The terms kufr and shirk sometimes have the same meaning and sometimes are different.

The difference between kufr and shirk is that when a person commits kufr, he does an action that negates his iman, whereas shirk is worse than kufr as it involves associating somebody or something with Allah and negates his iman. The kafir is the one who denies and conceals the truth. The basic meaning of the word kufr in Arabic is concealment. Shirk means devoting worship to anyone or anything other than Allah. Kufr may take the form of denying and rejecting, but the mushrik may also believe in Allah. This is the basic difference between the mushrik and the kafir. Each word may also carry the meaning of the other, so the word kufr may be used in the sense of shirk, and the word shirk may be used in the sense of kufr. Imam Nawawi (ra) said: "Kufr and shirk may carry the same meaning, which is disbelief in Allah (swt) or they may be used separately, whereby shirk refers to the worship of idols and other created beings, whilst also acknowledging Allah, as the kuffar of Quraysh did, and kufr may have a more general meaning than shirk." (Sharh Sahih Muslim, 2/71) Indeed anyone who rejects the religion of the prophet is a kafir. And one of the ways in which a person rejects the message of the prophet is by committing an act of shirk. Therefore, every single act of major shirk is a type of kufr, but not every single act of kufr involves shirk. Thus, kufr is the general name given to any act, statement, or belief that might expel a person from the fold of Islam. Shirk is merely one type of kufr, albeit the most common and evil form. It is possible for a person to reject Islam without necessarily falling into shirk, as is the case with Iblis, and some orthodox Jews; since they worship only Allah, and follow the Tawrah, yet deny the prophet-hood of Isa (as) and Muhammad (saw), which is kufr. It is also possible to reject Islam by falling into shirk and kufr simultaneously, such as the Christians; since they claim that Isa (as) is the son of Allah (swt) which is kufr; and give him divine powers, and direct acts of worship to him, which is shirk. Many acts have elements of both kufr and shirk in them, even though each act might be more representative of one of these two matters.

For example, atheism is pure kufr, but can also be considered a type of shirk as well such that the atheist takes his hawa as an ilah other than Allah. And as known idolatry is pure shirk, but it is also a manifestation of kufr. So kufr is in fact more general than shirk. Every shirk is kufr, but not every kufr is shirk in this sense. But in general terms, kufr may take the form of denying and rejecting, but the mushrik may also believe in Allah. This is the difference between the mushrik and the kafir. If they are mentioned in the same context, then each one of them have a separate meaning, i.e., kufr would mean to deny Islam in a manner that the people from other religions or atheists do; to deny or disbelieve in something that entails leaving Islam such as denying things that entail apostasy from Islam (i.e., worshiping another god other than Allah); or denying a fard (i.e., salaah, zakaah) or command which includes prohibition (i.e., making permissible to take riba); and everything whose obligation has been established by scholarly consensus. Mainly kufr means denial or rejection of Allahs Divinity. Shirk, if mentioned with kufr in the same context, means associating other partners with Allah (swt). However, if each one of them is mentioned in different context, they would have the same meanings and implications. Meaning the word kufr may be used in the sense of shirk, and the word shirk may be used in the sense of kufr. Thus a kafir can be called a mushrik since he or she has taken another god other than Allah. Allah says in the Quran:

Hast thou seen him who maketh his desire his god. (al-Jathiyah 45/23)

By the same token a mushrik may be called kafir since he or she has denied the Oneness of Allah with his statement, action, or thought. Allah (swt) named the invoking of the mushrik to anything other than Allah as kufr:

If anyone invokes, besides Allah, any other god, he has no authority therefore; and his reckoning will be only with his Lord! and verily the unbelievers will fail to win through! (al-Muminun 23/117)

In another ayah, Allah (awj) addressed the same act as shirk:

If ye invoke them, they will not listen to your call, and if they were to listen, they cannot answer your (prayer). On the Day of Judgment they will reject your "partnership" and none, (O man!) can tell thee (the Truth) like the One Who is acquainted with all things. (Fatir 35/14) Allah (swt) called the doers of shirk as kuffar in many verses like when He (swt) was talking about Christians:

They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Maryam. (al-Ma'idah 5/17)

They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Maryam. (al-Ma'idah 5/72)

They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three. (al-Ma'idah 5/73)

Also when He (awj) was addressing the mushrik of Quraysh, He (swt) said:

Say: O disbelievers! (al-Kafirun 109/1)

Allah (swt) calls Ahlul-Kitaab as kuffar in the first verse and mushrik in the latter:

The Jews call Uzayr a son of Allah and the Christians call Isa the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: How they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Isa the son of Maryam; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him). (at-Tawbah 9/30-31)

and the same repeated in the following two ayah:

Fain would they extinguish Allah's light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected, even though the unbelievers may detest (it). It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the pagans may detest (it). (at-Tawbah 9/32-33)

Mushrik were evaluated as kafir asli. Kafir asli consists of mushrik who are from the Ahlul-Kitaab (i.e., Jews and Christians), mushrik who are not from Ahlul-Kitaab (i.e., Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Zoroastrians etc.) and atheists. RasulAllah (saw) also used these two terms in the same meaning: It was narrated from Jabir Ibn Abd-Allah (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) said: Between a man and shirk and kufr there stands his giving up prayer. (Muslim) It was narrated from Buraydah Ibn al-Husayb that RasulAllah (saw) stated: The covenant that differentiates us from them (mushrik) is prayer; whoever gives it up is a kafir. (Abu Dawud; Tirmidhi; Nasai; Ibn Maajah; Ahmad, Musnad)

Qadi Iyyad said: Hence we regard as a kafir everyone who follows a religion other than the religion of the Muslims, or who agrees with them, or who has doubts, or who says that their way is correct, even if he appears to be a Muslim and believes in Islam and that every other way is false, he is a kafir. (Kitaab ash-Shifa bi Tarif Huqub al-Mustafa, 2/1071)

Imam Ibn Hazm said: Kufr and shirk are the same; every kafir is a mushrik and every mushrik is a kafir. This is the view of ash-Shafii and others. (Kitaab al-Fasl fi al-Milal wa'l-Ahwa wa'n-Nihal, 3/124)

Kafir is undoubtedly mushrik and vice versa. As Allah (swt) addressed the mushrik in the ayah which He (awj) forbade them to enter Masjid al-Haraam, this addressing includes everyone who has a different religion other than Islam, whether he is mushrik, or kafir:

O ye who believe! Truly the pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-wise. (at-Tawbah 9/28)

There are some, here and there, who try to use the slight difference between the terms kufr/kafir and shirk/mushrik to legitimize not making takfir of those who perform shirk. They claim that the one who performs shirk is mushrik however not every mushrik is kafir until the hujjah has been established upon them. The point here is the mistaken conclusion of theirs from the ikhtilaaf of the ulama for the situation of the ahl fatrah which they apply on everyone. Therefore they come across a situation which according to them makes the masses mushrik but not kafir. So when they see anyone who performs shirk, they call him mushrik but they do not make takfir of him until they establish the hujjah. And this lead them to not make takfir of the one who does not make takfir of such person and so on. Anyone who performs shirk is kafir with regards to their hukm of dunya. However the situation of the ahl fatrah in the akhirah had been discussed among the ulama and there is ikhtilaaf concerning the situation of the ahl fatrah with regards to the hukm of akhirah. With regards to the hukm of dunya anyone who performs shirk is kafir whether he is ignorant or one among the ahl fatrah. This issue is constant with the ijmaa. It is because the one who performs shirk is mushrik due to being the doer/performer of shirk and also kafir because of his rejection of tawhid. Even if he was not able to reach the nass regarding tawhid, he is still kafir with regards to his hukm of dunya, for the reason that he rejects the truth which is present in his fitrah (and aql). The ulama stated that everyone who performs shirk meaning the mushrik is kafir concomitantly. Muhammad Ibn Abdu'l-Wahhab (ra) wrote a risalah which he named: Mufidul Mustafid fi Kufri Tarikit-Tawhid (Advice to the one who may benefit regarding the issue of the one who abandons tawhid is kafir) The reason he wrote this risalah was due to some individuals making irtidad from the Huraymilah region and some so-called scholars of the Uyaynah region doubted their kufr and their being kafir and refrained from making takfir of them. Without doubt this irtidad did not take place in a manner that they all converted to Christianity or Mazdaizm. Those who made irtidad from the region of Huraymilah and other places were uttering the kalimah and claiming to be Muslim. And they became murtad due to performing shirk which refers to the abandoning tawhid. Surely they were, mushrik, kafir and murtad.

