In classical literature on Islamic human rights, the concepts of dignity and honour are used interchangeably. Distinguishing modern and pre-modern conceptions of human life’s value, dignity represents a value everyone possesses simply in virtue of being human, regardless of social hierarchy or religious preference. Honour, on the contrary, demonstrates a status which someone achieves because of a religious or societal preference. I will explain this difference further, relying on the works of Peter Berger and Charles Taylor. Afterwards, I argue that a large group of Muslim scholars who have tried to articulate a coherent Islamic version of human rights have neglected this crucial difference. I will focus my discussion on two scholars, Abdulaziz Sachedina and Mohammad Hashim Kamali, as examples of scholars who have neglected the difference. My conclusion is that anybody who intends to confront this topic must be clear about the difference between dignity and honour; otherwise, any argument for the compatibility or incompatibility in question is doomed to failure.

中文翻译：

---

荣誉还是尊严？伊斯兰人权的过度简化

在关于伊斯兰人权的古典文献中，尊严和荣誉的概念可以互换使用。区分人类生命价值的现代和前现代概念，尊严代表了每个人仅仅因为作为人而拥有的价值，无论社会等级或宗教偏好如何。相反，荣誉表明某人因宗教或社会偏好而获得的地位。我将根据 Peter Berger 和 Charles Taylor 的作品进一步解释这种差异。之后，我认为一大群试图阐明一个连贯的伊斯兰人权版本的穆斯林学者忽略了这一关键差异。我将重点讨论两位学者，Abdulaziz Sachedina 和 Mohammad Hashim Kamali，作为忽略差异的学者的例子。我的结论是，任何打算直面这个话题的人都必须清楚尊严和荣誉之间的区别；否则，任何有关兼容性或不兼容性的争论都注定要失败。