Rethinking The Contemporary Discourse of Jihād

Abstract

This article purposes to evaluate the phenomenon of domination of combative jihadism and factors that have conditioned the domination. It also evaluates whether the dominant concept of jihād can be paralleled to the Western concept of “just war”. It can be argued that normatively Islam recognises two forms of jihād namely the greater jihād (self-purification and improvement) and the lesser jihād (combative war). Historically, the contemporary discourse of jihād has been dominated by its combative meaning, however. This domination has been conditioned by several factors, such as the growth of the ideology of radical Islamism, the Western hegemonic behaviour, globalisation and the absence of alternative narratives. This article finds that, furthermore, the dominant concept of jihād, in a legalistic view, is relatively similar to the Western concept of just war, although, in reality, it tends to be illegal or “breaking the law”. It discusses the normative and historical meanings of jihād, the factors that have been conditioning the domination of combative jihadism, and jihād and just war.

Ulama and Radicalism in Contemporary Indonesia: Response of Al Washliyah’s Ulama on Radicalism

“…The most important type of jihād in Indonesia is jihād against lust and jihād against the temptations of Satan. From the explanation above, it can be seen that the ulama of Al Washliyah refuse the notion of Jihad as a "holy war" to crush the infidels as what is thought by radical fundamentalist groups (Bachtiar et al, 2019). The ulama of Al Washliyah also found errors from interpretation made by radical groups in interpreting verses related to jihād, which is one of several factors driving the emergence of radicalism and terrorism (Zuhdi, 2019).…”