Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

بَدِيعُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۖ أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَلَمْ تَكُن لَّهُ صَاحِبَةٌ ۖ وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ ۖ وَهُوَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ ‎

Arabic: “Badiʿu as-samāwāti wa-al-arḍi; annā yakūnu lahu waladun wa-lam takun lahu ṣāḥibah, wa-khalaqa kulla shayʾ, wa-huwa bi-kulli shayʾin ʿalīm.”

Translation (Pickthall): “The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a child, when there is for Him no consort, when He created all things and is Aware of all things?”​

Classical Tafsir Insights

Al-Ṭabarī (d. 923 CE) – Imam al-Ṭabarī, in his monumental Tafsīr, explains that “Badiʿ” (Originator) signifies creating something unprecedented, without any prior model​ surahquran.com. Early authorities like Mujāhid and al-Suddī noted that Allah “originated, created, invented and brought [the heavens and earth] into existence without precedence”, which is why innovation (bidʿah) in language derives from the same root​surahquran.com. Al-Ṭabarī highlights Allah’s absolute creatorship – having originated the entire universe ex nihilo, He is uniquely its sole creator. Thus, when the verse asks “How can He have a child when He has no consort?”, al-Ṭabarī emphasizes it is a rhetorical refutation of anyone claiming God has offspring. A child by definition results from a pair of similar beings, but “Allah does not have an equal”, and nothing from His creation can be His partner ​surahquran.com. All beings are khalq (created) and contingent on His will, so none can share His divine nature. This underlines the Qur’anic themes of divine uniqueness and transcendence: Allah has no peer, mate, or progeny, being utterly unlike His creation.

Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 1209 CE) – In Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, Rāzī provides a detailed theological analysis of 6:101, directly engaging claims of God’s “offspring” with rigorous logic. He notes the verse comes after refuting pagan Arabs who “falsely attributed to Him sons and daughters without knowledge” (cf. 6:100) ​quran-tafsir.net. Rāzī then tackles especially the Christian idea of God having a son (e.g. Jesus), dissecting it in three possible interpretations:

1. “Son” as a special act of creation: Rāzī says if the intent is that God “begetting” a son means He created Jesus in a miraculous way (without a father), this does not make Jesus literally God’s offspring. After all, Allah created Adam with no father and mother, and indeed “originated the heavens and the earth” themselves without any precedent​. By this logic, if a miraculous creation implied divine sonship, then the heavens and earth could also be called God’s “children” – an absurd notion​ quran-tafsir.net. Thus, Jesus’s extraordinary creation (“Kun fayakūn – Be! and he was”) confers no familial divine status, only that he is a created being of God’s will. This argument uses Allah’s creatorship of the entire cosmos (samāwāt wa-al-arḍ) as proof that nothing created, no matter how special, can share His Godhead.
2. “Son” in a literal, physical sense: Rāzī then refutes outright the idea of divine procreation in the biological sense. Such an idea, he argues, would require God to have a consort and a physical nature, which the verse explicitly negates. Generation in animals or humans happens only when a being has a spouse, reproductive organs, physical desire, and divisible substance – attributes impossible for God. “That type of birth only holds for bodies…all of which is impossible for the Creator of the world,” Rāzī writes, “This is the meaning of His saying: ‘How could He have a son when He has no consort?’”​ Here, Qur’an 6:101 is asserting God’s absolute transcendence (tanzīh) – He is not a corporeal being and is above any anthropomorphic processes. Rāzī further notes that resorting to procreation is a mark of created beings who cannot create life independently, whereas Allah is omnipotent and can create life directly. He has no need to reproduce; hence attributing a literal son to Him is incoherent. In short, physical sonship is incompatible with God’s nature as an immaterial, self-sufficient One.
3. “Son” as a co-eternal divine person: Rāzī lastly considers if someone claims God’s “Son” in a metaphysical sense – an eternal divine being (as orthodox Christian theology holds Jesus to be “begotten not made”). He reasons this is also untenable. If this “Son” were eternal (uncreated), there would be two Necessary Beings – which is impossible, for a “necessary existent” by definition is uncaused, utterly independent, and unique​ quran-tafsir.net. Two co-eternal gods would negate each other’s status as necessary. On the other hand, if the “son” is created in time, then he is just a contingent being – not literally part of God. In that case, God’s act of “begetting” a created son would either serve some need or benefit for God or not. Rāzī says if one imagines God needed a child to perfect Himself, that implies God lacked something (contradicting His perfection). If having a son offers no benefit to God, then it is purposeless – and God does not act in vain ​quran-tafsir.net. Thus, in all scenarios, the concept of divine sonship fails. By systematically dismantling these notions, Rāzī uses Qur’an 6:101 as a proof of tawḥīd (divine oneness): God’s essence admits no multiplicity or partnership. The verse’s logic “Wherefrom could He have a son?” is, on Rāzī’s account, a rational proof that God, the Originator of all, remains singular and transcendent, “Glorified above having a son”​surahquran.com.

