Was Hallaj guilty of blasphemy?

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In the Name of Allah Most Merciful Most Kind

Short Answer

The consensus view on al-Hallaj with Ahl al-Sunnah was that he was guilty of blasphemy. This seems to have been the view of Imam Junayd al-Baghdadi too. However, many later Sufi scholars diverged from this position and praised him.

Explanation

يَاأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا عَدُوِّي وَعَدُوَّكُمْ أَوْلِيَاءَ تُلْقُونَ إِلَيْهِمْ بِالْمَوَدَّةِ وَقَدْ كَفَرُوا بِمَا جَاءَكُمْ مِنَ الْحَقِّ

O you who have believed, do not take my enemy and your enemy as Awliyaa. Expressing love for them, while they have disbelieved in the truth that has come to you. (Surah al-Mumtahinah, 1).

It is not acceptable for a Muslim to make excuses for insults against Allah (Most High) or his Prophets (peace be upon them). Nor anything we hold sacred in Islam. Doing so undermines the sanctity and reverence we have for such lofty matters. That is why the view on al-Hallaj held by Ahl al-Sunnah was clear and uncompromising.

Multiple statements of extreme Kufr and blasphemy are attributed to al-Hallaj. Amongst them: I am al-Haqq (the Truth). Al- Haqq is one of the most regularly used Names of Allah (Most High) by Sufis. This is why Imam Junayd strongly rebuked him for saying this.

If you compromise with or undermine the enormity of such Kufr statements then it will have an impact upon the sanctity of our Deen. Which is why it is so dangerous to make excuses for or even praise such statements. When you say he was extremely close to Allah (Most High) and in a deep spiritual state, then you are praising him and by extension excusing what he said.

Rather we leave his affair with Allah (Most High) whilst strongly condemning the blasphemy attributed to him. It is far more reasonable to question the authenticity of what has been attributed to him, than to make excuses for it. Muslims making excuses for and indirectly praising such Kufr is a greater threat to the sanctity of our Deen than almost anything a non-Muslim can do.

Who was al-Hallaj

الحسين بن منصور الحلّاج، يكنى أبا مغيث، وقيل: أبا عبد الله: وكان جده مجوسيا اسمه محمى من أهل بيضاء فارس. نشأ الحسين بواسط، وقيل بتستر وقدم بغداد، فخالط الصّوفيّة وصحب من مشيختهم الجنيد بن محمّد، وأبا الحسين النوري، وعمرا المكي. والصّوفيّة مختلفون فيه، فأكثرهم نفى الحلاج أن يكون منهم. (تاريخ بغداد)

Al-Hussain bin Mansour al-Hallaj was called Abu Mughith. And it was said: Abu Abdullah. His grandfather was a Magian named Mahma from the people of Bayda, Persia. Al-Hussain was brought up in Wasit, some said Tustar. He went to Baghdad and mixed with the Sufis. Some of their Shaykhs he spent time with were, al-Junaid bin Muhammad, Abu al-Hussain al-Nouri, and Amar al-Makki. The Sufis disagreed regarding him. Most of them denied that al-Hallaj was one of them. (Imam Abu Bakr al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi 463H, Tarikh Baghdad). 

The above Nass (text) serves as a very brief biography of al-Hallaj. It mentions that his grandfather was a Magian and he grew up in Wasit. Importantly he spent time with Imam Junayd al-Baghdadi. However, most Sufis rejected and disowned al-Hallaj.

This reinforces the Ahl al-Sunnah view on al-Hallaj. If even Sufis disavowed Hallaj then for the generality of Ahl al-Sunnah to repudiate him makes more sense. Since the Sufis tend to be more tolerant of extremes than the generality of Ahl al-Sunnah.

