Surah An-Nahl (16) — Ayah 35

35. These polytheists say, “If Allah had willed, we would not have worshipped anything besides Him—neither we nor our forefathers—nor would we have declared anything unlawful without His command [33].” Those before them did the same [34]. The duty of the messengers is only to deliver the message clearly [35].

[33]
The Meaning of the People of the Book Taking Their Ahbar and Ruhban as Lords:

To declare something lawful that Allah has made unlawful, or to declare something unlawful that Allah has made lawful, is also clear shirk, as Sayyiduna ‘Adi bin Hatim ؓ asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ about the explanation of ﴿اَرْبَابًا مِّنْ دُوْنِ اللّٰهِ﴾ [9: 13]. Sayyiduna ‘Adi ؓ bin Hatim was formerly a Christian and then embraced Islam. When this verse of Surah Tawbah was revealed, he said: O Messenger of Allah, we did not consider our scholars and elders as lords. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Did you not accept whatever they declared lawful or unlawful without question?” Sayyiduna ‘Adi ؓ said, “That was indeed the case.” The Prophet ﷺ said, “That is what it means to take them as lords.” [ترمذي، ابواب التفسير، تفسير آيت مذكوره]
The polytheists of Makkah also declared many lawful things unlawful and unlawful things lawful, the details of which have already been mentioned in the footnotes regarding Sa’ibah, Bahirah, Wasilah, and Ham [5: 103]. The response of the polytheists is, in fact, an example of “an excuse worse than the sin itself.” In this way, they try to silence the prophets, and argumentative criminals often use the excuse of divine will to cover up their crimes. However, there is a great difference between Allah’s will and Allah’s pleasure, and this difference has already been explained in detail in the footnote of Surah Al-An’am, verse 144; it may be referred to there.

[34] When the polytheists were asked about the teachings of the Prophet of Islam and the Quran, they would reply that there is nothing special in this teaching; it is just the stories of the people of old, nothing new. In other words, their objection to the Prophet ﷺ was that he only presented the words of the ancients. In response, it is being told to them that the argument you present in justification of your polytheistic actions is also not a valid argument. It is the same old claim that misguided people have always made: if Allah did not will it, why would we do such things? However, the refutation of the polytheists’ argument is contained within it: if Allah had approved or willed this shirk of the polytheists, then Allah should have remained silent about their actions. But Allah has sent His Messengers to strongly refute and condemn these actions. So how can they claim that their actions are in accordance with Allah’s pleasure?

[35] The response of the polytheists is also wrong in this respect: our messengers had informed them in due time that the polytheistic actions they were committing were absolutely displeasing to Allah, to the extent that He could send His punishment upon them as a consequence. And the messengers never fell short in fulfilling this responsibility.