They bring some evidences to legalize their conclusion and have stated that Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Abdu'l-Wahhab said: "And when it is the case that we do not make takfir of the one who worships an idol, that which upon (the grave) of Abdu'l-Qadir, and the idol that is upon the grave of Ahmad al-Badawi and whatever is similar to these two, due to their ignorance, and the absence of the one who will notify them (make them understand)." (ad-Durar as-Sanniyyah, 1/102-104) And also he stated: "We declare as kafir those who associate partners with Allah in His Uluhiyyah after the proofs of the falsehood of shirk have been made clear to him. (Muallifaat, 7/60) Abdu'r-Rahman Ibn Hasan said: Muhammad Ibn Abdu'l-Wahhab said: We know very well that RasulAllah (saw) had never allowed asking from the dead with the way of istighasa or other than this even if they were pious, prophets or other than this; He (saw) had never commanded to make sajda to alive or dead on the contrary, he (saw) had prohibited these and their similars. All these are among shirk which are legislated as haraam by Allah (swt) and RasulAllah (saw). Ignorance taking over (the ilm) and the lack of knowledge regarding the risalah among the mutaahhirin (the later ones); until proven to them that RasulAllah (saw) had brought the opposite of what they practice and until shown everything in clear and obvious, it is not right to make takfir of them. (Majmua at-Tawhid) Our response to this and the way these statements should be understood is: Abdu'r-Rahman Ibn Hasan narrates under the chapter Asl of dini Islam and quotes from Muhammad Ibn Abdu'l-Wahhab as an end part of very long explanation regarding those who do not make takfir of the mushrik being kafir. Abdu'r-Rahman Ibn Hasan narrates: "Muhammad Ibn Abdu'l-Wahhab stated the following: Some among them show enmity towards the mushrik however they do not make takfir of them. Therefore this also results from not comprehending the meaning of lailahaillaAllah. Whereas this kalimah necessitates the rejection of shirk at the same time it also

necessitates making takfir of those who perform this (shirk). It is stable with ijmaa that it is a necessity to do this after the establishing of hujjah. Also in surah alIkhlaas and Kafirun this reality is expressed. Regarding we make takfir of you which is mentioned in Mumtahinah 60/4 Muhammad Ibn Abdu'l-Wahhab states: Whoever does not accept that which the Quran has accepted as kafir to be kafir will have opposed to that which the rasul brought regarding tawhid and its requirements. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab again says: There are some, who does not love tawhid nor shows hatred and enmity (bughz) towards it. Our response for this is the following: The one who does not love tawhid could not be muwahhid. It is because tawhid is the religion which Allah (awj) is pleased with for His slaves. Allah (awj) commanded: And have chosen for you Islam as your religion. (al-Maidah 5/3) If an individual is pleased with things which Allah is pleased with and actualized its requirements; surely he would love tawhid. It is for the reason that without love it is not possible to mention Islam (if there is no love for tawhid, there will be no Islam). Islam is only possible with loving (the love for) tawhid. "Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said: Ikhlaas is valid with the love of Allah, and it is bound to asking for His pleasure. Whoever loves Allah will also love His din. If he does not love Allah, this would mean he also does not love His din (or if he does not love His din, therefore this means he also does not love Allah) Muhabbah necessitates the requirements of ikhlaas; meaning the conditions of tawhid. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab said: There are some who do not love shirk however, does not show hatred and enmity towards shirk. If someone is in this state, then this would show that this person does not invalidate yet those which are invalidated by tawhid and also has not rejected

