Dejihadization Through Hadīth Reinterpretation and the Experience of Former Radical-Terrorism Prisoners

1. INTRODUCTION

The term jihad¹ has generated controversy and contradictions. Originally broad in meaning, jihad has often been misinterpreted as solely referring to physical warfare, bloodshed, and killing. As a result, jihad is frequently associated with violence, military aggression, and armed conflict, which risks portraying Islam as a religion of war and violence. For Muslims, jihad is a fundamental teaching, including the form of war that is considered holy,² in fact, dying in jihad is seen as a martyr's death, guaranteeing entry into heaven without reckoning. This belief encourages some groups to sacrifice their lives for jihad, particularly in wars against infidels or polytheists. Martyrs who die on the battlefield are buried without being washed, only shrouded in the clothes they wore at the time of their death. Several Hadīths of the Prophet (SAW) describe the virtues of martyrdom, often serving as motivation for jihad fi sabilillah (struggle in the way of Allah). However, the misinterpretation of jihad verses and Hadīths by radical groups has led to acts of terror, distorting the broader and essential meaning of jihad in Islam.³

Jihad has become a transnational issue that is frequently debated, especially after the emergence of ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) which is considered an extremist militant group and jihadi terrorist organization. This issue is discussed in various forums, seminars, mass media, and academic literature in the West and the East.⁴ As a concept in Islamic teachings, jihad is often misunderstood, both by some Muslims themselves and by Western observers. The extreme and destructive jihad movements have drawn global attention, leading to various negative labels from the Western world, including the United States, such as hardliners, extremists, militants, right-wing Islam, fundamentalism, and terrorism. In fact, after the collapse of communist ideology, Islam in some Western countries has been perceived as a frightening civilisation.⁵ This perception arises because the term jihad, which represents a holy and profound Islamic teaching, has been misused by certain Muslim individual.⁶ They are considering jihad as a pretext for committing acts of violence—killing innocent people, including civilians, children, women, and the weak and elderly. Such actions are entirely contrary to the universal Islamic principles of promoting peace, tolerance, and non-violence. Terrorism emerges to spread fear under the pretext of upholding Islam and fighting infidels. However, jihad in Islam, when interpreted as warfare, follows ethical guidelines that differ from terrorism, which disregards moral considerations and the psychological impact on children, women, and the elderly.Historically, terrorism has been driven more by religious ideology than political and economic factors, though in practice, it is influenced by complex social and geopolitical dynamics. The 2000 Pattern of Global Terrorism report identified 43 international terrorist groups, predominantly religiously motivated, though geopolitical also play a role.⁷ Based on these findings, it is evident that Islam has been disproportionately scrutinized, especially following the WTC (World Trade Center) bombing incident on September 11, 2001 in the United States.

Islam has no connection to radicalism and terrorism because it contradicts historical facts. Terrorism deviates from the true concept of jihad, bringing distruction to the earth and civilisation. From the perspective of common sense, legal reasoning, and the objectives of sharia, using terror, including suicide bombings as a form of jihad, reflects desperation, a loss of rationality, and a distortion of Islam as a religion of peace.⁸ Terrorism is terrorism, a crime against humanity, regardless of who commits it or what religion they follow. An inclusive understanding of jihad fosters a broad, egalitarian, and open religious awareness that can help realize Islam as rahmatan lil-'alamin (a mercy to all creation). This perspective encourages cooperation with other religious communities to uphold fundamental human rights and fulfill the essential goals of religious teachings.⁹ Conversely, the exclusive interpretation of jihad promoted by radical groups obstructs interfaith understanding, which is crucial for national harmony. It also undermines the cultural aspirations of societies seeking unity and disregards the reality of Indonesia’s diverse social fabric.¹⁰

The aim of this research is to explore the process of dejihadization through Hadīth reinterpretation and the experiences of former radicalism-terrorism. It aims to answer three main questions: how Hadīths often used to justify violence can be reinterpreted in alignment with the Prophet Muhammad’s peaceful mission; how the experiences of ex-convicts influence their changing views on jihad; and to what extent this process can serve as an effective deradicalisation model. The study’s implications include contributing to faith-based deradicalisation strategies, reinforcing an authentic understanding of jihad as a moral and spiritual struggle, and developing a framework for rehabilitating and reintegrating former extremists into society. Additionally, the research supports efforts to counter negative stigma surrounding jihad.

