In recent years, particularly in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, neo-traditionalism has emerged as a significant force in contemporary Islamic discourse. Within Western academic literature, neo-traditionalism is often characterized as a trend within Islamic Sunnism that emphasizes the importance of adhering to one of the four schools of Islamic Law, along with one of the traditional schools of theology, namely Ash’arism or Maturidism. Additionally, neo-traditionalism places high value on Sufism and underscores the significance of the unbroken sanad (chain of transmission) for acquiring authentic Islamic knowledge. In the discourse of neo-traditionalists, this appreciation of Sufism is accompanied by a critical stance towards modernity and the Islamic trends that have emerged in the modern period. Abdullah Bin Bayyah has frequently been cited as one of the foremost proponents of contemporary neo-traditionalism. Within Western academia, his religious and political discourse has been characterized in two distinct ways: firstly, as a reiteration of classical Islamic theology of obedience (Wala Qusay); and secondly, as a modernist discourse in line with that of Rashid Rida, albeit adorned with traditional elements to convey an aura of authenticity (David Warren). In my presentation, I aim to assess the ongoing academic discourse surrounding Bin Bayyah by examining his ideas in relation to each of these identified features of neo-traditionalism. To achieve this, I will juxtapose Bin Bayyah's discourse with that of another significant contemporary Islamic figure, Yūsuf al-Qaraḍāwī (d.2022). My contention is that after thorough analysis, it becomes apparent that Bin Bayyah’s legal methodology aligns closely with the contemporary centrist (waṣaṭī) reformist approach, predominantly championed by al-Qaraḍāwī and other like-minded revivalists. The disparities between al-Qaraḍāwī and Bin Bayyah in their legal approaches are more a matter of degree than essence. Both scholars engage in selective and creative ijtihāḍ, although Bin Bayyah generally exhibits more reluctance to explicitly override the established legal rulings of the madhhabs in favor of such creative interpretations. While both scholars strategically utilize the aura of tradition to legitimize their reformist discourse, Bin Bayyah’s narrative places heavier normative emphasis on the legal tradition of the madhhabs. Therefore, rather than representing a mere reiteration of traditional religious discourse or modernism cloaked in tradition, Bin Bayyah's discourse should be understood as an integral part of the centrist (waṣaṭī) approach that has been developed by revivalists and Islamic scholars since the 1970s.