Society and law can restrict polygamy without religiously forbidding it
Editorial verification status: This claim atom is extracted from a clarifying audiovisual source, and has now been linked to the closest books within Shahrur’s project at the book level. For precise academic citation, consult the original book and the original episode together.
Formulation of the claim
Shahrur holds that polygyny is not necessarily a legal religious prohibition if law or society prevents it, because legal prohibition is not the same as religious prohibition.
Explanation
He says that the permissible may be restricted by law if the public interest requires it. He emphasizes that legislative prohibition does not mean that the act has become intrinsically forbidden. In this way, he opens the door to a civil policy for regulating the family and polygyny according to public interest.
Its place in the episode’s argument
This idea links jurisprudence to the civil state, and explains how society can limit polygyny without directly clashing with the text as he understands it.
Limits of the claim
He does not say that polygyny is permitted without conditions, but rather that it is subject to general restriction.
Brief citation
“The law has the right to prevent them… they are not making it forbidden.”
Related links
- Shahrur - civil state
- Shahrur - sovereignty
- Shahrur - jurisprudence