NEW DELHI: The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has pleaded the Supreme Court must not deal with matters of faith such as instant triple talaq , insisting that any change in personal law must come after debate and consent of the community."You must accept other cultures. If it is bad, educate them. Have a debate and then bring in a law if they accept it,” senior advocate Kapil Sibal told a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India JS Khehar that is examining the legality of instant tripletalaq."If I have faith that Lord Rama was born at Ayodhya, then that is a matter of faith. Where is the question of constitutional morality,” Sibal asked to bolster his case. "We all want to change, but we don’t want somebody else to say that you must change. We are not saying it is permissible or immutable. There are some customs among Hindus also which may not be acceptable. But it is for the community to decide.” The Board also contended that though the practice was not sanctioned by the Quran it has been practised over 1,400 years now. "It has been there for 1,400 years, nobody disputed it but today you are saying this should not be your faith.You can’t determine this….” Sibal conceded that there was no reference to the practice in Quran. "Quran does not talk about it. But it is there in the Hadith — compilation of teachings of Prophet Mohammed. Today the Supreme Court is deciding whether it is part of Quran? When it comes to faith it is my belief. You can’t test it on the basis of some higher principles.” He referred to debates in the Constituent Assembly to point out that the framers had consciously avoided evolving a uniform civil code as they did not want to interfere with personal laws of various communities.CJI Khehar observed that the court had asked the government why it had not stepped in so that the court need not interfere, but the fact remained that it hadn’t. If there’s a legislative vacuum then the courts can always step in, he said. Sibal responded: "Once you start interfering there will be no end to it. Question will arise why me (only Muslims)? Today I read that a Dalit was not allowed a haircut.”He was talking about the recent caste clashes in Uttar Pradesh. He suggested that essentially all religions were "patriarchal” and were slowly evolving. "The court can’t change thingsin six days,” he said.Advocate Yusuf Mucchala, who also appeared for the Board, also admitted that the practice was undesirable but said that the community was in the process of addressing the problem through reforms. "We are working on it,” he said. Arguments in the case will continue.