Some people say that the Rafidah are a fifth school of jurisprudence; what is the summary of the statement regarding them?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Shaykh, may Allah reward you. Now, in some media outlets, it is described and said that the Rafidah are such that there is a difference between us and them, and that they are a fifth school of jurisprudence. What is the summary of the ruling on them?
The Shaykh : By Allah, this requires detail, because the Rafidah themselves are not on one path; they are divided. Some are close to the people of the Sunnah, some are far, and some are mushrikin (those who associate partners with Allah). They differ.
As for the statement that they are like the four schools of jurisprudence, this is like saying that Judaism and Christianity are like the Hanbali and Shafi'i schools, because the difference is apparent. For example, there are people who believe that the Manager of the universe is so-and-so, who is their imam, and that some of their imams are in a station that no close angel or sent prophet can attain, and that the Companions died upon hypocrisy and disbelief, and that Abu Bakr and 'Umar died upon hypocrisy. We cannot agree with them at all.
The scholars differ on this regarding the innovator: is there a distinction between the one who calls to it and the one who follows it blindly? It is true that a distinction is made between the one who calls to it and the one who follows it blindly, without doubt. But if the one who follows blindly is presented with the truth, is he excused? He is not excused; the original ruling is that he is not excused. Otherwise, those who said, "We found our fathers upon a nation," would be excused. Perhaps the truth comes to him from a person he does not know to be a scholar, and he has no confirmation of his knowledge. In that case, the layperson might be excused because the indications did not point to the truthfulness of this scholar. But if he knows that he is an imam among the imams of the Muslims, a scholar and a mujtahid, and the truth is conveyed to him, and he persists in rejecting it, then he has no valid argument.
The Shaykh : By Allah, this requires detail, because the Rafidah themselves are not on one path; they are divided. Some are close to the people of the Sunnah, some are far, and some are mushrikin (those who associate partners with Allah). They differ.
As for the statement that they are like the four schools of jurisprudence, this is like saying that Judaism and Christianity are like the Hanbali and Shafi'i schools, because the difference is apparent. For example, there are people who believe that the Manager of the universe is so-and-so, who is their imam, and that some of their imams are in a station that no close angel or sent prophet can attain, and that the Companions died upon hypocrisy and disbelief, and that Abu Bakr and 'Umar died upon hypocrisy. We cannot agree with them at all.
The scholars differ on this regarding the innovator: is there a distinction between the one who calls to it and the one who follows it blindly? It is true that a distinction is made between the one who calls to it and the one who follows it blindly, without doubt. But if the one who follows blindly is presented with the truth, is he excused? He is not excused; the original ruling is that he is not excused. Otherwise, those who said, "We found our fathers upon a nation," would be excused. Perhaps the truth comes to him from a person he does not know to be a scholar, and he has no confirmation of his knowledge. In that case, the layperson might be excused because the indications did not point to the truthfulness of this scholar. But if he knows that he is an imam among the imams of the Muslims, a scholar and a mujtahid, and the truth is conveyed to him, and he persists in rejecting it, then he has no valid argument.