The Holy Quran with Five Volume Commentary (Vol 3) — Page 475
PT. 14 AN-NAHL We have bestowed on them. By Allah, you shall certainly be called to account for all that you have forged. 1858 CH. 16 تَفْتَرُونَ وَيَجْعَلُونَ لِلَّهِ الْبَنْتِ سُبْنَهُ وَلَهُم مَّا And they ascribe daughters. 58 يَشْتَهُونَ to Allah Holy is He!-while they themselves have what they desire. 1859 "6:101; 37:153-154; 43:17; 52:40; 53:22. 1858. Commentary: The verse means to say that idolaters allege that their gods or idols have bestowed upon them such and such things while the gods themselves have no knowledge of any such bestowal of their favours upon them. The words (of which they know nothing) signify that idolaters who imagine they have received gifts from their gods and goddesses do not know who their gods are. abstruse more The verse constitutes one powerful argument in refutation of polytheism. Very often polytheists and idolaters are found to indulge in philosophical and metaphysical arguments in support of polytheism which confuse men's minds. In this verse they are told that the possibility that a certain thing can exist and the fact that it actually exists are two vastly different things. Even admitting for the sake of argument that there can be more than one God, does this hypothetical possibility actually prove that a particular person who is believed by idolaters to be a god is really so? These abstruse philosophical discussions do not prove anything. The godhead of the pseudo-gods has to be proved by strong and cogent proofs. This is a line of argument which at once takes the ground from under the feet of idolaters. They cannot prove the godhead of any one of their many gods. A polytheist will indulge in abstruse always metaphysical discussion about polytheism, but will never be able to adduce one single solid argument to prove the godhead of any of his many gods. It is in pursuance of God's own plan that the lives of the pseudo-gods of the polytheists show that they were so weak and helpless that in view of their weakness and even the most helplessness not confirmed polytheist could dare say that they were gods. 1683 1859. Commentary: The verse does not imply that the of disbelievers lies in offence attributing to God daughters and not sons. In 19: 91, 92, it has been clearly mentioned how it displeases God when a son is attributed to Him. The present verse only points to the folly of disbelievers that they go against