From ‘Sapiens' to ‘The Book of Mormon': The banned books the Taliban deems ‘deviant' and ‘un-Islamic'
Books including Dante's 14th century allegory The Divine Comedy, Joseph Smith's The Book of Mormon, Kahlil Gibran's The Prophet, and Yuval Noah Hariri's bestselling Sapiens – a wide-reaching history of humankind – have been pulled from circulation. The works of several well-known Islamic scholars and theologians, as well as Iranian intellectuals and Afghan writers, have also been blacklisted.
Independent Persian spoke to publishers and school librarians in Herat and Kabul who confirmed that books on women's rights, United Nations edicts, the biographies of Taliban critics, secular government structures, and even those about the former Afghan Republic have been labelled 'deviant' and are now banned from sale, distribution or public access.
Four Taliban ministries including the Ministry of Guidance, Hajj and Religious Affairs, the Ministry of Information and Culture, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Higher Education held a meeting on Sunday 13 July to reaffirm enforcement of this directive. During this meeting, the Ministry of Religious Affairs announced that, under an order from Taliban leader Akhundzada, a committee has been formed with representatives from all four ministries. This committee is tasked with reviewing books across the country and referring any 'suspicious content' to clerics for further scrutiny.
Noor Mohammad Saqib, the Taliban's Minister for Religious Affairs, referencing what he called a 'special decree' from Akhundzada, stated that books written in recent years with the aim of 'misleading and corrupting society' and distributed in libraries, educational institutions, and public spaces will now be collected and removed.
He added that guidelines are being developed for religious teachers and clerics so that they can educate the public about such books 'in light of Sharia principles'.
Saqib claimed that Afghanistan has not only suffered from military intervention in recent decades but also from what he called 'cultural attacks'. He alleged that many foreign cultural institutions operating in Afghanistan aimed to 'undermine Islamic and traditional Afghan values'.
Addressing Taliban officials, he said: 'It is now our duty to protect and fully introduce this [Islamic] culture to the Mujahid nation [of Afghanistan]'.
Criticising books published under the previous Republic, Saqib said they conflicted with Afghanistan's Islamic and traditional values and 'diverted young people from their true goals'.
He emphasised that now, under Taliban control, authorities have the opportunity to remove such works and replace them with content that is 'pure, Islamic and aligned with Afghan values'.
According to the Taliban leader's decree, any books identified as 'suspicious' or 'deviant' will be handed over to a group of clerics who will evaluate their content and determine whether they should be banned.
Previously, Taliban agents from the Ministries of Information and Culture, and Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, had already confiscated hundreds of book titles they labelled 'against national interests' or 'anti-Islam' from libraries and banned their publication and sale. Other Taliban institutions, including the Ministries of Education and Higher Education, have also restricted access to certain books in schools and universities.
A banned book list issued by the Taliban's Ministry of Information and Culture and sent to publishers and booksellers last winter prohibited texts that they considered 'against national interests, anti-Islam, in opposition to the Islamic Emirate, containing false beliefs, promoting ideas contrary to Islam' as well as works on women's rights and human rights. Publishers were also given a clear warning that selling these books is completely prohibited, and violators will face punishment.
Publishing professionals in Kabul say there is no clear or standardised process for reviewing books under Taliban rule. Any Taliban member, particularly officers from the Promotion of Virtue ministry, can enter a bookstore or library and ban any book they personally deem anti-Islamic or harmful to national interests.
A Kabul-based publisher, who asked to remain anonymous, told Independent Persian: 'Since the Taliban returned to power, not only has Afghanistan's once-growing publishing industry collapsed, but even book imports from Iran have been restricted. Taliban border agents now inspect all books, cross out images of living beings and deny entry to many titles.'
The publisher added that the Taliban's Ministry of Information and Culture has created a publishing committee made up mostly of clerics and individuals without higher education. 'These people review content, and if a book doesn't match their beliefs, they label it anti-Islamic or against national interests and block its publication'.
A source in Herat, who works as a literacy advocate, shared three separate lists of banned books from libraries in Herat with Independent Persian. These lists suggest that Taliban censorship is far more extensive than officially acknowledged.
