What Is Attributed to Shahrur
The witness states that Shahrur sees “the expansion in enumerating major sins and prohibitions in the name of increasing piety” as harmful to Islam and Muslims because it “narrows religion instead of broadening it.” The atom therefore records this specific criticism: the criticism of increasing the enumeration of prohibitions under the heading of piety.
For reading in the context of the book: Muhammad Shahrur: The State and Society.
Atlas Explanation
The atom does not say that every prohibition is rejected, nor does it itself specify a list of what counts as expansion. Its scope is narrower: the objection to inflating the enumeration of major sins and prohibitions when this is presented as an increase in piety. See also: Legislation, Limits, and Prohibition.
Synthetic Inference
The atom may be read as an objection to making the abundance of prohibitions a criterion of piety; but this describes the structure of the argument in the witness, not a detailed definition of Shahrur’s criterion for prohibition.
Open Question and Limits of the Evidence
The available witness does not establish that narrowing weakens commitment, nor does it provide a detailed criterion by which Shahrur distinguishes between prohibition and the criticized expansion in enumerating prohibitions. The location of the witness is also recorded as being in the final section of the book, without a page number or raw context available for verification.
It is contextually related to The story of Moses and the righteous servant symbolizes the conflict between knowledge and law, without the link being evidence for this claim.
The State and Society · The story of Moses and the righteous servant symbolizes the conflict between knowledge and law