Law always operates through coercion and authorizes particular patterns of pain

Evidence

The judicial process is an institution integral to every kind of state, and it is always based on coercion. In order to understand “secularism” I therefore did not begin with an a priori definition of that concept (“the universal principles of freedom and toleration” or “a particular cultural import from the West”). I tried to look at aspects of shari¯‘a reform as both the precondition and the consequence of secular processes of power. For the law always facilitates or obstructs different forms of life by force, responds to different kinds of sensibility, and authorizes different patterns of pain and suffering. — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 1234

Categorization

• XREF: Directly bridges to the Cooper vault thread: Asad’s claim that ‘secular’ law is not neutral but always coercively channels ‘patterns of pain and suffering’ parallels Cooper’s argument that apparently secular/‘neutral’ policy quietly privileges particular moral-normative orders.
• DEFINE: Key methodological self-definition: the secular is studied through shari’a reform as both precondition and consequence of secular power, not via a priori definitions of freedom/toleration.