This page explains a conceptual relation between two terms within Shahrur’s thought, and how this relation functions in the construction of meaning.
Within a Broader Family
This formulation belongs to the field of prohibition and the limits of authority over it. Its witness indicates a specific locus of the issue, while the encompassing family presents the relation of prohibition to God and to the message, and the negation of its possession by human beings or the state.
The Meaning of the Relation
The intended meaning is that the state is not the party that grants things the status of prohibition or imposes it as a religious ruling. According to the witness, prohibition is a matter of religion, whereas the state’s role is regulation and prevention within the public sphere, not issuing prohibition itself.
The Two Sides of the Relation
- First side: the state
- Relation: does not possess
- Second side: prohibition
Evidence
- Islam and the Human Being via The State Does Not Possess Prohibition
- Witness: religion prohibits, commands, and forbids, whereas the state regulates and prevents and does not possess prohibition.
Its Effect in the Knowledge Map
This relation shows the limits of state authority within the conceptual map, and separates the religious sphere from the political-regulatory sphere. It is important because it prevents conflating religious rulings with the functions of the state, and clarifies that exercising prevention and administration does not mean possessing the right to prohibit.