Ibn Kathīr (d. 1373 CE) – The eminent exegete Ibn Kathīr echoes and crystallizes these themes in his commentary. “He is the Badiʿ (Originator) of the heavens and the earth”, meaning Allah brought them into existence from nothing, with no prior example to emulate​. Ibn Kathīr highlights that childbirth is the product of two compatible spouses, a process inapplicable to Allah​. “How can He have children when He has no wife?” he quotes, “for the child is the offspring of two…and none of His creatures are similar to Him.”​ Allah has no equal or partner, and since “He alone created the entire creation”, all else is infinitely beneath Him ​surahquran.com. Ibn Kathīr cites other Qur’anic verses that strongly reject the ascription of any son to God, for instance: “They say: ‘The Most Merciful has begotten a son.’ Indeed, you have brought forth an atrocious claim!” (Qur’an 19:88)​surahquran.com. After quoting several lines from Surat Maryam, he concludes: “How can He have a wife from His creation suitable for His Majesty, when there is none like Him? How then could He have a child? Verily, Allah is exalted above having a son.”​ In Ibn Kathīr’s view, 6:101 decisively establishes Allah’s absolute uniqueness (wahdāniyya). The verse is a negation of shirk (associating partners with God) in any form – be it pagan myths of divine progeny or theological assertions of “God’s Son” – and an affirmation of His pure monotheism.

Comparative Theology: Qur’an 6:101 and Christian Doctrine

The Qur’anic assertion of God’s oneness and lack of offspring directly challenges key Christian theological concepts such as the Trinity and the divine sonship of Jesus. In Christian theology, God is understood as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – three persons in one God. The Son (Jesus Christ) is described as “eternally begotten” of the Father, “not made”, meaning that Christians do not conceive of God’s fatherhood in a physical manner involving a consort. In the Nicene Creed, Jesus is professed as “the only-begotten Son of God… begotten of the Father before all worlds… God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made”. The Father is said to generate the Son from His own substance in an eternal, metaphysical way​. In other words, the term “Son of God” in orthodox Christianity denotes an eternal relationship within God’s being – “The Father generates the Son, and the Son is ‘from the substance of the Father.’… The Father is unbegotten; the Son is begotten.”​crossway.org This begetting is understood as an eternal, spiritual reality, utterly unlike biological procreation (there is no mother or sexual act in Christian doctrine).

But, is it paradoxical, how can something created be eternal? The Qur’an, however, repudiates even this refined notion of divine sonship. Qur’an 6:101 can be seen as a direct response to any idea that God has a “son” in any sense. “How can He have a child when there is no consort for Him?” on a surface level targets crude anthropomorphic ideas – a reminder that God is not a male deity with a wife (a notion found in some ancient paganisms). But the verse’s implications go further, undermining the theological core of the Father-Son relationship as understood by Christians. The Quran insists that “He created all things”, so Jesus too is a created being, not an uncreated co-divine entity. From the Islamic perspective, calling Jesus “Walad Allāh” (son of God) compromises God’s transcendence and unity, effectively associating another being with Him in rank or nature​ surahquran.com. The Qur’an elsewhere firmly declares “He begets not, nor was He begotten” (112:3), which pointedly rejects the idea of divine generation outright. Muslim theologians note that even if Christians intend “begotten” in a mystical, eternal sense, the Qur’an’s absolutist language (“nothing is like Him”) leaves no room for any kind of filiation in God’s being​ corpus.quran.com. In Islam, God is al-Aḥad (the One/Unique) and al-Ṣamad (the Self-Sufficient). He is eternally complete without any second or offspring; any claim of a “Son” – even as an eternal divine person – is seen as detracting from His oneness (tawḥīd).

Despite this sharp contrast, both traditions share some common ground in recognizing God as transcendent and not subject to human biology. Christians do not believe God literally took a wife or physically sired a child – in fact, they too would repudiate such an anthropomorphic idea. Thus, when the Qur’an says “He has no consort”, a Christian might agree in principle, yet maintain that the Son is begotten “not by a consort, but from the Father’s own eternal being.” From the Islamic standpoint, however, any form of “begetting” remains incompatible with God’s unity and self-sufficiency. As al-Rāzī argued, even a co-eternal Son would violate the uniqueness of the Necessary Being​ quran-tafsir.net. Moreover, the Qur’ān’s emphasis that God “is aware of all things” (6:101’s ending) suggests that God’s knowledge and power already encompass everything without needing an incarnate helper or offspring. In Islamic thought, prophets like Jesus can be mighty and revered, but they are created servants, not literal kin of the Creator. Meanwhile, Christian theology developed the concept of the Incarnation (God becoming man in Jesus) – a concept the Qur’an implicitly challenges by maintaining that no aspect of creation can be God or part of God. In summary, Qur’an 6:101 serves as a concise rebuttal to Trinitarian beliefs: it reasserts pure monotheism in terms that exclude the Trinity’s Father/Son relationship, reinforcing that Allah’s oneness is absolute and unqualified.