What did he say

وقد ذكر الغزالي رحمه الله في كتاب «مشكاة الأنوار» فصلا في حال الحلّاج فأخذ يعتذر عما صدر منه مثل قوله: أنا الحقّ. وقول الآخر: ما في الْجُبّة إلّا الله. وهذه الإطلاقات الّتي ظاهرها كُفْر وحَمَلها على محامل سائغة. (تاريخ الإسلام)

Al-Ghazali (May Allah have mercy on him) has a chapter in the book “Mishkat al-Anwar” about al-Hallaj’s condition. He excused what he said, like his saying: I am the truth (al-Haqq). And : There is none in the robe except Allah. And such statements that appear to be blasphemy (Kufr). He (Imam al-Ghazali) interpreted them to something more acceptable. (Imam Shams al-Deen al-Dhahabi 748H, Tarikh al-Islam). 

In the Nass (text) above we have just two examples of the many vile things attributed to al-Hallaj. Regrettably, Imam al-Ghazali took the route of making excuses for them. This is one of several reasons why some of the great Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah, like Qadi Iyad, strongly disagreed with Imam al-Ghazali on his approach to Tasawuf (spirituality).

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو منصور القزاز قَالَ نا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ ثابت نا عَبْد اللَّهِ بْن أحمد ابْن عمار الصيرفي ثنا أَبُو عمرو بْن حيوة قَالَ لما أخرج حسين الحلاج للقتل مضيت فِي جملة الناس فلم أزل أزاحم حتى رأيته فَقَالَ لأصحابه لا يهولنكم هَذَا فإني عائد إليكم بعد ثلاثين يوما وكان اعتقاد الحلاج اعتقادا قبيحا. (تلبيس إبليس)

Abu Amr bin Haywah informed us saying: When Hussain al-Hallaj was brought forth to be executed, I went among the people. I continued to work through the crowd until I saw him. He said to his companions: Do not let this concern you. I will return to you after thirty days. Al-Hallaj’s Aqeedah (belief) was an abhorrent Aqeedah. (Imam Abd al-Rahman bin al-Jowzi 597H, Talbis Iblis).

Imam Ibn al-Jowzi narrated the above with his Sanad (chain of narrators). There is an abundance of detestable statements attributed to al-Hallaj. I will not continue to list them. Even these few clarify for us why he was considered blasphemous and executed.

Imam al-Junayd’s Fatwa  

Many say that al-Hallaj was executed due to Imam Junayd al-Baghdadis Fatwa. However, this is questioned due to Imam Junayd passing away years before the execution. The response of those who maintain this view is that he gave the Fatwa before passing and it was carried out later.

ممن أفتى بقتله الجنيد كما في شرح الكبرى عملا بظاهر الشريعة. (حاشية على إتحاف المريد شرح جوهرة التوحيد)

From those who issued Fatwa that he should be killed was al-Junaid. As stated in Sharh al-Kubra. It was in accordance with the apparent of the Shariah. (Imam Muhammad bin Muhammad al-Amir 1232H, Hashiyah ala Ithaf al-Mureed).  

ويحتمل أن يكون قال ذلك في حياته لما سئل عنه قبل أن يقتل بمدة طويلة. وكذلك ما قيل أن الجنيد وابن داود الظاهري من جملة من أفتى بقتله لا يصح، لأن الجنيد توفي سنة ثمان وتسعين ومائتين، قبل قتل الحلاج بإحدى عشرة سنة. (مرآة الجنان وعبرة اليقظان في معرفة ما يعتبر من حوادث الزمان)

It is possible that he said this during his lifetime when he was asked about it, long before he was executed. Likewise, what was said that al-Junaid and Ibn Dawud al-Zahiri were among those who issued a Fatwa that he should be executed is not valid. Because al-Junaid died in the year two hundred and ninety-eight, eleven years before al-Hallaj was killed. (Imam Abu Muhammad al-Yafi’i 768H, Mir’aatu al-Jinan).

