Journals / İslam Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 56

Sherman A. Jackson, The Islamic Secular

Pages
207–226
Publication Date
2026-07-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Fadel closes by engaging Jackson's critique of Andrew March and his skepticism toward Rawlsian public reason, suggesting that Jackson's own position may be more Rawlsian than he acknowledges.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article offers a critical review of Sherman A.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Jackson's The Islamic Secular .
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Fadel closes by engaging Jackson's critique of Andrew March and his skepticism toward Rawlsian public reason, suggesting that Jackson's own position may be more Rawlsian than he acknowledges.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Islamic secular · Sherman A. Jackson · Sharīʿa

Abstract

This article offers a critical review of Sherman A. Jackson's The Islamic Secular . Fadel characterizes Jackson's central concept as a modality of secularity internal to the Islamic tradition that, unlike its Western counterpart, does not devalue religion but instead sustains Islamically-inflected worldly flourishing. Summarizing the book's two parts—an intellectual history of the secular and the ḥukm concept in Islamic jurisprudence, followed by Jackson's critique of Wael Hallaq, Abdullahi An-Na'im, and Andrew March—Fadel appreciates the work's conceptual richness while raising several objections: the unclear capacity of the Islamic secular to mediate pluralism under modern state conditions; Jackson's underappreciation of fiqh's own disciplinary function toward religion (e.g., its aversion to bid'a); the difficulty of adapting a Western-derived category of "the secular" to Islamic thought; Jackson's failure to draw on the ʿibādāt/muʿāmalāt distinction, which could have bolstered his thesis; an oscillation in Jackson's treatment of siyāsa's relationship to sharīʿa; the historically contingent, rather than essential, nature of empire-state legal pluralism; and the possibility that modern legal monism is a functional requirement for collective action and equality of citizenship. Fadel closes by engaging Jackson's critique of Andrew March and his skepticism toward Rawlsian public reason, suggesting that Jackson's own position may be more Rawlsian than he acknowledges.

🔖

Cite This Article

Fadel, M. (2026). Sherman A. Jackson, The Islamic Secular. İslam Araştırmaları Dergisi, Sayı: 56, 207–226. https://doi.org/10.26570/isad.1994809

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (3)

  1. Āmidī, Sayf al-Dīn, Al-Iḥkām fī Uṣūl al-Aḥkām, 4 vols. Dar al Kutub al-’Ilmiyya, 1983.
  2. Bishrī, Tāriq, al-Muslimūn wa-al-Aqbāṭ fī iṭār al-jamāʻa al-waṭaniyya /Ṭāriq al-Bishrī. Dār al-Waḥdah, 1982.
  3. Casanova, José. “Secularisation, Religion, and Multicultural Citizenship”, In Religions and Dialogue: International Approaches, vol. 7, edited by Katajun Amirpur, Anna Koers, Doerthe Vieregge, and Wolfram Weisse. University of Hamburg, Waxmann, 2014.