Kalimantan, especially southern Kalimantan, has a rich and unique Islamic treasure, formed by a network of great scholars whose works are the main references. Two names that are inseparable from the intellectual history of Islam on the island are Sheikh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari (1710-1812) and Muhammad Basiuni Imran (1908-1976). Shaykh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari, nicknamed "datu Kelampayan, was a scholar who laid the foundation of the Islamic scientific tradition of Banjar through his monumental work, the tafsir of the Qur'an al-Karim al-Muyassar (better known as tafsir al-Banjari) and the book of Fiqh Sabilul Muhtadin. Meanwhile, Muhammad Basiuni Imran was a reformist scholar from West Kalimantan who wrote a simple commentary on the Qur'an.

The Muhammadiyah movement, as an Islamic organization, brought the idea of renewal (tajdid) in the early 20th century, marking a new chapter in the development of Islam in Kalimantan. Muhammadiyah, with its approach to religious thought that emphasizes the purity of faith and modernization of education, began to interact and, in some ways, dialectically with the established Islamic tradition whose intellectual heritage was built by scholars such as Sheikh Arsyad al-Banjari.

It is in this context that the following two problem formulations emerge to be examined:

First, regarding the relevance of Muhammadiyah's interpretation to the two mufassiri. The interpretation developed within Muhammadiyah, both individually by its members and institutionally (such as the tarjih assembly), is not born out of a vacuum; it is part of a long series of traditions of interpretation in the archipelago. The question that arises is whether there is a direct intellectual genealogical relationship, either direct or indirect, between the interpretation of Muhammadiyah and the methodology used by sheikh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari and Muhammad Basiuni Imran. For example, even though they are different times, can these two mufassir be seen as "proto-muhammadiyah" in terms of the spirit of educating the ummah through an easy-to-understand interpretation of the Qur'an? Or there is a fundamental difference in the approach and emphasis of the interpretation material.

Second, regarding the relevance of their interpretation methods to religious development in Kalimantan. These two scholars have a distinctive method. Sheikh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari uses a lot of riwayah (narration) approach by referring to classical books of tafsir in Arabic, while Basiuni Imran writes his tafsir in simple and easily digestible Malay, a method that is in line with the spirit of Muhammadiyah da'wah. These methods have shaped the way the people of Kalimantan understand religion for centuries.

The interaction between classical heritage and ideas of renewal created a dynamic and complex landscape of religious thought in Borneo. On the one hand, the scientific tradition of Sheikh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari which is encyclopedic and transmittive, remains a solid foundation. On the other hand, Muhammad Basiuni Imran's more pedagogical-contextual approach represents a new spirit for Islamic teachings to be more applicable and affordable to the general public.

Muhammadiyah, as an organization, comes with its own methodological framework, namely the tarjih method that emphasizes strong evidence, the use of reason in line with naql, and the principle of al-ruju' ila al-qur’an wa sunnah al-shahihah (return to the Qur'an and sunnah).

This study is also motivated by the contemporary phenomenon where the muslim community in Kalimantan, as in other regions, is faced with the challenge of a very diverse religious understanding, ranging from textual-literalist to liberal-secularist thinking. In this frenzy, understanding the roots of local tafsir traditions is a must to build a contextual, moderate, and inseparable Islamic discourse from its historical roots. By tracing the relevance of Muhammadiyah's interpretation with the two great mufassirs of Kalimantan, this study seeks not only to dissect the past, but also to provide perspective and insight for the development of constructive Islamic discourse in Kalimantan in the future.

This study uses qualitative research methods. Research that yields discoveries that cannot be achieved by statistical means or procedures [1]. This research method aims to understand the object being studied in depth by trying to understand and interpret the meaning of an event [2].

This research is also a type of library research [3]. Researchers use this type of research to explore and identify information (updated 2022). In this case, a comparative study of the methodology of the interpretation of the Qur'an by Kalimantan scholars and its relevance to Muhammadiyah thought: a case study of Muhammad Basiuni Imran and Sheikh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari.

