The thirty-first point: It may be replied that, as already explained, neither the name al-Ahad nor al-Samad indicates what he claims in any respect. Indeed, the falsity of his statement has become plain from what is necessarily known of Arabic usage and Quranic interpretation. His appeal to counterevidence therefore fails.

The thirty-second point: Suppose that what you have cited has evidentiary force, as does what they have cited. The two indications must then be examined, for they say, “The surah establishes our position, so yours is ruled out,” while you argue the reverse. If both indications are sound, their relative strength must be weighed.

It is well known that the interpretation of al-Samad as “the One who has no hollow interior” has reached us by mass transmission from the Companions and the Successors, is supported by Arabic usage, and has also been reported with attribution to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. As for the claim that a body cannot be described as ahad or wāhid (both meaning “one”), no authority worthy of reliance has said this. Rather, the explicit text of the Quran refutes it, as we have already explained. For example, Allah Most High says:

“And if there is only one [daughter], she shall have half.” [al-Nisā’ 11]

And He says:

“Would any one of you wish to have a garden of date palms and grapevines” [al-Baqarah 266]