Radio Reorient (New Books Network): Interview with Sherman Jackson, Part I

Date: October 17, 2025
Host: Radio Reorient team (Salman Syed, His Amir, et al.)
Guest: Professor Sherman Jackson, King Faisal Chair in Islamic Thought and Culture, University of Southern California

Episode Overview

This episode marks the launch of Season 13 of Radio Reorient and features the first of a two-part in-depth conversation with Professor Sherman Jackson about his new book, "The Islamic Secular." The discussion tackles the book’s provocative central notion—the “Islamic secular”—and Jackson’s efforts to re-examine the boundaries of Sharia, challenge Western definitions of secularism, and propose a reorientation of Islamic Studies and the role of the Islamic scholar in the contemporary landscape. The episode combines scholarly exploration with practical concerns regarding Muslim identity, knowledge production, and resistance against inherited colonial frameworks.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Motivation for Writing on "Islamic Secular"

Timestamps: [03:44]–[09:09]

• Jackson’s Intellectual Trajectory: His long-standing interest in the boundaries of Sharia began during doctoral research on Shihab Ibn al-Qarafi, a medieval Maliki jurist who distinguished between fatwa (legal opinion), judicial ruling, and state policy.
• Key Distinction:

  “It’s technically not correct to say that pork is haram in Islam. Eating pork is haram. Looking at pork is not. ...So the hukam establishes the status of a particular act... vis a vis a particular entity...” — Sherman Jackson [05:17]

• Beyond Permissibility: Not all worldly considerations are exhausted by sharia rulings; Sharia tells you what is halal or haram, but does not dictate the effectiveness or efficiency of decisions (e.g., economic or political policy).
• Defining the “Islamic Secular”:

  • Instead of adopting Western secularism, Jackson articulates an “Islamic secular” as areas of action/decision not directly dictated by revelation or Sharia, yet still within God’s gaze.

    “When I say secular, all I mean is that it is not a dictate of revelation... It does not mean that this is a category... outside the jurisdiction of the divine gaze of the God of Islam.” — Sherman Jackson [07:42]

2. Why Use the Oxymoronic Term “Islamic Secular”?

Timestamps: [10:29]–[17:21]

• Reclaiming Language and Conceptual Space:
  • Jackson argues Muslims must challenge the West’s monopoly over the term “secular,” which has historically excluded religious actors from many domains.
• Decolonizing Knowledge:

  “It’s important to me to... challenge the hegemony of Western language, to challenge the power of definition that the West has enjoyed for the last 300 years.” — Sherman Jackson [12:34]

• Double Consciousness (drawing from W.E.B. Du Bois): The Western secular produces a toxic sense in Muslims—the desire to be Muslim is simultaneously accompanied by the restriction of Muslimness to a narrow sphere.
• Not Negation, but Alternative Construction: Using "secular" in an Islamic context refuses default Western definitions and opens the space for Muslims to define their own realities.

3. Connecting Jurisprudence, History, and Prophetic Precedent

Timestamps: [19:12]–[21:00]

• Practical Example (al-Maqrizi and Hadith):
  • Jackson refers to juristic debates (e.g., al-Maqrizi’s objections to copper coinage) to show issues that are not purely moral nor purely shari’ concerns, but involve practical, technical knowledge.
  • He alludes to the hadith where the Prophet lets agricultural experts decide best practices—reinforcing the idea of expertise beyond the scope of revelation.

4. Rethinking Islamic Studies (“Islamic Studies 2.0”)

Timestamps: [21:00]–[28:36]

• Islamic Studies as a Colonial Project:
  • The academic discipline in the West arose in a colonial context, often excluding Muslim voices or treating them as insufficiently “objective.”

  “Islamic studies, as it arises in the Western academy, is in part... a colonial project... so powerful that it has even convinced Muslims to basically see themselves through the lens of the West...” — Sherman Jackson [23:21]

• From ‘1.0’ to ‘2.0’:
  • 1.0: Factual, historical study of Islam, in which Muslims and non-Muslims share a level playing field.
  • 2.0: The interpretive, engaged application of Islamic knowledge to contemporary challenges—requiring normative, lived engagement.

    “Islamic Studies 2.0 is, well, what do I want to do with that now? ...to highlight some or another perspective of Islam.” — Sherman Jackson [27:53]

5. The Evolving Role of the Islamic Scholar (“Islamic Scholar 2.0”)

Timestamps: [31:38]–[35:11]

• Jurists’ Authority Has Limits:
  • Sharia does not exhaust Islamic life; thus, Islamic activity—such as ethical work in politics, economics, or aesthetics—can be “Islamic” even outside strict legal boundaries.

