The Epistemological Foundations of the Tarjih Methodology in Contemporary Muhammadiyah

Abstract

This article systematically reviews the epistemological foundations of the Tarjih methodology in contemporary Muhammadiyah. Rather than treating Manhaj Tarjih as a list of legal techniques, the review examines the assumptions through which religious knowledge is sourced, validated, integrated, authorized, and revised. The findings identify five connected foundations. First, the Qur'an and Sunnah al-Maqbulah constitute the normative horizon, but their interpretation is understood as human, fallible, and open to tajdid. Second, bayani reasoning provides textual, linguistic, hadith-critical, and juristic controls. Third, burhani reasoning incorporates rational demonstration, causal explanation, empirical sciences, and multidisciplinary analysis of reality. Fourth, irfani reasoning operates primarily as ethical-spiritual vigilance, moderating textual rigidity and rational instrumentalism rather than functioning as an autonomous source of law. Fifth, collective ijtihad institutionalizes validation through deliberation, expertise, organizational authorization, and the possibility of revision. Maqasid and the hierarchy of basic values, universal principles, and detailed rules mediate the movement from sources to practical judgments. The synthesis characterizes this structure as critical revelational foundationalism combined with spiral epistemic pluralism. Its strength lies in connecting scriptural fidelity with scientific and social knowledge; its principal weakness lies in uneven operationalization, especially of irfani reasoning, and insufficient disclosure of how epistemic components are weighted in particular decisions. The article proposes an integrative architecture for evaluating Tarjih decisions as products of institutional epistemic governance.