Abstract
The relationship between Mukhtār al-Thaqafi and Imam Sajjād (AS) has sparked various significant discussions. While the prevailing belief suggests that Imam Sajjād accepted Mukhtār’s actions and held a positive view of him, some have dismissed evidence of blame against Mukhtār as distorted. They have sought to establish a consistent relationship between Mukhtār and Imam Sajjād based on reports from the latter. However, historical evidence presents a different perspective on their relationship. This article aimed to scrutinize the dynamic between Imam Sajjād and Mukhtār, seeking to answer the question of the nature of their relationship. The hypothesis pursued was that there appeared to be a consistent pattern of Imam Sajjād's negative stance toward Mukhtār al-Thaqafi. Historical studies, drawing from relevant sources and documents, led to the conclusion that Imam Sajjād initially held a favorable view of Mukhtār prior to his uprising, but adopted a strongly negative position after the establishment of his government. In fact, Imam Sajjād (AS) expressed his approval of Mukhtār’s actions solely in the context of seeking vengeance for Imam Hussain’s bloodshed.
Keywords: Shiite history, Shiite uprising, Imam Sajjād (AS), Mukhtar Thaqafi, vengeance for Imam Hussain’s bloodshed.
 
Introduction
Mukhtar al-Thaqafi is a prominent, yet complex, figure from the latter half of the first century AH. Throughout his political life, he exhibited various leanings, including Uthmani, Khariji, Zubayri, Shi'i, and even inclinations towards the Umayyads. However, Mukhtar's dominant persona in his later years, especially during his rule, was Shi'i. This Shi'i inclination may have been influenced by the political circumstances of that era.
One of the most striking features of Mukhtar's political activities was his extensive connection with the Shi'a movement. These connections involved interactions with Shi'i masses, Shi'i leaders, and even the Banu Hashim family. Among the influential Shi'i figures after Ashura, Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, Imam Sajjad (AS), and Ibn Abbas had extensive relations with Mukhtar al-Thaqafi. Each of these three figures adopted different stances towards Mukhtar and his uprising. Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, whose name and prestige Mukhtar exploited the most, initially supported Mukhtar's uprising but later expressed opposition. On the other hand, Ibn Abbas was almost consistently a staunch supporter of Mukhtar.
However, the story of the relationship between Imam Sajjad (AS) and Mukhtar is more complex and distinct from the two preceding figures. This article aims to meticulously examine these relations and answer the question: On what basis were Imam Sajjad's (AS) relations with Mukhtar formed? The contention of this research is that the relations between Imam Sajjad (AS) and Mukhtar follow a specific pattern.
From the very beginning of Mukhtar al-Thaqafi's establishment of his government, Imam Sajjad (AS) explicitly and decisively declared his opposition to him and persisted in this stance. All of Mukhtar's efforts to gain Imam Sajjad's (AS) satisfaction and approval were unsuccessful. The only instance where Imam Sajjad (AS) showed satisfaction with Mukhtar's actions was regarding the avenging of Imam Hussein's (AS) blood. In other words, the Imam (AS) only agreed with Mukhtar's actions concerning the vengeance for the martyrs of Karbala. In other matters, Imam Sajjad's (AS) serious and overt opposition to Mukhtar is noteworthy. This policy of opposition to Mukhtar by Imam Sajjad (AS) continued in the conduct and tradition of Imam Baqir (AS) and Imam Sadiq (AS) and is considered a constant practice within the family of the Imamate.
 
Materials and Methods
This study was conducted using a historical-analytical approach. Primary historical sources such as the works of al-Balādhurī, al-Ṭabarī, Ibn Saʿd, al-Masʿūdī, and al-Kashshī were consulted, and the reports related to the relationship between Mukhtār al-Thaqafī and Imam al-Sajjād (a) were extracted. These reports were then evaluated based on the criteria of historical criticism, including isnād (chain of transmission), content analysis, and the socio-political circumstances of the time. In addition, contemporary Persian and Arabic research was utilized to identify intellectual currents and modern perspectives regarding Mukhtār’s personality. The main methodological focus was a comparative analysis of the reports and an assessment of their credibility within their historical context, in order to reconstruct a relatively accurate picture of the relationship between Imam al-Sajjād (a) and Mukhtār.
 
Discussion and Results
The findings of the research indicate that the relationship between Imam al-Sajjād (a) and Mukhtār al-Thaqafī, contrary to the common assumption of complete support, was far more complex and multilayered. Historical evidence suggests that Imam al-Sajjād (a) openly opposed Mukhtār’s claims and political behavior, and in some instances even repudiated him. The only area in which the Imam expressed satisfaction with Mukhtār’s actions was in the matter of seeking vengeance for Imam Ḥusayn (a) and punishing the perpetrators of Karbalā. Examination of the sources reveals that Mukhtār primarily relied on the authority of Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥanafiyya to gain political legitimacy, while he made little effort to secure endorsement from Imam al-Sajjād (a). Thus, the Imam’s approval of certain actions by Mukhtār cannot be interpreted as comprehensive support; rather, it reflects the distinction between the Imam’s pursuit of justice in avenging Karbalā and Mukhtār’s political and instrumental approach. These findings demonstrate that traditional views regarding the Imam’s full support for Mukhtār require serious reconsideration and critical re-examination of the historical sources.
 
Conclusion
This article has examined the relationship between Imam Sajjad (AS) and Mukhtar al-Thaqafi. Many Shi'i scholars and researchers hold the view that Imam Sajjad (AS) had a positive opinion of Mukhtar, and this positive perception has generally been generalized to encompass Mukhtar's entire life and rule. In fact, positive reports about Imam Sajjad's (AS) stance have become a basis for purifying Mukhtar's image in Shi'i history. However, critical historical examinations reveal a different picture of the relations between Imam Sajjad (AS) and Mukhtar.
Historical evidence suggests that after Mukhtar came to power, Imam Sajjad (AS) adopted a strongly negative stance towards him. It appears that the Imam (AS) believed Mukhtar was exploiting the name and status of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) for political ambitions and to gain Shi'i support. Imam Sajjad (AS) not only expressed his critical views of Mukhtar in public forums but also warned his uncle, Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, against associating with Mukhtar. The Imam urged Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah to take a stand against Mukhtar and inform Shi'is of his exploitative intentions.
Meanwhile, Mukhtar also made efforts to gain Imam Sajjad's (AS) support, including sending him gifts and female slaves. However, given the Imam's critical view of Mukhtar, accepting these gifts was not possible for the Imam. For this reason, it can be considered natural that Mukhtar would also react negatively and show no inclination to send the heads of Imam Hussein's (AS) killers to Imam Sajjad (AS).
The only positive indication found in sources regarding the relationship between Imam Sajjad (AS) and Mukhtar is the Imam's possible satisfaction with Mukhtar's retaliation against the killers of Imam Hussein (AS). Nevertheless, this satisfaction in no way implies an endorsement of all of Mukhtar's behaviors, objectives, and claims.
Another question that arises is: What developments in the history of Shi'i thought led to the formation of a theological and positive view of Mukhtar? This topic requires further research, and its origins can be sought in the intellectual activities of the Hilla school and the works written to purify Mukhtar's image, which itself marks the beginning of another research endeavor.