Researcher of Political Science & Classical Islam. Initiated by the Khwajagan i-Naqshband.
Q. On your website, http://www.khwajagan.org you refer to the Rafidi’s as infidels, yet in another post referred to the Twelve Imams of the Awliya as being the same as those of the Shiites. If the Rafidi’s believe in the correct Imams, how is it possible for you to have referred to them as infidels? Please explain.
A. According to a direct narration by the author of the Rashahat ‘Ayn al-Hayat, the venerable Khwaja ‘Ubaidu’llah referred to the Rafidi’s as infidels. This takfir on them is not based on their explicit ideology or core doctrines. The doctrine of Imamate is in fact an Arab idea, or ideology, and is shared by individuals who refer to themselves as both Sunni and Shiite alike. It’s roots stem from the teachings of the first Imam, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (karram Allahu wajhu). The so called Rafidis are astray because they oppose regional Arab hegemony, and have always planned to destroy it, and revive the Persian Empire. Many of the doctrines they invented in the name of Shiism reflect this plot. However, these people are neither Sunni, since the argument for holding to the Sunnah instead of the Ahlul Bayt was an Arab idea, nor Shiite, since Shiite ideology of holding to the monarchy (Ahlul Bayt) for both political and spiritual guidance is also an Arab idea, rather they are people of Bid’ah, like the Nasibis.
From a religious stand point, to plot to destroy the regional Arab hegemony and leadership in religion is in fact an act of Kufr or infidelity as it is a rejection of the central tenets of Islam. The Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) has been reported to have said in numerous ahadith that holding on to the Qur’an and the royal family (monarchy), i.e., the Ahlul Bayt will prevent one from going astray in faith. Amongst the meanings of the leadership of Ahlul Bayt includes the leadership of the ‘Alids, but also the other royals of the Arabs like the Hashemites, the descendents of ‘Abd al-Muttallib, the Quraysh, the Adnanites, and real Arabs in general of Ishmaelite ancestry. Anyone who opposes these groups in the name of Islam with the intention to destroy the leadership of the Arabs in faith, has opposed Islam and has in fact committed Kufr according to the ‘Urafa, as confirmed by the new Naqib of Baghdad during my conversation with him on April 24th, 2011 at our home in Hyderabad. This includes the Turks, who in opposition to the revolt of the Sherif of Mecca, rejected the leadership of the Arabs, and even began calling the Adhaan in Turkish and banned all forms of Arabic culture. The result for opposing the leadership of the Arabs (in Islam) is that they lost everything they had which connected them to Islam, and the Holy Prophet (S), including the privilege to call themselves the leaders of the Islamic world, and as such, the Caliphate, another Arab idea, collapsed in their country. This was not the opinion of the Caliphs themselves, but as the leaders of the people are a reflection of their actions, the Caliph was forcibly exiled by Turkish nationalists, who opposed the Arabs, and as such became infidels.
Today you will still find such strange ideas amongst Turks who claim they are Muslims, they oppose the Arabs and hate them, yet claim they are Muslims. You will even find such strange doctrines amongst those who claim to be Sufis amongst them, even though all of their prayers, litany and devotions are in Arabic, and their Qutbs (Aqtaab) Arabs. The Turkish nationalists were motivated to exile the Caliph because the Caliphs defended the leadership of the Arabs (in Islam). In fact, the last Ottoman Caliph, ‘Abdel Mejid married his daughter to the son of the last Nizam of Hyderabad. The Nizam of Hyderabad traced his lineage back to the Quraysh, and was of Arab roots.
The author of the Rashahat included this incident from the the life of the venerable Khwaja ‘Ubaidu’llah regarding those who oppose Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, demonstrating that declaring the Rafidis infidels is not based on their rejection of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. The venerable Khwaja ‘Ubaidu’llah is quoted in the Rashahat as saying:
“One of the Shaikhs also found himself in a place where the Rafidis represented the majority. A Rafidi gang confronted him on the road, and they persisted in their blasphemous assertions concerning the venerable Abu Bakr. The Shaikh`s companions were about to thrash them severely, but he did not grant them permission. He said: “Leave them alone! The Abu Bakr they mention is not the one we know! Having created an imaginary Abu Bakr in their minds, they display him as the enemy of the people of the household of Allah’s Messenger, and they inveigh against him. If such an Abu Bakr had existed, we would also have inveighed against him!” On hearing this, the Rafidis attained to right guidance, and they kissed the Shaikh’s hand while seeking forgiveness” (Rashahat ‘Ain al-Hayat: Beads of Dew from the Source of Life. Translated by Muhtar Holland. Al-Baz. p.299).
And Allah Knows Best!