2. Research Methodology

This research employs a qualitative approach with a descriptive-exploratory phenomenological method to understand how radical groups interpret jihad. This approach aims to uncover the subjective experiences of the individuals involved in the phenomenon and analyse the meaning of jihad within a broader context. The study utilizes a desk research method, enabling an in-depth exploration of muktabar Hadīth texts and related media reports. The data sources consist of both primary and secondary data. Primary data are derived from muktabar Hadīth collection, which served as the main references for understanding the concept of jihad as taught by the Prophet Muhammad. Secondary data include scientific articles, research reports, and media accounts that illustrate how radical groups interpret jihad. Content analysis is used as the primary analytical technique, allowing for the identification of interpretative patterns across various sources. By dissecting the narratives of radical groups and comparing them with authentic Islamic teachings, this research aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the urgency of dejihadization in deradicalisation and counter-terrorism efforts.

3. Result and Discussion

Jihad is defined as a sincere effort to expand Islam, educate others about sharia, protect citizens, promote goodness, and foster peace.¹¹ Jihad differs from a mujahid, who dedicated all of his abilities, including his life, energy, thoughts, and emotions to this struggle.¹² Ibn Taimiyah describes jihad as devoting all one's abilities to achieving what Allah SWT desires while rejecting what He forbids.¹³ In the Sufi tradition, jihad is defined as mujahadah or the struggle against the impurities of the heart.¹⁴ Imam al-Qusyairi categorized jihad into three forms: the struggle of the soul, the heart, and wealth. Enduring hardships, combating negative thoughts, and giving charity. Sufis emphasize the spiritual dimension of jihad while accepting physical warfare as a means of preserving Allah's religion when necessary.¹⁵

First, al-qitāl¹⁶ (القتال). In the Qur’ān, al-qitāl refers to warfare as a form of jihad against enemies in the path of Allah. These revelations occurred in the context of Medina-era battles, indicating that jihad in the form of combat was first conducted at that time, when Muslims began facing significant threats from disbelievers.¹⁷ Second, al-ḥarb¹⁸ (الحرب). Raghib al-Asfahani defines al-ḥarb as any act of plunder committed during war time. Third, al-Ghazw¹⁹ (الغزو) in the Qur'ān refers to physical warfare against enemies in the way of Allah, this word only mentioned once in Sūrah Āli ʿImrān 3:156.²⁰ It specifically denotes military expeditions led directly by the Messenger of Allah, distinguishing it from sariyah, which refers to expeditions commanded by others. Muslims are instructed to engage in battle without adopting the attitudes of disbelievers or hypocrites. Fourth, al-Nafr²¹ (النفر) in the Qur'ān, as found in QS. Al-Taubah/9:41 refers to the command to set out for battle in the way of Allah. Fifth, irhāb²² (إرهاب). However, in the Qur’ān, it is not associated with terrorism or illegitimate acts of violence.²³

In Arabic, violence and radicalism are expressed through several terms, including al-‘unf, at-tatarruf, al-guluw, and irhāb. Al-‘unf means violence and is the antonym of ar-rifq which means gentleness. Abdullah al-Najjar defines al-‘unf as the unlawful use of force to impose one’s will.²⁴ Although the term does not appear in the Qur'ān, various Hadīths reference al-'unf and ar-rifq, emphasizing that Islam upholds gentleness and nonviolence toward all people, including non-Muslims. At-tatarruf, derived from at-tarf (edge), refers to extreme religious attitudes, whether leaning to the far right. Its opposite is al-wasath, meaning moderation, which is considered a virtuous quality in Islamic teachings. Al-guluw, refers to exceeding limits or being excessive, often associated with extreme religious behaviors.²⁵ Some Muslims exhibit al-guluw by accusing fellow Muslims of being disbelief over minor differences in jurisprudential matters (furū‘) or by displaying excessive fanaticism. The Qur'ān and the Hadīth of the Prophet strongly condemn such extremism, particularly the Hadīth narrated by Abdullah ibn Abbās, which warns against excessive religious zeal.

