Explanation of the author's statement: It contains issues. The first: The prohibition of every name that is worshipped other than Allah.

The Shaykh :"It contains issues. The first: The prohibition of every name that is worshipped other than Allah" Where is this taken from? From the ijma' (scholarly consensus) of the people of knowledge, because ijma' is one of the proofs relied upon in the religion. It is the third principle; the proofs are the Book, the Sunnah, ijma', and qiyas (analogical reasoning). So ijma' is one of the proofs relied upon in the religion.
The scholars, may Allah have mercy on them, differed regarding the possibility of ijma', and then they differed, after establishing its possibility, on whether it is a proof. The correct view is that ijma' is possible, and that when it occurs, it is a proof, due to the saying of Allah the Exalted: And this "if" is conditional; it does not indicate that disagreement will occur. Rather, even if it is assumed that disagreement occurs, the matter is referred back to Allah and the Messenger. From this, it is known that we may reach consensus, and that if we reach consensus, our ijma' is a proof. For this reason, when there is ijma', Allah did not say "refer it back to Allah and the Messenger," because ijma' is a proof. Yes, the important point is that this is not the place to elaborate on the proofs that ijma' is a proof. The correct view is that it is possible and that it is a proof. However, claiming ijma' is what requires evidence. Claiming ijma' is what requires evidence. For this reason, Shaykh al-Islam, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "The ijma' that is established is what the righteous Salaf were upon, because after them, disagreement increased and the Ummah (the Muslim community) spread out" And when Imam Ahmad was told that so-and-so said, "They have reached consensus on such-and-such," he denied that and said: "How does he know? Perhaps they disagreed. So whoever claims ijma' is a liar" Perhaps this statement of Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, was because the Mu'tazilah (a rationalist theological sect) and the people of ta'til (denial of the divine attributes) used to use the claim of ijma' as a pretext to establish their denial and their doubts, saying, "This is the opinion of the investigators," "This is the ijma' of the investigators," and the like. Yes, so the proof is the ijma' of the scholars. The author, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "The prohibition of every name that is worshipped other than Allah" Even though there is an exception in the ijma', which is "Abd al-Muttalib." It has been established for us that the correct view is that it is not permissible to name a child "Abd al-Muttalib." And the saying of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, is not an approval or an institution, but it is an information. A person is allowed to trace his lineage to his father and his grandfather and the like, even if they were worshipped other than Allah. Yes, and the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: The Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, said: And this is making a slave of other than Allah, but it is in the category of information.
"The second: The interpretation of the verse" And you have already known it.
"The third: That this shirk (associating partners with Allah) is in mere naming where its reality was not intended" And this is based on the story mentioned from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him. The correct view is that this shirk is true and real, and that it is the shirk of those among the children of Adam who associated partners with Allah. For this reason, Allah the Exalted said in the same verse: Yes, So it is the real shirk that occurred from the children of Adam. Good.
"The fourth: That Allah's gift to a man of a sound daughter is among the blessings" Based on the establishment of the story, and that the intended meaning of "sound" is a sound human being, a sound person. But why did the author mention the daughter and not the son? Because some people consider Allah's gift of a daughter to be among the misfortunes. Yes, Allah the Exalted said: Otherwise, Allah's gift of a sound male child is from the category of blessings, indeed it is a greater blessing than a daughter, even though there is also reward in the one who takes care of a daughter, raises her, and looks after her.
"The fifth: The mention by the Salaf (the earliest generations) of the difference between shirk in obedience and shirk in worship" First, we must know the difference between obedience and worship. As for obedience attributed to Allah, there is no difference between it and worship, for worshipping Allah is obeying Allah, is that right? As for obedience attributed to other than Allah, it is not worship. We obey the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, but we do not worship him. A person may obey his father without worshipping him, and may obey a king without worshipping him, indeed he may hate him. Yes, and as for obedience attributed to Allah, it is worship. For this reason, many of the people of knowledge defined worship as obedience. Yes, in any case, shirk in obedience is that I obeyed him not out of love, exaltation, and humility as I love Allah, humble myself to Allah, and exalt Allah, but obedience, meaning following his command. This is the difference between obedience and worship. And based on the story, did Adam and Eve obey Satan in worship? Obedience, not worship. Not worship. And this is based on the authenticity of the story.