the doctrine (1) of the Rāfidah. Reports to this effect are firmly and abundantly established in the writings of the scholars. Indeed, knowledge of what has been transmitted in this regard from the Imams of the Prophet’s Household necessarily yields certainty that the Rāfidah oppose them rather than agree with them (2).
The second response is to say: It is well known that the Shia differ greatly among themselves over Imamate, the divine attributes, divine decree, and other foundational matters of their religion. Which of their views, then, was taken from the infallible Imams? Their inconsistency is well known even in matters of Imamate.
Some of their disagreements concerning explicit designation and the awaited figure have already been discussed. As for the one who remains alive and is awaited, they hold various views (3): some say that (4) Jafar ibn Muhammad remains alive; others say that his son Mūsā ibn Jafar remains alive (5); others say that Abd Allah ibn Muāwiyah remains alive; others say that Muhammad ibn Abd Allah ibn Hasan remains alive; and still others say that Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah remains alive.
One group says that Alī explicitly designated (6) al-Hasan and al-Husayn (7); another says that he designated Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah (8); another says that [Alī ibn al-Husayn] appointed his son Abū Jafar as his successor; (another says: his son Abd Allah) (9); and yet another group