Firstly - what makes anyone think that I have not studied Islam in detail? It is precisely because I have studied Islam in detail that I know - very clearly - that the problem with today's Islam is that its interpretation derives from the socio-political context of the 10th to 12th centuries.

Telling me that such and such 12th century scholars agree on some aspect of Islam is pointless. I know that already.

What the Muslim world needs is a contemporary interpretation of Islam based on today's context. Not the mindless repetition of 12th century views. As I said before, all interpretations derive from the prevailing socio-political environment. Is Mahdar Tahir saying that today's situation is the same as that of the 12th century? I don't think so. Differing conditions require differing interpretations.

There are many issues that arise in today's world that do not have any analogue in the 10th century. One-third of the Muslim world today lives as minorities in non-Muslim countries. They face unprecedented problems and issues whereby they cannot find any solution in 10th century interpretations.

And what about the issues coming from technology? Where are their precedents in the ‘fiqh’ of the 10th century? Do we still need to ‘sertu’ with soil or is soaping enough? And so on. There is much pointless debate over unprecedented issues and all because we refuse to interpret Islam in today's context.

Indeed, the American Muslims have taken the lead in this matter. I refer Mahdar Tahir to Dr Muzammil Siddiqi's paper titled ‘Interpreting Islamic Principles’ where he discusses the urgent need to re-interpret Islamic principles.

Dr Muzammil is the vice-chair of the Fiqh Council of North America, a member of the Isna Shura Council and director of The Islamic Society of Orange County. No fool is he. And he, too, arrives at the same conclusion as I do.

Why does Mahdar Tahir insist that Islamic interpretations be based on the views of 10th to 12th century scholars? There are many contemporary scholars who do not agree with the Lina Joy decision based on their more contemporary interpretations.

In this matter, I find the Malaysians to be very conservative to the point of being Taliban-like! Is that good for a multireligious Malaysia aspiring to be an industrial powerhouse ?

I say ‘no’ to Mahdar Tahir. I say that I have studied Islam in detail, enough to know that many of our problems today have no analogue in the 10th to 12th century.

In particular, we no longer have the Dar-ul-Harb and Dar-ul-Islam worldview to justify criminalising apostasy. In today's world the choice of religion must be free of any compulsion even for Muslims. The Muslim world is not at war with some kind of Crusader West. Hence apostasy is no longer equivalent to treason.

Reinterpret Islam now!