Yasir Qadhi – What is the Ruling on Invoking Other than Allah-Ask Shaykh YQ #155

			Brother Nawaz from India, he emails a very lengthy question describing certain issues that are going
on in his area in his district, and mentioning some of the sectarian problems that are happening in
his homeland. But in particular, there's a question that is a very relevance to us. And he mentioned
that in his particular town, the majority of people follow a interpretation of Islam, in which they
are encouraged to visit the graves, and to invoke the Saints for their for their needs. And he is
saying that recently, he has come across a new, you know, scholar, a new, he has not heard of this,
you know, new group, and he mentions it by name. And he has benefited from this group and online and
		

			whatnot. And this new group is saying that the practices of his culture and of his people are
actually shook, and that anybody who does these types of practices of invoking the saints is in fact
committing Shrek. So now he is emailing me asking that he has heard a number of my lectures and now
what does he do because his family and his entire society is involved in these rulings.
		

			One
		

			out of seven,
		

			poverty can in
		

			a him fast
		

			recovery.
		

			Now, this is a very important a very necessary question. And it is one that requires time to
elaborate on. So for those of you that will be able to listen to the longer lecture and disregarded
humbler. That's great. If for some reason, you cannot listen to the remainder of this lecture. In a
nutshell, I will conclude that this action is not something that is approved in the Quran and
Sunnah. And that we should not be asking saints or the prophets of the lesson of our needs that we
have, and that this is the position of the vast majority of the roadmap of the past and of the
present. And I will also be arguing that doing so is actually opening up the door to shift. However,
		

			if your family and if your friends are involved with this practice, then you must treat them as
Muslims and consider them to be Muslims. And you should use your utmost wisdom and your utmost
patience to try to convince them to give up these practices. That is the short summary. But now
we're going to go into the longer, elaborate more elaborate lecture. Now for the detailed response.
Actually, this, this question is particularly awkward for me to answer for two reasons. First and
foremost, if you're listening to me regularly, you are seeing that I am trying my best to preach
tolerance and respect of other interpretations of Islam, especially those opinions that are followed
		

			by the for legal schools, and especially with the mainstream movements and groups of Islam. However,
this particular issue, in reality, it is difficult for any one strand to accept the others, because
some big words are being used. And for example, the word should is being thrown around. And so
obviously, when a group accuses another of committing Schick, which is the one unforgivable sin in
Islam, it's very difficult for either group to then say, Okay, this is something we can agree to
disagree, and then be gentle, and, and whatnot. It's not like a filter issue, you know, is the
saliva of the dog nudges or 401k? is a cat, how much do we give, you know, we can clearly agree to
		

			disagree on many issues of, you know, interpretation of law, and of the finer details of law. But
what is to be done? When the question that is being asked, the differences of opinion are quite
literally over eemaan and coiffeur, and tauheed and schilke. This is really what the the, the the
question entails. And so, obviously, it is made awkward because I don't want to preach a hatred of
anybody who you know, lowers his head to Allah subhanho wa Taala. I don't want to
		

			flame the fans of sectarianism. So as I give this response, I find it very difficult to, you know,
try to balance to do that, but inshallah, I still hope to be able to do that. In fact, I will go so
far as to state I would venture that this question of invoking the saints. This question is the
single most contentious and problematic issue in all of Sunni Islam. You know, certainly Islam is
not one unified, monolithic whole, within Sunni Islam. You'll have many strands and you have many
differences of opinion, legal and even, yes, some theological issues as well.
		

