IslamicSciences.info wrote:
View original post
The reason for the differences between NOW and THEN are that back then the Ulama were sort of vetted by the contemporaries and held in the public eye based on the opinion of other Ulama. So although a well-known Hanafi (scholars) would have vehemently disagreed with a Shaf’ae one, nevertheless the standard of scholarship could be determined.
In our times (particularly in the West and especially in America) there is no such thing. A man (or a woman) is put on a scholarly pedestal by layman and there is no vetting of the scholarship of the person.
I personally know “Imams” who have no clue about Fiqh and a famous “Imam” in UK told his group that if you ORDER your wife, she has to OBEY unquestionably. Brother believed this opinion and enforced it relentlessly until by chance he happened to come in contact with a few Deobandi “Muftees” and due to the title “Mufti” he decided to check this answer and also that his relationship was being affected.
I was giving a talk in America and two of fellow “Imams” who are held in high esteem amongst the laymen didn’t have a clue about Imam Nawawi (RA), let alone any meaningful knowledge of Hadeeth (beyond authentic and weak).
Therefore turning to the first available religious authority for a laymen is fraught with danger. The laymen has to do his (or her) research and get to a trustworthy and credible scholar.
Now let me get DOWN to the intellectual capacity of concerned and begin to talk about low-level issues like lobster etc. Once you have a trusted scholar then give them your scenario and circumstances and within the principles of the Madhab there is enough leeway for Ulama to formulate an answer.
Simply put, you cannot compare the level, authenticity and rigours of Islamic knowledge which exited previously to our youtube generation Imams (who talk a good game) but are terrifyingly ignorant!
