This page explains a conceptual relation between two terms within Shahrur’s thought and how this relation operates in the construction of meaning.
The Meaning of the Relation
This relation indicates that forbiddance is not the same as prohibition, because prohibition denotes a final ban that human beings have no authority to transgress, whereas forbiddance denotes a ban or guidance whose scope of determination remains open to human reasoning and legislative authority. Therefore, forbiddance is broader than prohibition in terms of practical signification, and not every forbiddance is understood as a definitive ruling of prohibition.
The Two Terms of the Relation
- First term: negation
- Relation: does not equal
- Second term: prohibition
Evidence
- Religion and Authority via Negation Is Not Prohibition
- Witness: Shahrur distinguishes between what God has forbidden as a final prohibition in which humans may not intervene, and what He has enjoined against, leaving the determination of its prohibition or permissibility to human reasoning and legislative authority.
Its Effect in the Knowledge Map
This relation gains importance because it defines the boundary between the fixed divine sphere and the human sphere of reasoning within the conceptual map. It prevents conflating what is a final prohibition with what is a negation open to evaluation and legislation, and thus helps organize the relationship between the religious text and legislative authority, and understand the space of reasoning in religion and authority.