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِيَّاكُمْ وَالْغُلُوَّ فِي الدِّينِ فَإِنَّهُ أَهْلَكَ مَنْ كَانَ قَبْلَكُمْ الْغُلُوُّ فِي الدِّينِ²⁶

“The Prophet warned against religious excess (ghuluw), noting that overzealousness destroyed past communities.”

Several other terms that have similar connotations to ghuluw include tanattu' (tough attitude) and tasyaddud (troublesome) or takalluf (forcing yourself).²⁷ These words are also mentioned in the Prophet SAW's Hadīth, such as the one from Ibn Mas'ud that follows: From 'Abdullah he said; Rasulullah SAW has said: 'Woe to those who like to exceed limits. (He said it three times).²⁸

Extreme religious beliefs can foster extremism, including acts of terror against those who disagree. However, not all extreme radical attitudes leads to acts of terrorism.

Radicalism manifests at two levels: thought and action. Cognitively, it appears in language or concepts that incite violence. In a political context, Zuly Qadir identifies three radical movements: jihadists (who use violence in the name of jihad), reformists (who pressure the government without resorting to violence but seek to destabilize it), and rejectionists (who reject democracy). Each of these groups seeks to seize power.²⁹ According to Rubaidi, political radicalism emerges as a response to the wealth and arrogance of civilization, and this phenomenon is universal.³⁰ Second, Religious radicalism, claims to follow the "manhaj al-salaf" stricly according to the scripture without considering the modern context. Juergensmeyer argues that radical actions arise from religious beliefs and resistance to Western ideology. The National Counterterrorism Agency (BNPT) identifies five typologies of radicalism in Indonesia: Non-ideological Radicals (HTI, IM) with non-violent radical thinking; Non-Terrorist Radicals (FPI) who involved in vandalism; Militia Radicals (Laskar Jihad) who participate in communal conflicts; separatist radicals, including GAM and NII, who seek independence; and terrorist radicals, such as JI and ISIS, who use terror to impose Islamic law.³¹

Religious radicalism is frequently associated with fundamentalism, which adheres to specific ideological beliefs. Imadudin Rahmat, referring to Hrair Dekmejian, outlines the following principles: First, Din wa al-Daulah: which views a Islam comprehensive system encompassing all aspects of life, with the state obligated to execute Sharia law based on the Qur’ān and Hadīth, making no distinction between religion and governance. Second, a return to the Foundations of Early Islam: This group relies heavily on the Qur’ān and Hadīth, considering individuals or governments that do not adhere to the teachings of the Prophet and the Khulafa' Rasyidin as unbelievers who must be opposed.³² Third, Puritanism and Social Justice, which emphasize maintaining Islamic values, resisting foreign cultural influences, upholding socio-economic justice, rejecting usury, and reducing dependence on the West. Fourth, God's Sovereignty and Law, where the ultimate goal is to uphold God's sovereignty by implementing Islamic law as the highest authority.³³ Fifth, Jihad as the Main Pillar, which is regarded as the primary means to dismantle the order of ignorance and spread Islam globally, including through violent means if necessary.³⁴

In Arabic, the term “terrorist” originated from the word irhāb, derived from lexeme rahiba-yarhabu which means “fear” or “threaten.” Its masdar, rahbatan and ruhban, evolved into irhāb which meaning “to frighten” or “to intimidate.” Additionally, rahaba can also mean “tired,” “monk,” “lion,” or “spearhead.”³⁵ In the Islamic era, the word irhāb has the meaning of al-khauf which signifies fear or submission as seen in Qur’ān³⁶ as follows: “O Children of Israel, remember My blessings that I have bestowed upon you, and fulfil your promise to Me, I will surely fulfil My promise to you; and only to Me should you fear (submit).”³⁷

