“传统主义者”一词本身是一个反应性的术语。这个词之所以必须被创造出来，是为了将其与“现代主义”和“改革派穆斯林”区分开来。传统主义者的根本特征在于尊重past穆斯林先贤的智识，并对现代例外论的正当性持怀疑态度。相反，现代主义者则怀疑past穆斯林先贤的智识，并坚定地相信现代例外论。

Being a “traditionalist” Muslim is a reactionary term. The term had to be coined in order to make the necessary distinction against “modernist” and “reformist Muslim.” The defining feature of a traditionalist is respect for the intellect of past Muslims and a skepticism in the validity of modern exceptionalism. The modernist, in contrast, is skeptical of the intellect of past Muslims and a firm believer in modern exceptionalism.

换言之，现代主义者认为我们生活在一个独特的时代，这使得我们必须以前所未有的方式践行伊斯兰教。现代主义者还往往认为，在当今时代，我们拥有过去穆斯林所不曾掌握的独特知识，而这些知识使我们有权以前所未有的方式践行伊斯兰教。

In other words, modernists believe we live in a unique time and that that necessitates practicing Islam in a way that it has never been practiced before. Modernists also tend to believe that, in modern times, we have unique knowledge that past Muslims were not privy to, and that knowledge licenses us to practice Islam in a way that it has never been practiced before.

传统主义者则认为，这种论证不仅缺乏说服力，甚至是不合理的。现代有什么独特之处，竟值得人们采纳前所未有的信仰和做法？过去1400年来，我们仍然是同一个物种，有着相同的需求、相同的基本心理结构、相同的倾向和相同的弱点。这并不是说伊斯兰教法不容许某些随时间和地点而变化的调整。但我们的时代并不足以特殊到能够证明现代主义者所主张的某些事情的合理性。

The traditionalist, on the other hand, finds this reasoning not only unconvincing but even irrational. What is so unique about modern times that merits the adoption of unprecedented beliefs and practices? Over the past 1400 years, we are still the same species with the same needs and basic mental makeup, the same tendencies, the same weaknesses. Which is not to say that the Sharia does not accommodate certain kinds of changes and variation across time and place. But our times are not exceptional and unique enough to even begin to justify some of the things modernists call for.

传统主义者也尊重过去1400年间穆斯林学者整体的智慧与精神洞察力。如果某些信仰与做法为绝大多数学者（甚至全部学者）所坚持，这本身就是这些信仰与做法正确且可靠的证据。乌玛不会在错误上达成一致。我们有什么特别之处？凭借何种独特的智识能力，竟敢违背历史上的一致共识？

Traditionalists also respect the intellect and spiritual insight of the collective body of Muslim scholarship over the past 1400 years. If there are beliefs and practices that the vast majority of, if not all, scholars upheld, that in itself is evidence of the validity and soundness of those beliefs/ practices. The community does not agree on error. What makes us so special, what unique intellectual capacity do we have to go against the tide of historical unanimity?