Introduction
There is a persistent myth, widely believed both within Muslim communities and outside them, that “religious” Muslims, those who pray, fast, and openly identify with Islam, are living embodiments of the faith’s actual teachings. Mosques are full of such people: men who pray five times daily, women who fast every Ramadan, families who send their children to Qur’an school, all convinced they are following the example of Muhammad and the first generations of Muslims. If asked, they’ll proudly describe themselves as “practicing” or even “devout,” and look with suspicion or pity upon those less observant.
But what if the story is more complex? What if, despite the outward displays, most “religious” Muslims are not, in fact, following the majority of what the Islamic sources prescribe? What if their lived religion is far more humane, adaptive, and gentle than the letter of the law? And, most strikingly, what if this very gap between textual Islam and lived Islam is not a sign of hypocrisy or failure, but one of the great blessings and survival secrets of Muslim civilization?
This essay argues exactly that. Drawing on lived experience, classical sources, and honest observation, we will see why most Muslims, even the so-called “religious” ones, quietly discard the most difficult, extreme, or unlivable parts of their faith, and why this is not only understandable, but good.
1. What the Texts Actually Require
To understand the gap between text and practice, we must start with what classical Islamic law and tradition actually teach. For many modern Muslims, “being religious” means performing the five pillars, abstaining from major sins, and holding certain core beliefs. Yet in the Qur’an, Hadith, and the earliest legal and biographical sources, the definition of a “good Muslim” is radically more demanding, and often shockingly at odds with modern values.
Consider just a few points:
- Literal Belief in All Unseen Realities: A Muslim must not only affirm God and the afterlife, but also the physical, imminent reality of hellfire, paradise, angels, jinn, and the Day of Judgment. Denying any one of these, or interpreting them as metaphor, is heresy by classical standards.
- Complete Ritual Practice: Prayers, fasting, zakat, and hajj are only the beginning. Rules about ritual purity, gender separation, attire, food, and private conduct are extensive, covering hundreds of daily acts.
- Loyalty to Islamic Law and Rule: The Qur’an and early jurists make clear that Muslims should live in a caliphate, under a government based on strict Islamic law (sharia), work to establish it if absent, and reject the legitimacy of secular, non-Muslim rulers. They cannot accept secular law or obey laws made by human beings – this is heresy i.e. Kufr. The obligation of jihad, struggle, including armed struggle, to advance Islam’s authority, is also central in classical law.
- Social and Legal Rules: Slavery is permitted, regulated, and normalized in the texts. In fact it would be considered ‘Sunnah’ i.e. a wonderful thing, since Mohammad himself, as well as his closest companions, practiced it, and thus Muslims should seek to do it too.
- Women’s legal and social status is explicitly unequal, ranging from inheritance to court testimony, movement, and public authority. Punishments for apostasy (leaving Islam), blasphemy, and certain sexual offenses are severe, up to and including death.
In short, the “Islam” of the sources is a totalizing, world-shaping faith, meant to order every detail of personal and public life, often with commands that clash dramatically with modern ethics. Yet most Muslims do not at all believe these things, and in fact would call them extreme, and even go as far as to say Islam forbids them. Not knowing that the texts themselves (if read literally like early Muslims did) demand them.
2. Lived Islam: What Most Muslims Actually Practice
Yet, if you visit any Muslim-majority country, or any mosque in the West, what do you find? Daily life that looks almost nothing like the world of the early sources.
- Selective Ritual Observance: Most self-identified religious Muslims perform some rituals but neglect many. Even the “five pillars” are variably kept: some pray but do not fast; some fast but do not give zakat; some rarely think of hajj. Rules on ritual purity, gender separation, and attire are relaxed or ignored when inconvenient.
- Literalism about the Unseen, But Only in Words: Nearly all Muslims say they believe in hell, heaven, jinn, and so on, but almost none live as if the threats and promises are immediate. If hell were felt as real and imminent, most would abandon ordinary pursuits for ceaseless prayer and penance. In practice, these beliefs are compartmentalized: professed on Friday, forgotten on Monday.
- Adaptation to Secular Law and Modern Life: The vast majority of Muslims, even in devout families, accept the legitimacy of non-Muslim governments, use banks and credit, send daughters to university, and raise children to be “good citizens”, not would-be conquerors or separatists.
- “Jihad” is redefined as “personal struggle,” not as armed conflict. Almost none see it as their duty to live under strict Shariah, and even fewer see it as a good thing to try to establish a caliphate, and even fewer still would ever think of raising a gun for Jihad on behalf of one.
- Massive Softening of Social Rules: Polygamy is rare. Slavery is universally condemned and unthinkable. Almost all Muslims today accept legal equality between men and women, at least in principle, and would never tolerate the punishments or legal distinctions of the classical law.
In other words, even among the “religious,” Islam is mostly lived as a flexible, humane, cultural tradition, rich in rituals, values, and stories, but far removed from the uncompromising commands of the texts.
3. The Myth of “Literal” or “Textual” Islam
This is where many people, both critics and defenders of Islam, get confused. When confronted with the gap between text and practice, some Muslims insist that “Islam has always been merciful, peaceful, and compatible with modernity,” pointing to the lived gentleness of their families and communities. Critics, meanwhile, accuse Muslims of hypocrisy or “taqiyya,” claiming that the faith is dangerous because its real teachings are hidden.
Both are wrong.
