Surah 20. Ta-Ha, Ayah 96

It is to be noted that the verb basura (lit., "he became seeing") has the tropical significance of "he perceived [something] mentally", or "he gained insight" or "he understood". Hence, Abu Muslim al-Isfahani (whose interpretation of the whole of this verse Razi analyzes and finds most convincing) explains the above phrase as meaning, "I realized what they [i.e., the rest of the people] did not realize - namely, that some of thy beliefs, O Moses, were wrong". It would seem that the Samaritan objected to the idea of a transcendental, imperceivable God, and thought that the people ought to have something more "tangible" to believe in. (See also next note.)

Contrary to the fanciful interpretations advanced by some of the other commentators, Abu Muslim (as quoted by Razi) explains the term athar (lit., "vestige" or "trace") in its tropical sense of the "practices and sayings" or - collectively - the "teachings" of any person, and particularly of a prophet; thus, he makes it clear that the phrase qabadtu qabdatan min athari 'r-rasul fa-nabadhtuha signifies "I took hold of a handful [i.e., "something"] of the teachings of the Apostle, and discarded it": it being understood that "the Apostle" referred to by the Samaritan in the third person is Moses himself. (As already mentioned in the preceding note, Razi unreservedly subsrcibes to Abu Muslim's intepretation of this passage.) In my opinion, the Samaritan's rejection of a part of Moses' teachings is meant to explain the subconscious tendency underlying all forms of idolatry and of the attribution of divine qualities to things or beings other than God: a futile, self-deceiving hope of bringing the Unpercievable closer to one's limited perception by creating a tangible "image" of the Divine Being or, at least, of something that could be conceived as His "emanation". Inasmuch as all such endeavours obscure rather than illuminate man's understanding of God, they defeat their own purpose and destroy the misguided devotee's spiritual potential: and this is undoubtedly the purport of the story of the golden calf as given in the Qur'an.

 This verse could also be translated as follows: “I had an insight which they did not have, then grasped some knowledge from the messenger ˹Moses˺, but ˹later˺ threw it away. This is what my lower-self tempted me to do.” According to many Quran commentators, while Moses and the Children of Israel were crossing the sea to escape abuse by Pharaoh and his people, the Sâmiri saw Gabriel on a horse leading the way, and every time the horse touched the ground, it turned green. So the Sâmiri took a handful of dust from the hoof-prints of the horse, and later tossed it at the calf so it started to make a lowing sound.

This answer of the Samiri is a fine example of unblushing effrontery, careful evasion of issues, and invented falsehoods. He takes upon himself to pretend that he had far more insight than anybody else: he saw what the crowd did not see. He saw something supernatural. "The Messenger" is construed by many Commentators to mean the angel Gabriel. Rasul (plural, rusul) is used in several places for "angels" e.g., in xi. 69, 77; xix. 19; and xxxv. 1. But if we take it to mean the Messenger Moses, it means that the Samiri saw something sacred or supernatural in his footprints: perhaps he thinks a little flattery would make Moses forgive him. The dust became sacred, and his throwing it into the calf made the calf utter a lowing sound! As if that was the point at issue! He does not answer the charge of making an image for worship. But finally, with arrogant effrontery, he says, "Well, that is what my soul suggested to me, and that should be enough!"