Tafsir of Ash-Shu`ara' 26:72

"Approaching them in worship or circling around them," and this—according to what has been said—is part of their elaboration.

"He said" is a continuation based on a question arising from the detail of their response.

"Do they hear you?" The verb of hearing (sama'a) has entered upon a non-audible object. The school of al-Farisi holds that in such a case, it takes two objects, and the second must be something that indicates a sound. According to him, the kaf (you) here is the first object, and the second object is elided; the estimation is: "Do they hear you calling?" It was elided due to the indication of His, the Almighty’s, saying: "When you call upon [them]," appearing thereafter.

The school of others holds that it is transitive to one object, and if a sentence—either uttered or implied—follows it, it is in the position of a state (hal) if the object is definite, or an attribute (sifah) if the object is indefinite. It is also permitted that it be a substitute (badal). If it enters upon an audible object, it is transitive to one object by consensus. It is possible that what is here enters upon that, based on the estimation: "Do they hear your call (du'a'akum)?" The genitive (mudaf) was elided due to the indication of "When you call upon [them]" also.

It is said that "hearing" here carries the meaning of "answering," as in the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) saying: "O Allah, I seek refuge in You from a call that is not heard," and from it is His, the Almighty’s, saying: "Indeed, You are the Hearer of the call," meaning: Do they answer you? In that case, there is no dispute that it is transitive to one object, and there is no need for estimating an elided genitive. The former view is better—to keep it upon its apparent meaning, for it is more suitable to the context.

Yes, it may be said that the aforementioned is more consistent with the reading of Qatadah and Yahya ibn Ya'mur: "Yusmi'unakum" (Do they make you hear), with a damma on the ya and a kasra on the mim from asma'a (to cause to hear), and the second object is elided; the estimation is: "the answer."

"When" (idh) is a temporal adverb for the past, and the present tense (mudari') was used to bring the past state to the present and recount it. As for the fact that hal (interrogative particle) specifies the present tense for the future, it does not matter here because what is considered is the time of the ruling, not the time of speaking, and it is likewise here because the hearing is after the calling.

Abu Hayyan said: There must be a metaphorical use (majaz) in "when" (idh), by making it mean "if" (idha), or a metaphorical use in the present tense by making it mean the past. And considering the evocation of the state is more eloquent in rebuke.

It was also read by assimilating the dhal of idh into the ta of tad'un (you call), by changing it to a ta and assimilating it into the [following] ta.