Many rulings are remnants of earlier traditions

2 min read

What is meant

Shahrur holds that much of what was attributed to Islam in jurisprudence is not an original ruling within it, but rather remnants of earlier legal traditions. Therefore, these rulings are not understood as binding in themselves merely because they are attributed to Islam.

The atom’s structure in the atlas

  • Type of argument: critical
  • Movement of the argument: distinguishes between Islam and what jurisprudence inherited from earlier legal traditions.
  • Central terms: jurisprudence, earlier legal traditions, Islam.
  • Degree of centrality: central.

This atom places inherited jurisprudence within the history of religions rather than within the founding text alone, thus reducing the authority of direct attribution to Islam.

Support

  • Supporting text: “Much of what jurisprudence attributed to it is in fact remnants of earlier legal traditions.”

Place of support in the book

  • Book: Religion and Authority.
  • Location: near the beginning of the book, within the critique of inherited jurisprudence.
  • Type of support: close evidence.
  • Identifying marker: Islamic jurisprudence is human and historical
  • Reading note: This passage is suitable as support because it hints at the distinction between sharia and historical jurisprudence, thereby supporting the idea that some rulings came from earlier remnants.

Degree of documentation

  • Level: directly documented
  • Meaning of the level: the atom relies on an explicit witness close to the wording of the claim.
  • Limits of reading: the formulation above is an analytical summary and should not be treated as a verbatim quotation unless the witness is quoted exactly.

Its function in the book

Its function here is declarative; it establishes a result on which what follows in the argument depends.

Editorial note

It is useful in critiquing the intermingling of the jurisprudential heritage and the Qur’anic source.

Graph View

Backlinks7

Muhammad Shahrur Atlas