The Ruling on Eating with and Sitting with the People of Major Sins

From Mu'adh 'Abd Allah Yusuf from Sudan. This message was received, and it says: Peace be upon you, and Allah's mercy and blessings. And after that:
From the Democratic Republic of Sudan, I ask that you present these questions to His Eminence Shaykh 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn 'Abd Allah ibn Baz. He says: What is the ruling on eating with a man who drinks khamr (intoxicants), sa'ut (hashish), and the like?
Answer: It is incumbent upon one who knows a man to be a drinker of khamr (intoxicants), or to be displaying some of the other munkar (what is wrong), to advise him, to direct him to good, and to guide him to what Allah has made obligatory upon him, which is leaving these haram (forbidden) things and filth. If he persists and does not accept the advice, then he should be boycotted. Boycotting him is a sunnah (recommended practice) so that perhaps he will repent, and perhaps he will turn back to Allah (Mighty and Majestic), just as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) boycotted those who lagged behind the expedition to Tabuk without an excuse, namely Ka'b ibn Malik the Ansari and his two companions. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions boycotted them for fifty nights when this sin occurred from them without a legal excuse, which was lagging behind the expedition after the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered it and mobilized the people for the expedition to Tabuk. From this and other hadiths, the scholars derived the legitimacy of boycotting one who displays sins and makes them public, or displays bid'ah (religious innovation), until Ibn 'Abd al-Qawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his famous poem on proper conduct:
Boycotting one who displays sins is a sunnah, and it has been said that deterring him is more obligatory and stronger.
And it has been said, absolutely, as long as he is open about it and he meets him with a frowning, scowling face.
The point is: Boycotting one who displays sins or bid'ah (religious innovation) is a confirmed sunnah (recommended practice). Some scholars said that it is obligatory absolutely. Some of them said: It is obligatory if it results in deterring from bid'ah (religious innovation) and sins. If it does not result in deterrence, it becomes a sunnah (recommended practice), not obligatory.
In any case, one who displays drinking khamr (intoxicants) or smoking, or other sins such as zina (unlawful sexual intercourse) and riba (usury or interest) and the like, deserves to be boycotted after advice, after direction... after guidance; because he may be ignorant and not know the prohibition of these matters, like one who grew up in lands far from Muslims, or it was confused for him in that regard. So calling him and advising him establishes the proof, and reminds him of Allah, and warns him of the consequences of these sins and as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said. If he persists and does not care about the advice, then he should be boycotted.
But if the Muslim sees that boycotting him may increase his evil, and sees that he should continue with him in advising from time to time, not for the love of his wealth or his food or the like, but for the purpose of... and directing to good and having mercy on him, so that perhaps he will turn back to Allah and perhaps he will repent, then there is no harm in repeating the advice to him, even if he visits him for that. And if he leaves eating food with him and the like, that is more appropriate, so that he does not think he came to him for the sake of food. So he connects with him for advice and direction, and leaves eating with him and sitting with him where there is no advice, so that he is not attributed with approving the munkar (what is wrong), and so that the one with the munkar (what is wrong) does not think he is pleased with him and that he does not see the refutation of this munkar (what is wrong).
And the believer does what is most beneficial always, and strives to do what is most beneficial and closest to deterring from falsehood and bringing good. This is what is incumbent in this position: boycotting one who displays sins, and not sitting with him, and not eating with him, except if the legal interest requires that he sit with him for advice and repeat that for advice and direction, and that this is more beneficial than boycotting him; because boycotting him increases his evil and increases his affliction and evils and persistence in sins, or in harming people and calling them to evil. In this case, it is incumbent to return to him and review with him in advice, so that perhaps he will repent and perhaps he will turn back. Yes.