Say to the polytheists of your people, 'Call upon those whom you worship besides Allah, from the idols and the angels, and you have named them by His name as you call upon Allah. Seek refuge in them in what befalls you, as you seek refuge in Him. And wait for their response to your supplications and their mercy, as you wait for Him to respond to you and have mercy on you.' Then He answered about them by saying, 'They do not possess an atom's weight of good or evil, or benefit or harm, in the heavens or in the earth. And they have no share in the creation of these two realms nor in the dominion.' As His saying, 'I did not witness their creation of the heavens and the earth,' and they have no helper among them to assist Him in managing His creation. He means: they are in this state of incapacity and distance from the conditions of lordship. So how can it be correct for them to call upon as one calls upon and to hope as one hopes? If you say: Where are the objects of the claim? I say: One of them is the omitted pronoun referring back to the relative clause. As for the second, it must either be 'besides Allah' or 'they do not possess' or omitted. The first is not correct, because saying 'they are besides Allah' does not form a coherent statement. Nor the second, because they did not claim that. So how could they speak what is an argument against them, and what if they said it, they would say it is the truth and monotheism? Therefore, it remains that it is omitted, its meaning being: 'You claimed them to be gods besides Allah,' and the reference to the relative clause was omitted as it was omitted in His saying, 'Is this the one whom Allah has sent as a messenger?' in disdain, due to the length of the relative clause for its connection. And the term 'gods' was omitted because it is described by the attribute 'besides Allah,' and the described can be omitted and the attribute can take its place if it is understood. Thus, both objects of the claim are omitted for two different reasons.