The reality is that literal, full-throttle Islam does exist, but only in the actions of tiny minorities. The Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, and similar groups take the texts at face value. They pursue the caliphate, impose classical punishments, enslave, wage jihad, and treat the Qur’an and Hadith as blueprints for modern life. They can quote chapter and verse for almost everything they do.
And for this very reason, they are hated and feared not just by non-Muslims, but by ordinary Muslims as well. Indeed, most of the people they kill and harm are usually Muslim. Why? Because their Islam, while textually authentic, is inhumane and unlivable. Mainstream Muslims instinctively reject it, not because they misunderstand the sources, indeed many don’t even know how to read arabic, but because they know what it would mean to actually live that way.
So instead, the masses, sometimes consciously, sometimes unconsciously, edit their religion. They keep the parts that bring meaning and comfort, and quietly discard or reinterpret the parts that would destroy family, peace, or ordinary happiness. Even the imams, scholars, and activists mostly participate in this “folk Islam.” The few who do not, who chase the purity of the text, become dangerous and unhinged, or burn out and leave, as so many ex-Muslims have.
4. Cognitive Dissonance, Flexibility, and Double Standards
But what about those moments when ‘religious’ Muslims suddenly become “strict literalists”, condemning modern sins like dating, drinking, or leaving Islam, while not commiting to the textual commands of jihad, slavery, or caliphate? The answer is a psychological trap which is very common in human beings: cognitive dissonance.
- When a rule is livable, convenient, or serves group identity, it is enforced with strictness, e.g. don’t drink or you will go to hell.
- When a rule is unlivable, unpopular, or would expose loved ones to hardship, it is softened, reinterpreted, or simply ignored, e.g. slavery was only done in the past. It’s haram now’ (even though there’s no textual evidence for this and claiming this position is technically kufr since slavery is clearly allowed in the Qur’an, practiced by Mohammad etc.)
- Heroes like Ali or Umar are never blamed; their “exceptions” are justified by appeals to special knowledge, context, or abrogation. But for ordinary believers, the letter of the law is invoked for control, e.g. ‘don’t talk about the civil war where early Muslims (including Mohammad’s wife, and best friends and family) went to war and killed each other. They are saved and loved by God. So don’t talk bad about them.’
This is not unique to Islam, but a universal feature of human religious life, and indeed in any situation where a person has to confront something uncomfortable in their belief system. It happens with atheists related to the necessity of the Infinite, with scientists when speaking about things that are politically incorrect, with political activists in something their side has done wrong and so on. Most people defend what they love, even against the evidence of their own texts. When their identity, community, or family is threatened by the implications of belief, the texts are bent or forgotten. This is why folk religion is always more flexible, humane, and sustainable than fundamentalism.
5. The Blessing of Folk Religion
It is easy to mock this inconsistency, to accuse ordinary Muslims of hypocrisy, or to lament the loss of the “pure faith.” But in reality, this folk religion, the editing, the forgetting, the softening of hard edges, is a profound blessing. It is what allows religious traditions to survive, to adapt, to bring meaning and comfort without causing endless conflict or suffering. Indeed, it’s the slow updating of religion to a sort of liveable spirituality which can be practiced while living an essentially secular, liberal, non-religious life.
Imagine a world where most Muslims actually lived by every command of the classical texts: endless holy wars, violent purges, stoning, slavery, the suppression of art, love, and free thought. The world would be unlivable, not just for non-Muslims, but for Muslims themselves. Most would flee, hide, or rebel. This is not a hypothetical; it is what happens wherever extremists seize power, and why their rule is always brief, bloody, and unpopular. It’s important to say however, that you need to have any fear about this: it is in itself not stable and not possible. As can be seen by the early civil war in Islam, and by indeed how modern Salafist Jihadi groups like Tahrir al Sham, and ISIS will actually kill each other today. Each claiming the other is deviant, or outright apostates.
Instead, what we see is an endless dance of adaptation:
- The heart quietly chooses what it can bear.
- The mind finds ways to justify what is chosen.
- The text is revered, but only rarely followed fully.
- The result is a religious life that, for all its flaws, is more beautiful and more humane than its sources.
6. The Irony: Literalists Are Rare, And the World Is Better for It
The bitterest irony is that the “extremists” are the honest ones, in terms of honesty to the texts (they are of course not honest or correct about what’s objectively true or good): they believe what the texts say, and try to live it. But honesty in service to an impossible, inhuman, and essentially oppressive, and in many ways immoral doctrine is a recipe for disaster. Ordinary Muslims, meanwhile, live with contradictions, but create lives filled with love, laughter, and ordinary goodness.
Most “religious” Muslims aren’t truly religious by the standard of the sources. They are, instead, human, flawed, flexible, drawn to what is kind and livable, willing to compromise for family and peace. That is not a flaw, but a blessing. They are in effect no different than non-Muslims, hence why they have for the most part been able to integrate into non-Muslim society. Also, as it stands there is no caliphate in the world, and yet Muslims are still living normal lives – thus illustrating the point that most Muslims are not trying to create one, and are, as we are saying, only ‘religious’ in the folk sense. Not the strict sense.
It is better for Muslims, for their neighbors, and for the world that this is so.
Conclusion
The gap between the Islam of the sources and the Islam of the mosque, the family, the home is not a secret, not a failure, and not a scandal. It is the very thing that allows religion to survive, and people to remain whole.
Most Muslims, even the “religious”, are not following the harshest, most radical parts of their tradition. They are, in the end, making their faith human, bearable, and open to life.
And for that, we should be grateful.
Discover more from Real Philosophy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
