Immortality Does Not Always Mean the Same Thing
Editorial verification status: This atom is extracted from an explanatory audiovisual source, and has now been linked to the nearest books within the Shahrur project at the book level. For precise academic citation, consult the original book and the original episode together.
Formulation of the claim
Shahrur distinguishes between “immortality” and “eternity,” or between temporary immortality and final immortality, depending on the Qur’anic context.
Explanation
He says that “immortality” in some usages may mean long-lasting continuance rather than absolute continuance, and he cites imprisonment for ten years as a relative form of “immortality.” In other contexts, such as “abiding therein forever,” the meaning is final. He thus rejects the naive conflation of all occurrences of the word. He makes context what determines the nature of continuance.
Its place in the episode’s argument
This atom helps explain the difference in formulations between Paradise and Hell, and why immortality in Paradise or Hell may not be semantically identical in all instances. It is part of his method of reading terms according to context.
Scope of the claim
The idea does not deny the existence of an afterlife immortality; rather, it rejects equating all uses of “immortality” with a single meaning.
Brief witness
“Immortality does not mean… immortality means peace and rest.”
Related links
- The Qur’an
- A Contemporary Reading Guide to the Wise Revelation
- The Mother of the Book and Its Elaboration