			And I would say I cannot think of any issue that is potentially more problematic and more divisive
within Sunni Islam with regards to this issue still, despite that, I will try my best in this
response to preach a type of tolerance. And inshallah, let's see, let's see what the result of that
is going to be. Also I said this this question is awkward for me for two reasons. Also, another
reason why this question is is is awkward is because, in particular, when it comes to me answering
the question, so I have had a change of opinion, with regards to my own response to this question.
And for many, many years of my life more than a decade of my life, I followed one particular
		

			opinion. And in fact, you can easily look up other YouTube videos of mine from 1015 years ago, you
can look up books that I have published, you know, from 20 years ago, in which I very, very clearly
advocated for one particular opinion, which I'm going to come to soon, however, around a decade ago
around, you know, literally a decade ago, eight, nine years ago, I went through a number of, you
know, intellectual changes and rethinking through, and frankly, this question, this question was the
catalyst, and it was the main cause for me to research very, very intensely for a number of months
where I would, you know, go over, you know, again, much can be said, I don't have time right now for
		

			this. And over the course of that timeframe, I myself began advocating another position, which is
the position I began this lecture upon. And in fact that answering this question, almost a decade
ago, in my own mind, was the primary cause that I, myself had a bit of a transformation. And I went
from one, you know, strand of Islam. And I moved on from that, that strand, because this question
for me, was one that I modified by my opinion. And so this is a particularly
		

			awkward question, because I'm telling you from now that you will find YouTube lectures and you will
find books of mine, in which I hold a position that is slightly different, it's not radically
different, slightly different than what I will be advocating in this particular lecture and have
been advocating for around a decade. So you'll find two different opinions of, of my own inshallah,
this is, you know, the reality of all people who study Islam for their entire lives and who do
scholarly research that, you know, over the periods of their lives, they are presented other
evidences and they modify or adopt or change their opinions. And so I hope that inshallah that is
		

			what I am demonstrating this as well. Now, we also want to make one final disclaimer that this
lecture today is about a very specific issue. And that is the issue of invoking the saints and or
the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam. For our needs. This is not an issue about another topic that
is called tawassul via the names of somebody so to say, for example, Oh Allah, I ask you by the
right of your nebby by the help of your newbie, that is a separate topic. So they said no, that's a
separate topic. Maybe another question, I will do that topic. But today's topic is to call out and
say yeah, I Li method. Yeah, AbdulQadir Gilani, Yara, Sula, law, give me this, do that prevent this.
		

			So this answer today is about a very clear cut scenario. And that is to call out to other than a law
and to ask something from the being that you are calling out. And to ask something of this world or
even of you know, the next life like something that you ask him, and you expect your your, your
request to be responded to. Now, with regards to this question, academically speaking, just purely
academically speaking, there are three primary opinions that are found within scholarly circles that
claim to be Sunni. Okay, three primary opinions amongst groups of Roma. And they all claim that they
are and asuna Well, Gemma, the first opinion, is that the action of invoking a saint to call out to
		

			a being to say, yeah, so and so do this for me. Okay. Yeah. So and So yeah, Abdulkadir agenda, any
idea that the rasulillah whatever it might be, I'm in trouble helped me, my son is sick cure him,
you know, I need to find a job, you know, help me find a job. The first opinion is that the mere
action of doing this is in and of itself major shift, that the action is major shift. Now, the and
so therefore, the action will or would constitute something that has the potential to expel one from
Islam. Now, within this first opinion, let's call this opinion one major shift. You have two sub
opinions, one a and one B.
		

			When he says that, therefore the one who does it becomes emotional.
		

			No ifs, ands, or buts about it, no way out. It's like a double arrow double as somebody
intentionally taking the muscle half hour to Billa and throwing it on the floor stomping on it,
knowing it is the most half wanting to disrespect the most half. There is no excuse unless you're
threatened by death. There is no excuse to do something of this nature. So any Muslim who invokes
the dead who calls out to a saint who invokes the prophets of the law while you send them group one
a would say that action of theirs has expelled them from Islam, and they are no longer a Muslim. And
they need to re accept the Shahada, and restate the Shahada, and repent to Allah subhanho wa Taala,
		