Together, the three lists contain 620 banned titles compiled by the Library Oversight Committee of Herat Schools. Members of this committee have already removed these books from shelves.
The listed books are flagged with terms such as 'Shi'ism, praise of traitors, promotion of secularism, democracy, Western freedoms, defence of women, communism, praise of Iran, superstition, anti-Taliban views, UN laws, descriptions of the Republic, praise of music and undesirable content.'
Banned authors include both Afghan writers and prominent figures from the wider Islamic world. For example, the Taliban have banned works like Kitab al-Tawhid by Mohammed ibn Abd al-Wahhab; Four Reforms in the Qur'an by Sayyid Abul A'la Maududi; Social Justice in Islam by Sayyid Qutb; biographies and writings of Jamal al-Din al-Afghani; books by Abdullah Azzam; and numerous Iranian intellectuals like Ali Shariati, Morteza Motahari, and Ramin Jahanbegloo. Books by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, including his well-known The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam, are also on the list. Many are marked as containing 'false beliefs, Shi'ite ideology, or heresy'.
Currently, the Taliban have no formal procedure for reviewing or censoring books. According to reports, decisions about a book's acceptability are often made arbitrarily and based on personal biases. However, the Ministry of Religious Affairs has said it plans to develop guidelines that will be distributed to imams and teachers so that they can identify 'deviant books' and inform the public about them.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Palestine Action ban coupled with Online Safety Act ‘a threat to public debate'
The Online Safety Act together with the proscription of Palestine Action could result in platforms censoring Palestinian-related content, human rights organisations have warned. Open Rights Group, Index on Censorship and others have written to Ofcom calling on it to provide clear guidance to platforms on distinguishing lawful expression from content deemed to be in support of terrorism. They say failure to act by the regulator act risks misidentification – including through algorithms – of support for Palestine as support for Palestine Action, which on 5 July became the first direct action protest group to be banned under UK anti-terrorism laws. It also runs the risk of misidentifying objections to Palestine Action's proscription as unlawful support for the group, the signatories claim. Sara Chitseko, a pre-crime programme manager at Open Rights Group, said: 'Crucial public debate about Gaza is being threatened by vague, overly broad laws that could lead to content about Palestine being removed or hidden online. There's also a real danger that people will start self-censoring, worried they might be breaking the law just by sharing or liking posts related to Palestine and non-violent direct action. 'This is a serious attack on freedom of expression and the right to protest in the UK. We need to ensure that people can share content about Palestine online with being afraid that they will be characterised as supportive of terrorism.' The organisations' concerns are exacerbated by Ofcom's advice that platforms can avoid worrying about their duties under the Online Safety Act (OSA) if they ensure they are more censorious than the act requires. 'This approach risks encouraging automated moderation that disproportionately affects political speech, particularly from marginalised communities, including Palestinian voices,' the letter says. Unlike in the EU, there is no independent mechanism for people in the UK to challenge content they feel has been wrongly taken down. The signatories want platforms – the letter has also been sent to Meta, Alphabet, X and ByteDance – to commit to an independent dispute mechanism, if evidence emerges of lawful speech being suppressed. The letter, also signed by Electronic Frontier Foundation in the US and organisations from eight European countries, as well as experts and academics, says: 'We are concerned that the proscription of Palestine Action may result in an escalation of platforms removing content, using algorithms to hide Palestine solidarity posts and leave individuals and those reporting on events vulnerable to surveillance or even criminalisation for simply sharing or liking content that references non-violent direct action. 'We are also concerned about what platforms understand by their legal duties regarding expressions of 'support' for Palestine Action.' The letter comes a week after the OSA's age-gating for 'adult' material came into effect, prompting fears about access to Palestine-related content. For example, Reddit users in the UK have to verify their age to access the Reddit sub r/israelexposed. Ella Jakubowska, the head of policy at EDRi in Brussels, said there would inevitably be suppression of 'critical voices, journalism and social movements around the world. The problem is worsened by automated content moderation systems, well known for over-removing content from Palestinian creators, in support of Black Lives Matter, about LGBTQI+ issues and more. 'It is very likely that in trying to comply with these requirements, platforms would unjustly remove content from people in the EU and other regions.' She said that would contravene laws such as the EU Digital Services Act, designed to strike a balance between keeping people safe online and freedom of expression. An Ofcom spokesperson said: 'We have provided detailed guidance to platforms about how to identify the particular types of illegal and harmful material prohibited or restricted by the act, including how to determine whether content may have been posted by a proscribed organisation. 'There is no requirement on companies to restrict legal content for adult users. In fact, they must carefully consider how they protect users' rights to freedom of expression while keeping people safe.' Meta, Alphabet, X and ByteDance were all approached for comment.