Although it is uncertain as to whether Imam al-Junayd gave the Fatwa of execution or not. It has been clearly and repeatedly mentioned in the books of history that Imam al-Junayd warned al-Hallaj. Deplorably, he still did not desist from the Kufr he was speaking.

قَالَ يَوْمًا للجنيد أَنا الْحق فَقَالَ لَهُ الْجُنَيْد أَنْت بِالْحَقِّ أَي خَشَبَة تفْسد فظهرت فراسته حَتَّى صلب بعد ذَلِك. (التبصير في الدين وتمييز الفرقة الناجية)

One day he said to al-Junayd, “I am the truth (al-Haqq).” Junayd said to him: You are by the truth (al-Haqq).” Which piece of wood will you corrupt. And his Firaasah (intuition) was manifest such that he (al-Hallaj) was crucified after that. (Imam al-Isfirayini 471H, al-Tabseer).

قَالَ السُّلَمِيُّ: وَبلغنِي أَنَّهُ وَقَفَ عَلَى الجُنَيْد، فَقَالَ: أَنَا الحَقّ. قَالَ: بَلْ أَنْتَ بِالْحَقِّ، أَيَّ خشبَةٍ تُفسد. (سير أعلام النبلاء)

Al-Sulami said: I was informed that he stopped by al-Junaid and said: I am the truth (al-Haqq).” He (Junayd) said to him: You are by the truth (al-Haqq).” Which piece of wood will you corrupt. (Imam Shams al-Deen al-Dhahabi 748H, Siyar Alam al-Nubalaa). 

As seen above Imam al- Yafi’i suggested that Imam al-Junayd gave his Fatwa to execute al-Hallaj prior to passing. But it was carried out years later. Even if people disagree with this view, it is clear that Imam al-Junayd strongly opposed al-Hallaj and mentioned execution to him.

This is very consequential. Since many of the people who make excuses for al-Hallaj also have great respect for Imam al-Junayd. However, what is even more consequential is that great Imams of Ahl a-Sunnah have mentioned that there was consensus upon the execution of al-Hallaj.

So how can people defend or excuse his words? Why do they have a divergent view on al-Hallaj. Surely it is required for them to observe the Ijma (consensus). Even if they dispute Ijma, it seems clear that the vast majority of early scholars condemned him.

Ijma against him

اتفق علماء العصر عَلَى إباحة دم الحلاج فأول من قَالَ إِنَّهُ حلال الدم أَبُو عمرو القاضي ووافقه العلماء وإنما سكت عنه أَبُو العباس سريج قَالَ وقال لا أدري مَا يَقُول والإجماع دليل معصوم من الخطأ. (تلبيس إبليس)

The scholars of the era agreed that al-Hallaj’s should be executed. The first one to say so was Abu Amr al-Qadi and the scholars agreed with him. Only Abu al-Abbas Surayj remained silent about it. He said: I do not know what he is saying.  But Ijma (consensus) is infallible evidence, beyond the possibility of mistake. (Imam Abd al-Rahman bin al-Jowzi 597H, Talbis Iblis).

وَأَجْمَعَ فُقَهَاءُ بَغْدَادَ أَيَّامَ الْمُقْتَدِرِ مِنَ الْمَالِكِيَّةِ، وَقَاضِي قُضَاتِهَا أَبُو عُمَرَ الْمَالِكِيُّ عَلَى قَتْلِ الْحَلَّاجِ وَصَلْبِهِ لِدَعْوَاهُ الْإِلَهِيَّةَ، وَالْقَوْلِ بِالْحُلُولِ وَقَوْلِهِ أَنَا الْحَقُّ مَعَ تَمَسُّكِهِ في الظاهر بالشريعة، ولم يقبلوا توبته. (الشفا بتعريف حقوق المصطفى)

In the era of al-Muqtadir, the Maliki jurists of Baghdad and its chief judge Abu Umar al-Maliki unanimously agreed on executing al-Hallaj and crucifying him for his claim of divinity and his affirmation of pantheism. Also, his saying: I am al-Haqq (the truth). This was despite his outward adherence to the Shariah. And they did not accept his repentance. (Qadi Iyad 544H, al-Shifa).

