The Relation
This relation means that political authority does not acquire its legitimacy from a direct religious mandate, nor from a clerical class, but from the people’s consent and their pledge of allegiance, and from governance being regulated by law. In this way, legitimacy shifts from a source above society to a civil relation within society, where rule becomes accountable to the people rather than speaking in God’s name.
Why does it matter?
This relation shows that the civil state in Shahrur’s thought is not merely a neutral administration, but a political structure that strips authority of sacred status. Law, citizenship, and human allegiance are not merely organizational details; they are conditions that prevent religion from being turned into a cover for tyranny, inheritance, or coercion.
Close evidence
- The Qur’an in Contemporary Thought via Political legitimacy comes from human allegiance
- Evidence: Political legitimacy is derived from people through allegiance, not from direct divine mandate.
- The Qur’an in Contemporary Thought via The civil state in the Muhammadan message derives its legitimacy from people and governs by law
- Evidence: The civil state brings together law, citizenship, rights, and a human source of legitimacy.
- The Qur’an in Contemporary Thought via The state is governed by law, not by religious coercion
- Evidence: State administration is based on law and citizenship, not on imposing religiosity.
Its effect in the atlas
This relation connects the path of state and religion with the path of monism and pluralism, because it makes the stripping of sanctity from authority part of the transition from monistic rule to the civil state.