Muhammad Al-Fakhr Ar-Razi writes:
فَثَبَتَ أنَّ الآيَةَ تَقْتَضِي كَوْنَ الأُمَّةِ مُؤَدِّينَ لِلشَّهادَةِ في دارِ الدُّنْيا وذَلِكَ يَقْتَضِي أنْ يَكُونَ مَجْمُوعُ الأُمَّةِ إذا أخْبَرُوا عَنْ شَيْءٍ أنْ يَكُونَ قَوْلُهم حُجَّةً ولا مَعْنًى لِقَوْلِنا الإجْماعُ حُجَّةٌ إلّا هَذا
,,So now it is established that the verse (2:143) requires that the Islamic global community is affirmed for witnessing in this world and that requires, that when the entirety of the Islamic global community makes something known,their statement is a proof and by our saying that the consensus is proof, it means nothing else but that.” [At-Tafsir-ul-Kabir, Volume 4, page 112]
نُقِلَ عَنِ الرَّوَافِضِ أَنَّ الْمُرَادَ بِهِ الْأَئِمَّةُ الْمَعْصُومُونَ وَلَمَّا كَانَتْ أَقْوَالُ الْأُمَّةِ فِي تَفْسِيرِ هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ مَحْصُورَةً فِي هَذِهِ الْوُجُوهِ وَكَانَ الْقَوْلُ الَّذِي نَصَرْتُمُوهُ خَارِجًا عَنْهَا كَانَ ذَلِكَ بِإِجْمَاعِ الْأُمَّةِ بَاطِلًا
,,It has been argued by the Rafidites, that this (4:59) means the infallible Imams and since the statements of the Islamic global community on the interpretation of this verse are limited to these points and the statement, you advocate,that lies outside of it, is wrong with consensus of the global Islamic community.” [At-Tafsir-ul-Kabir, Volume 10, page 149]
ْدَلَّتِ الآيَةُ عَلى أنَّ مَن ظَهَرَ كُفْرُهُ وفِسْقُهُ نَحْوَ المُشَبِّهَةِ والخَوارِجِ والرَّوافِضِ فَإنَّهُ لا يُعْتَدُّ بِهِ فِي الإجْمَاعِ لِأنَّ اللَّهَ تَعالى إنَّمَا جَعَلَ الشُّهَداءَ مَن وَصَفَهُمْ بِالْعَدالَةِ والْخَيْرِيَّةِ
,,The verse (2:143) indicates that, those, from whom disbelief comes to light – such as the anthropomorphists, the Kharijites and the Rafidites, is not counted as part of the consensus, since God only granted the testimony to those, whom He described as innocent and good.” [At-Tafsir-ul-Kabir, Volume 4, page 113]
If the entire Islamic global community agrees that the 59th verse of the 4th Sura An-Nisa’ does not mean the infallible Imams, then consequently the Imamites are not part of the Islamic global community, since there can be no consensus on this with them. It is only with them being excluded that one can speak of a consensus. Ar-Razi belonged to the Shafi’itic school and was an Ash’arite theologian. Thus he was neither Salafi, nor Wahhabi, nor Zionist. That only these would be against unity is falsehood.