In the Nusoos (texts) above, we see two of the great Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah conveying absolute or partial consensus upon the execution of al-Hallaj. Imam Ibn al-Jowzi reminded us that consensus (Ijma) is a definitive proof. So why are some Muslims ignoring that and holding a conflicting view on al-Hallaj?

وَكَانَ مِنْ أَعْظَمِ صَوَابِ أَحْكَامِهِ قَتْلُهُ الْحُسَيْنَ بْنَ مَنْصُورٍ الْحَلَّاجَ، قَبَّحَهُ اللَّهُ وَأَخْزَاهُ، وَذَلِكَ فِي سَنَةِ تِسْعٍ وَثَلَاثِمِائَةٍ، كَمَا تَقَدَّمَ. (البداية والنهاية)

One of the greatest of his rulings was his executing al-Hussain bin Mansour al-Hallaj. May Allah humiliate and disgrace him. And that was in the year three hundred nine. (Imam Ibn Katheer 774H, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihaayah).

I believe the Ijma (consensus) against al-Hallaj is sound, since no one in that era seems to have disagreed with it. However, if someone were to question it, I would raise two issues. Firstly, I would task such a person with providing a reference to a scholar of that era disagreeing.

Secondly, even if the Ijma is not upheld then it is certainly the case that the vast majority of scholars opposed al-Hallaj. So why would you oppose the majority of scholars on such an important issue and adopt an opinion that challenges sanctity.

Was he guilty of Hulool (pantheism)?

Many Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah have accused al-Hallaj of Hulool. Which may be translated as pantheism. It is the belief that Allah (Most High) resides within his creation. It is unquestionably Kufr (disbelief). Imam Qadi Iyad affirmed this in the Nuss (text) above. As well as mentioning other abhorrent beliefs al-Hallaj held.

That is why the scholars of his time and most of those after him completely condemned him. It was centuries after that we find some scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah champion a deviating view on al-Hallaj. Which is shocking as the accusation of Hulool is extremely credible.

قتلوه على الكفرِ والحلول والانسلاخ من الدّين، نسأل الله العفو. وكان قد صَحِب الجُنَيد، وعمرو بن عثمان المكي، وغيرهما. (تاريخ الإسلام)

They executed him for Kufr (disbelief), Hulool (pantheism), and relinquishment of the religion. We ask Allah for forgiveness. He had accompanied al-Junaid, Amr bin Othman al-Makki, and others. (Imam Shams al-Deen al-Dhahabi 748H, Tarikh al-Islam). 

وَاخْتلف المتكلمون وَالْفُقَهَاء والصوفية فِي حَاله أما المتكلمون فأكثرهم على أَنه من الحلولية. (التبصير في الدين وتمييز الفرقة الناجية عن الفرق الهالكين)

Theologians, jurists, and Sufis differed as to his condition. As for the theologians the majority of them agreed that he was from the pantheists (Hulool). (Imam al-Isfirayini 471H, al-Tabseer).

Great scholars supported him

Many of those who hold a divergent view on al-Hallaj say that great scholars praised him. And sometimes they say our scholars praise him. The response to this is obvious. Greater and earlier scholars denounced al-Hallaj. Including Imam al-Junayd. Why would you leave their view and follow a very controversial later departure.

As for people saying our scholars hold a positive view on al-Hallaj, they often mean contemporary scholars. This is a fundamental failing in methodology. Focusing on contemporary and recent scholars is not the way of Ahl al-Sunnah. Rather we give preference to agreed upon scholars. Especially those in the very early period.

Preferring recent and contemporary scholars is the way of extreme Salafis and modernist movements. Whereas Sunnis have always looked to agreed upon scholars. Even if we entertain this view, there are great later scholars who maintained the classical view regarding al-Hallaj.