			or else they're outside the fold of Islam, okay, this is one a, one B says the action is an action
of Shrek. But the Muslim who does the action and is very, very ignorant, very unaware living in a
faraway land or not really having studied the Quran, not knowing the the the evidences that that
Muslim who simply follows what his society says follows a misguided scholar, that we shall excuse
him out of his ignorance, and we'll cut him some slack. So we'll say the action is an action of
shirk. But this Muslim is excused because he's ignorant. And ignorance is an excuse, according to
one B for this action. Okay, so one a, we don't excuse for ignorance, it is basically anybody who
		

			says the calima should know better. And if you say la ilaha illAllah. And then you call to the st.
Automatically that has made you a mushrik. And then one B says, while there are evidences that have
their you know, Mister interpretation, and a person's mind is not fully aware, and he's an ignorant
person. And so he follows his scholarly community in class. And therefore, we will make an excuse
for the ignorant person. And we will treat that person as a Muslim, even though he will state that
your action is an action of should and Cofer so outwardly, we treat him as a Muslim, and we consider
him to be a Muslim. But in reality, we say your deed is the deed of should, and if you know better,
		

			and if you study the evidences, then really you have left the fold of Islam. So one be the action is
shooting, but the person is excused because of ignorance. Now, one B was the position that I myself
followed for 15 years of my life, and I preached and I taught, and I wrote books, defending one beat
some of the most advanced arguments in the English language ever written, and ever defending
paradigm, one B, were actually by yours truly. And so I'm very well well familiar with the arguments
and counter arguments for that position. Now, which group holds this position? Generally speaking,
it is the followers of Mohammed even Abdul Wahab and the natural movement of Saudi Arabia and the
		

			ladies movement of Indian Pakistan, that this movement generally it is a very clear cut, that the
action is always an action of Sheikh one, he says, Therefore, the person is machinic. And one B says
that the person might be excused because of ignorance. Now, again, I'm being academically historical
right here, whether you agree with this or not, but it is the truth. The early followers of Mohammed
Abdul Wahab were on opinion, one eight, and the person himself was upon opinion one a, but his later
followers and the Modern School of that trend, the modern scholars of that movement, generally
speaking, they're upon one beat. So this is a disconnect between the early and the founder and the
		

			early direct descendants, the grandsons and the the people who are proponents of the movement, pre
1900, that generally speaking, they were more sympathetic to one a, and that is how they dealt with
their opponents, regardless of snippets and phrases that one faces in their books, but in reality,
they treated their opponents as if there are non Muslims, if they disagreed with their
interpretation. And modern followers of the school many of my own teachers are one B, and one B is
basically the action issue but we'll cut them some excuse out of ignorance, okay. So this is the
first opinion. The second opinion, which is now the opinion that I follow. The second opinion is the
		

			opinion that invoking the saints it is how long and it is evil. And it is an evil innovation, a
religious innovation, a bitter, and it is a stepping stone to shift. It is opening the doors to
shift, but it is not shift in and of itself. Unless that action is accompanied by a belief that
you're calling out to a God. It is accompanied by a belief that
		

			You are defying that entity that you are calling. So, opinion to says that the action is evil and
how wrong and bedarra and Moncure and the stepping stone to shirk, but it is not necessarily should
in and of itself. And if a person has a particular leader or belief about the one they are calling,
then it becomes shift. And if they have another leader or belief, then it is held on but it does not
become in and of itself shift it is dangerous. And it is something we warn against, but in and of
itself, it is not going to be shook unless the person doing it believes that they are worshipping a
being that is worthy of worship that has independent powers that has the powers of a god. And this
		

			is the position of the majority of modern day magic is for sure this is the Maliki madhhab. And it
is also many of the Hanafi scholars and really a lot of the Shafi scholars of Egypt and Syria and in
the in terms of the strands of Satanism, this is the default position of the Deobandi movement as
well. And it is also the position of many of the scholars and other famous institutions that they
would say that it is wrong and it is evil and it is a stepping stone to Schick but that it is not in
and of itself schilke unless the action is associated with a belief or it is accompanied by a belief
that is going to be a belief of should and therefore the actual then also become an action of Shere
		

			Khan. As I said, I myself am now an advocate of this second position I used to be one be and now I
am very staunchly in opinion to
		

			the third opinion, the third opinion, which is there, and factually speaking, factually speaking,
one finds it amongst scholars in from around 700 600 years ago. It's nothing that's you know, we
cannot say that this is a new opinion, I have done an extensive amount of research in this and you
will actually find statements from respected so neuro dama but again, factually speaking very, very
small minority going back 500 years, 600 years, even one of them 700 years, and they will say that
it is permissible, those scholars said permissible and some of the modern followers of that trend
will say it is Mr. hub, it is not just permissible, but it is encouraged and it is pleasing to Allah
		

			to ask these entities for our needs. And this is the position that is found in some Hanafi scholars
in some chapter is called as of our times and it is predominant in some interpretations of the soul
for Sufism, not all not all, many of the scholars of the soul, wolf are in the second category. And
some of them are in the third category. And in our times to make us understand like you know what
we're talking about. So the popular trend in our Indian Pakistani circles would be the Burrell v.
trend of Islam. And so group one is like the earlier d 70 bucks on group two is like the deobandis
and group three is the three is like the babies and they have their positions in this regard. Now,
		

			what further complicates the answer to the simple question of should we or should we not what
further complicates This is that because this issue is so sectarian based within these strands, and
because this issue has been advocated or criticized for over 600 700 years, this issue has been
discussed and extrapolated upon and commented on for hundreds and 1000s of pages. And for So for the
last 800 years. Anything that you can possibly think of saying it has been done on any one of these
camps, and it has been analyzed, it has been commented on, it has been refuted counter refuted
counter counter refuted. And by the way, so one of the things we need to understand is that there
		

			are levels of advocating and refutation. There are levels. Generally speaking in this q&a that I'm
doing with all of you, all of these q&a series at home that I have over right now 160 or something,
something questions done in this regard. So generally speaking, I'm not going into that level of
detail. I'm simply doing the first level and what is the first level the first level is the level
that is used by the the average Muslim who wants to learn and the beginning student of knowledge
which has to present the evidence has to prove the point that is level one, you caught your evidence
as you're bringing the Quran and Sunnah you bring the sameness of the aroma, that is level one, of
		

			course level one each of these groups has done that they have proven from their paradigm they think
they have proven each one of them has advocated group one, a group one B, group two, group three,
they've all proven from their versions of understanding. They quote their particular verses they
quote their verses decode the verse
		

			is the same with the traditions, that is level one, level two comes along, and then refutes each one
of these. So level two will then come and take the evidences of the second group and the evidences
of the third group and refute them. And the same goes for this. And the same goes for that. And then
level three comes and refutes the refutations and also goes does, you know goes into a lot more
analysis of who says what and what not. And we can go on and on. And therefore, dear viewer, I
cannot confuse you in this basic lecture. This is a very basic q&a. And anything that I say in these
2030 minutes, anything that I say, can easily be taken to level two and level three and refuted and
		

			to be brutally honest, I'm able to then refute that level either, because again, I've done this
research, this is my area of 14 expertise, which is Islamic theology. And I have done a lot of
research and in particular, this issue, I have read no exaggeration, 1000s of pages in this regard.
And I know the evidence is inside out. So anything I say, because it is a basic lecture, those that
disagree will easily be able to then latch on and then go to their level two. But of course, I don't
have time nor even the energy or desire to go to my level two and level three. So we have to simply
leave it at that and state that, believe it or not, every single one of these movements, has refuted
		

			the others in their own paradigm in their own ways. And
		

			one of the things that I would advise the advanced student of knowledge to do is to if you really,
really want to research, you will have to break away from reading the books of only your own federal
car. Because this is one of the most common problems of the advanced student, don't say this to the
average person, the average person, you follow the show that you like an end of story, the basic
student of knowledge should not go and read every single book that would confuse them the basics to
the knowledge sticks with one school masters it and then moves on. But you see the advanced students
one of the one of the mistakes of the genuine researcher is that they do not want to read what the
		

			other schools say, from their own books, and from their own teachers, the teachers of the other
school, rather what they do, they restrict themselves to what their own teachers spoon feed them.
They restrict themselves to refutations that their own teachers have chosen. So their own teachers
will say, Oh, those guys say x and to refute x, you say why those guys say Ah, you fruit a, you say
B. And so the student feels Oh, I know all the evidences, but the student has never actually studied
with the other side, the student has never read cover to cover, they might read a you know, snippet
here and there. But they don't study cover to cover. And they don't immerse themselves in the
		

			worldview and the and the entire psychology and paradigm of the other school. And so they fail to
understand the other school. Now, this is not to say that all of them are correct, obviously, they
are not all correct, clearly, in the end of the day, the action is either shoot, or it is how long
and a stepping stone to shoot or it is is almost to have, it cannot be all three simultaneously. And
neither am I advocating that what I am saying is that the advanced student of knowledge, the
advanced researcher, should not and cannot restrict himself to only listening to one group of
scholars if they really want to understand the psychology and this is what I myself did almost a
		

			decade ago, is that I read directly from the writings and teachings the entire, you know,
refutations and counter refutations, and I read them back and forth, back and forth, back and forth.
Whereas before this point in time, I was basically relying on one strand to tell me what they said
and how to refute that. And that's not the way to, to go independent. And so during that research,
as I said, it made me realize that one a and one B is problematic. And by the way, it is problematic
for multiple reasons of them is that you will have to make fear of the scholars who advocate these
actions and if you know the names of those scholars, those are some very well known names there is
		

			no way out of it even if you say that the ignorant person is excused What do you say to the
audience? What do you say to them famous aroma of the strands of Islam that have advocated this and
this is one of the reasons that I myself went down researching only to discover that in fact, one a
and one beat does not make any sense actually, position two is the one that is sound and actually
does make sense, which is that the action is dangerous and it is held on and it is evil, but in and
of itself it is not shipped unless it is accompanied by a particular intention and theology. Now,
what do we do because you see whether we like it or not, you will find Rama and not just modern
		

			dilemma because we have to understand these movements very old wisdom the urban deism, you know
Allah Hadees
		

			They might be modern, only 120 years old. But the concepts that formed them, they go back hundreds
of years, literally centuries, if not before this. So this notion of invoking the saints, the
calling out to the dead, you find people in the seven hundreds of the hijra, literally seven
hundreds of the hijra, you find people advocating all three positions, some of them said that it
should in and of itself, someone that said it's how to move should not do it, and some of this
editors job is why not okay. So, what exactly you know, is to be done here. And, and again, to not
go into a lot of detail, but we need to understand each one has a particular definition of worship
		

			and definition of Riba and definition of,
		

			and definition of tawheed. And, and based on their definitions, they can then advocate completely
different worldviews. So for example, the first position which is the position of Iraq global hub,
the first position is that Doha is an act of worship in all scenarios and senses, and it is a soul
right of Allah subhana wa Tada. So whoever makes to our to other than a law has committed shift.
It's a very simple, very watertight in its own worldview, that if you say that calling out to
anybody for your worldly need is a draw, and do it the right due to Allah subhanho wa Taala, then
one plus one equals two. So to call out to anybody other than a law is therefore shift. Okay. So
		

			this is the position that advocated by the first school, the second school says, that no, calling
out in and of itself is not necessarily should rather the shift element will come if you believe
that the one you are calling is a God isn't a law, and you are wanting to worship that either there
must be the intention of worship, why because actions are judged by intentions. And if you did not
intend to worship other than a law, then you cannot be held liable for worshipping other than Allah
in them. And Umberto beneath is a very simple, very common sense logic. And they give actually many
solid examples, and of those examples is that every single ritual every single deed, if you don't do
		

			it, you know, for the intention of shidduch it will not constitute shit, but it might be how long
for example, such The is the classic example right, such as the prostration we can prostrate to an
entity out of respect, and that prostration it used to be highlighted in the previous Shetty as such
as use of and his parents is the Quran says, who will have a ruler who suggests that they bow down
and such and to lower the head in respect to somebody else is something that is still found in
Eastern cultures, it was found in Western society, you know, a man would lower his head to the lady
you lower your head in respect, and in the Sherry as of previous profits, it was allowed, our
		

			shittier has come and they have said and the sorry, the Profit System has said it is haraam. It is
not allowed. It's not sure how to lower your head out of respect to a person. It's not Schulich.
Nobody says this even group one does not say this, that if you lower your head out of respect,
because the angels bow down to Adam, it could not be a theological shift. It's allowed by Allah for
their Shetty. But our shittier has come and forbidden it.
		

			So if you were to bow your head to a person out of respect, you would not be considered a machine.
If you go to the Far East, and everybody's bowing and you're like, Okay, I'll also about you're not
considering the president to be a god, you that's what they're all doing is how long you shouldn't
do that. But it is not shitting. Now, if you bow down to the statue of a God, and you prostrate
thinking that the God is worthy of respect than the shirk was, the difference is your Nia, in the
first case you didn't intend to worship in the second case you didn't intend worship of a deity.
Likewise, this group will argue to call out to an entity is not in and of itself should look rather
		

			only if you believe that that entity has powers and is worthy of worship and is a God, would it be
considered shift? Otherwise, it would be wrong. And this is, as I told you, my in my opinion, the
more sound answer theologically, it actually fits and makes sense. Because again, whatever I say,
now you can easily go to level two, that's the problem. But the point being that you can call
somebody and ask somebody for something that they're capable of doing. So I can call my friend and
say, Hey, can you pick me up? Give me a ride. And that's obviously not Should I can call my child
and say, can you help me with the groceries and in Arabic, this is a type of drop. And from the
		

			perspective of group three, we're going to come to they are saying it's the
		

			same genre, the same philosophy, the same idea that I'm calling an entity and asking that entity
something that that entity can do. I don't intend worship, I don't intend, that's a god. And the
response is that obviously Allah has not given them that power, but see the mistake of ascribing a
power to an entity. That mistake if you think Allah gave that power does not constitute shift, it
constitutes a mistake. So one cannot extrapolate that calling a dead entity for your needs is in and
of itself shift. And again, that's much can be said here. But position number two basically says
that it is held on but not sure. position number three, as we explained, they state that asking the
		

			debt as I already explained very briefly, is not a bad and it is not. Rather they say it is simply
asking an entity something that Allah has given them the power to do, just like I gave you the
examples of if I'm in my car in the garage, and I call out to my son, hey, son, come help me lift
the groceries. Nobody would say this shit.
		

			group three says the same philosophy. Again, I'm not equating I'm talking about the philosophy that
when you call out to the st. A law has given the saints some powers according to group three, and
the st will then give you what you want. Just like my son has physical strength Mashallah, who is a
young man, right? He's stronger than me. Mashallah. So I call my son to lift the groceries. group
three says the same philosophy. I'm calling a mahalo. group three says we're not calling a god.
We're not considering this to be a god. We're not giving divine powers. We know that Allah has given
that entity those powers not. Not it is not a God, and we are not worshiping that entity. And so
		

			they have their evidences for doing it. And of course, I mean, I disagree with this paradigm for
multiple reasons of them. Is that the the undeniable reality is that the earliest of generations the
Sahaba abubaker. So therefore, the Allahu I remember the top these great companions, none of them,
none of them ever called out to the Prophet sallallahu. It he was sending him after he left this
earth, despite the fact that there were so many problems happening. There was a drought that people
died, there was a plague in Syria, again, 10s of 1000s of harbor died. There was Civil War, over
50,000 people were killed civil war between the companions. And never once did one of the groups say
		