    “Sharia is not coterminous with Islam. Islam is broader than Sharia.” — Sherman Jackson [32:49]

• Expanding Recognition: Denotes Islamic value to work by non-jurists when informed by Islamic ethos and aims, though “Islamic scholar” as a term may remain tightly attached to traditional religious sciences.

6. Critical Engagement with Hodgson’s “Islamicate” and Shahab Ahmed

Timestamps: [35:11]–[41:03]

• Debating the Islamicate:
  • Jackson finds utility in Hodgson’s "Islamicate" but rejects equating it with modern Western-style secularism. He’s open to its rearticulation provided it isn’t stripped of religious relevance.

    "I don’t see the Islamicate as non-religious." — Sherman Jackson [37:28]

• Challenging Essentialist Readings of Context/Pretext:
  • Through his self-identification as a “nominalist,” Jackson emphasizes God’s ultimate autonomy: He is not bound by any fixed cosmic order.

    “God retains the right to define on his own terms, and that he is not dictated to by a pre-existing cosmic order...” — Sherman Jackson [39:21]

• Critique of Overextending ‘Islamic’ Agency:
  • Disagrees with approaches that label all Muslim actions as “Islamic," preferring to foreground juristic sources and the limitations they acknowledge.

7. The Larger Project: Liberatory Reorientation?

Timestamps: [28:36], [29:49], [30:35], [54:23]

• Beyond Mere Opposition to West:
  • Jackson clarifies that his purpose is not simply to “liberate from” the West, but to reclaim spontaneity and fullness in engaging the Islamic tradition, unshackled from inherited colonial definitions.

    “To be liberated from the West does not necessarily equal Islam. ... How are we going to re-immerse ourselves in our own tradition...?” — Sherman Jackson [30:44]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Book’s Purpose:

  “To abandon the term secular simply because the West has defined it in a certain way would imply that the Western understanding is the only understanding of secular that we can have... And here we have a 1400-year-old civilization... [which] cannot have its own definition of secular.” — Sherman Jackson [14:46]

• On Knowledge and Hierarchies:

  “The whole idea of the category of Islamic Studies... is a way of particularizing Muslimness and kind of removing it from this experience which is universalized... this post-Christian secular experience.” — Chella Ward [47:35]

• Reorient Host’s Take on the Word “Secular”:

  “For some people, it’s very triggering... For us it’s seen as a welcoming word, a word for the idea of liberation or being moved away from religion.” — Unnamed Host [44:35]

• On Reason, Revelation, and Divine Will:

  “If you want to talk about realism, is pork really negus ontologically? No... That’s what I mean by nominalist, right?... God is not bound by any pre-existing cosmic or any other kind of order in terms of what God does.” — Sherman Jackson [41:03]

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment Description | |-------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 03:44–09:09 | Professor Jackson on Sharia’s boundaries and genesis of ‘Islamic secular’ | | 10:29–17:21 | Why use the term ‘Islamic secular’—decolonizing language & knowledge | | 19:12–21:00 | Practical application: Maqrizi, day palms hadith, law vs. fact | | 21:00–28:36 | The colonial origins of Islamic Studies and call for ‘2.0’ reformation | | 31:38–35:11 | Redefining the Islamic scholar and recognizing non-juristic authority | | 35:11–41:03 | Engaging Hodgson, Islamicate, and philosophical debates on reality/context | | 47:35–49:57 | Hosts discuss how ‘Islamic Studies’ as a category reinforces Western norms | | 54:23–55:07 | “Multiple seculars”: Jackson’s project as resistance and epistemic expansion |

Hosts’ Reflective Discussion

Framing ‘Secular’ in the West ([44:35–49:57])
The hosts unpack how secularism in the West is often a continuation of post-Christian norms, effectively universalizing a Christian-derived framework while invisibilizing or minoritizing Muslim expression (e.g., school hymns vs. “Allahu Akbar”).

Decolonial Possibilities and Knowledge Production ([52:06–54:23])
Jackson’s project is situated as more than a counter-argument; rather, it pluralizes the secular and resists both Islam’s reduction and the universalization of Western models of knowledge.

Conclusion

This episode is a rich, layered entry into Professor Sherman Jackson’s efforts to reclaim conceptual tools for Muslims navigating modernity. By reframing “the secular” from within the Islamic tradition and calling for Islamic Studies 2.0, Jackson offers both a critique of inherited colonial structures and a constructive proposal for Muslim autonomy in knowledge-making, communal engagement, and individual practice. The conversation initiates critical questions about interpretation, authority, and the future of Islamic thought—threads to be continued in the next episode.