A 179-page Pashto book titled Da Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamaat Aqeedah, attributed to Afghan Taliban Supreme Leader Mullah Hibatullah Akhundzada, raises fundamental questions about the religious justification of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP) armed campaign against Pakistan. The religious principles outlined in the book provide a framework for examining the contradictions between TTP’s ideological claims and its actions, particularly as the organization considers the Afghan Taliban its ideological role model.
The book sets out clear principles concerning the sanctity of Muslim life and property, obedience to governing authority, restrictions on declaring fellow Muslims infidels, religious unity, justice and the fulfillment of trusts. These teachings offer an important standard against which TTP’s ideology and operational activities can be assessed.
Pages 131–132 emphasize the prohibition of raising arms against fellow Muslims and stress the importance of protecting their lives and property. This principle directly contradicts TTP’s armed activities in Pakistan, where its attacks target civilians and state personnel, resulting in loss of life, destruction of property and insecurity among local communities. The organization’s use of violence against fellow Muslims raises serious questions about its commitment to the religious principles it claims to represent.
The contradiction becomes more significant in light of the book’s position on rebellion against governing authority. Page 133 advises Muslims to refrain from rebelling against rulers, except when ordered to commit an act contrary to Islamic teachings. This principle places restrictions on armed opposition to established authority and challenges TTP’s strategy of using violence against Pakistan’s state institutions and security forces. Its armed campaign, therefore, raises fundamental questions about the religious basis of its actions, particularly when assessed against the teachings attributed to the Afghan Taliban leader.
The book also addresses the dangers of takfir, or declaring fellow Muslims disbelievers. Pages 108–109 discourage declaring a Muslim an infidel merely on the basis of committing a sin. This teaching challenges extremist interpretations that use accusations of disbelief to justify violence against other Muslims. Similarly, pages 135–139 condemn sectarian divisions and disagreements that undermine collective Muslim unity. These principles stand in contrast to ideologies that promote religious intolerance, division and violence. TTP’s ideological positions and armed activities must therefore be examined against the book’s emphasis on restraint in takfir and the preservation of Muslim unity.
Another important principle appears on page 141, which identifies justice, honesty and the avoidance of betrayal as essential religious responsibilities. These obligations establish a standard for evaluating the conduct of organizations claiming religious legitimacy. TTP’s attacks, which undermine public security and endanger Muslim lives, raise questions about the consistency of its actions with these religious responsibilities.
Ultimately, the book attributed to Mullah Hibatullah provides an important ideological reference for questioning TTP’s religious justification for violence in Pakistan. Its teachings on the sanctity of Muslim life and property, obedience to authority, restrictions on takfir, Muslim unity and justice expose significant contradictions between TTP’s stated religious objectives and its operational conduct. The Afghan Taliban must demonstrate consistency between its religious declarations and practical policies by preventing TTP from using Afghan territory to launch attacks against Pakistan. Religious principles must be reflected through actions rather than invoked selectively to justify armed and political objectives.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Rawalpindi.
