Hello Tahir

First of all, let me acknowledge up front that your questions are legitimate and valid by all counts. These are theological challenges faced by reformist Muslims precisely because Islam, like any other ideology is a closed system of belief allowing for very little evolutionary thought.

Nevertheless, well-meaning people sometimes attempt creative solutions within the framework of Islam in an effort to resolve long-standing social and philosophical quandaries. My attempt to separate the temporal aspects of the faith with its spiritual beliefs falls within this category, knowing full well that there are many shortcomings with this approach.

The verse of the Quran that you cite can be suspended. All of the Quran’s regulations dealing with special commandments have to be weighed against its overarching principles of ensuring peace and justice in society. If, due to changed circumstances, the Quran’s injunctions dealing with specificities come into conflict with its overarching principles, then it is only appropriate to uphold the overarching principles of justice and benevolence rather than the specificities that the Quran deals with. You can accuse me of cherry-picking if you want, but there is historical precedent for my stance in Omar bin Khattab's edicts about suspending Quranic punishments.

Now about ijtihad. I was merely quoting Iqbal. I am not a proponent of ijtihad. I am in fact a staunch advocate of the separation of religion and state. Laws should be enacted based on the needs of communities and societies, not on religious dicta.

If at times I give the impression of advocating ijtihad, it is only in the context of existing sharia-based societes that will not accept the guidelines of Jeffersonian democracy, at least at this point in time. Some societies like Pakistan will continue to uphold religion as the foundation for their laws. Only in that context am I advocating ijtihad, as a means to allow at least some reform in these countries.

Hope that clarifies things.

Regards,

Farzana.