Intended meaning
The text holds that the slogan “God’s sovereignty” (ḥākimiyya) when used in the political sphere is not an expression of direct divine rule, but a cover that grants legitimacy to a human authority that practices coercion. For this reason, the slogan becomes a tool for justifying compulsion rather than a principle that removes injustice.
The atom’s structure in the atlas
- Type of argument: Critical
- Argument movement: The slogan of sovereignty may turn into a cover for coercive authority.
- Key terms: God’s sovereignty, legitimacy, human authority, coercion, compulsion.
- Degree of centrality: Primary.
It criticizes the use of a religious slogan in the political sphere when it is harnessed to confer symbolic legitimacy on coercion, thereby severing the link between the slogan and any actual project of justice.
Reading aids
- Muhammad Shahrur: Draining the Sources of Terrorism
- Critique of authoritarianism and monism
- Religion rejects compulsion, and its regulation is governed by the worldly function of the state
Grounding
- Supporting text: “The slogan of ‘God’s sovereignty’ in political practice is nothing but a veil for conferring legitimacy on coercive human authority.”
Degree of documentation
- Level: Directly documented
- Meaning of the level: The atom rests on an explicit witness closely aligned with the wording of the claim.
- Limits of reading: The formulation above is an analytical summary and should not be treated as a verbatim quotation unless the witness is reproduced word for word.
Its function in the book
Its function here is argumentative; it supports a larger conclusion in the chapter or prepares for it.
Related to
Editorial note
The atom exposes the mechanism by which the sacred is instrumentalized in politics.