In Law Number 15 of 2003 Concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Terrorism, Chapter I (General Provisions), Article 1 paragraph 1, Criminal Acts of Terrorism are defined as any conduct that fulfills the element of a criminal act under the provisions of this Law. The rules of Chapter III (Criminal Acts of Terrorism), Articles 6, 7, specify that anyone might be penalised for committing Criminal Acts of Terrorism if they: (1) Intentionally use violence or threats of violence to create an atmosphere of terror or widespread fear among the public, or causes mass casualties by depriving individuals of the freedom, taking lives seizing property, or causing damage or destruction to vital strategic objects, the environment, public facilities, or international facilities.³⁸ (2) Intentionally use violence or threats of violence to create an atmosphere of terror or widespread fear among the public or cause mass casualties by seizing freedom, taking lives, seizing property, or causing damage or destruction to vital strategic objects, the environment, public facilities, or international facilities.³⁹

Radical groups often misuse the concept of jihad to justify acts of violence and terrorism, even though true jihad fundamentally contradicts such actions, including attacks on non-Muslims outside of war situations. One of the Qur’ānic verses frequently cited to justify radicalism and terrorism is Sūrah Al-Anfal, 8:60. Quraish Shihab, a renowned Qur’ānic interpreter, notes that the phrase تُرْهِبُونَ in this verse is commonly misinterpreted by terrorist groups as justification for acts of terrorism. However, the verse actually emphasizes the importance of maintaining peace, with the use of force permitted solely as a deterrent.⁴⁰ A narrow and misguided interpretation of scripture, such as that employed by Imam Samudra in the Bali bombings, contradicts Islamic principles.⁴¹ Similarly, One of the Hadīths used as a narrative for acts of terrorism is Ibn Umar's Hadīth, as narrated by al-Bukhari as follows:

عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ النَّاسَ حَتَّى يَشْهَدُوا أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَيُقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُوا الزَّكَاةَ فَإِذَا فَعَلُوا ذَلِكَ عَصَمُوا مِنِّي دِمَاءَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَّا بِحَقِّ الْإِسْلَامِ وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ⁴²

Translation: According to Ibn Umar, the prophet of Allah said, “I was commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no deity except Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Messenger, establish prayer, and pay zakat. If they do this, they have secured their blood and wealth from me (except by Islamic law), and their reckoning is with Allah.

The Hadīth on jihad is frequently misinterpreted misconstrued by jihadist groups as a justification for radicalism and terrorism, ignoring its specific context, which refers to polytheists who were actively fighting Muslims rather than all non-Muslims. They also disregard other Hadīths that condemn the killing of children, women, priests, and the destruction of religious sites.⁴³ Historically, the jihad of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was primarily defensive, aimed at protecting Muslims from aggression.⁴⁴

Hadīth "أمرت أن أقاتل الناس" (Umirtu an uqātila al-nās) has been extensively analyzed by scholars regarding its textual, contextual, and intertextual meanings. Transmitted by Ibn Majah from Abu Hurairah, this Hadīth appears in 65 chains across the six major Hadīth collections. The word أمرت, meaning "to command," signifies an order from a superior aimed at achieving a beneficial outcome.⁴⁵ A key distinction lies in the use of The term "أقاتل" (to fight) rather than "أقتل" (to kill). The term "أقاتل" implies a reciprocal, defensive action in response to aggression, rather than unilateral violence. Muhammad Said Ramadhan Al-Buthi explains that this term reflects mutual confrontation rather than unprovoked aggression, underscoring that the Prophet Muhammad did not seek to impose Islam through violence but upheld the rights of non-Muslims.⁴⁶

In interpreting the word an-nās (الناس) in the Hadīth, scholars note that while it appears general, it often refers to specific groups in Arabic. In this context, an-nās refers spesifically to polytheists engaged in hostilities against Muslims, rather than all polytheists.⁴⁷ This interpretation is reinforced by Qur’ānic.⁴⁸ Ibn Hajar and Ibn ‘Arabi emphasize that the term is general in wording, it is specific in intent, thereby excluding People of the Book and non-combatants. The historical context of the Hadīth further supports this understanding, presenting it as a defensive directive aimed at protecting the Muslim community from aggression. Sūrah at-Taubah⁴⁹ complements this interpretation by addressing specific hostilities rather than issuing indiscriminate commands.⁵⁰ Ibnul Qayyim and Yusuf Al-Qaradawi emphasize the prohibition of harming women, children, and non-combatants, highlighting Islam’s commitment to justice and ethical warfare. Their interpretations counter extremist misreadings by upholding the principles of human dignity and respect.

