Tafsir of Yunus 10:29

This refers to a lack of approval, not a lack of perception. The lack of perception by the angels regarding their worship is not apparent. Indeed, if one were to suggest that this interpretation must hold even if the intent is the Messiah, peace be upon him, it would not be far-fetched; for his lack of perception regarding their worship—despite the fact that he will descend and break the cross—is the same. It is hardly correct to interpret it according to the literal meaning unless the intent is idols, for their lack of perception is evident.

This has been countered by the argument that there is no proof for the angels (peace be upon them) perceiving their worship, which would necessitate diverting the wording from its literal meaning. These worshipped beings are neither the Guardians (Hafaza) nor the Scribes (Kiraman Katibin), but other angels. Perhaps they are occupied with performing what they were commanded, distracted from paying attention to what occurs in this world. We do not claim regarding the angels (peace be upon them) what the philosophers claim; for they are the ones who said, when asked about the Names: "Exalted are You; we have no knowledge except what You have taught us" (2:32). And this is Gabriel (peace be upon him), who, despite his high status, was often asked by the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about things, and he would reply: "I do not know; I will ask my Lord."

Likewise, there is no proof that the Messiah (peace be upon him) perceived the worship of these addressees at the time it occurred. His descent and breaking of the cross do not necessitate his perception of their worship at that time, as is clear. One may find support for his lack of perception in what Allah the Exalted recounted from his reply to His inquiry: "I said not to them except what You commanded me - 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.' And I was a witness over them as long as I remained among them; but when You took me, You were the Observer over them, and You, over all things, are Witness" (5:117).

An objection was raised against the latter view, stating that it is not valid at all with this statement, because the devils are the ones who adorned this heinous act for them and enticed them into it. How, then, can it be said that they are truly unaware of it, or that they do not approve of it? Perhaps those who hold this view are forced to accept the possibility of falsehood occurring on the Day of Resurrection.

It has also been said: The first statement is not valid with this interpretation either, because idols cannot be described as truly unaware. For "unawareness" (Ghafla), as understood from the Qamus, is a name for the turning away and departure of the heart from something toward something else; this is the state of those who possess hearts, and idols are not among them. Likewise, they cannot be described by it metaphorically as "lack of approval," for it is apparent that the intent of "lack of approval" is displeasure and hatred. It is evident that idols are not characterized by displeasure or approval, as these are dependent upon perception, and they have no perception. Whoever attributes perception to inanimate objects according to their own world, the matter is simple for him; but those who do not attribute it say that it is a metaphor for the lack of perception.

It may also be said: The intent of their unawareness regarding the worship of the polytheists is the lack of a "preparatory demand" (al-talab al-isti‘dadi) for it. This ultimately returns to denying that they possess any worthiness of worship and confirming the wrongdoing of their worshippers. In this case, it is more apparent that the "partners" are intended to be all those worshipped besides Allah the Exalted, whether sentient or otherwise, and all of them are truthful in saying that. "Lack of demand" may be intended to include both actual and verbal demand if the speaker is considered someone to whom such a description applies, such as the angels (peace be upon them). This perspective does not depend on whether the partners perceive their worship or not; it is possible they have perception, and it is possible they do not.

The apparent meaning is that interpreting "unawareness" as "lack of approval"—which is intended to mean displeasure and hatred—necessitates perception, for hating something while being unaware of it is inconceivable. Attributing this to all the partners, even generally, at any time in the worldly life, is not accepted. Perhaps the expression "unawareness" is more derogatory toward the addressees and their worship than expressing it as "lack of demand," for example—so reflect upon this.

The Ba in billahi (by Allah) is connective, shahidan (as a witness) is an accusative of specification (tamyiz), and anna is lightened from the heavy anna. The lam is the separator between the lightened form and the negative particle. The adverbial phrase is connected to ghafilin (unaware), and the prepositional phrase is placed first to observe the rhyme. The meaning is: "Allah is sufficient as a witness, for He is the All-Knowing, the All-Expert, cognizant of the essence of the situation, that we were unaware of your worship." It is apparent from the words of some researchers that "Sufficient is Allah..." is a testimony for the preceding negation, not for the subsequent affirmation.