Muhammadiyah, as a modern movement, has developed a methodology and ideology of interpretation that is distinctive, different from the classical tradition. This approach is fundamentally tied to a social mission and is driven by collective institutional mechanisms, making it a unique social and renewal machine.

Muhammadiyah interpretation does not strictly follow the framework of conventional interpretation analysis, which usually distinguishes the method into three forms: riwaya, ra'yi, and isyari [3]. Similarly, he did not fully follow the four methods.

Tafsir in Indonesia: tahlili, ijtimai, muqaran, and maudhu'i(August 2014). On the other hand, Muhammadiyah's tafsir works are mainly grouped based on the systematics of their presentation, namely systematic and thematic [4].

A prime example of the collapsed approach is the Tafsir al-Azhar by Prof. Dr. Hamka, which is composed in its entirety of 30 juz following the order of the standard mushaf. Although systematic, this work still shows thematic characteristics by grouping the verses in each surah to highlight the central theme, making it easier for the reader to understand the meaning of the verse as a whole [5]. On the other hand, Muhammadiyah also compiled other monumental works, such as tafsir at-tanwir, which explicitly uses a thematic approach. This collective project involves 25 interpreters responsible for specific themes, who are then coordinated in an editing team to harmonize the length and style of the language [6].

This thematic approach is very crucial because it allows the interpretation of Muhammadiyah to focus on contemporary social, economic, and political issues, beyond just the ritual aspect. This makes the interpretation of Muhammadiyah very relevant to the challenges of the times and the needs of modern society, playing an important role in shaping a dynamic religious understanding [7].

The core of the Muhammadiyah movement is the concept of tajdid (renewal) and purification (purification). However, the purification of aqidah, which is described as the sharpening of monotheism, is not the ultimate goal but rather the central point that underlies and encourages social activity. According to Muhammadiyah, monotheism must be translated into historical-empirical reality with the aim of "humanizing humans.”

This understanding directly gives birth to a pragmatic social mission. Muhammadiyah established various social institutions, such as hospitals (pku), educational institutions, and nursing homes as a tangible manifestation of purified monotheistic theology[8]. The relationship between theological beliefs and social action shows that the Muhammadiyah tajdid movement is not rigid, but is a response to the dehumanization and challenges of contemporary society [8].

This movement also faces challenges in applying the concept of tajdid in areas rich in local wisdom, such as in Central Java. This practical adjustment or so-called acculturation is carried out by Muhammadiyah leaders so that the concept of renewal can run well and exist in a heterogeneous society, proving that their approach is not a top-down coercion, but a careful adaptation [9].

Muhammadiyah's attitude towards religious issues also reflects its commitment to rationality and modern science, one of the most prominent examples being its official view that it prefers the use of hisab (astronomical calculations) over rukyat (lunar observation) to determine the beginning of the hijri month. this position is based on the belief that hisab provides higher accuracy and is a systematic and reliable approach [10]. this commitment is very important because it shows that the renewal in Muhammadiyah is not only theological, but also methodological, where scientific accuracy is considered an integral part of religious practice.

The collective and institutional aspects of Muhammadiyah's tajdid are the main differences from the model represented by the other two figures. the resulting interpretations, such as the at-tanwir tafsir compiled by a team [11], are a reflection of the movement's mission. the authority of interpretation is no longer centered on a charismatic cleric, but on an organized and continuous system. therefore, the interpretation of Muhammadiyah is inherently pragmatic and socially oriented.

The works of Muhammad Basiuni Imran's tafsir, such as the tafsir of the seven surahs and the tafsir ash-siyam, show a great influence of the tafsir al-manar by Muhammad Rashid Ridha [11]. Some studies have even concluded that these works are translations and summaries of Tafsir al-Manar, which are presented in Malay in Jawi script to make it easier for the local community to understand [12].

Although the sources are textual and literal, Muhammad Basiuni Imran's approach to their presentation is very contextual. He used a method called "cultural enculturation [13].” He took Middle Eastern reformist writings, summarized them, and presented them in local languages and scripts[13]. The main objective is to protect the understanding of the Sambas Malay community from practices that are contrary to the teachings of Islam and to prevent blind taqlid towards certain madzhab sutus, taking into account the local socio-cultural reality [14].

Muhammad Basiuni Imran showed a progressive attitude that was in line with modernism, especially in legal issues. he advocates the use of hisab (astronomical calculations) rather than rukyat (lunar observation) to determine the beginning of the hijri month. This view, which is in line with Muhammadiyah, shows its commitment to scientific knowledge and places it as part of a wider intellectual network that promotes hisab in the archipelago, including its teacher, Sheikh Tahir Jalaluddin.

He also showed flexibility in fiqh, willing to deviate from the dominant opinion of the Shafi'i madzhab, as in the case of Friday prayers. This attitude shows that he is not a muqallid (blind follower) but a mujtahid (decision-maker) who considers the socio-cultural conditions of his society. Thus, his thinking presents an interesting synthesis: he can be a "textualist" in his source of knowledge (adopting the Tafsir al-Manar) and at the same time a "contextualist" in his application (translating and adapting the message for a local audience).

Sabilal Muhtadin is known as a comprehensive fiqh book that describes madzhab Shafi'i, but Shaykh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari not only refers to prominent scholars, but also introduces his independent perspective on Islamic law [15]. His methodology in interpreting the verses of the law combines textual evidence (riwayah) with rational analysis (ra'yi), including the use of metaphors and logical reasoning [16].

A crucial point in his thinking is the use of 'urf (local customs or customs) as one of the methods of ijtihad. An example can be seen in his fatwa regarding disfellowshipping that faces or turns his back to the qibla. He distinguishes the law between a place that is indeed provided (a toilet) and an open place. If it is done in a toilet that has a barrier wall, the act is not makruh or haram, an adaptation of universal law to the local physical reality [17].

The thought of Muhammad Arsyad Al-Banjari is also characterized by the paradigm of "neo-sufism," which combines bayani (textual), irfani (intuitive), and burhani (rational) approaches [18]. However, one of the important meeting points with Muhammadiyah was its rationalist spirit. Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari was a pioneer in the use of scientific methods and astronomical observations to straighten the direction of the Nusantara Qibla, a practice that was later adopted by K.H. Ahmad Dahlan, the founder of Muhammadiyah [19].

This shows that the impulse for renewal and integration of rationality is not a phenomenon that only appears in the modern era, but is rooted in the scientific tradition of the archipelago. K.h. Ahmad Dahlan not only imported the idea of tajdid from the Middle East, but also built on the foundations laid by scholars such as Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari, who had integrated empirical science into religious practice.

Comparative analysis of these three subjects shows that the relevance of Muhammadiyah tafsir lies in its position as the most successful institutional form of a long-term intellectual project.

There is the same spirit of tajdid that crosses different eras. These three entities, in their respective contexts, seek to revitalize Islamic practices. In particular, there is a striking harmony in the use of rationality and science:

The following is a table that summarizes the comparison of methodologies and intellectual meeting points of the three:

The comparative table 1 presents a clear mapping of the methodological, historical, and intellectual distinctions among Muhammadiyah, Muhammad Basiuni Imran, and Sheikh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari. The structure effectively highlights how each exegetical tradition emerges from a specific socio-historical setting—ranging from the pre-modern clerical-state context of al-Banjari, through the transitional intellectual milieu of Basiuni Imran, to the modern institutional reformism of Muhammadiyah.

The “Intellectual genealogy” row is particularly valuable, as it situates each figure or movement within its broader scholarly networks: the Haramain and neo-Sufi tradition for al-Banjari, the Egyptian modernist and Ridha-influenced circle for Basiuni Imran, and the global-modernist Islamic reform movement for Muhammadiyah. This positioning helps explain the distinct interpretive tendencies observed in their respective tafsir methods. In terms of methodology, the table successfully demonstrates the evolution from riwāyah-based and fiqh-oriented interpretation (al-Banjari), to contextual and intertextual summary-style interpretation (Basiuni Imran), culminating in Muhammadiyah’s thematic and collective hermeneutics. This progression underscores a shift from individual, scholar-centered exegesis toward a more institutional, collaborative, and semantically oriented approach.

The final row on model tajdīd captures the varying modes of religious renewal—from the cleric-state synergy of the 18th century, through the pioneering yet individual reformist effort of Basiuni Imran, to the modern collective-institutional tajdīd of Muhammadiyah. This helps reveal how structures of authority shape the nature and impact of exegetical renewal in different eras. Overall, the table effectively synthesizes complex historical and methodological data into a comparative framework that highlights both continuity and transformation within the trajectory of tafsir in the Malay-Indonesian world.

Table 2 effectively highlights the shared intellectual intersections among Muhammadiyah, Muhammad Basiuni Imran, and Sheikh Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari, especially in two core domains: hisab–rukyat and the integration of rationality in religious practice. Although each figure or movement emerges from a different historical context, the table successfully shows that they converge on a reformist epistemology grounded in scientific reasoning, empirical accuracy, and critical engagement with tradition.

In the section on Hisab & Rukyat, the table demonstrates that all three positions express a clear inclination toward rational, calculation-based methods. Muhammadiyah institutionalizes this approach by prioritizing hisab as a more accurate and systematic method for determining time-related worship. Basiuni Imran shows a similar orientation, shaped by the influence of reformist scholars such as Sheikh Tahir Jalaluddin. Meanwhile, al-Banjari—though pre-modern—already exhibits a proto-scientific attitude, pioneering astronomical calculations for qibla determination. This continuity across centuries indicates that the “scientific turn” in Nusantara Islamic practice is not solely a modern phenomenon but has deep roots in earlier scholarly traditions.

The row on Rationality Integration further strengthens this point. All three perspectives emphasize the use of reason (‘aql) and empirical knowledge as legitimate tools in religious interpretation. Muhammadiyah formalizes the integration of scientific knowledge—especially astronomy—into its jurisprudential practice. Basiuni Imran applies rational critique to challenge taqlīd and validate fiqh through logical reasoning. Al-Banjari similarly incorporates rational calculations in matters of qibla direction and broader ijtihad. Together, these data points show a consistent intellectual strand: a commitment to harmonizing revelation with rational inquiry.

Overall, the table underscores that despite differences in era, institutional structure, and interpretive style, Muhammadiyah, Basiuni Imran, and al-Banjari share a common epistemological foundation rooted in scientific reasoning and critical engagement with tradition. These meeting points help establish a historical continuum that challenges the assumption that Islamic rational reform in Indonesia is purely a modern import, showing instead that it is part of a longer indigenous intellectual trajectory.

Despite their similarities, there are significant differences in the mode of tajdid they represent. Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari operated in a model of state patronage, where his influence was closely linked to his support from the banjar sultanate. In contrast, Muhammad Basiuni Imran was an individual pioneer who represented modernist thought through his own work, which unfortunately did not continue institutionally after his departure [20]. Muhammadiyah, on the other hand, represents a collective and institutional model. His authority does not depend on a single charismatic figure, but on an organized system, such as the arjih and tajdid assemblies.

There are also ideological differences, especially between the purification of Muhammadiyah and the traditionalism of Banjar[21]. Despite all parties' efforts to purify, Muhammadiyah's approach is often seen as more puritanical and less syncretic than the banjar tradition, which is rich in local ceremonies such as baayun maulid and batampung tawar [21].

In the end, the relevance of Muhammadiyah's tafsir and tajdid lies not in its claim as the final stage of the evolution of renewal, but in its success as the most adaptive and sustainable form of institutionalization. Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari remains relevant as a precursor who shows that pre-modern tajdid can be contextual and rational, a foundation that the modernists later built. Muhammad Basiuni Imran is relevant as a bridge that directly connects Middle Eastern reformist thought with local audiences, demonstrating how an idea can be translated, summarized, and internalized to meet the needs of society.

Muhammadiyah strengthens this legacy by transitioning scientific authority from an individual persona to a collective movement. The resulting interpretation is now the work of a team, not the work of a single genius. This post-individualistic model is the main reason why Muhammadiyah can survive and continue to be relevant in the midst of changing times. These three intellectual currents, in the end, together form a rich and dynamic Indonesian Islamic tapestry, demonstrating its capacity to adapt to context, dialogue with tradition, and embrace modernity.

The relevance of Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari lies in his ability to institutionalize and systematize the teachings of Islam. Its main legacy is not only in the form of written works, but also in sustainable educational institutions. The "kampung dalam pagar" which he founded became the first Islamic boarding school in Kalimantan and gave birth to many prominent scholars who spread Islam throughout the archipelago [25]. This educational model has become a blueprint for many Islamic boarding schools in South Kalimantan.

The enduring influence of his thoughts is also immortalized in physical and symbolic form. The name of his work, Sabilal Muhtadin, is now the name of the great mosque in Banjarmasin (Drs. KH. Darul Quthni, M.H., Samsul Rani, S, Ag, M, Si, Drs. Humaidy, M, Ag, Agung Nugroho, M, Si, Drs. H. Syukriyansyah, M.M, Drs. H. Ahmad Nawawi, M. Si, Fiska Ilyasir, M 2022). This mosque not only functions as a center of worship, but also as an educational center, continuing the vision of Sheikh al-Banjari in fostering a cadre of scholars (Drs. KH. Darul Quthni, M.H., Samsul Rani, S, Ag, M, Si, Drs. Humaidy, M, Ag, Agung Nugroho, M, Si, Drs. H. Syukriyansyah, M.M, Drs. H. Ahmad Nawawi, M. Si, Fiska Ilyasir, M 2022). In other words, his method of interpretation and his solid approach to fiqh in the Shafi'i school have become a bastion of faith and sharia in the region, providing a stable foundation in the midst of various challenges of modern Islamic understanding.

The relevance of Muhammad Basiuni Imran lies in the reformist model he offers, which prioritizes dynamism and responsiveness. He was the driving force behind Islamic education reform in Sambas by establishing Madrasah Al-Sulthaniyah and Tarbiyatul Islam [27]. These institutions integrated 'aqli (scientific) and naqli (revelation) knowledge, a progressive idea of its time [28].

In the field of fiqh, he showed flexibility by using ijtihad to resolve contemporary issues faced by his society, such as differences of opinion regarding the practice of Friday prayers and the tradition of talkin mayit [29]. His non-blind approach to a particular sect encourages the ummah to think openly and realistically. This is a very important legacy, since it shows that Islam is a religion that can continue to dialogue with social reality without sacrificing its basic principles. This model is very relevant in the context of da'wah based on local wisdom and religious moderation today.

Although separated by time and space, the methods of interpretation of Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari and Muhammad Basyuni Imran have the same goal: to integrate and institutionalize Islamic teachings in Kalimantan. However, their approaches are very different, a difference that can be understood from the context of their respective times.

Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari lived in the pre-colonial era, where the main challenge was to purify the aqidah and provide clear practical guidance for the newly converted muslims. His strict and madzhab Shafi'i approach to fiqh is a direct response to this need. On the contrary, Muhammad Basiuni Imran lives in the modern era, where the challenge is no longer just to purify the aqidah, but also to face the influx of ideas from outside and maintain the relevance of Islam in the midst of social changes. His reformist approach that takes ideas from the Middle East but mixes them with local wisdom is a different but equally effective strategy.

The legacies of these two scholars are not contradictory, but complementary. Shaykh al-Banjari's method of interpretation creates a religious structure that is organized, solid, and adheres to the principles of the Shafi'i school. This strong foundation is essential for forming a stable religious identity. On the other hand, Muhammad Basiuni Imran's approach shows how the foundation can be applied flexibly to deal with modern and local issues [30]. He taught that Islam is not a static ideology, but a framework that can interact with social reality.

Collectively, their heritage shapes the religious landscape in Borneo that is unique: al-Banjari provides depth and theological stability, while Basiuni Imran contributes to its scope and social relevance. Both provide different models for a moderate understanding of Islam in Indonesia.

Their heritage is not only recorded in the history books, but lives and develops in the Kalimantan society until now.

The table 4 presents a useful comparative overview of the types of intellectual and institutional legacies left by Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari and Muhammad Basiuni Imran, along with their contemporary manifestations and relevance. Overall, the table highlights how the influence of these two scholars persists across different domains—institutional, educational, intellectual, and da'wah—while also adapting to the changing religious landscape of contemporary Indonesia.

For Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari, the table shows that his legacy is primarily institutional and intellectual, embedded in enduring structures such as the Sabilal Muhtadin Grand Mosque and the pesantren (Islamic boarding school) system in South Kalimantan. These institutions continue to function as guardians of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama‘ah (Aswaja) and the Shafi‘i school of jurisprudence. Their sustained relevance demonstrates the long-term impact of al-Banjari’s work, which not only shaped religious life in his own era but also continues to serve as a stabilizing force amid the challenges of new Islamic movements and shifting theological discourses. His legacy reflects the strength of pre-modern scholarly authority embedded in community institutions.

For Muhammad Basiuni Imran, the table emphasizes a different type of heritage—one rooted in thought and da'wah. His contextual preaching in Sambas, his rejection of blind taqlīd, and his establishment of educational institutions underscore his role as a reformist thinker during the transitional period of early 20th-century Southeast Asian Islam. The continued appreciation of his da'wah model, particularly its grounding in local wisdom and moderate reasoning, illustrates how his intellectual contributions remain relevant today. They offer a framework for addressing contemporary religious tensions while promoting a balanced, principle-based approach to Islamic practice.

Taken together, the table effectively shows how both scholars represent two complementary modes of Islamic legacy:

Their respective inheritances continue to shape contemporary Islamic education, religious life, and community resilience in the region, illustrating the enduring interplay between traditional authority and reformist thought within Nusantara Islam.

This research shows that the methodology of interpretation and religious thought of Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari and Muhammad Basyuni Imran has a deep relevance and compatibility with the manhaj tajdid of Muhammadiyah. This conformity is divided into two main aspects: ideology and orthopraxia

Ideologically, the two scholars are pioneers of reform who have the spirit of anti-taqlid and purification, in line with the basic principles of Muhammadiyah. Both emphasize the importance of returning to the Qur'an and as-sunnah as the main source of law, while rejecting religious practices that are considered deviant. In addition, they adopt a rational and contextual approach in understanding the teachings of Islam, which means that their thinking not only adheres to the text, but is also able to integrate it with social realities and the development of the times, characteristics that are also prominent in Muhammadiyah thought.

Orthopraxically, their thinking has shaped the daily worship rituals among the Muslim community of Kalimantan. Muhammad Arsyad al-Banjari's monumental work, the book Sabilal Muhtadin, is the main reference in worship practices such as taharah, prayer, zakat, and fasting, which reflects the strict practice of fiqh shafi'i. Meanwhile, Muhammad Basiuni Imran complemented with an emphasis on understanding the essence and relevance of worship in modern life.

The influence of the thoughts of these two scholars did not stop in their time. Its scientific heritage continues to live and develop, becoming the object of intensive study by young academics and researchers at institutions such as UIN Antasari and IAIN Pontianak. In addition, their thinking has been an inspiration for contemporary mufassir and has become a major topic in several scholarly forums, confirming its enduring relevance in the Islamic scientific tradition in Indonesia, especially in the context of tajdid.

Azmil Iman Hartafan: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration. Andri Nirwana AN & Ainur Rhain: Methodology, Writing – review & editing, Investigation.

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to all those who have supported this research. Special thanks are extended to Andri Nirwana AN and Dr Ainur Rhain as the main supervisor for his expert guidance, valuable advice, and continuous encouragement throughout the entire research and writing process. The support from the University of Muhammadiyah Surakarta in providing resources and an academic environment conducive to this study is also gratefully acknowledged.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

This research did not receive any financial support.