The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

[Calender121438]

1) I found this thread interesting: http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...ic-communities

2) Please also read this thread: http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...lly-mushrikeen

3) A lot of "Muslims" prefer the words of their "scholars" over the Quran. According to them, their "scholars" are clear when they say something but Allah was not clear when He said:

A) "And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers." (Surah 5:44).

B) Exalted is He and high above what they say by great sublimity.(Surah 17:43).

4) Ironically, these same "Muslims" do not have a problem with the clarity of the ayah I am about to quote, even though it was also particularly revealed on the Children of Israel(peace be upon him):

A) Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.(Surah 5:32).

May Allah guard us against worshiping "scholars" and guide us to the straight path. Ameen.

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

Assalamu alaykom

I only read the first thread , so excuse me if something was explained in 2)

Firstly , no one is worshipping scholars - except maybe those who are extreme in venerating the dead.

There are different classes of people. Islam is a religion of balance and justice. It is unjust to equate the ignorant with the possessor of knowledge.

The issue with your perspective is that it opens the door to the ignorant people to speak on / judge the Quran without the prerequisite knowledge required. This actually belittles the tradition and opposes the overwhelming position ( if not , their consensus ) , that one should " ask those who know , if you do not know "

Even Salafi scholars like Ibn Uthaymeen who you happenned to praise , is of the opinion that the layman shluld ask from the scholar most qualified and be content with that fatwa.

What often causes doubts to the "truth seeker" is following the errors of scholars , which is something no one should desire. But I would argue two points against the alleged 'truth seeker'

1) If you are so concerned with following the truth in matters where the classical scholars differed , then be sincere and learn Arabic , grammer , hadith sciences and Quran exegesis. Until then , humble yourself and ask those who know / remain in tune with them due to your incompetence.

2) Difference of opinion in matters of furoo' are a mercy and it dates back to the time of our Salaf. Learn to 'agree to disagree' this is adaab al ikhtilaf.

With regards to that thread , many people are assuming or superimposing theology which they may feel is true and disregard the positions of great Ulama.

1) Admit your ignorance firstly. If you are not a scholar then you are a layman , and are in no position to suggest that these scholars were incorrect due to your misconception and ignorance of further evidence which refutes what you perceive to be the position of Islam.

2) Classical Ulama ( They are not innovators ) believe in certain honour / praise which translates to different laws pertaining to certain peoples.

All of us believe in preference given to ahl al bayt (as) along with certain laws which distinguish them ( They don't accept charity ) , so it is not completely unislamic.

If it is 'Shaykh worship' to be humble until Allah blesses you with Ilm , then it is 'Nafs Worship' from my perspective via your ignorance / emotions / false assumptions

Barak Allah feekum

[AbuNajm]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

3) A lot of "Muslims" prefer the words of their "scholars" over the Quran.

Apparently you have not studied any sciences of the Quran. If you had, then you would know that there are 4 types of verses in the Quran:

Ibn Abbās RA divided Tafsīr into 4 aspects:

A) Tafsīr which the Arab knows from his own familiarity with the language;
B) Tafsīr which no one is excused for being ignorant of it;
C) Tafsīr only the Scholars know;
D) Tafsīr only Allah knows, and whoever says they know it is lying.

For all those who do not know the Arabic language, then they would be ignorant of 2 out 3 possible explanations for the Quran. This is the reason that Muslims not only prefer the words of their scholars with regards to the meaning of the Quran, but they must depend on them.

Anyone who neglects the meaning of the Quran according to the scholars is astray since they would be neglecting at least 33% of possible Tafaaseer.

According to them, their "scholars" are clear when they say something but Allah was not clear when He said:

A) "And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers." (Surah 5:44).

This Ayah has both a "clear meaning" but also aspects of Fiqh which are not apparent to anyone except the Mufassir and Faqeeh.

4) Ironically, these same "Muslims" do not have a problem with the clarity of the ayah I am about to quote, even though it was also particularly revealed on the Children of Israel(peace be upon him):

A) Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.(Surah 5:32).

If Muslims were to rely on what contemporaries claim this verse means and exclude all other meanings, then truly we would be astray.

