Two types of Ikhtilaf (difference of opinion):

Two types of Ikhtilaf (differences of opinion):

We have to differentiate between valid differences of scholarly opinion between the recognised Madhahib which come up due to multiple possibilities in interpretations of texts & multiplicity of hadiths on the one hand and invalid misinterpretations and distortions of the Deen by either denying the clear ayat and ahadith or interpreting them in such a way that is either not possible linguistically or that goes against all principles of interpretation.

 If an individual scholar clearly denies agreed upon matters of belief or rejects Sahih Hadiths or distorts the traditional fiqh, then other scholars have a duty to warn about it since thats a serious matter and people may get misguided due to such a scholar. 

This is not sectarianism. This is preservation of the Deen and a duty of the Scholars which is crucial. Allāh’s Messenger (ﷺ) stated: “This knowledge will be carried by the trustworthy of every generation. They will expel from it the distortions of those who go to extremes, the lies of the falsifiers, and the interpretations of the ignorant.” (Authentically Reported by Ibn Qutaybah in ‘Uyūn Al-Akhbār 2/119, Al-Bayhaqī in As-Sunan Al-Kubrā 10/209, Al-Ājurrī in Ash-Sharī’ah no. 1-2, At-Tabrīzī in Mishkāt Al-Masābīh no. 248, Ibn Abdul-Barr in At-Tamhīd 1/59)

The responsibility of the common people is to stick to the general body of Ulama of their school of thought whether Shafi, Hanafi, Maliki or Hanbali and not follow those who go against the general scholarly consensus. The problem is people get impressed by good oratory skills and then defend their favourite speaker / Daiee even when they have problematic positions.

That's because, many people cannot identify problematic opinions of some famous writers or speakers. That's why such individuals have a large following of awaam. Informing about their pitfalls is a duty of those who know about the issue. It's an amanah. 

Just like when an individual doctor has a problematic treatment protocol which goes against the mainstream medical knowledge, then it's the duty of other doctors to warn the people against him. So, just because there's a controversy involving one doctor, patients cannot stop going to all doctors! Those who warn against him are not creating fitnah, rather he was the one who is creating fitnah and the others who pointed it out are only doing their duty and it points to their sincerity and well-wishing for the society. It also indicates that the system of medical practice is having effective and robust mechanism for preventing it's misuse and abuse by any erring individual. This mechanism should actually increase the credibility of the system and strengthen the trust of the people in it.

Female scholars in history vs Modern working women:

Female scholars in our history generally took the knowledge from their mahram relatives, who were scholars themselves, at home. And their numbers compared to the total number of scholars and Imams is small. 

A good example of women learning from their mahram relatives is Imam Ala' al-Din al-Samarqandi's daughter Fathima. Imam Al-Kasani was a student of the Hanafi legal scholar 'Ala' al-Din al-Samarqandi (died 1144), the author of Tuhfat al-Fuqaha'. Al-Samarqandi's daughter, Fatima, was also trained in Fiqh. Fatima al-Samarqandi was highly sought after for marriage. Fatima and her father only accepted Al-Kasani's proposal after he wrote Bada'i As-Sana'i as an explanation of Tuhfat Al-Fuqaha, and Bada'i As-Sana'i was accepted as a Bridal Gift for Fatima. This book is considered as one of the authoritative Hanafi fiqh books and is even today taught to fiqh students in madaris. 

However, such examples simply cannot be used to push the justification of modern universal female employment in factories and general offices. There have been some excellent fighters among sahabiat too that we read in history but it was not the norm for ladies to fight. Exceptions were there and will always be there and it cannot be used to generalise that for all. 

Ayesha siddiqua RA narrated 2100 ahadeeth in her 63 years of life. The Sahaba used to come and ask her from behind a curtain or used to write a letter asking the questions and she used to answer them by narrating the ahadeeth. It cannot be compared to the modern jobs that women do in any way. The female Hadith narrators (who were generally elderly in age) afterwards too used to listen to the ahadeeth from behind a curtain and give ijaza of that Hadeeth to the seekers who used to read out the Hadeeth loudly to her from behind a curtain. 

Their example simply doesn't justify modern women working in factories and general offices. 

Some people use the names of Hadith female narrators to make a claim that women used to learn and teach every where in society even in mixed gatherings. First of all we should know that every narrator of Hadith was not a scholar. Even common people used to memorize some ahadeeth and narrated to others. It doesn't make them scholars.

Islam doesnt discourage females from learning or teaching ilm but it has to be with the conditions stated by Shariah. Learning relevant basic Deeni knowledge is compulsory on every male and female. So definitely we need female scholars too to teach the women. 

Islam has a general scheme of social and family roles for males and females and it cannot be changed at our whims and to match the modern trends. The consequences of altering it will be disastrous. Let us keep all the genuine exceptions given in Shariah for women to work outside as exceptions without upsetting the divine balance.