Koonj has a great post which makes the point that we humans interpret and create all laws, even religious law.
Religion and religious law must always be the human reading of a law. The notion of a “God’s-eye-view” law is a tempting and beautiful one. However, it is one of those things for which we yearn on earth, similar to perfection, eternal life, perfect beauty, endless love, and so on. Earthly life is not made for such things.
A human being cannot access “God’s-eye-view” law or religious law.
Paradoxically, religion and religious law must always be more or less human–but always somewhat human.
To claim that you have access to God’s-eye-view of law is to claim that you have God’s view, which approximates blasphemy.
So to claim that your perspective on religion/religious law is infallible, is, in a way, to claim divinity. And as even Ibn Arabi says, the Lord is the Lord wa in tanazzal, and the servant is the servant, wa in ta’arruj (will not translate for fear of doing it poorly).
[…] Some of us think that literalism is safe refuge from our own readings, but there is never any refuge from our own readings. Whether you read one of the seven inner meanings and the seven inner meanings of the inner meanings of each Qur’anic verse – or whether you try to go from a “linear atomistic” (see Mustansar Mir) reading of each line, – or whether you struggle to read the Qur’an using the Qur’an itself as its commentary – or whether you use a scholar’s readings – we ordinary human beings always use words, our limited five senses and our limited spiritual senses, to try to KNOW.