Tafsir of Al-An'am 6:40

A command to the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, to rebuke them and silence them with an argument they have no way of denying.

As for the Ta (ت) in ara'aytum (أرأيتكم), Abu al-Baqa' stated that it is a pronoun for the agent, and what follows it is a particle of address brought for emphasis. It is not a noun, for if it were, it would be either in the genitive case—and there is no preposition here—or in the nominative case—and it is not one of the nominative pronouns, nor is there a requirement for one—or in the accusative case. The latter is invalid for three reasons:

1. This verb is mental (a verb of the heart), in the sense of "to know," and it takes two objects, as in your saying: "Have you seen Zayd, what he did?" If the mentioned [particle] were the object, it would be a third object.
2. If it were made an object, it would be the agent in meaning, but the meaning is not that; for the purpose is not "have you seen yourself," but "have you seen someone else." That is why you say: "Have you seen (for yourself) Zayd," where Zayd is someone other than the addressee and is not a substitute for him.
3. If it were so, the signs of duality, plurality, and feminine gender would appear in the Ta, so you would say: ara'aytuma-kuma, ara'aytumukum, and ara'aytun-kunna. This is the school of the Basrans.

Regarding the two objects in this verse, it is said that the first is omitted. Its estimation is: "Have you seen (for yourselves) it—the punishment—or it—the Hour," those occurring in His saying: "If the punishment of Allah comes to you" (meaning worldly punishment, as it came to those before you), "or the Hour comes to you" (meaning its terror, as indicated by what follows). The discourse is of the type of tanaazu' (mutual contention), where ra'a (to see) and ata (to come) contend for one object, which is "the punishment of Allah" and "the Hour." Thus, the second [verb] acts upon it, and it is implied in the first. The second object is the interrogative sentence, which is His saying: "Is it other than Allah that you call upon?" The link to the first object is omitted, meaning: "Is it other than Allah that you call upon to relieve that?"

It is also said that there is no tanaazu', and the estimation is: "Have you considered your worship of the idols, or the idols you worship—will they benefit you?" Another view is that the interrogative sentence stands in the place of both objects.

Al-Radi, following others, held that ra'a here is physical. Others say it is mental, in the sense of "to recognize." According to both views, it is transitive to one object. The original wording is an interrogation regarding knowledge, recognition, or vision, but it is used metaphorically for the meaning of "inform me." It is only used when inquiring about a strange state of affairs.

In it, as al-Kirmani and others stated, there is a figurative use of "seeing" to mean "informing," because vision, in any sense, is a cause for information. The interrogation is made to carry the meaning of a command by virtue of the shared nature of "request." The claim of some that the interrogation is for expressing wonder does not contradict it being in the sense of "inform me," as it is said that this is from the perspective of the original speech.

It is narrated from Abu Hayyan that al-Akhfash said: The Arabs stripped this expression of its meaning entirely. They said ara'aytuka and araytuka by deleting the second hamza when it means "inform me." When it means "to see," its hamza is not deleted. He also necessitated address for this meaning, so you would never say arani Zaydun 'Amran ma sana'a (Zayd showed me what 'Amr did) in the sense of "to inform." He removed it from its subject entirely for the meaning of imma (as for), based on the entry of the fa after it, such as in His saying: "Have you considered when we took refuge in the cave?" The fa only entered because it had shifted to the meaning of imma. The meaning is: "As for when we took refuge in the cave, the matter is such and such." It has also been shifted to the meaning of "inform me" as we have previously stated. When it is in this sense, the name of the person being informed must follow, and the sentence after the interrogation is mandatory. Sometimes it is shifted to this meaning while being followed by a conditional clause and an adverb of time. He was not agreed upon in all of this.

The master of the Kufans, al-Kisa'i, held that the Ta is the pronoun of the agent and the particle of address is in the place of the first object. Al-Farra' held that the Ta is a particle of address and the subsequent attachments are in the nominative case as the agent, being accusative pronouns used as nominative pronouns. This is discussed at length in its place. The preferred view among many researchers is that of the Basrans: that kum here, as well as the other attachments, is a particle of address. The object of the inquiry and the focus of the rebuke among them is His saying: "Is it other than Allah," etc., and His saying: "If you are truthful."

"If you are truthful" is linked to "Have you considered," serving to emphasize the rebuke and expose their falsehood. The response to the condition is omitted, relying on the indication of what has been mentioned. The estimation, according to what has been said, is: "If you are truthful in that your idols are gods, or that your worship of them is beneficial, or if you are a people whose nature is truthfulness, then inform me: Is it other than Allah the Exalted that you call upon if the punishment of Allah comes to you...?" for their truthfulness is a requirement for their reporting their calling upon someone other than Him, the Exalted.

It is also said that the answer is what is indicated by His saying: "Is it other than Allah that you call upon?" meaning: "Then call upon Him," with the pronoun referring to "other than Allah." This was objected to on the grounds that it compromises the eloquence of the noble arrangement; for the demand upon them is only to report their calling upon someone other than Him, the Majestic, when that which is to come arrives, not to call upon Him [the false gods] themselves.

Others allowed that the object of the inquiry is omitted, the estimation being: "Inform me, if the punishment of Allah comes to you or the Hour comes to you, whom do you call upon?" They regarded His saying "Is it other than Allah..." as a new beginning for the rebuke, with the meaning: "Do you single out your gods with supplication as is your habit when an affliction strikes you, or do you call upon Allah, the Exalted, instead of them?" In this view, placing the object first is for the purpose of specification. Some have argued that its placement first is because the denial is attached to it, and they denied that it relates to specification.