Compare what many think this verse means with its actual preferred meaning according to a leading scholar in exegesis:

وَأَوْلَى هَذِهِ الْأَقْوَالِ عِنْدِي بِالصَّوَابِ قَوْلُ مَنْ قَالَ: تَأْوِيلُ ذَلِكَ أَنَّهُ مَنْ قَتَلَ نَفْسًا مُؤْمِنَةً بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ قَتَلَتْهَا فَاسْتَحَقَّتِ الْقَوَدَ بِهَا وَالْقَتْلَ قِصَاصًا , أَوْ بِغَيْرِ فَسَادٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ , بِحَرْبِ اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَحَرْبِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ فِيهَا , فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا

Abu Ja'far said: "And the worthiest of these opinions of being correct, according to me, is he who says: "the meaning of that is that whoever kills a Believing person for something other than a life for a life, then it deserves retaliation and death as retaliation; or [whoever kills a Believing person] for something other than spreading corruption in the earth and waging war against Allah, His Messenger and the Believers, then it is as if he kills all mankind..."

This is the correct understanding of the verse, whereas many people today think it refers to any human being, when it actually refers only to "Believers".

Due to the false interpretations that are abundant today, for this and many verses, many people think that the correct interpretation is false and the false interpretation is correct.

So the ignorant person thinks that what the translation of a verse says is the "apparent" meaning and what they understand from it is the correct interpretation. Even though the Arabic may have several different possible meanings and the Salaf agreed on what those possible meanings are, and they are all contradictory to what this ignorant person thinks the verse means.

Thus, the ignorant person reviles the correct meaning because it contradicts his false understanding. Then he accuses the people who adhere to the meanings as understood by the Salaf as "worshiping scholars" and "taking the words of scholars over the Quran".

May Allah guard us against worshiping "scholars" and guide us to the straight path. Ameen.

A good Du'a with an evil intent.

[Calender121438]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

Assalamu alaykom

I only read the first thread , so excuse me if something was explained in 2)

Firstly , no one is worshipping scholars - except maybe those who are extreme in venerating the dead.

There are different classes of people. Islam is a religion of balance and justice. It is unjust to equate the ignorant with the possessor of knowledge.

The issue with your perspective is that it opens the door to the ignorant people to speak on / judge the Quran without the prerequisite knowledge required. This actually belittles the tradition and opposes the overwhelming position ( if not , their consensus ) , that one should " ask those who know , if you do not know "

Even Salafi scholars like Ibn Uthaymeen who you happenned to praise , is of the opinion that the layman shluld ask from the scholar most qualified and be content with that fatwa.

What often causes doubts to the "truth seeker" is following the errors of scholars , which is something no one should desire. But I would argue two points against the alleged 'truth seeker'

1) If you are so concerned with following the truth in matters where the classical scholars differed , then be sincere and learn Arabic , grammer , hadith sciences and Quran exegesis. Until then , humble yourself and ask those who know / remain in tune with them due to your incompetence.

2) Difference of opinion in matters of furoo' are a mercy and it dates back to the time of our Salaf. Learn to 'agree to disagree' this is adaab al ikhtilaf.

With regards to that thread , many people are assuming or superimposing theology which they may feel is true and disregard the positions of great Ulama.

1) Admit your ignorance firstly. If you are not a scholar then you are a layman , and are in no position to suggest that these scholars were incorrect due to your misconception and ignorance of further evidence which refutes what you perceive to be the position of Islam.

2) Classical Ulama ( They are not innovators ) believe in certain honour / praise which translates to different laws pertaining to certain peoples.

All of us believe in preference given to ahl al bayt (as) along with certain laws which distinguish them ( They don't accept charity ) , so it is not completely unislamic.

If it is 'Shaykh worship' to be humble until Allah blesses you with Ilm , then it is 'Nafs Worship' from my perspective via your ignorance / emotions / false assumptions

Barak Allah feekum

1) Wa alaykum salam. None of what you said is wrong except one thing. You did not judge me fairly, the justice of Islam requires you to do that.

A) Indeed this, my brother, has ninety-nine ewes, and I have one ewe; so he said, 'Entrust her to me,' and he overpowered me in speech."[David] said, "He has certainly wronged you in demanding your ewe [in addition] to his ewes. And indeed, many associates oppress one another, except for those who believe and do righteous deeds - and few are they." And David became certain that We had tried him, and he asked forgiveness of his Lord and fell down bowing [in prostration] and turned in repentance [to Allah ].(Surah 38:23-24).

2) Please read both of the threads that I posted before assuming things about me. By "worshiping sheikhs", I mean obeying the slaves of the Taghut like Sudais:

A) Proof: http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...n-Donald-Trump

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

1) Wa alaykum salam. None of what you said is wrong except one thing. You did not judge me fairly, the justice of Islam requires you to do that.

