Source location: Toward New Foundations for Islamic Jurisprudence, p. 172.
Intended Meaning
Here, inheritance is not presented as synonymous with bequest. The criterion Shahrur sets out is a difference in sphere and type of justice: bequest is for the private sphere, and inheritance for the public sphere. Thus, the phrase “inheritance achieves public justice” summarizes this attribution without going beyond it.
What Is Attributed to Shahrur
In his treatment of bequest and inheritance, he states: “He draws a decisive distinction between bequest and inheritance: bequest belongs to the private sphere and private justice, while inheritance belongs to the public sphere and public justice.”
The evidence thus establishes a distinction between the two terms and links each to a different sphere and type of justice.
Atlas Explanation
The Atlas reads “public justice” as the description attached to inheritance in the evidence, in contrast to “private justice,” which is attached to bequest. This does not mean that the Atlas defines these two types beyond the text, or equates inheritance with bequest.
Limited Inference
This contrast implies that, at this point in Shahrur’s argument, the function of inheritance is not presented as identical to that of bequest; the text assigns each a different normative scope.
Open Question and Limits of the Evidence
This evidence alone does not explain in detail what falls within the “public sphere” and the “private sphere,” nor the mechanisms by which inheritance achieves public justice or bequest achieves private justice. The context of the chapter must be consulted to document those details if they are to be asserted.