Abstract
Teacher-directed aggression by students has become a documented, cross-national occupational hazard, yet prevailing institutional responses rely almost exclusively on Western behavior-management and surveillance-based interventions that address only its behavioral symptoms. This study responds to the resulting gap in Islamic educational leadership scholarship by constructing a Prophetic Leadership Framework that hermeneutically re-contextualizes the Ulul Azmi, the five resolute prophets, as a pedagogical archetype for contemporary teachers. Employing a qualitative-philosophical inquiry, the study applies three sequential procedures: textual exegesis of Qur'anic prophetic narratives, thematic synthesis of classical and modern Islamic educational thought, and philosophical construction of an applied model. The analysis derives five interdependent attributes, resolute persistence, critical intellect, righteous advocacy, transformative compassion, and comprehensive integrity, drawn respectively from Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, and Muhammad, and maps each attribute onto a specific station of a six-stage self-regulatory cycle adapted from classical Ghazalian spiritual psychology. The study further situates this framework within the decolonial theory of education and the emerging literature on teacher moral injury, arguing that internalized, prophetically modeled authority addresses not only student aggression but the ethical harm that carceral discipline inflicts on teachers themselves. Findings indicate that teacher authority reconstituted through exemplary representation and rightful conduct offers a structurally different mechanism for reducing student aggression than external surveillance, one grounded in internalized moral accountability rather than deterrence. The study concludes that decolonizing teacher leadership in Islamic schools requires reuniting spiritual exemplarity with concrete institutional safeguards, including legal clarification of disciplinary authority and restorative ethics mechanisms, so that spiritual authority remains accountable rather than unchecked. The framework is offered as a testable, indigenous alternative to behaviorist discipline models, with explicit limitations concerning its Naqshbandi-influenced theological grounding and untested empirical status.