Question:

According to Al-Khu’i, is the opponent (Mukhalif) a Muslim?

Answer:

Abu Al-Qasim Al-Khu’i writes: “Yes, the leadership (Wilayah), by which the succession (Khilafah) is meant, belongs to the necessities of the school of law, but not to the necessities of religion. All this is to be added to the people who are in opposition to us and this obviously includes the state of the remaining groups who are in opposition to the followers of the twelve Imams (a.) and Zaid Ibn Ali, Muhammad Ibn Al-Hanafiyyah and Isma’il Ibn Ja’far (a.) as well as others as imams, because the judgment of the people who contradict (to us) is applied to them on the basis of fulfilled necessity, because there is no difference between denying the leadership and agreeing with it regarding the imams (a.) as a whole and confirming the leadership to some of the imams (a.) and denying it regarding others among them. How could this be the case when it has been reported that whoever denies one of them has already denied all of them (a.)?It has already been recognized that the denial of leadership (Wilayah) by them as a whole does not necessarily lead to their being declared disbelievers or unclean, especially in view of the denial of some to the exclusion of others among them. Therefore, it is valid to apply the judgment of purity to all those who do not belong to the followers of the Imams (a.), and externally (Zahir) ascribe them to Islam without making any distinction between those who are in opposition (to us) and others other than them, even though they are all in fact disbelievers and belong to those whom we refer to as Muslims in this world and attribute them to disbelievers in the afterlife.” [At-Tanqih Fi Sharh Urwat Al-Wuthqa, Volume 3 Page 80]

قال أبو القاسم الخوئي: نعم، الولاية بمعنى الخلافة من ضروريات المذهب لا من ضروريات الدين. هذا كلّه بالإضافة إلى أهل الخلاف. ومنه يظهر الحال في سائر الفرق المخالفين للشيعة الاثني عشريّة من الزيدية والكيسانية والإسماعيلية وغيرهم، حيث إن حكمهم حكم أهل الخلاف لضرورة أنه لا فرق في إنكار الولاية بين إنكارها ونفيها عن الأئمة عليهم السلام بأجمعهم وبين إثباتها لبعضهم ونفيها عن الآخرين عليهم السلام كيف وقد ورد أن من أنكر واحداً منهم فقد أنكر جميعهم عليهم السلام و قد عرفت أن نفي الولاية عنهم بأجمعهم غير مستلزم للكفر والنجاسة فضلاً عن نفيها عن بعض دون بعض فالصحيح الحكم بطهارة جميع المخالفين للشيعة الاثني عشرية وإسلامهم ظاهراً بلا فرق في ذلك بين أهل الخلاف وبين غيرهم وإن كان جميعهم في الحقيقة كافرين، وهم الذين سمّيناهم بمسلم الدنيا وكافر الآخرة