Tafsir of Al-`Ankabut 29:8

(And We have enjoined upon man kindness toward his parents)—that is, We have commanded him to care for them and show them consideration.

"Husnan" (kindness) is in the accusative case as a description of an omitted verbal noun (maṣdar). It means: iīṣā’an ḥusnan (an injunction of kindness), meaning "possessing goodness." Or, it is in itself "good" due to its extreme excellence, similar to the saying of the Exalted: "And speak to people good (ḥusnan)" [2:83]. This is what Abu Hayyan chose, and it is not without merit.

Al-Zamakhshari said: "Ḥusnan" is the direct object of an omitted verbal noun that is genitive to "his parents." That is: "We have enjoined upon him to provide his parents—or to render to his parents—kindness." This involves treating the omitted verbal noun as having its operative effect while remaining omitted, which is not permissible according to the Basrans. It is also suggested that "ḥusnan" is the verbal noun of an omitted verb, meaning: aḥsinu ḥusnan (do good, a good deed). The clause is in the position of the direct object of "We have enjoined" because it implies the meaning of "speech." This follows the school of the Kufans, who hold that whatever implies the meaning of speech may operate on clauses without the need to assume the presence of "speech" (al-qawl). According to the Basrans, "speech" must be assumed in such instances. On this basis, it may be the direct object of an omitted verb, and the clause is the content of that speech, while the "speech" clause explains the "injunction." That is: "We said: 'Treat them well' or 'Do good to them.'" Under this interpretation, it is appropriate to pause at "his parents" to indicate the commencement of the clause that follows.

Ms08103 favored assuming the imperative (i.e., "Do good"), as it is more consistent with the address and prohibition that follow. However, he weakened it due to the excess of assumptions involved. Ibn Atiyyah reported from the Kufans that they treat "ḥusnan" as the object of an omitted verb and assume the meaning: "that he should do good," involving the omission of an and its connected clause while keeping the operative effect, which is not permissible according to the Basrans. It is also said that "ḥusnan" is in the accusative because of the removal of the preposition, and "toward his parents" is connected to "We have enjoined," with the ba (in bi-wālidayhi) meaning "in the matter of," i.e., "We have enjoined man in the matter of his parents with goodness." This, as you can see, is weak.

Isa and al-Jahdari read "ḥasanan" with two fathahs (as an adjective). In the codex of Ubayy, it is written as "iḥsānan" (to do good).

(But if they strive to make you associate with Me that of which you have no knowledge, do not obey them)—this is a conjunction to what preceded it. It is necessary to assume the omission of "speech" (if it was not assumed before), meaning: "And We said: If they strive against you, etc." This is to avoid the necessity of joining an imperative (inchoative) clause to a declarative one, for if the conditional clause has an imperative response, the entire clause is considered imperative, as the scholars have stated. If "speech" is not assumed, joining it to "We have enjoined" is improper due to the aforementioned reason, nor to what it operates upon, because it carries the meaning of speech (which is superior), even if both are imperative, because it is not part of the "kindness toward parents," as he is prohibited from obeying them in this instance. As for joining it to "We said," which explains the injunction, it causes no harm, for it includes a limitation of the injunction, provided it does not lead to disobedience in the final outcome. It is as if it were said: "Be kind to them and obey them so long as they do not command you to commit a sin." Reflect on this.

The apparent meaning that the context requires is that "what" (in ma laysa laka bihi...) is general for everything other than Allah, the Exalted. The saying of the Glorified: "bihi" (of it) involves the omission of a genitive, meaning: "you have no knowledge of its divinity." The indefiniteness of "knowledge" is to express contempt. The intent of "associate with Me" is something that cannot be, nor could it ever be, a god. The move from the explicit statement to the phrasing in the Majestic Order indicates that whatever is not known to be valid—even if only generally, as in blind imitation—is not permitted to be followed, even if its falsehood is not known. How then about that which is known to be false in the most perfect way?

The scholar al-Tayyibi made the negation of knowledge a metonymy for the negation of the known object. He argued that this style is mostly used regarding Allah, the Exalted, such as: "Do you inform Allah of that which He does not know?" [10:18]. Then he said: "It contains an indication that the negation of shirk (polytheism) belongs to the self-evident sciences and that the sound human nature (fiṭrah) is molded upon it, based on the hadith: 'Every child is born upon the natural disposition.'" That is because the one addressed by the saying of the Exalted: "We have enjoined upon man" is the human species. End quote.

There is a discussion regarding this. The object to which "obey them" relates is omitted because of the clarity of the speech’s indication toward it, meaning: "If they exert their effort in compelling you to associate with Me something other than Me that possesses no divinity, do not obey them in that, for there is no obedience to a created being in the disobedience of the Creator." The attachment of the prohibition of obeying them to their striving in compulsion is an indication that the cause for the prohibition in matters less than that is established a fortiori (by priority of reason), and likewise, the cause for the prohibition in the striving of one of them is also established.

(To Me is your return)—meaning: the return of those among you who believe, and those who associate others with Me, and those who are righteous, and those who are disobedient. The clause confirms what preceded it, which is why it is not conjoined with a conjunction.

(Then I will inform you of what you used to do)—by recompensing each of you for your deeds; if good, then good, and if evil, then evil.

The verse was revealed concerning Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas. When he, may Allah be pleased with him, embraced Islam, his mother, Hamna bint Abi Sufyan ibn Umayyah ibn Abd Shams, said: "O Sa'd, I have heard that you have apostatized. By Allah, I will not be shaded by a roof, nor eat or drink, until you disbelieve in Muhammad (peace be upon him)." She was the most beloved of her children to her, but Sa'd refused. She remained in that state for three days. Sa'd came to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and complained to him, and this verse was revealed, as well as the ones in Luqman and Al-Ahqaf. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) ordered him to treat her gently and satisfy her with kindness.

It is also reported that it was revealed concerning Ayyash ibn Abi Rabiah al-Makhzumi. He had migrated with Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with them both) to Medina. Abu Jahl ibn Hisham and al-Harith ibn Hisham—his half-brothers through his mother, Asma bint Makhrama, a woman from Banu Tamim of Banu Hanzala—came out and settled with Ayyash. They said to him: "Part of the religion of Muhammad is the maintaining of ties of kinship and kindness to parents. Your mother has left off eating, drinking, and staying indoors until she sees you. She loves you more than we do. Come out with us." They persisted in pressuring him. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) advised him: "They are deceiving you; I have wealth that I will divide between me and you." They did not cease pressuring him until he obeyed them and disobeyed Umar. Umar said: "If you must disobey me, then take my she-camel, for there is no beast in the world that can catch her. If you see anything suspicious from them, return." When they reached the desert, Abu Jahl said: "My camel is exhausted, carry me with you." He said: "Yes." He descended to make room for himself and him, but they seized him, bound him, gave him a hundred lashes, and took him to his mother. She said: "You will remain in torment until you return from the religion of Muhammad (peace be upon him)," and thus this verse was revealed.