Taliban follow strict Islamic creed that doesnt change with the times scholars say

The return of the Taliban, a word meaning “students,” to control in Afghanistan marks the return of a top-down set of strict beliefs unlikely to evolve with the times, scholars who have studied the group say.

The Taliban say they follow the tradition-bound Salafist school of Sunni Islam that hews to the Islamic teachings of the first three generations of Muslim believers, beginning with the Prophet Muhammad’s generation.

The teachings of these “pious predecessors,” as they are called by Salafists, form the basis for what their adherents follow today, including a rejection of religious innovations in Islam since the eighth century.

The Sunni/Salafist Islamic school “is one of the strictest interpretations of the Islamic tradition,” where the “literal meaning is adhered to. And any input by intuitive reason is doubted or rejected,” said Abdulaziz Sachedina, the International Institute of Islamic Thought chair in Islamic Studies at George Mason University in Fairfax.

In the case of the Taliban, adherence to its particular brand of Salafist teaching includes a strict subjugation of women and the rejection of non-Islamic images. In early 2001, the Taliban destroyed two giant Buddhas carved into cliffs in Bamiyan, Afghanistan, which were decreed to be “idols” opposed to their interpretation of Shariah law, the Islamic legal code covering almost every aspect of daily life.

During its previous period of ruling Afghanistan, from 1996 to 2001, the Taliban were noted for closing schools that educated young girls, banning females from most professions, and forcing women to wear the burqa, an all-covering dress. Press reports indicate that after this month’s takeover, women are again required to wear burqas and cannot leave their homes unless accompanied by a male relative. The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that female journalists working for state television were stopped from going to work.

In the Taliban’s previous reign, Mullah Muhammad Omar, then-leader of the group, ordered the historic Buddha sculptures destroyed after consultations with a group of Taliban scholars. The move sparked a global outcry over the destruction of what were considered historic cultural artifacts, cementing the Taliban’s image in many quarters as a retrograde branch of Islamic belief.

“The first Taliban state, as many observers have noted in recent days, was arguably the most misogynistic in modern history,” said Jeffry R. Halverson, a professor of religious studies at Coastal Carolina University in Conway, South Carolina, who has studied the movement.

“The impact on women was enormous. But people may not realize that the Taliban also declared war on Afghanistan’s culture. They destroyed film archives, paintings, music and media. Muslim men were arrested for not growing beards.”

Sayed Hassan Hussaini Akhlaq an Afghan-born former chancellor of Gharjistan University in Kabul, said the Taliban “present [their] own interpretation” of what they claim are the original teachings of Islam.

Mr. Akhlaq, who now teaches at Coppin State University in Baltimore, said the group is “not honest with their claim of following traditional schools” of Islamic thought because he believes “they are not rationalist” in their application of Shariah law, which sets forth rules for virtually all Islamic life and is based on the Koran and the Hadiths, an oral commentary written down centuries ago.

But Shariah law, unlike the Ten Commandments, is not written in stone. Scholars have identified at least five “schools” of Shariah interpretation.

The Taliban is purposely not changing with the times. Mr. Sachedina said the group today won’t apply reason to its current rule in Afghanistan, although earlier interpretations of the Koran and the Hadiths  were “set by human reasoning.”

“It’s also a kind of hypocrisy, whereby the earlier history is being denied,” Mr. Sachedina said. “Because the earlier history was a history of development, a history of growth. That’s how the early tradition was able to keep pace with the social and political realities.”

The Taliban deny that evolution, Mr. Sachedina said, instead insisting that “the tradition” of those early generations contains enough information to determine today’s practices. They answer challenges by declaring, “We need to find out if there is a text that we have not paid attention to” to answer a societal question.

He said the Taliban’s approach is iconoclastic within the global Islam of today.

“I think this movement is very much identified with this kind of approach to the everyday situation because Afghanistan is not a general trend,” Mr. Sachedina said.

“In the Muslim world, what we find to be unusual in Afghanistan is the ability of Taliban to really control the country in a way that is completely out of tune” with nations such as Saudi Arabia that “also is quite conservative in many aspects of life, and yet you find that modernization has crept in.”

Although far from the standards of New York, Paris or London, Saudi Arabia in recent years has modified its approach to religious life and how citizens are governed, dropping in 2018 the kingdom’s ban on women driving automobiles. In April, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told Al-Arabiya television, “There are no fixed schools of thought and there is no infallible person,” saying authorities should practice a “continuous interpretation” of the Koran and the Prophet Muhammad’s teachings and practices known as the Sunnah.

Out of line with any theology is the Taliban’s reported retribution against those who cooperated with the ousted government, U.S. and allied troops, or foreign organizations, because theology cannot exist without ethics and moral behavior. Mr. Sachedina said the disconnect between the agreements signed by Taliban negotiators in Qatar, in which respect for human rights was promised, and the reports of reprisals illustrate the problem.

“Theology has always produced ethics,” Mr. Sachedina said. “If theology is not able to produce moral reasoning and moral behavior, then that theology is useless.”

But John L. Esposito, founding director of Georgetown University’s Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, said he sees a potential for optimism from what he called a generational split in the movement, with younger members wanting to be more flexible.

“You have a lot of people who come from a younger generation, and they themselves are quite diverse in, in some ways, in terms of how they really want to act, what they really want to see and do,” he said in a telephone interview. “It’s a bit of a defining moment, in that, will it be that the Taliban while using muscle in certain situations, will it be in other situations, that they will be more flexible because there has been a sense so far, that the Taliban would like to have some kind of relationship with the international community.”

He also thinks that the Taliban might not be as hard-line as in the past because they don’t want Afghanistan to be invaded by the West again.

“This is a time of posturing. They’re taking over the country, and their goal [is] to take it over as fully as they can. They realize they made a lot of mistakes in the past, and they probably want to avoid some of that some of them, so that they don’t justify having their country invaded again by a western country,” Mr. Esposito said.

Mr. Halverson, the Coastal Carolina University scholar, emphasized the Taliban don’t “actually have a theology, technically speaking” but instead hold to a creed.

“The distinction between the two is that a creed tells you what to believe, but theology utilizes reason to try and explain why and how to believe those things,” Mr. Halverson said. “The Taliban has no use for theology. They believe Muslims should simply conform to whatever they find in a religious text without asking how or why.”

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Thank you for being a Washington Times reader. Comments are temporarily disabled. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Share this post