The Islamic Secular: A ‘Realm’ of Assessments, Not Topics: A Reply to Professor Rachel Scott

This essay responds to Rachel Scott's review of The Islamic Secular, which examined the Moroccan mellāḥ (Jewish quarter) as a lens for questioning how the shar'ī/non-shar'ī distinction applies to the status of religious minorities under Islamic rule. The author clarifies that his prior descriptions of the Islamic Secular as a "realm" or "domain" may have misleadingly suggested a hermetically sealed area excluding all shar'ī topics, when in fact the shar'ī and non-shar'ī interpenetrate: an institution like the mellāḥ can simultaneously instantiate shar'ī rules (dhimmah, jizyah) and non-shar'ī, discretionary policy considerations (efficiency, safety, reputation). Addressing Scott's question of where the shar'ī boundary lies, the author argues that establishing the theoretical existence of such a boundary—rather than achieving unanimous agreement on its precise location—is sufficient to enable principled negotiation, comparable to ambiguities inherent in legal precedent or hadith authentication. The essay further defends the Islamic Secular against the charge that it exonerates sharī'ah of discriminatory features, arguing instead that non-Muslims were more affected by discretionary policy than by exempting sharī'ah rules, and pushes back on Scott's implicit liberal-democratic standard of formal equality as the measure of a just political order. The author reiterates that the Islamic Secular offers no prefabricated political arrangement but rather a framework for principled deliberation on contested questions of minority status and communal autonomy.