Dear Farzana sahiba let us read these Verses from Quran!

chapter 5, verse 51 most common English translation, 

“O, you who believe [in the message of Muhammad], do not take Jews and Christians as awliya (friends/guardians)’. They are awliya’ to one another, and the one among you who turns to them is of them.

Truly, God does not guide wrongdoing folk.” 

5:38 Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done—a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise. 39 But if anyone repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, God will accept his repentance: God is most forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)

24:02

“The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day; and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.” (Yusuf Ali) 

And now let us read what you said in your post 57:

“Temporal law can be separated from the doctrinal aspects of the faith based on the belief that societies evolve. This leaves Muslims with the freedom to enact laws according to the needs of changing societies and do not require Muslims to implement Quranic punishments in a literal sense”     

And here is your post 88 quote..

“One of these juristic principles is the concept of “isltislah” or “juristic preference” which is agreed upon as a preferred course of action in the interest of public good.”

“Rafi Raza’s analysis demonstrates a certain lack of understanding about the historical currents in the development of Muslim jurisprudence, ones that can be traced right back to the prophet’s own practice.” 

Farzana sahiba! since you have cited from sunnah, let us read following:- 

“By God! if Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad had committed this theft, I would definitely have cut her hand. (Muslim, Kitab-al-Hudud).”

Here even by employing your logic and reasoning and citing of “Historical Muslim jurisprudence leading to Prophet Mohammad sa “, takes you back to Quranic punishment’s own exertion.

On one hand you are advising that Historical Muslim jurisprudence is to be followed to avoid the implementation of Quranic punishments and on the other hand you admire Tariq Fatah when he says quote

“I have sincerely attempted to find the so called Golden Age of Islam that was free of bloodshed, civil strife, palace intrigues, outright racism, slavery and pillage. I have failed. From the Ridda (Apostasy) Wars of Caliph Abubaker to the humiliating defeat of Caliph Mustasim, I have not found a single period that I could in all honesty I would trade for my 21^st century existence as a Muslim living in a secular democratic society”.  

I really do not get that. Why one has to lay such a convoluted foundation just to win an argument? i.e.,

“the freedom to enact laws according to the needs of changing societies”? 

@ As we speak, many such societies have acknowledged brothels, sodomy, homosexuality etc, as lawful activities. Would you like to shed light over this particular area citing Islam in “changing societies”?

@ Does this “literal sense” has to be undone in every single verse of Quran, relating to “non-faith based” matters by the “evolved, and changing societies”? Why Yes and why No? If it applies to one verse then why can’t be applied to all of Quran as a principle?

@ (“this leaves Muslims with the freedom to enact laws….”)

Let us not play with diction or command of language to answer this very simple question that what you think how Muslims of this World would start “enacting laws” !

Ten, twenty or thirty undemocratically self appointed members of a forum or congress? Or by Golden hands of Royals of Arabia? (

@ Is it possible for Muslims to indulge in making and imposing of temporal laws with out a Shria govt.? Should Justice Rana Bhagwan Das be appointed to look into such matters of Islamic Shria?

I guess rather than using words(“do not require Muslims to implement Quranic punishments in a literal sense” ) you simply should have “lightened your burden” by researching more on alternatives in other verses of Quran as JIC sahib mentioned.

Quote JIC… 

“Let me lighten your burden by saying that if you feel apprehensive about verse 24:2, I suggest you take a look at verses 4:15-16 as an alternative that provides another way out of punishment through repentance. It is a good example of making full use of God’s guidance by accepting it whole heartedly rather than rejecting parts of it. Most likely, this is what Omar bin Khittab did too, rather than suspending Quranic verses. Even the Prophet did not have the authority to suspend or remove any verses that had been revealed to him.”  

Here is an example  …

“39 But if anyone repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, God will accept his repentance: God is most forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)

@ I wonder if you have missed my last paragraph  :“

I conclude that as a Mujtahid , a somewhat educated Muslim makes up his / her own ruling on the permissibility of an Islamic law but only for his/herself, unless is appointed by a Sharia Government or God.” 

@ As for barbaric punishments of Islam are concerned,

**From Abu Gharib jail  to  Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp and Bosnia to Kashmir, and from Kabul to East Timur , we already have seen the “temporal laws” of “evolving societies”.

** From “Daisy Cutter” to “Cluster Bombs” and from Atomic to Hydrogen Bomb, there is nothing barbaric, all that is barbaric is “Islamic punishments”!  

Nuclear Weapons

   China =410 France 464 India  60  Israel 200

Pakistan 25?  Russia ~10,000   United Kingdom 185

 United States ~10,500 

@ Now come back to the “employing of a reasoned approach in solving social problems” here is the Golden age of a Most Modern Society on Earth, who is “liberating” all other societies.

Please notice the numbers how they grow as USA becomes more reasoning and more liberal and secular state.

Prisoners in the United States, 1990–2006

 I do agree with the use of  “reason and revelation—a principle endorsed by the Quran” but discarding of a clear order of a verse of Quran by overestimated reasoning is not easy to digest.

Negating an order of the verse and exclaiming that the verse is not discarded is just a try to hold the ear from around the neck this time!

http://www.rafiraza.com