“The Messenger of Allah captured Tsumamah bin Utsal, a leader from Yamamah, and repeatedly offered him kindness. After three days of compassionate dialogue, Tsumamah embraced Islam, declaring, ‘I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.’ He later performed Umrah and pledged loyalty to the Prophet, ensuring wheat supplies from Yamamah required the Prophet’s permission.”⁵¹

During Abu Bakr's caliphate, wars erupted against groups that refused to pay zakat, rejected prophethood, and opposed the Muslim community. The situation in Medina after the death of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was critical, and zakat was essential for public welfare.⁵² False prophets such as al-Aswad al-‘Unsi, Tulaihah al-Asadi, Musailimah al-Kadzdzab, and Sajjah bint al-Harith posed significant threats to the Islamic faith, including Malik bin Nuwairah of Banu Yarbu’ withheld zakat from Abu Bakr. Despite Umar's initial opposition, citing a Hadīth that protects one’s life and property upon reciting the shahada—Abu Bakr insisted that shahada must be accompanied by both prayer and zakat. He justified taking firm action to uphold Islamic principles and unity.⁵³

Some jihadist groups misinterpret Hadīth on warfare against disbelievers, ignoring historical and contextual nuances. A proper understanding of these Hadīth necessitates considering their socio-political background to prevent misuse and uphold their true intent.⁵⁴

Hadīths on jihad are widely recorded in major Hadīth collections, including Sahih Bukhari (6 Hadīths), Sahih Muslim (6 Hadīths), Sunan an-Nāsai (23 Hadīths), and Sunan Ibn Majah (5 Hadīths). Other collections, such as Sunan at-Tirmidhi, Sunan Daruqutni, Sunan al-Baihaqi, and Musnad Ahmad, also contain multiple Hadīths on jihad, each offering insights into its principles and practice in Islam. One of the Hadīths on jihad that will be analyzed in this study explores the concept of dejihadization through a Hadīth-based approach. This Hadīth is narrated by Ibn Majah from Abu Hurairah, above:

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ النَّاسَ حَتَّى يَقُولُوا لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ فَإِذَا قَالُوهَا عَصَمُوا مِنِّي دِمَاءَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَّا بِحَقِّهَا وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ ⁵⁵

The significance of sanadic studies in Hadīth lies in verifying its authenticity. The Hadīth narrated by Abu Hurairah, a thiqah, (trustworthy) companion, demonstrates strong sanadic continuity through reliable narrators.⁵⁶

Abu Hurairah transmitted his Hadīth to his student, Abi Salih, who was also thiqah and remained with him for 44 years before passing away in 101 AH. Subsequently, Al-A'masy, a tsiqah expert in faraid (inheritance law), transmitted from Abi Salih using the symbol ‘an,⁵⁷ followed by Hafs Ibn Ghiyath who was confirmed tsiqah by Ibn Hajar and al-Nasa'i, indicating direct narration from Al-A'masy.⁵⁸ This Hadīth is classified as sahih li dhātihi because its sanad is free from shādh (anomalies) or ‘illah (defects), and its matan (text) aligns with the Qur’ān, Sunnah, and sound reasoning. The credibility of the narrators and the absence of textual discrepancies reinforce the authenticity of this Hadīth in both its sanad and matan.

The third step in assessing the Hadīth is to examine the circumstances surrounding its transmission, known as Asbāb al-Wurūd al-Ḥadīth (the causes of a Hadīth's descent). Understanding the historical and contextual background of a Hadīth is crucial in interpreting its intended meaning. Several events are linked to the emergence of the Hadīth امرت ان اقاتل الناس, particularly the directive given to the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) to confront hostile forces, specifically polytheists or non-Muslims engaged in aggression against Muslims. For example, in the book of al-Bayan as follows:

قَاتِلْهُمْ حَتَّى يَشْهَدُوا أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ فَإِذَا فَعَلُوا ذَلِكَ فَقَدْ مَنَعُوا مِنْكَ دِمَاءَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَّا بِحَقِّهَا وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ

Translation: “Fight them until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. If they do so, they have protected their blood and property from you, except for what is rightfully due (Islam) while their reckoning is with Allah.”

