Please excuse me if I misunderstood you sidi - but your conclusion seems to consider all "fiqhi-differences" at par. This does not seem to be the purport of hazrat's words. To quote: khilaaf-e-Shar'a umuoor ko riwaaj dete hai - ya khilaaf e shar'a baaton par jari hain unke khilaaf-e-Shar'a umuoor ko riwaaj dene ki wajah se, ya ma'aaz Allah, sulh kulliyat wa-gayraha ki wajah se, ya badmazahbon se aazadaana ikhtilaat ki wajah se - aise ulaama awaam ke liye sakht muzir hain It's clear that fiqhi-differences which are untenable are within the ambit of "khilaaf e shar'a". That is why I posted the other reply: Now this is a very cautiously worded question - if it was asked by a layman, he was probably under the influence of someone who has some knowledge about fiqhi matters. Hazrat saw right through it and his reply is edifying. He says that not just any "ikhtilaaf" is considered valid and quotes durr-al-mukhtaar: As for us, then it is but the following of that which they have judged as most correct or which they preferred - just as if we had asked them in their lifetimes (meaning those who belonged to one of the categories of mujtahids - including the ashaab e tarjeeH) Then hazrat further dismantles the deception of modern claimants by saying: This is regarding some sahib-e-ijtihaad or ahl-e-tarjeeh from bygone centuries. Does this apply to anyone today? Are the people of our age muqallids or mujtahids? Are they from the ashaab-e-tarjeeh?...... As to whether anyone on the face of the earth today is of that level - then it is in this very durr e mukhtar: Pronouncing judgments or giving fatwa based on a marjuh (an opinion that is not the established or elevated opinion of a madhhab) is jahal (ignorance) and a violation of consensus (against the ijma' of the ummah) .... and reverting from taqleed after an action is unanimously invalid and this is the chosen verdict of the madhhab. After this hazrat quoted another important statement from durr-al-mukhtar - which I could not catch clearly - but it was something about ikhtilaaf being limited to a qualified mujtahid. So the following words of hazrat should be seen in light of the above reply: aur ulama kla ikhtilaaf jo khaalis ilmi ikhtilaaf hai - wo hadith ke mutabiq raHmat hai - aur usmein awaam ka koi hissa nahi hai - awaam tamaam ulama ki - jo zimmah daarne ahlesunnat hai - agarche unmein koi 'ilmi ikhtilaaf ho - iske ba wajood unpar tamaam ulama ki tawqeer wajib hai - ye aise hi hai jaise ki shafi'i, hanafi, maliki, hanbali ikhtilaaf - ke is ikhtilaaf ke ba wajood sunni sahih sahihul aqeeda tamaam ulama ki tawqeer o tazeem awaam par lazim hai. Aur sunni sahih ul aqeeda ulama ko bura kehna aur bura kehelwaana ye sakht haraam, bad kaam aur kufr anjaam hai ------ The fore-going is to clarify that not all fiqhi differences are created equal. If anyone listens to the other verdicts of sayyidi taaj al-shari'ah (raHimahullah) himself, or read the fataawa of Alahazrat ('alayhirraHmah), they will note that they deal with untenable fiqhi aberrations with a severity almost matching that of aberrations in aqaid. Otherwise, which ikhtilaaf is not khaalis-'ilmi? We are definitely not talking about some territorial disputes or money-motivated wrangling among scholars. ----- Now, my question: If a sunni sahih-ul aqeeda aalim sahab is used to doling out rulings based on marjuh or even cross-madhhab opinions - can I - as a layman with a small idea of it's invalidity - inform my friends about it and ask them to keep away from him? And what if the person in question is not even a qualified mufti - but just a celebrity muqarrir whose entire credibility is built around facebook and twitter?* Is THAT considered disrespect which will cause me a bad-ending?!! al 'iyaadu bi Allah --- * and were this person to sit in a gathering of mutfis he would do well to remember switzer's advice: It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it.