Al-Qiyamah: (34) Woe to you, and woe!

Awla laka fa-awla: It is derived from al-wali, meaning proximity, and is originally a superlative form. It became predominantly used to denote destruction and a supplication for it, as if it were said: "Destruction is more fitting for you," meaning, may Allah Almighty cause you to fall into destruction that is closer to you than any other evil or destruction. This is an intensification in the context of destruction.

In the Sahah, it is narrated on the authority of Al-Asma’i that it means "what destroys him is near to him" or "it descends upon him," and he recited the verse: "He alternated between two paths of it / And it is closer (awla) that we add to the three," meaning it is nearer. Tha'lab said: "No one has said anything better about awla than what Al-Asma’i said." According to this, awla is a verb in which the pronoun of destruction is implied by the context of the lamentation, and the lam is redundant according to some scholars.

It has also been said that it is a past-tense verb of supplication derived from al-wali (nearness), except that the subject is a pronoun referring to Allah Almighty and the lam is redundant—meaning, "May Allah Almighty cause you to fall into what you dislike." Alternatively, the lam is not redundant, meaning "Allah Almighty has brought destruction closer to you," which is close to what was mentioned from Al-Asma’i.

Abu Ali said that awla laka is a proper noun for "woe," built upon the pattern of af'al derived from the word al-wayl (woe), with a transposition of letters. Its original form is awyal, and it is non-diptote (ghayr munsarif) due to its status as a proper noun and its metrical pattern. Thus, it is a subject (mubtada') and laka is its predicate. The objection to this is that "woe" is not non-diptote, nor is it like ayyam (days), given that it is not a standard measurement and is never separated from that which it describes. Furthermore, transposition of letters based on difference in the root is not resorted to without evidence, and the concept of a generic proper noun is something outside of standard analogy and difficult to grasp, especially in this context.

It has also been said that it is a verbal noun (ism fi'l) that is indeclinable, meaning: "Woe to you, evil upon evil." A group of scholars preferred that it is a superlative (af'al al-tafdil) meaning "the most fitting and the most appropriate," acting as a predicate for a deleted subject estimated according to what befits the context. Thus, the estimation here is: "The Fire is more fitting for you," meaning you are more entitled to it and more deserving of it; so, "woe!"