وَمَثَلُ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ كَمَثَلِ ٱلَّذِى يَنْعِقُ بِمَا لَا يَسْمَعُ إِلَّا دُعَآءً وَنِدَآءً صُمٌّۢ بُكْمٌ عُمْىٌ فَهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ
“The likeness of those who disbelieve (in relation to the messenger) is as the likeness of one who calleth unto that which heareth naught except a shout and cry. Deaf, dumb, blind, therefore they have no sense.” — M. M. Pickthall
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the expression in the verse should be understood as 'meselü a'mâlihim' (the condition of their deeds), meaning there is an omitted possessive construction (hazf). The word 'keramâdin' is in the position of predicate. Furthermore, this exegete notes that the word 'er-rîhu' can also be read as 'er-riyâh'.
على تقدير : مثل أعمالهم ، وكرماد : الخبر وقرىء : ( الرياح )
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kesîr, in this verse the state of misguidance and ignorance in which the disbelievers find themselves is likened to grazing animals that hear their shepherd's voice but do not understand what is said. This comparison has also been interpreted as a parable representing idol worship; however, Ibn Kesîr noted that since idols hear nothing and understand nothing, and there is no life in them, this second interpretation is weaker.
أي فيما هم فيه من الغي والضلال والجهل كالدواب السارحة التي لا تفقه ما يقال لها بل إذا نعق بها راعيها أي دعاها إلى ما يرشدها لا تفقه ما يقول ولا تفهمه بل إنما تسمع صوته فقط
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, a possessive construction is omitted in the verse; the interpretation is 'and the parable of those who disbelieve is like the parable of one who calls out'. Because disbelievers are immersed in imitation, they do not reflect on what is recited to them; they are likened to animals that merely hear the sound without understanding its meaning. Additionally, it is mentioned as an alternative that this could be a representation in terms of their imitating their forefathers or worshipping idols.
والمعنى أن الكفرة لانهماكهم في التقليد لا يلقون أذهانهم إلى ما يتلى عليهم، ولا يتأملون فيما يقرر معهم، فهم في ذلك كالبهائم التي ينعق عليها فتسمع الصوت ولا تعرف مغزاه، وتحس بالنداء ولا تفهم معناه.
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Taberî, the parable in this verse compares the disbeliever's inadequacy in understanding what is recited to him from Allah, and his rejection of the call to monotheism and admonition, to an animal that hears the sound when called but does not understand what is said to it. After mentioning various views (comparisons to camels, donkeys, sheep; interpretation as echo), the exegete states that he prefers the view of Ibn Abbas and those who follow him.
وأولى التأويل عندي بالآية التأويل الأول الذي قاله ابن عباس ومن وافقه عليه
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the reason why the deeds performed by disbelievers in this world are compared to ashes scattered on a stormy day is that just as the wind disperses ash and leaves no trace or mark of it, disbelief also renders their deeds void and nullifies them, leaving no news or trace of these deeds. Various possibilities are enumerated regarding what these deeds are: charitable acts such as giving charity, maintaining kinship ties, being kind to parents, and feeding the hungry; acts counted as disbelief such as idol worship; or both types being intended together. According to the third possibility, when they see both the deeds they thought were good and those that were actually good come to nothing, their regret and remorse become even greater.
أن الريح العاصف تطير الرماد وتفرق أجزاءه بحيث لا يبقى لذلك الرماد أثر ولا خبر
Comparison
Common ground
Zemahşerî, Beydâvî and Taberî agree on a common axis that the expression in the verse contains an omitted possessive construction (meselü'l-lezîne keferû ke-meseli...) and emphasize that the parable compares disbelievers to animals that hear the call but cannot grasp its meaning. Taberî and Ibn Kesîr, based on transmitted reports, underscore that this comparison relates to the state of not understanding the call to monotheism.
Differences
While Zemahşerî and Beydâvî emphasize grammatical and rhetorical analysis of i'rab and omission, Taberî and Ibn Kesîr base their work on chains of transmission and make choices between the views of the Companions and Successors. Fahreddin er-Râzî, by addressing the parable in a different verse context (deeds compared to ashes), engages with the interpretation of representation and discusses the distinction between righteous and disbelieving deeds; in this respect, he diverges from the others in subject matter. These differences stem from the methodological inclinations of the exegetes: linguistic/rhetorical (Zemahşerî, Beydâvî), transmission-focused (Taberî, Ibn Kesîr), and theological-philosophical (er-Râzî).
Historical context
From Taberî to er-Râzî, an expansion can be observed from transmission-based interpretation toward language and logic-based analysis; however, the fundamental idea of the parable (hearing without understanding/deeds coming to nothing) remains constant, with only methodological emphases and modes of exemplification varying.
Modern connection
This comparative reading draws attention to the fact that hearing words without reflection or neglecting the unity of intention and deed can render one's efforts meaningless. In our time, this can be considered a cautionary lesson that reminds us of the importance of striving for deep understanding when acquiring knowledge, the value of deeds performed with sincere intention, and the significance of intention in acts of social welfare.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar