The problem with the above post is that their is a huge disconnect between the 'Ulema and the masses. Sherman Jackson identified two possible explanations: being cut off from above and being cut off from below. The 'Ulema have been excluded from the political system as 'elites' by the state due to the rise of secularism. Thus, they've been evicted from the top. Secondly, due to the rise of literacy, many people are going past the 'Ulema to approach religious and classical texts themselves. Mass education and modern means of communication (printing press, internet, libraries, universities) have thus, taken the authority of the 'Ulema from below. The Salafi dawah seems to be doing a good job in reaching out to the masses, something that Traditional 'Ulema fail to do. In my opinion, the only way traditional 'Ulema can compete in the modern world is to re-invent methods for reaching out both to the masses and to the political system. The 'Ulema have been relegated to a minor role among other intellectual elites. They must compete, whether they want to or not, against philosophers, social scientists, politicians, military rulers, etc. The thing that we have to recognize is that their are multiple paradigms operating in the Ummah today. The greatest obstacle to Muslim unity is the lack of agreement over an operating paradigm. What is needed is a paradigm shift in both the masses and the political systems. Through the sheer force of argument, the 'Ulema, like Imam Ashari or Imam Ghazzali before them, can re-gain authority. However, in order to do that, they must be able to engage their 'intellectual rivals' in a constructive manner and dialogue. This is something, unfortunately, that Sunni 'Ulema fail to do. Shi'i 'Ulema, on the other hand, seem to be more on the ball. Shi'i 'Ulema study Western philosophy in their maddrassehs with the intent to refute it or at least critique it. We could learn a lot from each other.