Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:51

"And God said, 'Do not take two gods...'"

If you ask: They only combine the number and the counted object for numbers beyond one and two—saying "three men" (rijāl thalātha) and "four horses" (afrās arbaʿa)—because the counted object is devoid of indicating the specific number. As for "a man" (rajul), "two men" (rajulān), "a horse" (faras), and "two horses" (farasān), the counted objects themselves indicate the number, so there is no need to say "one man" (rajul wāḥid) or "two men" (rajulān ithnān). What, then, is the reason for His saying, "two gods" (ilāhayn ithnayn)?

I say: A noun that carries the meaning of singularity or duality indicates two things: the genus and the specific number. When the intent is to signify that the meaning intended—the point toward which the discourse is driven—is the number itself, it is reinforced with what emphasizes it. Thus, it indicates the focus upon it and the concern for it. Do you not see that if you were to say, "He is only a god," without reinforcing it with "one," it would not be sound, and it would be imagined that you are affirming divinity, not oneness?

{So fear Me alone} This is a shift in speech from the third person to the first person. It is permissible because the One who is dominant is the Speaker. This is a form of iltifāt (apostrophe/shift in address), and it is more eloquent in instilling fear than saying, "So fear Him," or having the preceding part of the verse also be in the first person.

{To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and the earth, and to Him is the religion [due], constantly. Then is it other than God that you fear?}