This parable involves one who calls out—that is, someone calling to sheep or other animals—and those to which he calls: the animals.

One interpretation holds that the caller is the worshipper who invokes the idol, while the idol is what he calls upon. The disbeliever, in his invocation, is thus like someone calling to what cannot hear him. This is the view of a group that includes ‘Abd al-Rahmān ibn Zayd «1» and others.

The author of al-Kashshāf and several others raised an objection to this interpretation. They said that the words “nothing but calls and cries” do not support it, since idols hear neither calls nor cries.

Three answers have been offered to this objection.

The first is that illā (“except”) is redundant, so the meaning is: “to what hears neither calls nor cries.” They state that al-Asma‘ī noted this usage in the poet’s words:

“Lean she-camels, never other than kneeling.”

That is, they remain kneeling. This answer is unsound, however, because illā is not redundant in an affirmative construction.

The second answer is that the comparison concerns calling in general, not the particular characteristics of what is called upon.

The third answer is that these people, in invoking their gods, which do not understand their invocations, are like someone calling to his sheep: he gains nothing from his calling, beyond merely uttering calls and cries. Likewise, the polytheist gains nothing but toil from invoking and worshipping his dead saint.

Another interpretation is that the disbelievers are like livestock, which understand nothing of what the shepherd says beyond the sound. The shepherd represents the one calling the disbelievers, while the disbelievers are the livestock to which he calls.