A) Indeed this, my brother, has ninety-nine ewes, and I have one ewe; so he said, 'Entrust her to me,' and he overpowered me in speech."[David] said, "He has certainly wronged you in demanding your ewe [in addition] to his ewes. And indeed, many associates oppress one another, except for those who believe and do righteous deeds - and few are they." And David became certain that We had tried him, and he asked forgiveness of his Lord and fell down bowing [in prostration] and turned in repentance [to Allah ].(Surah 38:23-24).

2) Please read both of the threads that I posted before assuming things about me. By "worshiping sheikhs", I mean obeying the slaves of the Taghut like Sudais:

A) Proof: http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...n-Donald-Trump

Barak Allah feekum

I have read your second thread , and please do not take this offensively , because my intent is not evil.

Your OP engages in both , incorrect usage of scripture - as it would relate to the given situations they were abscribed to .. Along with a slander which I would assume you may take back , regardless if you are persuaded by what follows in this message.

1) I am not sure why you quoted 6:121 , and if I assume based on the context of your thread , you are trying to imply that Salafis eat the meat of ahl al kitab and subsequently have made the haram in to halal - following their jewish predecessors - and all Salafis who follow them are engaging in Shaykh worship.

If this is true , then it is clear that your entire way of thinking is incoherent and really needs to be revaluated , lest you openly accept a primitive and extreme understanding of Islam - one which is without any foundation and falls apart once it is parallel to abrogations / apparent contradictory texts.

It is the standard opinion of the Shafi'i madhhab that the food of the ahl al kitab is halal. This stems off the verse [5.5] , which is argued as being towards the end of the life of the Prophet(saws) , which means it is the more recent in terms of abrogations .. There is simply a valid difference of opinion , and further proof that one should not be hasty in judgement of experts , if one is not an expert.

2) There is not a scholarly consensus on the disbelief of the rulers. Once again , your quoting of the text and claiming that Salafis respond with statements of their Ulama is because they may not have been dealing with the situation as primitively ( No offense ).

Yes text may say that such people are Kaafiroon but the ayat preceeding that uses fasiqoon.

When you said , Salafis worship their Shaykhs by obeying them in legislation , this was slander. Salafi Shaykhs are not legislating , nor are they claiming that ruling by other than what Allah revealed is not kufr. Rather , it is kufr , but not all kufr necessarily makes one a kaafir.

With regards to legislation , the intent of the ruler / internal beliefs are a deciding factor. A ruler who is forced or is following his desires but acknowledges that Allahs law is the highest and best is not a kaafir as per the opinion of Uthaymeen - which does not negate it's kufr.

The rulers not being kuffar is the opinion of the majority and if you follow what is deemed to be the more severe and strict position in this regard , then I challenge you to bring me any non Salafi scholars who agree with you. In fact , in my research I have only come across Sufi Ulama who do not believe that the act is Kufr akbar in and of itself. Rather , this is a belief widespread with those influenced by Muhammad ibn abdul Wahhab ( Salafis )

I may add more to this post , just need a minute inshaAllah.

Fi aman Allah

[Calender121438]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

Barak Allah feekum

I have read your second thread , and please do not take this offensively , because my intent is not evil.

Your OP engages in both , incorrect usage of scripture - as it would relate to the given situations they were abscribed to .. Along with a slander which I would assume you may take back , regardless if you are persuaded by what follows in this message.

1) I am not sure why you quoted 6:121 , and if I assume based on the context of your thread , you are trying to imply that Salafis eat the meat of ahl al kitab and subsequently have made the haram in to halal - following their jewish predecessors - and all Salafis who follow them are engaging in Shaykh worship.

If this is true , then it is clear that your entire way of thinking is incoherent and really needs to be revaluated , lest you openly accept a primitive and extreme understanding of Islam - one which is without any foundation and falls apart once it is parallel to abrogations / apparent contradictory texts.

It is the standard opinion of the Shafi'i madhhab that the food of the ahl al kitab is halal. This stems off the verse [5.5] , which is argued as being towards the end of the life of the Prophet(saws) , which means it is the more recent in terms of abrogations .. There is simply a valid difference of opinion , and further proof that one should not be hasty in judgement of experts , if one is not an expert.

2) There is not a scholarly consensus on the disbelief of the rulers. Once again , your quoting of the text and claiming that Salafis respond with statements of their Ulama is because they may not have been dealing with the situation as primitively ( No offense ).

