Intended meaning
Shahrur holds that the conflation of Qur’anic narratives and legislative rulings is the cause of many problems, including the claim of abrogation and the apparent contradiction between the verses of fighting and peace. If the two domains are separated, it is no longer permissible to project rulings onto narratives or to treat narratives as though they were rulings.
The atom’s structure in the atlas
- Type of argument: Distinguishing
- Movement of the argument: It separates narratives from rulings in order to remove the problem of abrogation and apparent conflict.
- Key terms: narratives, rulings, abrogation.
- Degree of centrality: Central.
The atom establishes a reading principle that prevents projecting the narrative domain onto the legislative domain, and thus reduces the need for forced reconciliation between texts that differ in function.
Links that help with reading
- Muhammad Shahrur the Book and the Qur’an
- The Book, the Qur’an, and the Mother of the Book
- The Qur’an and the Mother of the Book
Basis
- Supporting text: «It confirms that distinguishing between narratives and rulings resolves the problems of abrogation and the apparent contradiction between the verses of fighting and peace, and prevents projecting rulings onto narratives».
Degree of documentation
- Level: Directly documented
- Meaning of the level: The atom rests on an explicit witness close to the wording of the claim.
- Limits of reading: The wording above is an analytical summary and should not be treated as a verbatim quotation unless the witness is quoted verbatim.
Its function in the book
Its function here is argumentative; it supports a larger conclusion in the chapter or paves the way for it.
Related to
Editorial note
What is meant here is the clarification of a difference in domain, not the denial of the moral value of narratives.