The Qur’an in this source is the fixed text that possesses authority over grammatical rules and over human understanding. Muhammad Shahrur insists that its signification should not be diminished by occasions of revelation, abrogation, or interpretation out of context, because its universality is the basis of its global scope.
Referred to by
- Occasions of revelation restrict the Qur’anic text
- Occasions of revelation are intrusive historical disciplines
- The origin of accusing woman of sin
- Accusing woman of sin is not Qur’anic
- Avoidance is not equivalent to prohibition
- The jilbab is a staged instruction
- The first sin was not sexual
- The Muhammadan message is universal
- The message rebuilds society and the family on the basis of equality and contract
- The Sunna and hadith are not one thing
- Jurisprudence needs to be re-founded
- A historical reading of the Qur’an rejects restricting its universality
- Qat’ is a term with a broad meaning
- The Book has a dual structure of the decisive and the ambiguous
- The Qur’anic text is fixed and understanding changes
- Existence can only be understood through the interdependence of being, process, and becoming
- Interpreting the text outside its context is more dangerous than fabrication
- The minimum limit of women’s dress
- The authority of the text over grammatical rules
- The universality of the message requires a Qur’anic reading independent of historicity and narration
- Understanding religion and legislation rests on the triad of being, process, and becoming
- There is no place for arbitrariness or excess in the Revelation
- Women’s dress is understood from the text as a limit and a function, not as a fixed inherited symbol
- The concepts of honor and chastity are not part of the Revelation’s referential framework
- The concepts of honor and ʿawra are historical
- Toward new foundations for Islamic jurisprudence: the Qur’an makes up the basis of renewed legislation, and fiqh is a historical understanding subject to revision