What Is Meant Here?
At this point, Shahrur does not treat prohibition as a ruling on the thing itself in the abstract, but as a ruling on an act performed in relation to it. His stated example is the slaughter of livestock for eating and benefiting from it. Under this formulation, it is therefore not enough to say that “livestock is prohibited” or “permitted” without specifying the act.
What Is Attributed to Shahrur
In discussing the phrase “livestock has been made lawful for you,” he states: “Permission and prohibition in the Wise Scripture concern acts and are not ascribed to the essences of things.” He adds that “what is lawful is the الأصل in things, and what is prohibited is the exception.” He then places an explicit qualification on this rule that permissibility is the default: “Except in the matter of killing a living being, whether human, animal, or plant: prohibition is the الأصل and permissibility is the exception.”
On this basis, he interprets the permission in the example as pertaining to the act: “The slaughter of livestock for eating and benefiting from it has been made lawful for you.”
Atlas Explanation
The decisive distinction in this atom is between the thing itself and the act: the thing itself is the object under discussion, whereas the act is what is done to it, such as slaughtering, eating, and benefiting in the example. Shahrur’s claim here is not that prohibitions do not exist; rather, it shifts the primary locus of the ruling from the thing in the abstract to the specific act connected with it.
For the broader context: Muhammad Shahrur, The Qur’anic Stories, Vol. 2, and Legislation, Limits, and Prohibition.
Synthetic Conclusion
As Shahrur formulates it, the rule means that the interpretive question is not merely, “Is this thing itself prohibited?” but rather, “Which act is the subject of prohibition or permission?” The rule that permissibility is the default remains qualified by the exception he explicitly states concerning the killing of a living being; the principle of permissibility must not therefore be treated as a rule without exceptions.
Open Question and Limits of the Reading
This witness alone does not provide a detailed list of the acts that fall under every text of prohibition, nor does it explain how to distinguish among all Qur’anic uses of “prohibition.” The central statement also occurs in the context of interpreting livestock, although Shahrur frames it there as a rule concerning permission and prohibition.
For reading within the framework of the book: Prohibition, and within the thematic framework: The Original State of Things Is Permissibility, and Prohibition Applies to Acts.
The Qur’anic Stories, Vol. 2 · The Original State of Things Is Permissibility, and Prohibition Applies to Acts