Intended Meaning
This atom establishes a specific value judgment: coercion when carried out “in the name of religion” is presented as contradicting the essence of religion and as stripping the human being of their humanity. The atom does not extend this statement into a comprehensive definition of religion or detailed judgments on the means of coercion.
What Is Attributed to Shahrur
The cited passage states: “Coercion in the name of religion contradicts the essence of religion and strips the human being of their humanity.” This formulation combines a judgment on coercion in the name of religion with an indication of its effect on human humanity.
Atlas Explanation
The statement is read here as a value-based argument, not as a detailed account of a political or jurisprudential system: its focus is the rejection of attributing coercion to religion, not an account of procedures for addressing coercion. For the book’s broader context, see Muhammad Shahrur, Religion and Authority.
Synthetic Conclusion
The argument can be organized along a single line: calling coercion religious does not, in this statement, grant it religious legitimacy; rather, it makes the outcome contrary to the essence and a stripping of the human being’s humanity. This conclusion closely follows the wording of the cited passage; it does not add a new definition of religion or of the human being.
Open Question and Limits of the Reading
The cited passage does not specify the forms of coercion intended here, nor does it explain a criterion for distinguishing it from obligation in other domains. Nor does it state that freedom or choice are definitions of the essence of religion in this context. The theme of the human being and responsibility can be pursued in Freedom, the Human Being, and Responsibility, and the entry Freedom can be consulted without assuming that either entry establishes additional detail for this atom.
Links That Help with Reading
Religion and Authority · Islamic heritage became a standard instead of remaining material for study