Scientific and Philosophical Reflections

Philosophically, Qur’an 6:101 touches on profound themes such as necessary vs. contingent existence and divine simplicity. Philosophers and theologians in Islam (and indeed in classical theism generally) argue that God is a Necessary Being – existing by His own nature, without a cause – whereas everything else is contingent, existing only because He created it. The verse highlights that “He created all things”, implying nothing else shares His eternal self-existence. Medieval Islamic philosophers like Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) developed arguments to show that the Necessary Being must be utterly one and unique. Avicenna reasoned that the ultimate cause of all contingent things cannot itself be contingent; it must be singular and without equal, otherwise it wouldn’t be truly necessary. In fact, Avicenna provided a philosophical proof for the Islamic doctrine of tawḥīd by demonstrating “the uniqueness and simplicity of the Necessary Existent.” ​en.wikipedia.org The term simplicity here means that God is not composite or made of parts – God’s essence is unified and indivisible. This concept of divine simplicity reinforces why God cannot have a “child.” A father and son in any sense would imply a division or distinction in essence (even the Christian idea of Father and Son involves two persons, which Islamic thought would view as compromising pure unity). But the Necessary Being in Islamic understanding has no peer, no components, and nothing internal that could “split off” as another divine person. Thus, philosophical theology supports the plain meaning of Qur’an 6:101: God’s oneness is absolute, allowing no second alongside Him.

Furthermore, Rāzī’s earlier point about an eternal son violating the Necessary Being’s uniqueness ties into the law of non-contradiction in metaphysics: there cannot be two absolutes. The verse implicitly invites us to contemplate: if God is the sole origin of everything (“kulla shayʾ”), nothing can exist alongside Him as an uncreated equal. This is closely related to the Quranic phrase “Laysa ka-mithlihi shayʾ” – “There is nothing like unto Him” (42:11)​ corpus.quran.com – a maxim often quoted to exclude any anthropomorphism or multiplicity in God. The uniqueness of God (often termed tawḥīd al-dhāt, oneness of essence) means God isn’t a species with potential family members; His transcendence (tanzīh) means He is beyond all categories of the created world. The verse’s rejection of a consort and child for God can be seen as a specific instance of that general principle: infinite, non-physical, self-sufficient Being cannot generate or beget in the way finite beings do.

Another angle is the critique of anthropomorphism. Historically, many mythologies projected human family structures onto deity – with father gods, mother goddesses, divine sons and daughters forming pantheons. Qur’an 6:101 cuts through this anthropomorphic projection by asserting God’s otherness. By saying God has no consort, it denies the notion that God is just a supersized person who would have a wife or sexual relations. As one scholar on Islam and ancient religions notes, the Qur’an is here “reminding us and our Christian brothers and sisters that any idea of God having intercourse leads to a completely erroneous idea of what God is.” ​islam.stackexchange.com In Islamic thought, even gender and biological states are properties of creation, not of the Creator. Allah is often referred to with the pronoun “He” in scripture, but this “He” is a grammatical convention, not a literal gender – God is beyond male or female. Thus, God does not literally father children, and terms like “Father” are not among His 99 Names in Islamic tradition. By contrast, the Quran calls God “al-Khāliq” (The Creator) and “al-ʿAlīm” (The All-Knowing), as in this verse. These names emphasize action (creating) and attribute (knowing) rather than any relational title like “father.” The end of 6:101, “He is Knower of all things,” reinforces God’s omniscience and omnipotence – qualities that further render moot any notion that God would “need” an offspring. In philosophical terms, God is the uncaused cause and the ever-sustaining force of existence; adding the idea of a “Son” adds nothing but confusion to that picture, from the Islamic vantage point.

It is also worth noting how scientific insight has rendered the old pagan concept of gods procreating even more incongruous. We now understand the universe in terms of quantum fields, elementary particles, and cosmic laws – a far cry from the anthropomorphic gods of Olympus or Babylon who produced children through intercourse. The Quranic worldview, especially as interpreted by later scholars, is intellectually closer to philosophical monotheism than to mythological thought. In a sense, Qur’an 6:101 anticipates a rational critique of mythology: by highlighting God’s role as cosmic creator, it removes Him from the realm of biological beings. Science shows us a universe governed by consistent laws (which, for believers, reflects the wisdom of a single Lawgiver). The doctrine of divine simplicity also finds an echo in scientific elegance: ultimate reality (God) is conceived as fundamentally one and indivisible, not a composite being. While science itself doesn’t pronounce on God, it has cleared away many naive images of God. The Qur’anic insistence that God is unlike the created order finds support in our modern appreciation of how unique and non-anthropomorphic the origin of the universe must be. In Islamic theology, any physical or imaginable form is not God – “whatever comes to your mind, God is different from that” goes a famous maxim. This stance preempts the pitfalls of imagining God on a creaturely model. By declaring God has no consort and no offspring, Qur’an 6:101 guards the purity of faith from both crude and subtle anthropomorphisms.