(abandoned) shirk. Although it is necessary to reject the worship of any other than Allah and keep distant from this; he does not actualize this. Therefore because this individual does not carry anything from Islam, Islam will not protect his life and properties. Thus the hadith mentioned previously constitutes evidence of this. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab said: Some do not reject shirk because of not having knowledge of shirk. This person also could not be a muwahhid. To be a muwahhid he needs to reject shirk and keep distant from shirk; he also has to keep distant from ahl shirk and perform takfir of them. The one who does not recognize shirk cannot achieve that which lailahaillaAllah exhibits. Whoever does not behave according to the meaning this kalimah implicates could not be accounted as mumin. In this state it means he is not upon Islam and he does not know anything from Islam. It is because whoever does not accept and submit to what the meaning kalimah comprises, attesting to its truth while attributing it to ilm and certainty and thereby holding ikhlaas and love foreground; it will mean he will not have actualized the requirements of the kalimah. These individuals are not upon anything from this din. Even if they utter the kalimah lailahaillaAllah they do not know what this kalimah indicates and comprises. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab stated: Some do not know tawhid yet do not reject it. This is similar to the expression mentioned in the previous paragraph. These individuals prior to anything do not have knowledge of what to do regarding the matters which all nabi who had been sent to explain the din. The state of those individuals who are in this situation are like those Allah had said: They are only like cattle; nay, they are worse astray in Path. (al-Furqan 25/44) Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab said: Some these are the most dangerous ones- practice tawhid however does not know its value, does not show hatred and enmity towards those who reject tawhid and also they do not make takfir of them. The reason for Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab using the expression these are the most dangerous ones is because they do not know the value of the thing they practice and they do not actualize the hard conditions of tawhid. Whereas these are the conditions which confirm tawhid and makes it sahih and these are surely

required. As you learned before; tawhid necessitates while establishing hujjah, informing the mushrik that they are kafir and showing hatred and enmity towards them, keeping distant from shirk and rejecting shirk. Therefore these individuals only fool themselves. It is because they do not actualize any of the indications of nafy and isbat (rejection and acceptance) of the kalimah lailahaillaAllah which we also call ikhlaas. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab said: Some reject shirk and does not find it right -according to his opinion- ; however does not comprehend the true nature of shirk. These as such are very close to the previous ones however they do not comprehend the true nature of shirk yet. If they had comprehended the true nature of shirk, they would practice what the muhkam ayah indicated. As in this statement of Ibrahim (as):

I do indeed clear myself of what ye worship: (az-Zukhruf 43/26) We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have made takfir of you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever, unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone. (al-Mumtahina 60/4) For the individual who knows shirk and rejects shirk must keep distant from ahl shirk and their taghout; befriend the believers and show hatred and enmity towards shirk and ahl shirk and accept them as enemies. These two types of human kind consist of the majority among those who claim to be Muslim today. They do not practice, the necessity of tawhid which will make them an absolute muwahhid, due to ignorance and they do not know what the kalimah ikhlaas requires to be accepted and prohibited. Indeed how great the number of those fooled who do not know the true meaning of din is. As obviously understood Allah (awj) declares ahl shirk as kuffar and attributes them with this (kufr) in His muhkam ayah: It is not for such as join gods with Allah, to visit or maintain the mosques of Allah while they witness against their own souls to infidelity. (at-Tawbah 9/17)

The situation is the same in the sunnah. Ibn Taymiyyah said: Ahlut-Tawhid and ahlus-Sunnah, will attest to what the rasul had informed them and obey them in their orders; they will perform the requirements of their commands while comprehending. They will reject the tahrif and mistakes of the extremists and they also oppose the ta'wil of the ignorant. They will make Jihaad against those who oppose the prophets while only wishing to be closer to Allah with it (Jihaad) and to gain His pleasure; they do not expect their reward from them but only to be rewarded by Allah (jj). On the other hand the ignorant and extremists, because of not being able to differentiate what are commanded and what are prohibited; they cannot realize what are right and what are wrong, therefore they cannot comprehend the aim of the prophets and they cannot investigate the ways of obeying the prophets. On the contrary they are ignorant regarding those brought to them (risalah) and they are ignorant regarding those which had been given (commands and prohibitions) to them. They merely glorify their own aims. The things that Shaykhul-Islam brings forth are the same as the later two groups which were mentioned by Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab. The similar of these incidents which are brought forth by Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah had been mentioned previously. It is: At the beginning, muayyan (definite and specific) takfir will not be made. The reason for this is, as the marhum (i.e., Shaykh) had mentioned previously that before the establishment of hujjah there is a need to pause the hukm (of takfir), tawaqquf. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab said: We know very well that RasulAllah (saw) had never allowed asking from dead with the way of istighasa or other than this even if they were pious, prophets or other than this; He (saw) had never commanded to make sajda to alive or dead on the contrary, he (saw) had prohibited these and their similars. All these are among shirk which are legislated as haraam by Allah (swt) and RasulAllah (saw). Ignorance taking over (the ilm) and the lack of knowledge regarding the risalah among the mutaahhirin (the later ones); until proven to them that RasulAllah (saw) had brought the opposite of what they practice and until shown everything in clear and obvious, it is not right to make takfir of them. Marhum (i.e., Shaykh) here explained, other than the incidents of the establishment of hujjah and stubbornness; it is not necessary to attribute kufr in absolute sense specifically and muayyan (definite). It is because after the prohibition of associating partners in ibadaah, some made takfir of him among the

