Safavid Sufi Order

[Millard Winnin]

Andin a sahih (authentic) hadith from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nusr al Bazanti, from Imam al Redha (as), that he said: A man among our companions said to Imam al Sadiq Ja'far bin Muhammad (as): "A group has appeared in this period, they are called sufis, so what do you(as) say about them?" Imam(as) said: "Indeed they're our enemies so whoever is inclined towards them so he's not from us and would be resurrected with them and people would come (in the future) claiming to love us while they would be inclined to them (sufis) and would imitate/emulate them(sufis), adopt their titles and interpret their sayings, but then whoever is inclined to them (sufis) so is not from us and I(as) dissociate from them and whoever denounces their teachings so he's like as if he did jihad against the kuffar along the Prophet(PBUH)."

Allama Ardbili wrote in Hadiqat al Shia: And by a sahih (authentic) sanad (chain of narration) from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. abi Nusr al Bazanti, and Muhammad b. Ismail b. Bazi', from Imam al Redha (as) that he said: "One in whose presence the Sufis are mentioned but he does not denounce them with his tongue and heart, so he is not from us. And the one who denounces them, so he is like the one who fought the kuffar along the Prophet (pbuh)."

A long time ago, I was of the belief that these narrations are authentic, but upon further investigation and research These narration aren't authentic. These narrations didn't pop up in our books until the Safawid dynasty. Even though some anti-Sufi narration attempt to quote al-Mufid, you aren't able to see these narration from any of al-Mufid's extant works. Yes, al-Mufid went against a particular type of Sufis, mainly those who follow al-Hallaj (a person known for his extreme beliefs, even some Sufi scholars go against him), but not a broad brush on all Sufis.

There is good reason to believe that these narrations are Safawid fabrications added to our books in order to create an anti-Sufi sentiment. If you read history, you'll see that Safawids were notoriously oppressive to the Sufis and generally overall anti-Sufi.

Majority of anti-Sufi narrations are taken from Muqqadis al-Ardabili's (993 AH) Hadeeqah al-Shi'ah. If you read Agha Buzorg al-Tehrani's entry of Hadeeqah al-Shi'ah in his al-Dharee`ah, he talks about these anti-Sufi narrations being fabricated under al-Ardabili's name and added to his book after his death. Then al-Tehrani says that if you read al-Ardabili's other books you'll see that he affirms the belief of Wahdah al-Wujud, which further solidifies al-Tehrani's assumptions that these narrations are fabricated and added to al-Ardabili's books.

At first, it is necessary to know that Islam is a school that guarantees prosperity and happiness of mankind in this world and in the Hereafter. The material and spiritual needs of those who adhere to Islamic doctrines are fulfilled. It can easily be understood through the Quranic verses that God has called on His servants to relinquish worldly desires and pay attention to spirituality and the Hereafter [1] but He has also reminded them not to go to extremes by isolating themselves and giving up activities related to the material world. In fact, they should also benefit from worldly bounties and blessings and carry on their daily activities in accordance with religious standards and be not oblivious of God at the same time.[2]

Therefore, a real Muslim is one who is not whimsical and worldly-mind but he benefits from the worldly blessings and uses them as a means for the afterworld. Thus, he prays to God for his good both in this world as well as in the hereafter. [3]

Some of them adhere only to the worldly aspects of the religion such as maintaining law and order, establishing government, agricultural activities, business, scientific advancements etc. They are negligent of the fact that all of these are only preludes for the perpetual life in the Hereafter, and more importantly, they are meant for seeking God's pleasure and that they are valueless by themselves.

Some others stick to the spiritual aspects of Islam abandoning the world and leaving any activities that are an integral part of a social life thus making themselves a burden on the others. It is interesting to know that some of these individuals use the apparent renunciation of the world as a means for saturating their carnal and worldly desires!

