Tafsir of Al-`Ankabut 29:42

"Indeed, Allah knows whatever they call upon other than Him as a thing."

This is based on the assumption of an omitted verb of speech; that is to say: "Say, O disbelievers, 'Indeed Allah knows...'" It has been said that there is no need for this assumption, as it is possible that "you call upon" (tad'una) is an instance of iltifat (shift in person), intended to signal indignation, though this is a subject of debate.

Abu Amr and Salam read "He knows what" (ya'lamu ma) with assimilation. Abu Amr and Asim (in one narration) read "they call upon" (yad'una) with the yā’ of the third person, in consistency with what precedes it.

"What" (ma) is an interrogative pronoun, in the accusative case as the object of "you call upon," and "knows" (ya'lamu) is suspended by it, such that the entire clause is in the place of an accusative object for "knows." The first "from" (min) is attached to "you call upon," as is apparent; the second "from" is for clarification (tabyin). It is also permissible that it is for partition (tab'id). It has also been suggested that "what" is a negative particle, the second "from" is an addition (mazidah), and "a thing" (shay’) is the object of "you call upon"—meaning: "You do not call upon anything other than Him, the Exalted," as if what they call upon other than Him, the Almighty and Majestic, is so contemptible that it does not deserve to be called a "thing."

It is also possible that "what" is a masdariyah (participle of the infinitive), such that it and what follows are interpreted as an infinitive serving as the object of "knows" (assuming "knows" means "recognizes," which takes only one object), and "from" is for partition—meaning: "He recognizes your calling and worshipping of any portion of anything other than Him." It is said that "from" is for clarification, "thing" denotes that infinitive, and its tanwin is for belittlement—meaning: "He knows your calling upon other than Him is a worthless calling."

It is also permissible that "what" is a relative pronoun, serving as the object of "knows" (meaning "recognizes"), while the object of "you call upon" is an implied relative pronoun returning to it; and "from" is either for clarification of the relative or for partition. It is also permissible to consider it as an addition in this and the following interpretations, though the weakness in that is evident.

The discourse according to the first two interpretations of "what" serves to expose the ignorance of the disbelievers who have taken protectors other than Allah the Exalted, because it denies the "thing-ness" of what they have taken as a protector, and the interrogation regarding it carries the meaning of negation, as it is a form of censure. This serves to emphasize the parable, for the fact that their object of worship is not a thing worth considering is appropriate; hence, no conjunction (‘atf) is used.

According to the latter two interpretations, the discourse serves as a threat to them, for the knowledge of their calling and worship is synonymous with their retribution for it; likewise, the knowledge of what they call upon is synonymous with their retribution for calling upon it. The omission of the conjunction here is because it is an incipit (isti’naf). It is permissible for the intent to be both the exposure of ignorance and the threat in all these interpretations.

His saying, "And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise," is in the position of a state (hal), from which causality is understood for both meanings. For it is the height of stupidity to associate that which is not even counted as a thing with One whose status is such that all inanimate objects, in relation to the One who is Powerful, Overpowering over all things, and who has attained the utmost extremity in knowledge and the perfection of action, are like pure non-existence. And [it is understood that] the One who possesses such attributes is capable of punishing them.