Tafsir of Al-Isra 17:47

(We are most knowing of what they listen to) – that is, what they are preoccupied with, such as idle talk, mockery, and derision of you and the Quran. It is narrated that when the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) would stand, there would be two men from [the tribe of] Abd al-Dar on his right and two on his left, clapping, whistling, and confounding him with poetry.

It is permissible for the ba (in bihi) to be causal or to signify the lam (meaning: for the sake of), i.e., "We are most knowing of what they listen to on account of, or for the sake of, in terms of mockery." It is linked to "they listen." Interpreting it according to its literal sense—meaning: "Do they listen with their hearts or with the outwardness of their hearing?"—is not apparent. The first ba (in bihi) is linked to "most knowing," for the superlative form of "knowledge" and "ignorance" takes the ba, whereas otherwise, it takes the lam (e.g., huwa aksa lil-fuqara' - "He is the most clothing to the poor"). The intent behind His—the Exalted—being "most knowing" of that is a threat to them.

(When they listen to you) — [this is] an adverbial phrase for "most knowing," not its object. Its purpose, as stated by the Shaykh al-Islam, is to emphasize the threat by informing [them] that just as the aforementioned listening occurs from them, [His] knowledge is attached to it, not that the knowledge derived there is from someone else. It is not intended to limit His knowledge—the Exalted—to that specific time.

Likewise is His saying: (And when they are in private conference). However, [this is] in terms of its attachment to that by which they are conspiring, which is indicated by the context of the arrangement. The meaning is: We are most knowing of that by which they listen to [matters] in which there is no good—which you have heard—and of that by which they conspire among themselves. It is permitted that the first be an adverb for "they listen" and the second for "they conspire," and the meaning would be: We are most knowing of that by which the listening occurs at the time of their listening, without delay, and of that by which the conspiracy occurs at the time of their conspiracy. The first [interpretation] is more apparent.

(Najwa) is a verbal noun raised as a predicate, similar to the construction "Zayd is justice" (Zaydun 'adlun). It is also permissible to consider it a plural of naji, like qatla and qatil (i.e., when they are conspirators).

(When the wrongdoers say) — [this is] an appositive (badal) to the second "when" (idh), and an explanation of what they are conspiring about; thus, it is other than that which they listen to, not the object of a deleted mention as has been said. [The term] "the wrongdoers" is an explicit noun substituted for a pronoun to indicate that their conspiracy is a form of wrongdoing, meaning each of them says to the others during their conspiracy: (You follow nothing) — meaning, you follow nothing—if, hypothetically, adherence were found in you. It is also permissible that the meaning is: You do not follow, by way of idle talk and mockery, (except a man bewitched).

[This means] a man who has been bewitched and thus gone mad. This is akin to their saying: "He is only a possessed man." It is also said: It means that magic has been cast upon him, through the subtlety and precision of which he arrives at what he brings and claims; thus, it is in the meaning of their saying "a sorcerer." Some have made mashuran (bewitched) mean sahiran (sorcerer), just as mastur (covered) can mean satir (covering).

According to Abu 'Ubaydah, mashuran means that he has been given "sihr," and when [it is said] "he is bewitched," it means [he has] lungs. From this is the saying of Imru' al-Qays: "We see ourselves directed toward a matter of the unseen, and we are nourished (nushar) by food and drink"—intending "we are fed." Also [from this is] the saying of Labid or Umayya ibn Abi al-Salt: "If you ask us who we are, we are but sparrows of this nourished (musahhar) creation." By this, they alluded to his being a human who breathes, eats, and drinks, and who is not distinguished from them by anything that warrants following him—according to their corrupt assumption.

The remoteness of this is not hidden, to the point that Ibn Qutaybah said: "I do not know what compelled Abu 'Ubaydah to this repulsive interpretation, especially since the predecessors interpreted it in clear ways."