فَلَوْلَا أُلْقِيَ عَلَيْهِ أَسْوِرَةٌ مِنْ ذَهَبٍ أَوْ جَاءَ مَعَهُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ مُقْتَرِنِينَ ﴿۵۳﴾ فَاسْتَخَفَّ قَوْمَهُ فَأَطَاعُوهُ إِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا قَوْمًا فَاسِقِينَ ﴿۵۴﴾ فَلَمَّا آسَفُونَا انْتَقَمْنَا مِنْهُمْ فَأَغْرَقْنَاهُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ ﴿۵۵﴾ فَجَعَلْنَاهُمْ سَلَفًا وَمَثَلًا لِلْآخِرِينَ ﴿۵۶﴾ وَلَمَّا ضُرِبَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مَثَلًا إِذَا قَوْمُكَ مِنْهُ يَصِدُّونَ ﴿۵۷﴾

﴾53﴿ Falaw laa ulqiya 'alaihi aswiratun min zahabin aw jaaa'a ma'ahul malaaa'ikatu muqtarineen
﴾54﴿ Fastakhaffa qawmahoo fa ataa'ooh; innahum kaanoo qawman faasiqeen
﴾55﴿ Falammaaa aasafoonan taqamnaa minhum fa aghraqnaahum ajma'een
﴾56﴿ Faja'alnaahum salafanw wa masalan lil aakhireen
﴾57﴿ Wa lammaa duribab nu Maryama masalan izaa qawmuka minhu yasiddoon

﴾53﴿ So why has a bracelet of gold not been cast upon him, or why have angels not come with him in procession
﴾54﴿ So he deceived his people, and they obeyed him. Indeed, they were a rebellious people
﴾55﴿ So when they angered us, we took retribution from them, and drowned them all
﴾56﴿ So We made them a precedent and an example for those who came after
﴾57﴿ And when the son of Mary is mentioned as an example, your people raise an outcry because of it

[53] This is also a form of denial and humiliation of Mūsā (peace be upon him), where Pharaoh attempts to discredit him by comparing the messengers of Allah to the envoys of worldly kings.
In those times, royal messengers would wear golden bracelets and armlets, and many servants would accompany them as a sign of honor and status.
Based on this, Pharaoh raised two objections against Mūsā (peace be upon him):
1. He did not wear golden ornaments.
2. He had no entourage or group of servants with him.
Thus, Pharaoh tried to argue that Mūsā could not be a true messenger, using superficial worldly standards to judge divine prophethood.
[54] The phrase (فَاسْتَخَفَّ قَوْمَهُ) means that Pharaoh’s claim and his belittling of Mūsā (peace be upon him) led his people to ignorance, and this ignorance became the reason for their obedience to Pharaoh.
Note: The method of false leaders and scholars who follow falsehood is just like that of Pharaoh—they deliberately prevent their followers and students from learning the knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and from engaging in critical inquiry, so that they remain ignorant and continue to obey them blindly.

[55] In this verse, the punishment of Pharaoh and his people is mentioned as a warning to other deniers.
The phrase (فَلَمَّا آسَفُونَا) means: “When they enraged Us.”
Asaf here means intense anger (ghaḍab), and it is also an attribute of Allah the Exalted—though, like all divine attributes, it is not comparable to the anger of creation.
[56] The word (سَلَفًا) is the plural of sālif, just as khadam is the plural of khādim. It can also be a verbal noun (maṣdar) used to refer to a group.
Salaf refers generally to those who came before, whether in goodness or evil—therefore, when used in praise, it is often combined with a qualifier like ṣāliḥ (righteous) or ṣāliḥīn (the righteous ones).
The difference between salaf and mathal (example) can be understood in several ways:
1. Salaf refers to a previous example of punishment, while mathal refers to an event from which a lesson is drawn.
2. Salaf is used for those who committed similar acts in the past, and mathal is used for those in later times who act like them.
3. The Israelites became salaf for the righteous—an example of salvation, while Pharaoh and his people became a mathal—a lesson for evildoers.
In the phrase (فَجَعَلْنَاهُمْ)—“So We made them”—the pronoun refers to both groups collectively (i.e., those punished and those saved).
[57,58] This verse is a rebuke and a prelude to the incident of ʿĪsā (peace be upon him). There are two possible connections between this and the preceding verses: First possibility: The argument and stubbornness of Pharaoh’s people toward Mūsā (peace be upon him) was mentioned previously. Now, the opposition and denial of the polytheists of Makkah toward the Prophet Muhammad (May Allah bless him and give him peace) is mentioned.
The core of it is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) would frequently mention the story of ʿĪsā (peace be upon him) to affirm tawḥīd and refute the polytheists.
So the polytheists would stir up controversy, saying: “He always mentions ʿĪsā—perhaps his intention is that we take him (Muhammad) as a god, just as the Christians made ʿĪsā into a god.”
Thus, the meaning of (أَآلِهَتُنَا خَيْرٌ أَمْ هُوَ)—“Are our gods better, or is he?”—would be: “Are our gods better, or the god (allegedly) promoted by Muhammad?” They claimed: “Rather, our gods are better.” Second possibility: This connects back to verse 45, where it was stated that in the true religion, no messenger is allowed to approve false deities.
So when they heard ʿĪsā (peace be upon him) mentioned in the Qur’an, they objected: “Why is divinity not given to him, even though Christians consider him a god? And if ʿĪsā is a made-up god, then our gods are even better than him.”
Hence, (أَآلِهَتُنَا خَيْرٌ أَمْ هُوَ) would mean: “Are our gods better, or is ʿĪsā?”—and they concluded, falsely, that their gods are better. The phrase (وَلَمَّا ضُرِبَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مَثَلًا) means: whenever the Qur’an presents an example of the weakness and servitude of ʿĪsā (peace be upon him) to refute the polytheists...
(مَا ضَرَبُوهُ لَكَ إِلَّا جَدَلًا)—“They mention him only out of argumentation”—meaning the polytheists only cite ʿĪsā (peace be upon him) as a counter-example in stubbornness and opposition, even though they know well that he was never a god.