Finally, the verse invites reflection on the relationship between Creator and creation. If God “created every thing” (kulla shayʾ), then everything apart from God is property and product of His will. This implies God’s lordship (rubūbiyya) over all and the dependency of all existence on Him at every moment. Philosophers term this the doctrine of continual creation or necessary dependence – the cosmos cannot exist or persist by itself. Thus, any being within it, no matter how exalted (even a prophet or messiah), is nurtured and sustained by God, not an independent divine agent. The Quranic argument can be seen as saying: if God already exercises total creative power and knowledge over the universe, what purpose or sense would having a “divine son” serve? This reasoning aligns with Occam’s Razor philosophically: do not multiply entities without necessity. A single omnipotent Creator is sufficient to explain reality; positing a divine family is unnecessary and indeed contradictory to God’s singular nature. Classical Christian theologians like St. Thomas Aquinas also asserted God’s simplicity and lack of parts, even as they upheld the Trinity as a mystery. Islamic theologians, however, pushed the simplicity to its logical end – God has no “persons” and no plurality within. Thus, Qur’an 6:101 can be appreciated as a succinct theological statement that harmonizes with a philosophically robust monotheism and even finds a friendly resonance in the idea of a universe with a singular beginning, governed by one set of laws.

Conclusion

Qur’an 6:101 offers a rich intersection of theology, philosophy, and science, all coalescing to deepen our understanding of Allah’s nature. The verse categorically affirms Allah’s transcendent uniqueness: He alone is the originator of the cosmos, bringing the totality of the heavens and earth into being without any precursor or partner. In doing so, it negates the possibility of God having any peer, mate, or offspring, thereby safeguarding the principle of pure monotheism. Classical Islamic scholars like al-Ṭabarī, al-Rāzī, and Ibn Kathīr elucidated how this verse refutes anthropomorphic conceptions of deity and underscores attributes of glory and self-sufficiency. The theological message stands in deliberate contrast to doctrines like the Trinity or the sonship of Christ, asserting that even concepts of “eternal begetting” do not fit the Islamic vision of God’s oneness. Philosophically, the verse aligns with arguments for a Necessary, simple, and indivisible Being – one whose existence underpins all reality but shares essence with none of it ​en.wikipedia.org. Scientifically, the idea of an origination of the universe dovetails with the discovery that the universe had a beginning ​science.nasa.gov, inviting believers to see in the Big Bang a sign of the kun fayakūn ( “Be!” and it is ) of creation.

In a single aya, the Qur’an thus weaves together themes of creatorship (God as source of all), uniqueness (none like Him), and transcendence (loftier than material causation or human-like procreation). Contemplating 6:101 leads one to appreciate the Islamic conception of God as utterly One – the eternal, uncaused Cause of everything else. This has a profound spiritual implication: Allah is not a father figure in a literal sense, but the relationship between God and creation is even more intimate – everything depends on Him at every moment, and He knows all things completely​ science.nasa.gov​ surahquran.com. By denying God any “children,” the verse elevates the Creator-creature distinction: God does not propagate; He creates and commands. Such a God is infinitely beyond us, yet, as the source of all, nearer to us than any familial tie could express. In summary, Qur’an 6:101 delivers a powerful message of divine transcendence and unity that resonates through Islamic thought: Allah, the originator of the universe, is alone in His divinity, unparalleled in majesty, and worthy of worship without any associate – “Subḥānahu wa taʿālā ʿammā yaṣifūn” – Glory be to Him, exalted above what they ascribe (to Him)​ quran-tafsir.net.

Sources: Qur’an 6:101 (Arabic text and Pickthall translation) ​quranv.com; Tafsīr of al-Ṭabarī, al-Rāzī, Ibn Kathīr on 6:101​ surahquran.com​ quran-tafsir.net​quran-tafsir.net; Qur’an 19:88-95 ​surahquran.com and 42:11​ corpus.quran.com; Kevin DeYoung, What Does “Begotten, Not Made” Mean?​ crossway.org; NASA, Universe Began with the Big Bang (~13.8 billion years ago)​ science.nasa.gov; Avicenna on the Necessary Being’s uniqueness ​en.wikipedia.org; and related scholarly analyses.