The previous Hadīth is contained in the narration of Imam Muslim, namely:

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ يَوْمَ خَيْبَرَ لَأُعْطِيَنَّ هَذِهِ الرَّايَةَ رَجُلًا يُحِبُّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ يَفْتَحُ اللَّهُ عَلَى يَدَيْهِ قَالَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ مَا أَحْبَبْتُ الْإِمَارَةَ إِلَّا يَوْمَئِذٍ قَالَ فَتَسَاوَرْتُ لَهَا رَجَاءَ أَنْ أُدْعَى لَهَا قَالَ فَدَعَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَلِيَّ بْنَ أَبِي طَالِبٍ فَأَعْطَاهُ إِيَّاهَا وَقَالَ امْشِ وَلَا تَلْتَفِتْ حَتَّى يَفْتَحَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ قَالَ فَسَارَ عَلِيٌّ شَيْئًا ثُمَّ وَقَفَ وَلَمْ يَلْتَفِتْ فَصَرَخَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ عَلَى مَاذَا أُقَاتِلُ النَّاسَ قَالَ قَاتِلْهُمْ حَتَّى يَشْهَدُوا أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ فَإِذَا فَعَلُوا ذَلِكَ فَقَدْ مَنَعُوا مِنْكَ دِمَاءَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَّا بِحَقِّهَا وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ

Translation: Abu Hurairah said: Then Ali walked away and stopped without turning his back and called out: 'O Messenger of Allah, on what basis am I fighting people? The prophet replied: "Fight them until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. If they do so, they have protected their blood and property from you, except for what is rightfully due (in Islam), while their reckoning rests with Allah.”⁵⁹

This statement provides an overview of the context of the Hadīth regarding jihad against non-Muslims, particularly during the Battle of Khaibar which took place in Muharram of the seventh year of AH. During that battle, Ali bin Abi Talib was appointed as the leader of the Muslim forces. Understanding this historical context is crucial, as radicals and extremists often overlook it, interpreting the Hadīth in a purely literal sense. The Battle of Khaybar was a strategic response to a potential external threat rather than an act of unprovoked aggression. Similarly, the Hadīth narrated by Imam Muslim from al-Miqdad bin al-Aswad and the Hadīth concerning the debate between Abu Bakr and Umar regarding those who refused to pay zakat must also be analyzed within their specific historical contexts (asbāb al-wurūd) to prevent misinterpretation. ⁶⁰

Ali Imron emphasized the importance of understanding the background of terrorism, including the informal education and non-formal skills of the perpetrators. In Indonesia, this phenomenon is closely linked to the Indonesian Islamic State (NII) movement, initiated by Kartosuwiryo in 1949 with the aim of establishing an Islamic state. This movement was continued by Darul Islam (DI) and Jamaah Islamiyah (JI) under the leadership of Abdullah Sungkar and Abu Bakar Ba'asyir, whose mission inspired acts of terror against non-Islamic groups.⁶¹ One of the short-term objectives was jihad in the form of armed struggle against non-Muslims, especially those involved in conflict with Muslim communities in Indonesia.

Ali Imron revealed that he acquired his bomb-making skills at the Afghan Mujahideen Military Academy during the war against communism (1979-1991). Around 400 members from both DI and JI , including himself, received training there, while his younger brother, Ali Fauzi, studied at the Mindanao Military Academy.⁶² The close ties between DI and JI leaders reinforced the doctrine of jihad as martyrdom, which needs to be reexamined through the lens of fiqh al-jihad. Enhancing public understanding of terrorist networks, ideologies, and doctrines is essential to support deradicalization efforts and prevent extremism.⁶³

In interviews with Kompas TV Ali Imron stated "It only takes 2 hours to become a terrorist" and Then in TV One News, he explain further “There are still many people fighting over (to become Martyrs)”.⁶⁴ underscoring the persistent appeal of jihadist ideology. Ali Imron pointed out that young individuals are particularly vulnerable to radical doctrines, as they often seek alternative ideologies when struggling with life's uncertainties and societal complexities. His insights stress the urgency of countering extremist narratives through education, critical thinking, and socio-economic support systems.⁶⁵

