The Salafi sect of (sunni) Islam is crazy. They justify all kinds of extremely immoral stuff and they hate Jews like hell.
There are 2 or three (or more) schisms within the Salafi sect. Al-Qaeda represent the most radical and immoral schism and
http://www.salafimanhaj.com/ represent a less radical schism, although you will still find some pretty bigoted stuff there. I would hazard a guess that a large proportion of Arabs follow the Salafi sect, although only a small proportion follow the radical schism. Saudi Arabia has really funded the spread of the Salafis in the last many decades.
Most sunni Indians/Pakistanis/Afghanis follow the Deobandi sect of Islam.
The shafi madhab has nothing to do with salafism. Salafism is something in and of itself within sunnism (although some traditionalists will say that they are out of sunnism). Salafism is about a century old; the madhahib have been around for about 1200 yrs. And the Deobandi school is sub-branch of the hanafi madhab. There are four sunni madhabs that still survive: hanafi, hanbali, shafi and maliki. The hanbali one is the most "strict" (although each of them have their *very very special* and utterly ridiculous and difficult to follow rules).
Most Arabs don't follow any madhab - not consciously. Certainly not salafi. They "follow" what their country or region has traditionally followed for centuries. Salafis are - thankfully - a minority, even though they do have a lot of influence on how people perceive social issues and Islam being the "solution" to those ills. Their influence is spreading through politics and satellite TV, but you're not going to see people rushing to have two fist fulls of beard or enacting all the small OCD rituals in their live that the salafis do.
Umdat as Salik is one book for the shafi that was written 200 yrs ago as an abridged fiqh guide for "everyday people." It was the abridged, everyday Joe version of imam Nawawi's 9 volume master work on the fiqh of the shafi madhab. Today it is considered a book for the level of the scholars and you are *supposedly* not supposed to consult it or quote its rulings to others unless you have formally studied it with a scholar so that you don't repeat the wrong information (b/c so many of the entries are only one or two sentences and of course b/c allah will punish you GRIEVOUSLY for making mistakes in talking about Islam...) (so, yes, Muslims have been dumbing themselves down).
Anyway, Umdat as Salik has almost no commentary in it. It's not the full rulings and it doesn't present the reasonings or the arguments or even, in many cases within the text, whether or not the ruling is a minority or majority one. I wouldn't necessarily take it as the end all be all of shafi rulings, bc there are many areas that one needs to clarify the accuracy of the statement prior to making fun of it and exposing it (which I think the book does need to be exposed and made fun of). For example, is the retaliation being spoken of here the death penalty? Well, I can't read Danish and while I do have copies of the original text and have studied it I didn't study this particular book within it and I don't have the books at the house to go and read myself. However, if I recall correctly the retaliation here means that the killer should be killed, and it is saying that the exception is the parent. Whose ruling is this? The quote does not tell us (Umdat is a collection of commentaries, esp the translated version which is a mish mosh). Does the book say anywhere that in this case, the parent should not be subjected to imprisonment or anything like that? Does it tell us if it is a minority, deviant, or majority ruling? If not, then don't take it as "This is what Islam SAYS!!!"
Topic: Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2