			Yasuda lamented. Yeah, so and so help me out help they want. They didn't do that. Because they
understood that that's not why Allah sent the messenger. So a lot while he was sending them, we have
to really think a little bit critically, Is this why our Prophet system was sent that us beings call
other than a law in our times of need Is that why? What are shady I came with, so we have to be a
little bit more critical here. I know the arguments of group three, I'm aware of the thought and the
various things that use that I want to talk about them in this brief q&a. But I want to ask a simple
psychological question. Do you really think that this is what the religion of Islam is about? That
		

			when we're in trouble when my child is sick, when I don't get a job, I think of previous generations
and people that have gone on and invoke them from for my needs, or should I call out to Allah
subhana wa tada and say, oh, Allah, yeah, how far we are exactly. I'm a nun. Jaco, we shall secure
my son. What is the reality of the meaning of the kalama? So again, I mean, I, I think that this is
something that really we need to be clear about. And also, by the way, another thing that we can
say, and it is a bit of an emotional argument, it's not fully academic, but it is still something
that I think should be said, that it is undeniable that in those places where such veneration occurs
		

			of the saints, in those places, where the graves they are bowed down to and people tie things and
knots and whatnot, in those types of areas, really the line between Islam and between paganism
becomes very, very blurred. And that is why at these shrines and in these, you know, types of
subcultures, one finds people, maybe of a paganistic faith tradition, are also coming and
participating. And I have visited the great land of India to is the land of my ancestors, my my all
my afforda my grandfathers were born in India and they migrated to Pakistan. My parents were both
born in India and then came to Buxton as young children. So it is the land of my ancestors. I'm not
		

			saying this in a in a negative thing. But I have seen with my own eyes, multiple places, that in
these locations of Muslim shrines, there are Hindus that also come and participate. But you will
never find a Hindu come to the masjid and pray five times a day, but you will find in these areas
		

			people of different faiths merging together, and it kind of indicates that they see a commonality
with what is happening here, that doesn't make sense to the rest of the oma. And that is why really,
we need to be, you know, very clear and firm, we all have to have read lines. And for me, I do
preach tolerance, and I do preach, definitely don't preach, you know, sectarianism, but at the same
time, there must be reasonable limits, and of those limits is that we do not invoke the dead for our
needs. Now, that having been said, Remember, my position is not the position of group one anymore, I
do not consider the action to be inherently should in and of itself. And by the way, the FD there is
		

			a very again, the evidence is used by group three, they are very similar to but not exactly the same
as the psychology of those who worship rather than a lot, but it is not the same. And that's a key
point here. Unlike what group one says, the group one says, I will explicitly state that their
evidences are the same as the evidences of the Quran, that is simply false. That is totally false.
The kurush when they worship their gods, they recognize them to be gods, and they recognize what
they're doing is worship man Budo, whom we only worship them, they considered it to be worship, but
no Muslim ever says I am worshipping the prophets, Allah Larson, I'm worshiping God that a Janani or
		

			Ali or these other you know that no Muslim says this, or believes this in their mind, it is not
worship, and in their mind, it is not worship, if they don't consider it to be worship, and we
believe in them and amount of money at how can we consider to be worshipped. Also, Allah says in the
Quran, woman yet the room Allahu Ella and her whoever calls out to another ILA. besides Allah shall
have no excuse. On the day of judgment, it is very clear, whoever calls out to anila. So to call out
to a non Isla, I can call my son and say help me in and of itself, this is not, it cannot be
shitting, it could be haraam. And so to call the dead is how wrong because the shediac does not
		

			allow us. But it is not should to simply call out, if you don't consider the being that you call out
to be an idiot, or on again, it's very clear in this point, look at the technical language. So the
point being the kurush. And even, you know, the pagans of our times and whatnot, the gods that they
worship, they consider them to be gods, and they consider them to be icons of worship. Whereas these
misguided Muslims and they are misguided, but they're also Muslims, these misguided Muslims do not
consider these entities to be gods. And they also do not consider their actions to be worship. And
therefore, I don't agree with group one, two considers this to be should, in any scenario, rather,
		

			group two is the one that is more sound, and it makes all the evidences fit, fair and square in this
regard. Now, all of this having been said, and this is a very long response, but it needs to be
done. That my advice, and especially our brother is writing, you know, from the lands of India, the
lands of our own forefathers. My advice is that, you know, you mentioned that the majority of your
family, the majority of your peoples are doing this, your own village is doing this. So, now that
you have been exposed to another ideology, and it looks like you've been exposed to group one, you
know, you're saying that, you know, the the the Salafi movement has basically, you have been exposed
		

			to that. So realize there's a group too as well, that is the position that I'm advocating and that
is the majority position, historically, speaking simply in terms of quantity, simply in terms of the
number of scholars, you will find group two is the majority, even to group one online Mashallah to
article or their presence is indeed immense. And, of course, my own respected teachers and the
scholars of Saudi Arabia, pretty much they're all on group one, and I respect them and I appreciate
them. But at the same time, the notion of considering other Muslims to be committing Schick is
indeed very problematic and it is itself an opening door to danger as we have seen amongst many
		

			extremist movements. So I do not consider the action to be an action of should rather I say that and
by the way, even if you follow group one in shallow to either your following group one be okay, in
which case excuses are made for the average lay person, and they are considered to be Muslim within
the fold of Islam. So my advice to you dear brother, my advice to you is that
		

			this action is not correct, but the people that are doing it are your kith and kin, and they are
your fellow Muslims as well. They are Muslims. And so do not begin with a hostile manner of trying
to correct them throwing out adjectives like shitcan, Cofer and whatnot because it's going to turn
people away as we have seen in the last 30 years.
		

			is going to turn people away. On the contrary, approach them with gentleness and with manners and
approach them not by negating what they do, but by affirming who Allah is. Not by criticizing the
icons that they're generating. But by talking about the love of Allah talking about Allah is Samir
Allah is Vasil. Why would you go to another entity when a law can hear you when a law sees you?
Allah answers you Allah is rezac, Allah is Shafi Allah use keep on mentioning the attributes of
Allah, preach to them by affirming the power of Allah, and not by negating their doctrines. And by
talking about their teachers know, how can they I mean, no Muslim is going to reject you, when you
		

			come to him talking about the power of Allah, the majesty of Allah, the names and attributes of
Allah, so approach them in this wise manner, and also approach them as well, by mentioning the fact
that, you know, why did the process that I've come to he comes to that, you know, other entities are
worshipped or did he come, you know, so that we all turn to Allah subhanho wa Taala. So, approach
them with gentleness with with wisdom, and do not antagonize be thinking in the long term. And, you
know, I realized it is an emotional issue, but we cannot increase the sectarianism between our own
Muslim Brethren, and especially to your brother you are writing from a land where, unfortunately,
		

			certain strands of these polytheistic religions and the BJP party and others, they are going down
the route of fascism, the route of almost genocidal tendencies, and in this stage, and in this
context for us, Muslims to turn against each other, and for us Muslims to stab each other in the
back because, you know, I mean, I have been to India many times, and I have many, you know,
colleagues and friends and mentors from there. And I know for a fact that this interest,
sectarianism between this strand and that strand, it has reached such nasty levels that friends of
mine, colleagues of mine, Muslims, other strands have reached out to the BJP. And other strands have
		

			said, Oh, that guy is a fanatic. And that guy is an extremist, because he preaches other than, you
know, position one or position two or position three. And so you have our own Muslim Brethren,
thinking that it is better to reach out to the BJP and be against another Muslim because of this
interest, sectarian hostility. Surely, we can all agree that that is ludicrous. Surely we can all
agree that that is not allowed. Please, dear brother, even as you adopt a position, understand that
the people who advocate these other positions are within the fold of Islam, as long as you follow
one beer two or three, they're all within the fold of Islam and treat them like fellow Muslims and
		

			be gentle and wise with them and realize that your job is to preach in the best of manners and the
wisest and manners is that Allah subhanho wa Taala guides me in new to that which he loves.