Beyond Textual Literalism

Islamic Legal Interpretation and Religious Moderation among Nahdlatul Ulama Youth in Bone Regency

Abstract

Radical religious narratives are often reinforced by literalist and decontextualized interpretations of Islamic texts that overlook their historical circumstances and the broader objectives of Islamic law (maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah). This study examines how young Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) activists in Bone Regency, South Sulawesi, construct religious understandings of radicalism and promote contextual approaches to Islamic interpretation. Employing a qualitative socio-legal approach, the research draws on in-depth interviews with young NU leaders affiliated with NU autonomous organizations, observations of religious study sessions, and documentary analysis of official NU publications. The data were analyzed through thematic analysis, supported by normative examination of relevant principles of Islamic jurisprudence (uṣūl al-fiqh). The findings indicate that NU youth understand radicalism as a manifestation of religious extremism (al-taṭarruf al-dīnī), which may be associated with rigid textual interpretations, political frustration, and crises of religious identity. In response, they develop contextual interpretations of religious texts, particularly verses frequently invoked to legitimize violence. Their interpretive strategies draw on uṣūl al-fiqh principles, including al-amr ba‘da al-nahy li al-ibāḥah, to distinguish context-dependent religious commands from universal normative obligations. This approach positions religious moderation not merely as an ideological commitment but also as a form of Islamic legal reasoning grounded in contextual interpretation and the pursuit of public welfare. This study contributes to Islamic legal studies and socio-legal scholarship by demonstrating how localized youth-led religious engagement can challenge extremist narratives and strengthen contextual approaches to Islamic legal understanding within Muslim communities in Indonesia.