A question arises in “lahum fīhā dār al-khuld”: if Hell is already understood as enduring, what additional permanence is gained by imagining an abode of permanence within it?
The objection distinguishes duration from the severity of punishment. One explanation relates the expression's impact to the severity of the state within Hell; merely multiplying “everlasting abodes,” however, does not automatically increase everlastingness itself.
The analysis must identify precisely which attribute is involved and where intensification is claimed. Not every striking formulation intensifies the same aspect in the same way.