Intended meaning
The state capable of enduring here is the “state of the citizen,” not a state founded on the sanctification of persons. The passage identifies its elements as law, freedom, human rights, and institutions.
What is attributed to Shahrur
Shahrur says: “The state qualified to endure is the state of the citizen, founded on law, freedom, human rights, and institutions, not on the sanctification of persons.”
The wording presents the “state of the citizen” as the description of a state qualified to endure, and states that it is founded on law, freedom, human rights, and institutions.
Atlas explanation
This atom treats the statement as a criterion for evaluating the state in this context, rather than as a description of a specific historical state. “Endurance” is the outcome that the text links to these elements taken together.
For reading in the context of the book: Muhammad Shahrur: The State and Society. It is connected to the theme of The Civil State, Religion, and Authority and to the entry Freedom.
Synthetic conclusion
From the contrast between institutions and the sanctification of persons, it may be understood that the focus of evaluation in the statement is the structure of the state and its general elements, not the exaltation of a particular person. This is an inference from the contrast contained in the passage, not a detailed definition of a complete political system.
See also: The people and the state translate plurality within a political unity.
Open question and limits of the passage
This text alone does not explain how institutions are to be organized, nor how freedom and human rights are to be translated into constitutional or legal guarantees. Nor does it establish that the “state of the citizen” is synonymous with any other political designation; the statement should therefore be read only within its stated terms.
The State and Society · The people and the state translate plurality within a political unity