This paper reconsiders the concept of the "golden mean" (derekh ha-'emtsa'i) as an epistemic core of Jewish Enlightenment thought in Muslim lands during the late nineteenth century. It focuses on three Jewish intellectuals (maskilim) from distinct Ottoman contexts: Barukh Mitrani (1847-1919) of Ottoman Turkey, Shelomo Bekhor Ḥutsin (1843-1892) of Baghdad, and Shalom Flaḥ (1853-1936) of Tunis. These maskilim wrote in Hebrew and in their vernaculars, Ladino and Judeo-Arabic, to reach diverse audiences and promote internal reform. Though based in different regions, they published in overlapping Hebrew-language forums and addressed similar tensions, revealing a shared epistemic orientation. At the center of their thought stood a Maimonidean ideal, rooted in Aristotelian ethics, of "moderation." This concept circulated in Islamic traditions and in Jewish and Christian thought under Muslim rule and was reintroduced under the conditions of Ottoman reform. The "golden mean" was not a "moderate" or "Sephardi" stance, as often portrayed in scholarship. Rather, it was a distinct mode of Jewish knowledge production, shaped between rabbinic rejection of reform and radical "Westernization" that privileged French culture over Hebrew learning and communal cohesion. This was not merely a theoretical posture. It was grounded in the lived experience of the maskilim, who faced attacks from conservative circles yet resisted assimilation, whether to Western norms or to the ideological demands of the Ottoman state. Their writings resonate with Muslim and Christian reformers across the region, including the Arab Nahda. Through close readings of essays and sermons, this paper challenges Eurocentric narratives and reframes the "golden mean" as a regional and transnational response to internal division and external epistemic hierarchies.