By Professor Azizah Y. al-Hibri
aalhibri@richmond.edu
T. C. Williams School of Law, University of Richmond

March 12, 2001

 I have been asked by concerned American and Canadian Muslim organizations to comment on a recent statement made by the Taliban, the ruling party in Afghanistan, which was reported in the Washington Post on March 2, 2001. According to the Washington Post, the Taliban announced the beginning of a campaign to destroy all statutes in Afghanistan, including the historical statues of Bamiyan, in the name of Islam.

 In responding to these Muslim organizations, I rely primarily on the Quran, and sunnah. I also rely on traditional sources of Islamic jurisprudence as well as Islamic history. Additionally, in matters of jurisprudence I rely heavily on a fatwa issued earlier by Dr. Taha Jaber al-Alwani on a related topic. In matters of Islamic history and world religions, I rely on statements made by Professor Seyyed Hussein Nasr on this and other occasions.

 There is no doubt that something is very wrong with the Taliban position on this and other matters. Chief among these other matters is the TalibanÂ’s oppressive limitations on Muslim womenÂ’s rights, which have been addressed elsewhere. While there is no central interpretive authority in Islam, an acceptable interpretation must satisfy a minimum number of requirements. For example, the interpretation must be based on the QurÂ’an and sunnah (the reported words and example of the Prophet). It must be based on knowledge and motivated by piety. It must also serve (rather than harm) maslaha (public interest) of Muslims in particular and humanity in general.

 Assuming arguendo that the TalibanÂ’s interpretation of Islam satisfies these minimal requirements, the Taliban are still not entitled to force their views on other Muslims, within and outside Afghanistan, and on the rest of the world. For, the very Islamic jurisprudence which protects their right to freedom of thought, also protects the freedom of thought of other Muslims and non-Muslims as well. It is for this reason that when the Abbasid Khalifah (Caliph) Abu JaÂ’far al-Mansour approached Imam Malik with the idea of adopting the Maliki math.hab (school of thought) as the official math.hab of the land, the Imam rejected the idea repeatedly. Realizing that he is only a human being who is capable of error, he refused to impose his views on a whole people.

 The Taliban seem to have no such concerns. This is consistent with their rejection of other basic Islamic principles, such as shura (consultation with other Muslims), and bayÂ’ah (a system of elective non-authoritarian governance). It is also consistent with their rejection of the Islamic injunction that the pursuit of education is the duty of every Muslim, male and female. Finally, it is consistent with their rejection of the overarching Islamic model of harmonious gender, racial, religious and general human relations.

The Full Text of the Opinion