The Relationship of Early Mashayikh of Sufi Orders with Infallible Imams (A) (Analytical Historical Investigation)

It is difficult to speak about “the relation between early Mashayikh of Sufi orders and Infallible Imams”. Adopting a historical approach to this question entails overlooking the content of Sufism and entering to a sphere which will show whether “Sufism and Imamate” are connected or not. If we take a glance at the studies in this field, we see that from far past times, some have tried to link Sufis to Shiite Imams and moreover consider Imams as the first rings in Sufi orders. There have always been great scholars among proponents and opponents of this alleged bond; but the way some of them argued shows that their beliefs, presuppositions and even sentiments overshadowed their scholarly quest. To reach to an accurate view on the relationship between Sufi Mashayikh and infallible Imams, we need a minute and comprehensive historical survey about life, works and beliefs of each stage (Tabaqah) of Sufism. These surveys unmask a bulk of historical truths about Sufism, hence the importance of this kind of survey. After recounting the Sufis contemporary to Imams in early sources, and by using library sources and descriptive method, this thesis discusses about those Mashayikh that there is a report, whether confirming or rejecting, about their relationship with Infallible Imams. Elaborating the historical reports about relationship of four of early Sufi Mashayikh considered by recent scholars as connection points to Imams shows that from a large number of Sufis who were contemporary to Imams only a few of them had relationship with Imams. A detailed analysis of these reports, which sometimes show Sufis affection for and sometimes their opposition to Imams, reveals some historical truths, but apparently the claim of relationship between Sufi orders and Imams have no convincing basis, according to Shiite foundations. It is obvious that the author by entering this path, should pave his way in a vague and disputant route on one hand, and analyze the data in an unbiased way on the other hand. At last he should admit that all findings are only a part of historical “appearance” of the subject and still there is a room for further discussions.