Intended meaning
What is meant here is Shahrur’s critique of the use of “abrogating and abrogated” in interpretation: according to the available evidence, this use leads to fragmenting the text and excluding some of its meanings, rather than reading it neutrally.
What is attributed to Shahrur
Shahrur says: “The science of abrogating and abrogated is not an innocent tool, but a Salafi means of fragmenting the text and suppressing some of its meanings in favor of ideological deployment.” The objection here is directed at the function he attributes to this science: fragmentation, suppression of meanings, and ideological deployment.
Atlas explanation
This atom records a specific critical claim and does not turn it into a general judgment on everything called abrogation in the tradition. Nor does it add practical examples or a historical account, since the available evidence provides none.
Synthetic inference
The claim can be understood as an objection to a reading that selects certain meanings from the text and excludes others under the heading of abrogation. But this states the logical import of the available evidence; it is not an explanation of the mechanism of abrogation or an independent proof of it.
Open question
Does Shahrur mean to reject the concept of abrogation at its root, or to criticize a particular mode of its use that he calls “Salafi”? The available evidence does not settle this.
Links for further reading
- Muhammad Shahrur Al-Qasas Al-Qur’ani Vol. 1
- Critique of heritage, jurisprudence, and exegesis
- Abrogation and being abrogated
- Islam is a universal human message
Al-Qasas Al-Qur’ani Vol. 1 · Islam is a universal human message