ulama therefore he turned to be an ummah himself. However it is not possible that he treated them as he said. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab at the beginning of his dawah, when he heard some were asking help from Zayd Ibn Khattab (ra), he told them: Allah is superior (more khayr than) to Zayd Ibn Khattab. Therefore he did not stand against them directly however with soft words he struggled to distance them from shirk. It is because the important issue here is maslahat, but surely not hatred. Allahu alim." (Majmua at-Tawhid, 47-55) If the entire passage is read carefully it will be easily seen that Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab did not mean that ignorance is an excuse. Shaykh describes the conditions of making takfir directly to the kafir. When it is looked into the method of the call of the prophets, we come across the fact that, this (making takfir to the face of kafir) only takes place after the truth is clearly shown to the society. Indeed in this passage he is giving examples of Ibrahim (as) and also mentions surah Kafirun are the most important steps to reading between the lines. This matter should not be mixed with the situation of hukm-i takfir. It is because whether the hujjah had established or not, the performer of shirk is mushrik. If he was going to talk about ignorance being an excuse he would be contradicting himself within the same passage. Also he has been condemning those who do not make takfir of mushrik in the pages full of his work. How could it be possible for him to be performing what he has been condemning for pages in front of his readers? What we understand from this passage is the following: A lot of people are performing shirk without knowing it is shirk because the ilm of tawhid has been forgotten. Although their performance of shirk does not exclude them from being mushrik and kafir; it is not right to make takfir of them upfront to their face at the beginning of the dawah because of the maslaha of dawah, in order not to scare them from tawhid. It is necessary to call at the beginning of the dawah with soft words, and try to keep them distant from shirk. Allah (awj) commanded Musa (as) and Harun (as) to call Phaorah who is worse than all other mushrik with qawli layyin. However those who are stubborn on kufr and denial and also those who show the enmity and hatred towards Islam openly are not included this. On the other hand it is one of the biggest slanders towards Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab and the ulama of Najd is claiming that they excused the graveworshippers and did not make takfir of them. It is clear, stable with tawatur and much known that Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab makes takfir of graveworshippers. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab (ra) stated:

Know that from the beginning to the end, the tawhid all the prophets called to is the tawhid of Allah in all ibadaah. In this (matter) none of the murakkab angels or the prophets has any right (of share). Those others have no right either. From this frame du'a will be only made to Him. It is stated in the ayah: And the places of worship are for Allah (alone): So invoke (du'a) not any one along with Allah. (Jinn 72/18) Therefore whoever prays to Allah day and night and then goes to a grave of a prophet or awliya and makes du'a to him surely means that he has two ilah. Essentially this person has not made shahadah that there is no ilah but Allah. It is because his ilah is the one who he invokes. Just as todays mushrik do at the graves of Zubayr, Abdul-Qadir etc. Whoever sacrifices 1000 animals to Allah and then sacrifices one for a nabi or for another; this individual becomes one who has two ilah. As stated in the ayah:

Say: Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (al-Anam 6/102)

Nusuk mentioned in the ayah is sacrificing therefore you make the comparison. Whoever genuinely makes his ibadaah only to Allah and does not associate anything regarding these matters, this person is the one who witness lailahaillaAllah. Whoever associates another (something/someone) to do ibadaah besides Allah is mushrik and the one who denies lailahaillaAllah. These shirk which I had mentioned are seen today other than those ghuraba mentioned in the hadith; in everyone in the east and west. (How little of the ghuraba there are.) There is no ikhtilaaf among the ulama of all madhabs regarding this matter. (ar-Rasail ash-Shahshiyya; ar-Risalatul-Ishrun, 166-167) A sufi and enemy of the ulama of Najd, Ibn Abidin describes the position of ulamah of Najd: The followers of Abdul-Wahhab those subject to the Khawarij, have come from among the Najd and were defeated by Makkah and Madinah. They supposedly make tahlil and tahrir of the Hanbali madhhab. According to their i'tiqaad they are the only Muslim. They call their muhalif as mushrik and they believe it is mubah

to kill the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah wal jamaa'ah. And they have even killed many of the Muslim scholars. Haq (jj) broke them all and their cities. Finally the Muslim soldiers found peace by defeating them. (Ibn Abidin, Radd al-Mukhtar, 4/262) Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab said: Know that this kalimah is the alamati farq which distinguishes Islam and kufr. It is the word of pious (taqwa); urwatul-wuska. This is what Ibrahim (as) established:

And he left it as a Word to endure among those who came after him, that they may turn back (to Allah). (az-Zukhruf 43/28)

Meaning it is not the uttering (with jahl) without knowing its meaning. Thus the munafik also were uttering this however they are in the most bottom level of jahannam under the kuffar. While they were praying and giving charity (tasadduk). On the contrary it means; stating it with knowledge by heart, uttering while loving it (kalimah) and its followers. Also it is showing hatred and enmity towards those who oppose it. Therefore RasulAllah (saw) stated: Whoever utters that there is no god other than Allah with ikhlas In one narration it is with ikhlas sourced from the heart In another it is: confirming with the heart In another hadith it is said: whoever utters lailahaillaAllah and rejects everything which is worshipped other than Allah. And some other hadith which show the ignorance of the majority of the folk regarding this shahadah You can see that when the mushrikin of our times, some of whom claim to be people of knowledge, possessing zuhd and striving hard, are in distress they begin to seek help from other than Allah like Maruf or Abdul-Qadir Jilani or those greater than them like, Zayd bin al-Khattab and az-Zubayr or

those who are greater than them like RasulAllah (saw), and help is sought from Allah. And more severe and disastrous than this is the fact that they seek help from the tawaghit: the disbelievers and the apostates like Shamsan, Idris (also called al-Ashqar), Yusuf and their likes." (ad-Duraru's-Saniyya 2/116-120; Tarikhu Najd, 397) Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab says commenting on Ibn Taymiyyahs words: These are his words quoted verbatim. Notice the fact that he differentiates between unclear matters and what we are discussing here with respect to making takfir on an individual. Also notice his takfir on their leaders, mentioning each individual by name, and explicitly stating consensus over the apostasy of Fakhr alRazi from Islam, even though he is from the greatest of Shafii scholars. Can it then be deduced from his words that an individual is not to be declared a disbeliever if he prays to Abdul-Qadir in ease and hardship?! (Fatawa al-Aimma al-Najdiyya, 3/120-124) Sulayman Ibn Sahman says: The words of Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and his likes are not concerning the grave-worshippers and Mushriks. His words are specifically about those heretics who oppose Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaah. This is known from the words of the Shaykh. Once you know that the words of Ibn Taymiyyah are about the heretics, such as the Qadariyyah, the Khawarij and so on, save the extremists among them, it becomes clear to you that the grave-worshippers are beyond this category of people. His words regarding the lack of takfir are only intended for certain matters the proofs for which are not so clear to some people, such as the matters of Qadr, Irja, and the like of it from what the heretics have said. (al-Dhiya al-Shariq, 168-169) Abdul-Latif Ibn Abdur-Rahman Ibn Hasan says: These two Shaykhs (i.e., Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim) declare that whoever does an action which is kufr or apostasy, he is to be ruled with accordingly, and in according to whatever he did from kufr, shirk or fisq, unless there happens to be a preventative factor preventing one from declaring such ruling. This is only applicable to certain cases and does not apply to the one who worships an idol, a grave, a man or a city, because the proofs have already become manifest due to the proofs established by the messengers. (Fatawa al-Aimma al-Najdiyya, 3/300)

The term of takfir sometimes used as a different meaning then its usual and general meaning. It usually used as referring 'the one who is not on the path of Islam, kafir; sometimes although not often is used to refer the kafir who deserves the punishment of both this dunya and akhirah. This hukm here used is concerning the principles of Takfir and Punishment and not for the attribute of belief. Therefore those who are among the ahl shirk will be attributed as mushrik by ijmaa. However they would not be made takfir of with the meaning that they will be punished and fought. Punishments of hadd and Jihaad are included in this hukm. For this reason it is prohibited to attack suddenly to those tribes who had never heard of Islam.

However they are mushrik and kafir even before the hujjah is established against them and certainly they are not Muslims.