Therefore, in view of the fact that woolen garments were the cheapest of clothes in the early period of Islam, normally poor and indigent people used to wear such type of garments. If a person wore such clothes to fight his carnal desires and renounce the world, there would have been no objection to it. In this respect, Abuzar Ghaffari who was a great pious man says as such: "I have two loaves of bread one of which I eat at midday and the other at dusk and I have two pieces of woolen cloth one of which I wear to cover my private part and the other I put on my shoulders, I have nothing to do with the world! [4]

In fact, by saying this to the people around him, he wanted to imply that a person could be contented with the least if necessary and that he himself did not exchange his faith for the world and it did not mean that he considered divine bounties to be haram because we know for sure that when Abuzar lived in exile, he had some thing, though little, for himself and his family to eat and to survive. [5]

Later on, a group of Muslims went to extremes in terms of pietism secluding themselves from the world to the extent that they termed wearing shabby woolen clothes as the Muslim expression raising objections even to the Infallible Imams and the nobles. [6] In other words, they turned real piety which is recommended by the religion to piety-mongering (pietism) seeking clients for themselves and falling, willy-nilly, into the trap of a world which they were apparently renouncing.

Considering that the lexical root of 'tasawwuf' is traced to sūf "wool", gradually those who were wearing simple wool-made cloaks were known as Sufiyah or Mutsawwefah and their school of thought was named "tasawwuf". In late centuries, names like Dervish, Kharabati etc. have also been used to refer to these individuals. Terminologies like Khaneqah, Mey, Pir, Qalandar etc. enjoy a special place in their school.

Moreover, we must know that Sufi teachings are not restricted to wearing woolen clothes and that the masters of this school have announced other behavioral standards or codes of practice to the proponents. Some of these codes are baseless and ungrounded religious innovations and some others were evaluated in line with Qur'anic and Shari'ah rules. In this connection, sometimes the actions which were rooted in the religion were modified somehow and changed into an innovation. For instance, there are narrations [7] prescribing a certain deed to be performed sincerely for a period of 40 days which, if done accordingly, will lead to very positive results but the Sufis have changed it into "seclusion rite" [chelle nishini] and added certain manners to it which are not consistent with the sacred Shari'ah of Islam. As a result, Sufism changed into a composite of valid practices and innovations originating in the Sufists' tastes. [8] This led some Muslims who were seeking to perform only the religious laws and engage in self-reconstruction according to the divine instructions to be labeled and accused of being Sufists or dervishes.

In view of the above, it can be said that although some external forms and rites of Sufism are not rooted in the religion, we cannot and should not reject or endorse the entire Sufi teachings. In fact, the Sufi teachings should be examined section by section and its conformity with the religion should be checked. Moreover, it is not appropriate to accuse a Muslim, who gives more importance to the spirituality and to self-reconstruction methods, of being a Sufi.

Yes, initially they were. The Safavid order was a Sunni-Sufi Order. They then developed into a militeristic and messianic cult who would, in some cases, take their Leader as a Qibla and worship him, amongst other things, whose only connection with Shi'ism was their veneration of the 12 Imams [as].

In general, the Safavids weren't too fond of Sunnis. Some scholars such as Newman and Rizvi suggest these groups were not persecuted solely for their Sunnism, rather they were persecuted due to them either posing a direct or implicit threat to the ruling elite. Evidence for this can be seen in the massacres of Shi'is as well as Sunni and Sufi groups during Safavid rule. Though overall, they persecuted the daylights out of non-Shi'is.

From my brief reading of this, in the latter part of the Safavid era, the Shii scholarly elite gained more prestige and influence. Many Scholars, such as al-Majlisi and Ni`matullah al-Jaza`iri, amongst others, espoused strong anti-Sufi sentiments. Majlisi held significant power as well, and it's reported he exiled Sunnis from one of the provinces. Regarding the attitude found in Shi'i literature, there was a lot of works produced attacking Sufis. However, at times, Shii scholars, such as Mulla Sadra and Fayz al-Kashani, were attacking deviant Sufi practices and psuedo-Sufis, and not the spiritual path itself. Essentially, there was a shift towards a more polemical and scholarly opposition to Sunnis, and consequently, Sufism, during this period, as opposed to physical violence and persecution that was previously the norm.

3a8082e126