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
White House backs anti-Islam preacher in two-tier policing row
The Trump administration is backing a controversial Christian preacher at the centre of a 'two-tier' policing row over his right to criticise Islam, The Telegraph can reveal. Dia Moodley, a father of four, met US officials dispatched to interview British 'victims of censorship' amid growing concern in Washington that free speech in the UK is under threat. In the past four years, the evangelical pastor, from Bristol, has been the subject of repeated enforcement action by Avon and Somerset Police over his street preaching, which includes comparisons between Christianity and Islam, as well as sermons on abortion and homosexuality. In his preaching, Mr Moodley says Islam is 'lies' and 'darkness', while Christianity is 'light'. He contrasts the Bible, which he says is 'the truth', with the Koran, which he claims is 'not true'. In one public sermon in 2024 he stated his belief that there are differences between 'the moral standards of the God of Islam and the Christian God.' Street preaching is a visible part of religious life in the US, especially in the South and Midwest. But in the UK, it is less socially accepted, and even viewed as a public nuisance. In 2021, Mr Moodley was banned from 'passing comment' on any faith other than Christianity and from giving sermons without police approval. It can now be revealed that the pastor, 58, was among the activists who met US State Department diplomats during their fact-finding mission to the UK in March. Until now, it was only confirmed that the US delegation met five anti-abortion activists charged over prayer vigils outside clinics, including Livia Tossici-Bolt, convicted in April for protesting in Bournemouth. The others were Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, Rose Docherty, Adam Smith-Connor and Father Sean Gough, who all described being detained for silent prayer. Mr Moodley's inclusion appears to be further evidence of the Trump administration's willingness to interfere in UK domestic affairs, potentially broadening its free speech concerns from buffer zone legislation to broader allegations that Christians are being silenced while other faiths, including Islam, are appeased. 'Free speech in crisis' In an interview with The Telegraph, Mr Moodley said he was 'pleased' to be invited to meet a five-person US State Department team in London on March 19. 'We've been crying out here in the United Kingdom for quite a few years now, especially over the last year or two. Our position has been that free speech is in crisis,' he said. 'So when the US State Department came and said they wanted to sit across the table from us and hear directly what we were going through, it felt like what our own government needed to do – to sit down with us and ask what is actually happening on the ground, rather than hearing our Prime Minister saying 'free speech has always been here',' he added, referring to Sir Keir Starmer's comments to JD Vance, the vice president, in February. Asked whether he feared being used as a political pawn, Mr Moodley said his only concern was that the UK free speech crisis had 'caught the attention of somebody else'. The meeting was facilitated by ADF International UK (ADFI), the British arm of an American Right-wing Christian group, which had been contacted by US State Department officials seeking to speak with 'victims of censorship in the UK'. Its US partner, Alliance Defending Freedom, lobbied to overturn Roe v Wade in 2022 – a ruling that triggered abortion bans in 13 states. Since then, the group has shifted focus to Britain, funnelling £1.1 million into its UK arm last year for campaigning and related activity. Mr Moodley, who is a client of ADFI, told US State Department officials how, in October 2021, police banned him from 'passing comments on any other religion or comparing them to Christianity'. The order also barred him from 'delivering a sermon or religious address at a time or place that has not had prior consent and approval of Avon & Somerset Constabulary'. 'Being able to compare is part of the Christian methodology to get the message out, and here we have the police saying 'you can't do that, and if you do that, we could possibly arrest you',' Mr Moodley said. With support from ADFI, in December 2021 he successfully challenged the order. After further litigation, the force admitted in February 2024 the restrictions had been 'disproportionate'. 'Christians treated less favourably' Unlike other activists who met the delegation, Mr Moodley's main concern is 'two-tier policing'. He claims Christians are treated less favourably than Muslims with the most recent incident taking place in Bristol on March 22, just days after his meeting with the State Department. While giving a sermon, Mr Moodley compared Islamic and Christian teachings, which provoked an angry response from Muslim passers-by. 