Passage cited: «Drying Up the Sources of Terrorism», p. 158.
What is meant
This passage does not present faith as a response produced by force; rather, it requires that it arise from “voluntary conviction and consent.” From this condition, Shahrur proceeds to question the practice of enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong when it is accompanied by the stick or the whip.
What is attributed to Shahrur
Shahrur says: “And if faith in God, His angels, His books, and His messengers is invalid unless it arises from voluntary conviction and consent, then how can enjoining what is right with the stick and forbidding what is wrong with the whip be valid?”
The statement occurs within an argument in which he compares faith to contracts of sale, allegiance, and marriage in terms of their invalidity when accompanied by coercion, compulsion, duress, or force.
Atlas explanation
The argument here is specific to its context: the voluntary nature of faith is the premise, and the rejection of coercive instruments in enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong is the conclusion that Shahrur frames as a question. The atom should therefore not be read as a comprehensive account of every issue of coercion, but as a statement of its connection to the validity of faith and to a critique of coercive exhortation or censure.
For reading in the broader framework: Muhammad Shahrur: Drying Up the Sources of Terrorism, Freedom, Human Beings, and Responsibility, and Freedom.
Conclusion
His position in this passage can be formulated as follows: if the validity of faith is conditional upon voluntariness, then coercion by stick or whip cannot be a means consistent with enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong.
Open question and limits of the evidence
Does Shahrur mean by “coercion” a comprehensive definition that includes all forms of material and moral pressure? The brief statement attributed to this meaning is available without an established raw context, so this page does not settle the matter. Nor do the available passages specify alternative mechanisms for practicing enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong.