<![CDATA[This article examines the tension between the normative ideals of wasathiyyah (moderation) articulated in the hadith tradition and their historical implementation in early Islam. While previous studies have primarily focused on the theological and ethical dimensions of Islamic moderation, limited attention has been given to the relationship between normative hadith teachings and the political realities that emerged after the Prophet Muhammad’s death. Employing a thematic hadith analysis combined with a historical-critical approach, this study analyzes selected hadiths on moderation, balance, anti-extremism (ghuluw), and the fulfillment of rights, alongside historical sources concerning the Medina Charter and early Islamic political developments. The findings demonstrate that the hadith tradition consistently promotes moderation as an ethical framework grounded in justice, balance, and proportionality. These principles were institutionally embodied in the Prophet’s leadership, particularly through the Medina Charter, which provided a model for managing religious and social diversity. However, the study finds that post-Prophetic political conflicts, succession disputes, and sectarian contestations complicated the realization of these ideals, transforming wasathiyyah from a lived political ethic into a contested moral aspiration. Theoretically, this study argues that wasathiyyah should be understood not merely as a theological doctrine but as a dynamic ethical framework whose implementation is shaped by historical and political contexts. By integrating normative hadith analysis with historical inquiry, the article contributes to contemporary scholarship on Islamic moderation, pluralism, and the relationship between religious ideals and political practice.]]>
