exalted is He:

“And your God is one God”
[Al-Baqarah: 163]

or His words:

“Say, ‘He is Allah, One’”

or similar passages—which Allah revealed in the language of the Arabs, informing us that He is One and that He is one God—as evidence that what is intended is what they call “one” in their terminology, a meaning unfamiliar in the Arabic language.

Rather, anyone who says, “The Quran more clearly indicates the opposite of the conclusion they seek,” has spoken the truth. For the Quran was revealed in the language of the Arabs, and among actually existing entities they recognize as “one” only that which is eternal in itself, possesses attributes, is distinct from other things, and can be pointed to.

As for that which cannot be pointed to at all, and is neither distinct from other things nor intermingled with them, the Arabs call it neither wāhid nor ahad; indeed, they do not even recognize it. Thus, the terms wāhid and ahad indicate the opposite of the conclusion they seek to derive from them, not the conclusion they seek.