'I held up in my one hand my Bible and my copy of the Koran – it's my own personal copy of the Koran, in which all my notes are, my pages are highlighted, and stuff that I've studied in the Koran – and a man literally said to me, as he walked across from the shopping precinct, 'if you do not stop right now, I'm going to stab you',' he claimed. What happened next was captured on video and shared with The Telegraph. 'Three other men came up, identified as Muslims, and said to me they want my Koran. Their words to me were, 'this is not your book'. Meaning it's a book of their faith, and they tried to grab it from me.' He said: 'They made every attempt to grab it to such a point, imposing themselves upon me in a very dangerous way, where they pushed me off the ladder, I could have knocked my head on the sign board behind me.' Mr Moodley continued: 'The police arrived on the scene whilst these men were there, and did nothing about it. It smells of two-tier policing. It smells of the fact that there was a Muslim crowd there, and they did not want to upset this Muslim crowd.' He was told by Avon and Somerset Police on July 21 they would not pursue charges against the individual who allegedly threatened him. In a statement, Avon and Somerset Police confirmed that following the incident on March 22, a man in his 20s attended a voluntary interview. No further action was initially taken, but after Mr Moodley submitted a victim's right to review, the case was reconsidered and referred to the CPS. A force spokesman added: 'The process is ongoing and therefore this remains a live police investigation. This has been recorded as a public order incident and a hate crime.' Mr Moodley is also considering fresh legal action against the force, supported by the ADFI, over what he claims is institutional hostility toward his Christian faith.
Sky News
13 hours ago
- Sky News
X criticises Online Safety Act - and warns it's putting free speech in the UK at risk
Why you can trust Sky News The Online Safety Act is putting free speech at risk and needs significant adjustments, Elon Musk's social network X has warned. New rules that came into force last week require platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, TikTok and X - as well as sites hosting pornography - to bring in measures to prove that someone using them is over the age of 18. The Online Safety Act requires sites to protect children and to remove illegal content, but critics have said that the rules have been implemented too broadly, resulting in the censorship of legal content. X has warned the act's laudable intentions were "at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach". It said: "When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of 'online safety'. "It is fair to ask if UK citizens were equally aware of the trade-off being made." 3:53 X claims the timetable for platforms to meet mandatory measures had been unnecessarily tight - and despite complying, sites still faced threats of enforcement and fines, "encouraging over-censorship". "A balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children. It's safe to say that significant changes must take place to achieve these objectives in the UK," it said. A UK government spokesperson said it is "demonstrably false" that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. "As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression," they added. Users have complained about age checks that require personal data to be uploaded to access sites that show pornography, and 468,000 people have already signed a petition asking for the new law to be repealed. In response to the petition, the government said it had "no plans" to reverse the Online Safety Act. 5:23 Reform UK's leader Nigel Farage likened the new rules to "state suppression of genuine free speech" and said his party would ditch the regulations. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday that those who wanted to overturn the act were "on the side of predators" - to which Mr Farage demanded an apology, calling Mr Kyle's comments "absolutely disgusting". Regulator Ofcom said on Thursday it had launched an investigation into how four companies - that collectively run 34 pornography sites - are complying with new age-check requirements. These companies - 8579 LLC, AVS Group Ltd, Kick Online Entertainment S.A. and Trendio Ltd - run dozens of sites, and collectively have more than nine million unique monthly UK visitors, the internet watchdog said. The regulator said it prioritised the companies based on the risk of harm posed by the services they operated and their user numbers. It adds to the 11 investigations already in progress into 4chan, as well as an unnamed online suicide forum, seven file-sharing services, and two adult websites.
