OK. Sorry about my memory. Abul Kalam Azad says
If you know Urdu you will find what he says easy to understand. But I will summarize what he says.
He says 'Ilah' is from اَلِهَ which means '...that which stuns the intellect, or that cannot be comprehended' - instead of believing blindly, I have checked it in Raghib, and it is there with the other interpretations.
Allah is essentially from Ilah, not what you say, as it is explained in the Quran, 'There is no Ilah but Allah (Al-Ilah)' so what is the problem - See how Ilah is being contrasted with Allah? ???
Anyone who does not worship is Allah ?? What absurdity??? There are many a ones (who don't engage in worship) which could be explained with this word if what you say is correct, which would directly go against Qul huw Allahu Ahad. If still you want to say Allah -> Someone who doesn't (need to) engage in worship then 'Nothing' which does not exist is also Allah because it doesn't need to worship because it doesn't exist?
Nothingness doesn't exist.
Absurdity!!!! Both cannot be called Allah
This is what your interpretation has to answer!