Imron highlights that jihadists groups justify acts of violent acts as jihad fi sabilillah based on a literal interpretation of the Qur'ān and Hadīth. Groups like Darul Islam (DI) and Jamaah Islamiyah (JI) have historically pursued the establishment of an Islamic state through violent means. However, as a former militant, Imron later realized that such actions contradict the true concept of jihad in Islam, which emphasizes ethical conduct, justice, and adherence to Qur’ānic principles. He advocates for a re-evaluation of jihad through a scientific and contextual approach to Hadīth to prevent misinterpretation and radicalization.

Ali Imron, a former terrorist involved in the 2000 Christmas Eve church bombings, explained that jihadists often exploit inter-religious conflicts as a "field of jihad." Since the fall of the New Order, Indonesia has faced significant religious tensions, leading to conflicts in Ambon, Poso, Sampang, and the Tanjung Balai temple burnings. These tensions have provided extremist groups with recruitment opportunities and justifications for violence. Imron highlighted that many terrorist acts, such as the 2002 Bali Bombing, were motivated by revenge for past conflicts. In particular, the Bali attack was a response to U.S. military actions in Afghanistan after 9/11, targeting American tourists as symbols of Western influence.⁶⁶

Ali Imron emphasized that strengthening religious harmony is a crucial deradicalization strategy in Indonesia, where inter-religious tensions and geopolitical factors often fuel terrorism. Despite the presence of around 400 Afghan terrorist alumni reside in the country, only a fraction have executed attacks, indicating some success in government and civilian efforts to curb extremism. However, the risk of resurgence remains if the underlying conditions persist. The state must regulate sensitive religious issues and address hate speech that fosters division.⁶⁷ Imron stressed the need for the state to regulate sensitive religious issues and curb hate speech that fosters division. He also highlighted the role of "half-radical" groups that undermine Pancasila, conspiracy theories driven by political actors, and the importance of educating the public about the exclusive involvement of Darul Islam (DI) and Jamaah Islamiyah (JI) in these acts of terrorism.

Hasan, Peter Beyer, and Badrus Salih argue that involvement in extremism, jihadism, and terrorism is not solely due to misinterpretations of jihad texts but is also influenced by complex economic and political factors. Ali Fauzi, a former terrorist in Indonesia, supports this view, emphasizing that the roots of terrorism require multidimensional solutions. After his arrest, he founded the Lingkar Peace Foundation in Tenggulun Village, Lamongan, to rehabilitate ex-convicts through life skills training, economic empowerment, and worship trips.⁶⁸ Despite facing threats from former radical sympathisers, Ali Fauzi continues to strive for rehabilitation and dialogue for peace and reintegration.⁶⁹

4. Conclusion

This study highlights the importance of understanding the roots of terrorism, including the informal education and skills of perpetrators. The misinterpretation of jihad as warfare often arises from doctrines accepted uncritically, making radicalization a swift process, particularly for individuals experiencing alienation or life uncertainty. Military training abroad enhances technical expertise in bomb-making and combat strategies, reinforcing extremist beliefs. Social conflicts and interreligious tensions are frequently exploited to justify acts of violence as jihad, driven by a misinterpertation of religious teachings. Countering extremism requires strengthening scientific approaches to religious studies, particularly through Hadīth analysis. Promoting social harmony is a key deradicalisation strategy, with the state playing a crucial role in regulating sensitive issues and addressing hate speech. Economic and political factors also contribute to terrorism, emphasizing the need for comprehensive solutions. Rehabilitation programs for former extremists have proven effective in preventing re-radicalization and facilitating social reintegration. A holistic approach that combines education, social stability, and policy interventions is essential for combating radicalism, fostering peace, and ensuring long-term security.

Conflict of Interest

The authors of the manuscript have no financial or non-financial conflict of interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

The data associated with this study will be provided by the corresponding author upon request.

Funding Details

The researcher (Muhammad Hafis) would like to thank the Indonesian Education Fund Management Institution (LPDP) as a supporter of publication funds, State Islamic University (UIN) Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, Indonesia  for supporting the research.