And there succeeded after them a generation who inherited the Scripture the Torah from their forefathers choosing the transient things of this inferior life that is the ephemeral aspects of this lowly thing that the world is in the way of what is lawful and what is unlawful and saying ‘It will be forgiven us’ what we have done; and yet if similar transient things were to come to them they would take them wa-in ya’tihim ‘aradun mithluhu ya’khudhūhu this sentence is a circumstantial qualifier in other words they hope for forgiveness whilst committing the same offence again and persisting in it and in the Torah there is no such promise about forgiveness for persistence in sin. Has not the covenant of the Scripture mīthāqu l-kitābi the annexation functions in place of fī ‘in’ sc. ‘the covenant in the Scripture’ been taken a-lam yu’khadh ‘has it not been taken’ is an interrogative meant as an affirmative from them that they should not say about God anything but the truth? And they have studied wa-darasū is a supplement to yu’khadh ‘has it not been taken?’ they have read what is in it so why do they impute lies to it the Scripture by ascribing to it the idea of forgiveness for persistence in sin? And the Abode of the Hereafter is better for those who are wary of what is unlawful. Do they not understand? ya‘qilūn may also be read as ta‘qilūn ‘do you not understand?’ that it is better and so prefer it to the abode of this world?