to them are the philosophers, although they too do not follow the principles of any particular philosopher. For this reason, various groups of philosophizers affiliated themselves with them. Ibn Sīnā and his household were their followers, as were Ibn al-Haytham and others like him, and Mubashshir ibn Fātik and the like. The authors of the “Epistles of the Brethren of Purity” composed their epistles somewhat along their lines. Among them are the Ismāʿīlīs and those belonging to the House of the Mission in Muslim lands.

This is not the place to describe their condition. The point is simply that they were among the greatest liars and those most deeply steeped in associating partners with Allah, and that they lied about their lineage and other matters. Thus, you find that most of those associated with shrines who claim descent from ʿAlī are liars. One may be a client of Banū Hāshim, or have neither kinship nor clientage ties with them, yet say, “I am an ʿAlawī,” meaning an adherent of ʿAlī’s religious doctrine. He portrays ʿAlī—may Allah be pleased with him and his pure household—as having followed the religion of the Rāfidīs. Not content with this slur against ʿAlī, he also passes himself off as a member of his household. The lies concerning graves are too numerous to record in this fatwa.

Fifth:

The Rāfidīs are, without exception, the most untruthful of all the groups within the Muslim community. Among all groups professing Islam, they are the most extreme in religious excess and in associating partners with Allah. From among them came the first person to claim divinity for Quran reciters and prophethood for someone other than the Prophet—may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him—