Permission Is One Thing and Will Is Another
Editorial verification status: This atom has been extracted from an explanatory audiovisual source and is now linked to the closest books within the Shahrur project at the book level. For precise academic quotation, consult the original book and the original episode together.
Formulation of the claim
Shahrur distinguishes between divine permission and will, making the former necessarily realized and the latter contingent.
Explanation
He understands permission as a legal or normative command that inevitably comes to pass.
As for will, it implies that a thing may happen or may not happen.
He uses this distinction to explain differences among human actions and expected outcomes.
Medicine, for example, may have a “permission” for healing, but going to the doctor remains a matter of will.
Its place in the episode’s argument
This distinction helps him reconstruct the concept of destiny away from absolute determinism.
It also explains how divine laws operate alongside human freedom.
Limits of the claim
He does not make permission and will synonymous, nor does he equate laws with choice.
Brief witness
“Permission is inevitably realized… as for will, the matter of harm is contingent: it may happen or it may not happen.”
Related links
- Shahrur - the Decisive Text
- Shahrur - Freedom
- Book: The Qur’an in Contemporary Thought