What is the ruling on praying behind some of the imams who commit acts of shirk (associating partners with Allah), such as asking Allah by the status of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)

Your Eminence, the father (may Allah preserve you), what is the ruling on praying behind some of the imams who commit acts of shirk (associating partners with Allah), such as asking Allah by the status of the Prophet, and the like? May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : We have discussed this issue in some gatherings, and I do not know now, the time is approaching nine, so let us suffice ourselves with five minutes to speak about this question.
First: It is not permissible to hasten to declare some of the people of religious innovation as disbelievers merely because they have fallen into some of it, before the argument of the scholars is established against them; for it is known from the principles of the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) that those who are disbelievers in an open manner, we do not rule for them with the Fire until the argument of Allah is established against them, as in His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): , and as in His saying (peace and blessings be upon him), as narrated by Imam Muslim in his "Sahih" from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: ; so, the one who enters the Fire is the one to whom the argument of the message of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) reaches, and then he does not believe in it. This is the position of all the scholars of the Muslims. Therefore, the righteous Salaf (the earliest generations) in their beliefs, which the Khalaf (the later generations) inherited from them, say that the prayer is valid behind every righteous person and every open sinner, and that the funeral prayer is performed for the deceased, whether he was righteous or an open sinner. They do not declare a disbeliever anyone who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, except after the argument of Allah is established against him. If we know this reality, and we see that some Islamic sects have fallen into pure shirk (associating partners with Allah) for which there is no room to interpret it as anything other than shirk, then it is not permissible to hasten to takfir (declaring someone a disbeliever) except after establishing the argument. And I believe that the argument, for many people, and especially among them the non-Arabs who do not understand the Arabic language, and especially among them those who have not previously been guided to Islam, nor their fathers, such as the Europeans and Americans and the like; for these people, it is not easy to say: the argument of Allah has been established against them. This is the word of Allah being recited to them night and day.
You know that many Arab Muslims do not understand the word of the Lord of the Worlds; so how do we think of the non-Arab disbelievers? As for them, they understood the Qur'an and the argument of Allah was established against them. This is the first point. And secondly: some innovations are not shirk (associating partners with Allah), but can be considered an error, or misguidance, or an innovation; because shirk is a great matter, as our Lord said in the noble Qur'an: . The previous example mentioned in the question, which is: seeking nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul) by the status of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family); this is undoubtedly an error contrary to the Sunnah (the Prophet's way), and this has a long discussion, and it has exceeded...
...with the created being, as we used to hear this a lot in our Syrian lands, and we had debates and discussions with some of the misguided innovators, so one of them would address the issue with his lopsided, deviated intellect, and say: If a person has a need with an emir or a minister, does he come to him and ask him to fulfill his need, or does he insert an intermediary between him and that emir? So we would say to them: Yes, an intermediary is necessary, but what is your opinion of the emir who does not need an intermediary, and accepts and opens his door to all people to address him face to face, and does not let them insert an intermediary between him and them; is this better for you, or the emir who must have an intermediary?
The poor man thinks a little and follows his misguidance with hesitation, but he cannot say it, especially when I remind him of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, whom some contemporaries called, and lied, saying: he is the first democrat in Islam! And they mean by democracy, as you know, justice. 'Umar ibn al-Khattab is the first democrat in their claim, as for Abu Bakr and as for the Messenger who raised them, he was not the first democrat in his expression. The point is: when we remind these misguided people that 'Umar ibn al-Khattab used to have the Bedouin come to him and say to him: O 'Umar, my need is such and such; what do you see? Is this better, or the emir you used as an example? He has no choice but to say: 'Umar is better. So we say to them: O poor ones, woe to you! You have likened the Lord of the Worlds to the misguided emirs, and you refused to liken Him to 'Umar the just and wise. If you had likened Him to him, you would have been in clear error; because Allah says , so how is it that you refused to liken Him to 'Umar and likened Him to misguidance? Is this not enough for you as a warning in your error in seeking nearness to Allah through the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), let alone seeking nearness to Allah through those lower in status and rank? So their hands fall, as it is said.
This type is undoubtedly major shirk (associating partners with Allah), but there is a type of seeking nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul) that is not of this kind at all. It was reported from some of those known for their adherence to the Book and the Sunnah that they permitted seeking nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul) by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) only, not by all the prophets, not by all the created beings. They held fast to the hadith of the blind man, among them al-'Izz ibn 'Abd al-Salam, among them Imam al-Shawkani, who opposed the doctrine of the Zaydiyyah and threw himself to the Book and the Sunnah, and was not satisfied with anything else as a substitute for them. Indeed, it was also narrated from Imam Ahmad, the Imam of the Sunnah, that he said that seeking nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul) by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) is permissible, based on his standing at the hadith or the apparent meaning of the hadith of the blind man. So do we say about this second type, from those who permitted seeking nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul), even though we do not declare Allah to be in that state, that they... committed shirk or fell into it? The answer is: No. So, seeking nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul) by the created beings has two states: the one who seeks nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul) by likening the Creator to the created being, that is disbelief itself. And the one who seeks nearness to Allah through a means (tawassul) thinking that there is evidence for it, which is the hadith of the blind man; he is to be corrected and not declared misguided, so how can he be declared a disbeliever?!
We ask Allah (Mighty and Majestic) to make us guides and guided, not misguided or deluded. And peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.