أَرَءَيْتَ مَنِ ٱتَّخَذَ إِلَٰهَهُۥ هَوَىٰهُ أَفَأَنتَ تَكُونُ عَلَيْهِ وَكِيلًا · أَمْ تَحْسَبُ أَنَّ أَكْثَرَهُمْ يَسْمَعُونَ أَوْ يَعْقِلُونَ إِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا كَٱلْأَنْعَٰمِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ سَبِيلًا
"Have you seen the one who has taken his own craving as his god? Will you then be a guardian over him?"
This sentence is almost identical with al-Jāthiya 45/23, and it was treated in detail there — in particular the two readings of the construct ilāhahū hawāhu (which of the two is the object) were set out in a table. I do not repeat it here.
The difference here must be recorded: in al-Jāthiya what followed the sentence went on to the sealing; here what follows is a limit of responsibility: a-fa-anta takūnu ʿalayhi wakīlā.
The same word was treated at al-Zumar 39/41 (wa mā anta ʿalayhim bi-wakīl). And at al-Qaṣaṣ 28/56 the table of this limit across seven sūras was given; this verse is added to that table.
كَٱلْأَنْعَٰمِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ سَبِيلًا — the comparison was treated at Muḥammad 47/12, and it was recorded there: the animal's eating is not blamed; what is described is a human being's contenting himself with just that much. I rely on that treatment.
And the ground for the addition bal hum aḍallu sabīlā is worth recording: an animal has no way from which it might stray. The comparison looks at a capacity given and left unused. I give this as my own reading.