This is a lexical entry that gathers the technical meaning of this term in Shahrur across his various books, and connects its multiple uses.
This entry belongs to the Shahrur lexicon. For reading by theme, one may refer to Shahrur’s major themes and shared concepts.
Meaning in Shahrur
A fault is an erroneous act committed by a human being without full intent or through overstepping of the self, and thus it does not always equal deliberate violation. It is used to distinguish what falls within the sphere of forgiveness from what entails correction or the restoration of a right, depending on its relation to God or to people.
Distinctions
- Fault does not always correspond to wrongdoing or sin, because these terms differ in the degree of responsibility and in what follows from them in terms of forgiveness or correction
- Fault does not equal associationism with persistence, because this is not treated like faults that are subject to forgiveness.
Instances from his books
- Islam and the Human Being: fault in Shahrur is the erroneous act that may occur without intent or with excess against the self, and it is broader than mere deliberate violation. Based on it, a distinction is made between what pertains to God’s right and what pertains to people’s rights, and between what can be forgiven and what requires correction
What is adjacent to it and differs from it
- God
- Humanistic Islam is re-founded Qur’anically as a system of values, freedom, and citizenship that transcends closed identity
- Islam is historically and conceptually prior to the specificity of the Muhammad-centric message
- The distinction between fault, wrongdoing, and sin distributes responsibility between forgiveness, correction, and persistence
- Fault, wrongdoing, and sin
- Faults in relation to God are forgivable
- Associationism is unforgivable when coupled with persistence
- The Qur’anic method and the redefinition of concepts move Islam from identity to values