Yes text may say that such people are Kaafiroon but the ayat preceeding that uses fasiqoon.

When you said , Salafis worship their Shaykhs by obeying them in legislation , this was slander. Salafi Shaykhs are not legislating , nor are they claiming that ruling by other than what Allah revealed is not kufr. Rather , it is kufr , but not all kufr necessarily makes one a kaafir.

With regards to legislation , the intent of the ruler / internal beliefs are a deciding factor. A ruler who is forced or is following his desires but acknowledges that Allahs law is the highest and best is not a kaafir as per the opinion of Uthaymeen - which does not negate it's kufr.

The rulers not being kuffar is the opinion of the majority and if you follow what is deemed to be the more severe and strict position in this regard , then I challenge you to bring me any non Salafi scholars who agree with you. In fact , in my research I have only come across Sufi Ulama who do not believe that the act is Kufr akbar in and of itself. Rather , this is a belief widespread with those influenced by Muhammad ibn abdul Wahhab ( Salafis )

I may add more to this post , just need a minute inshaAllah.

Fi aman Allah

1) You misunderstood me on why I quoted Surah 6:121. Read Surah 9:31 in the context of Surah 6:121.

2) It depends on if you consider the slaves of the Taghut to be "scholars". The ruling on the apostate rulers is clear from the Quran, Sunnah, and the consensus of the sahaba(Caliphate of Abu Bakr).

3) I could careless about what any "scholar" says after Allah and His Messenger have already decided a matter:

A) It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.(Surah 33:36).

4) Interesting articles:

A) http://theghurabah.blogspot.com/2013...that_9302.html

B) https://justpaste.it/najashi

5) Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen(May Allah have mercy on him): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgKdU3tlqLI

[AbuNajm]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

It is the standard opinion of the Shafi'i madhhab that the food of the ahl al kitab is halal. This stems off the verse [5.5] , which is argued as being towards the end of the life of the Prophet(saws) , which means it is the more recent in terms of abrogations .. There is simply a valid difference of opinion , and further proof that one should not be hasty in judgement of experts , if one is not an expert.

Not sure if you're aware, but the Shafi'ee Madh'hab also says that the term Ahl al-Kitab only applies to those people who had converted to Christianity or Judaism before the time of the Prophet SAWS.

Any people who became Christian or Jew after the Prophet SAWS are not able to be called "Ahl al-Kitab" or take that benefit. They remain Mushrik Asli.

This is because no other Deen except Islam is accepted by Allah after the Ba'ath of the Prophet SAWS.

So the Shafi'ee Madh'hab does not consider all Christians and Jews today to be "Ahl al-Kitab".

Look at Europe in the middle and end of the 7th century CE- much of Europe had yet to accept Christianity. Then look at the rest of the world- the Americas and Australia are not "Ahl al-Kitab"; even England has a questionable time line of conversion to Christianity in time.

People today assume that any Christian or Jew is considered "Ahl al-Kitab", but this is not true.

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

1) You misunderstood me on why I quoted Surah 6:121. Read Surah 9:31 in the context of Surah 6:121.

"And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned, for indeed, it is grave disobedience. And indeed do the devils inspire their allies [among men] to dispute with you. And if you were to obey them, indeed, you would be associators [of others with Him]." [6:121]

"They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him." [9:31]

What's your point?

This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. [5:5]

Does the Qur'an have contradictions ? Nope , it is a concept promoted within the Quran and outside the Quran.

We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent? [2:106]

2) It depends on if you consider the slaves of the Taghut to be "scholars". The ruling on the apostate rulers is clear from the Quran, Sunnah, and the consensus of the sahaba(Caliphate of Abu Bakr).

3) I could careless about what any "scholar" says after Allah and His Messenger have already decided a matter:

A) It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.(Surah 33:36).

This is the crux of the issue. You could careless what scholars say based on your understanding of the Quran and the Sunnah. An understanding which is free from the Arabic language , free from science of ahadith , science of the Quran , abrogated / texts dealing with specific circumstances , logic , etc .. You are not a mujtahid , and are simply in no position to have a position.

According to your ways , any deviant and misguided individual can justify anything , through their understanding of the Quran - whilst twisting and bending ayat in order to fit in to their understanding of the Quran / Sunnah and then quote as you have ..

It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.(Surah 33:36)

Surely , this is where sincerity and humbleness comes in. May Allah grant it to us.

5) Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen(May Allah have mercy on him): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgKdU3tlqLI

Musa Cerentino is not an aalim , but Shukran for the articles.

Shaykh Salih ibn al Uthaymeen Raheemahullah is a recognized Hanbalee Faqih. That youtube video you sent was developed by someone following their Nafs , taking snippets out of several fatawa to establish a specific result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7Ov2gcEopY Describes what I mentioned , and it is one full fatwa in it's full context.

May Allah grant us fiqh in our religion and free us from the lack of intellect presented to us by the khawarij , ameen.

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

Not sure if you're aware, but the Shafi'ee Madh'hab also says that the term Ahl al-Kitab only applies to those people who had converted to Christianity or Judaism before the time of the Prophet SAWS.

Any people who became Christian or Jew after the Prophet SAWS are not able to be called "Ahl al-Kitab" or take that benefit. They remain Mushrik Asli.

This is because no other Deen except Islam is accepted by Allah after the Ba'ath of the Prophet SAWS.

So the Shafi'ee Madh'hab does not consider all Christians and Jews today to be "Ahl al-Kitab".

Look at Europe in the middle and end of the 7th century CE- much of Europe had yet to accept Christianity. Then look at the rest of the world- the Americas and Australia are not "Ahl al-Kitab"; even England has a questionable time line of conversion to Christianity in time.

People today assume that any Christian or Jew is considered "Ahl al-Kitab", but this is not true.

Yes I have heard about their definition of ahl al kitab and this also is relevant with regards to marrying women from among them.

[Calender121438]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

"And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned, for indeed, it is grave disobedience. And indeed do the devils inspire their allies [among men] to dispute with you. And if you were to obey them, indeed, you would be associators [of others with Him]." [6:121]

"They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him." [9:31]

What's your point?

This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. [5:5]

Does the Qur'an have contradictions ? Nope , it is a concept promoted within the Quran and outside the Quran.

We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent? [2:106]



This is the crux of the issue. You could careless what scholars say based on your understanding of the Quran and the Sunnah. An understanding which is free from the Arabic language , free from science of ahadith , science of the Quran , abrogated / texts dealing with specific circumstances , logic , etc .. You are not a mujtahid , and are simply in no position to have a position.

According to your ways , any deviant and misguided individual can justify anything , through their understanding of the Quran - whilst twisting and bending ayat in order to fit in to their understanding of the Quran / Sunnah and then quote as you have ..

It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.(Surah 33:36)

Surely , this is where sincerity and humbleness comes in. May Allah grant it to us.



Musa Cerentino is not an aalim , but Shukran for the articles.

Shaykh Salih ibn al Uthaymeen Raheemahullah is a recognized Hanbalee Faqih. That youtube video you sent was developed by someone following their Nafs , taking snippets out of several fatawa to establish a specific result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7Ov2gcEopY Describes what I mentioned , and it is one full fatwa in it's full context.

May Allah grant us fiqh in our religion and free us from the lack of intellect presented to us by the khawarij , ameen.

After that khawarij comment, I will no longer respond to you. I am not trying to offend you but you are one of the people that I am talking about. You take the words of the "scholars" over the Quran.

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

After that khawarij comment, I will no longer respond to you. I am not trying to offend you but you are one of the people that I am talking about. You take the words of the "scholars" over the Quran.

I am not offended at all. Is the Du'a offensive to you?

What is incoherent with regards to my posts? My intention is to promote truth , but I will not submit to shallow understandings.

[Calender121438]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

Just to clarify before someone accuses me of supporting IS, I do not support them: http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...y-of-an-advice

[Calender121438]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

1) Another clarification: The two videos of sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen in here clearly contradict each other. A true Muslim would not choose the clear statement of Allah over the statement of any "scholar". A true Muslim would really realize the danger of the statement of Allah:

A) They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.(Surah 9:31).

2) Furthermore, there is no difference between disbelievers, wrongdoers, and defiantly disobedient in the Quran, for example:

A) " But whoever disbelieves after that - then those are the defiantly disobedient" Surah 24:55

B) "And none reject Our verses except the wrongdoers." Surah 29:49

3) If you need more clarification, please read these two interesting articles:

A) http://theghurabah.blogspot.com/2013...that_9302.html

B) https://justpaste.it/najashi

[talibilm09]

Re: The danger of worshiping sheikhs(Reminder).

:salams

More on this subject here

http://www.ummah.com/forum/archive/i.../t-403508.html

May Allah guide us all to his right path