Statements of the past scholars concerning Shia

Shaykh Al Islam Ibn Tayymiyyah (rh) "The Raafidah revile the companions and their narrations, but the inner reality of the matter is that they desire revilement of the Messengership (itself).....For indeed the dispraising of the best of generations, those of whom accompanied the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) is a dispraise of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam)." (Majmu' al-Fatawa) Imam Abu Hanifah (rh) and Imam Muhammad (rh) Hafiz ibn Hajar Makki (may Allah have mercy on him) writes in Al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, p.362-363,

"It was already mentioned that the Hanafi scholars condemned one with kufr who denies the caliphate of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr and Sayyiduna 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with them). This ruling is mentioned in their books with detail as it is mentioned in Al-Asl by Imam Muhammad bin al-Hassan al-Shaybani (may Allah have mercy upon him). It is obvious that they have inherited it from their Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah be pleased with him) and he knows more about the Rawafid as he is from Kufa and Kufa was the origin and headquarter of the Rawafid. Among the Rawafid, there are many groups, some must be condemned with kufr while some not. So, when Imam Abu Hanifah regards the denier of caliphate of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) as kafir, so one who curses him will necessarily be called kafir except that if one makes some difference. As it is clear that the reason of declaring him as kafir is his opposition to the ijma' (consensus) based upon the ruling that one who denies a unanimous matter (of religion) will be called kafir. This is a general rule among the theologians. The caliphate of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) is a unanimous matter from the time when Sayyiduna Umar came forward for his ba'yah (solemn pledge of obedience), but it cannot be contradicted with the delay made by some Sahabah; since those who delayed in ba'yah they did not delay due to any disagreement about his eligibility of caliphate, therefore they used to take his bestowals and used to take their issues to him. So, ba'yah is something and ijma' is something else, and one is not necessary for the other. You should understand this point, as some people commit mistake therein. If you object that calling anyone withkafir is conditioned with the rejection of a matter categorized as necessary in religion. I will say that the matter of his caliphate falls in the same category; since it is proved from widely reported traditions to the extent of being necessary that the Sahabah took oath of allegiance (bayah) with him, so this matter turned like a unanimous matter known necessarily. And there is no doubt in the matter and there was no Rafidhi in the period of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, neither in the reign of Sayyiduna 'Umar nor Sayyiduna 'Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them) rather they emerged later on."
Verdict of Imam Malik (rh)

Hafiz ibn Hajar Makki (may Allah have mercy on him) writes in Al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, p.294, "And from this verse, Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), as reported from him, had deduced the verdict of kufr of Rawafid as they show hatred towards the Sahabah. He further states because the Sahabah causes them anger and every individual who is angered by the Sahabah is a kafir. This extraction is excellent as the verse in itself bears testimony to it. Therefore Imam Shafi (may Allah have mercy on him) has agreed with him (Imam Malik) on the verdict of declaring them [Rawafid] kafir and a large group of Imams agreed with him too." Verdict of Imam al-Shaf'I (rh)

"Yusuf ibn Yahya al-Buwayti said, 'I asked al-Shaf'i (may Allah have mercy on him), 'Can I pray behind a Rafidhi?' He said, 'Do not pray behind the Rafidhi, nor the Qadari, nor the Murjiyi'. I said, 'describe them to me.' He said, `The one who says that Iman is statement [only], then he is Murjiyi`. And whosoever says that Abu Bakr and 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with them) are not the two imams, then he is a Rafidhi. And whosoever places the Will for himself, he is Qadari." (Siyar A`lam al-Nubala', 10:31)

Verdict of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (rh)

"Imam al-Khilaal said: 'Abd al-Malik ibn 'Abd al-Hamid informed me saying: I heard Abu 'Abd Allah [Imam Ahmad] say: 'Whosoever reviles the Companions, then I fear disbelief for him like the Rawafid'. Then he said, 'Whosoever reviles the Companions of the Prophet, then we do not believe he is safe from having rejected the Religion'. (Sunnah lil-Khilaal, 3:493)
Verdict of Imam Bukhari (rh)

Imam Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) writes in his book, I dont see any difference between praying Salat behind a Jahmi or a Rafidi and a Christian or a Jew [because these two sects are kafirlike Jews and Christians, even if they refer to themselves as Muslim]. They [Jahmis/Rawfid] are not to be greeted, nor are they to be visited, nor are they to be married, nor is their testimony to be accepted, nor are their sacrifices (zabiha) to be eaten. (Khalq Af'al al-Ibad, p.13) Verdict of Ibn Hazam (rh) "Verily the Rawafid are not from Islam and they are a sect thats beginning originates about twenty five years after the demise of Holy Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace). Their origin was in the acceptance of the invitation of the one Allah had

disgraced ['Abd Allah ibn Saba]; the one who made evil plans against Islam. They are a sect that is equated to the Jews and Christians in their lies and deceit." (Al-Fasal fi al-Milal, 2:65) Verdict of Imam Abu Zar'ah (rh) "If you see anyone degrade any of the Companions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), know that he is a disbeliever (zindiq)." (Al-Assabah, 1:10; Al-Kifayah, p.49) Imam Abu Zar'ah was one of the teachers of Imam Muslim. (may Allah have mercy on them) Verdict of Mulla 'Ali Qari (rh) "According to me, this is not the case with the Rawafid who emerged in our time, since they believe that most of the Sahabah were kafirlet alone the Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamah, as they [Rawafid] are kafir unanimously (ijma') without any dissent." (Mirqat, 9:137)

Imam Ibn Abidin (rh) The great Hanafi jurist, (May Allah have mercy on him) states:

"There is no doubt in the disbelief (kufr) of those that falsely accuse Sayyida Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) of adultery, deny the Companionship of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr ( Allah be pleased with him), believe that sayyiduna Ali (Allah be pleased with him) was God or that the angel Jibril mistakenly descended with the revelation (wahi) on the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give peace), etc, which is apparent Kufr and contrary to the teachings of the Quran ". (Radd al-Muhtar, 4/453). Shaykh Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlvi (rh) Rawafid are out of pale of Islam. For them, orders are the same as for the murtad (apostate) ( Page 411, Fatawa-e-Azizi )

Fatawa-e-Alamgiri (also known as Fatawa-i-Hindiya in Turkey, Egypt and Syria) is a compilation of law created at instance of the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb (who was also known as 'Alamgir'). It consists of exhaustive number of possible situations and their juristic rulings by the great Hanafi jurists of the time.

Compiled from posted statements here http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f15/official-ia-

sh-ah-r-fi-ah-66493/ and here http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?54580Sunni-view-on-Shiah-Rawafid-Twelvers