This page explains a conceptual relationship between two poles within Shahrur’s thought, and how this relationship operates in the construction of meaning.
Within a broader family
This relationship falls within the field of the function of the Qur’anic narratives in Shahrur’s thought. Its witness points to a specific aspect, and the family brings together moral lesson, knowledge, and the uncovering of historical laws while negating the transformation of narratives into a direct source of legislation.
Meaning of the relationship
This relationship means that the Qur’anic narratives may not be treated as a source from which legislative rulings are derived. Here, they are presented as a sphere of moral lesson, indication, and reflection, not a sphere for formulating practical rulings. The meaning of this is that the function of narratives in this conception is guidance and admonition, not the establishment of binding rules.
The two poles of the relationship
- The first pole: the Qur’anic narratives
- The relationship: are not fit to be
- The second pole: material for legislation
Evidence
- The Qur’anic narratives, vol. 2 via The Qur’anic narratives are not material for legislation
- The witness: the Qur’anic narratives are not material for legislation; the Qur’anic narratives are presented as material for moral lesson, not material for rulings, as the narratives confirm they are not used for legislation
Its effect on the knowledge map
This relationship gains importance because it determines the position of the Qur’anic narratives within the conceptual map of religious knowledge, separating what is read for moral lesson from what is relied upon for legislation. In doing so, it prevents confusion between Qur’anic narrative and the sources of rulings, and clarifies that the cognitive value of the narratives belongs more to the construction of meaning and admonition than to the sphere of legal inference.