وَأجْمع فُقَهَاء بَغْدَاد أَيَّام المقتدر بِاللَّه على قتل الحلاج لدعواه الألوهية وَالْقَوْل بالحلول وَقَوله أَنا الْحق وَمَا فِي الْجُبَّة إِلَّا الله مَعَ تمسكه فِي الظَّاهِر من حَاله بالشريعة وَلم يقبلُوا تَوْبَته حَيْثُ عدوه زنديقا وَإِن كَانَ فِي الصُّورَة صديقا وَالْحَاصِل أَنه كَانَ كَغَيْرِهِ من جهلة المتصوفة المنتمين إِلَى الْإِسْلَام والمعرفة حَيْثُ قَالُوا إِن السالك إِذا وصل فَرُبمَا حل الله فِيهِ كَالْمَاءِ فِي الْعود الْأَخْضَر بِحَيْثُ لَا تمايز وَلَا تغاير وَلَا اثنينية وَصَحَّ أَن يَقُول هُوَ أَنا وَأَنا هُوَ. (الرد على القائلين بوحدة الوجود)

The jurists of Baghdad, in the days of al-Muqtadir Billah, unanimously agreed to execute al-Hallaj due to his claim of divinity and his belief in pantheism. Also, his saying, “I am the truth (al-Haqq),” and “There is no one in the cloak but Allah.”  That was despite his apparent adherence to the Shariah. And they did not accept his repentance. Such that they considered him a heretic. Even if his appearance was that of a pious person.  

The reality is that he was like other ignorant Sufis who claim Islam and gnosis. They said that when the seeker arrives, perhaps Allah will dwell in him. Like water in a green branch. Where there is no distinction, discrepancy, or duality, and it is correct for him to say, “He is I,” and “I am He.” (Imam Ali al-Qari 1014H, al-Radd ala al-Qaileen bi Wahtadu al-Wujood).

ومنهم من قال «بألوهية جعفر الصادق وألوهية آبائه» وهم الحسين وابنه زين العابدين وابن زين العابدين محمد الباقر، وهؤلاء الشيعة موافقون في ذلك لمن يقول بالحلول، وهم الحلاجية أصحاب حسين بن منصور الحلاج. كانوا إذا رأوا صورة جميلة زعموا أن معبودهم حل فيها. (السيرة الحلبية)

Among them are those who believed in the divinity of Ja’far al-Sadiq and the divinity of his fathers, namely al-Hussain, his son Zain al-Abidin, and the son of Zain al-Abidin Muhammad al-Baqir. These Shiites agree with those who believe in Hulool (pantheism). They are Al-Hallajiyah, the companions of Hussain bin Mansour al-Hallaj. If they saw a beautiful picture, they would claim that their deity resided in it. (Imam Ali al-Halabi 1044H, al-Seerah al-Halabiyah).   

What is Imam al-Ghazali’s view?

In the following Nass (text) Imam al-Dhahabi makes it clear that Imam al-Ghazali defended al-Hallaj. This is very surprising since it would dictate violating the consensus of earlier scholars, including Imam al-Junayd. And it would promote a new antagonistic view on al-Hallaj.

قُتِل في هذه السنة ببغداد، لما أفتى الفقهاء والعلماء بكفره. ومن نظر في مجموع أمرِه عَلِمَ أنّ الرجل كَانَ كذّابًا مموّهًا مُمَخْرِقًا حُلُوليًّا، لَهُ كلامٌ حلوٌ يستحوذ بهِ عَلَى نفوس جُهّال العَوام، حتى ادّعوا فيه الرُّبُوبيّة. كتبتُ مِن أخباره في الحوادث. وقد اعتذر أبو حامد الغزاليّ عَنْهُ في كتاب ” مشكاة الأنوار ” وتأوّلَ أقواله عَلَى محامل حسنة. (تاريخ الإسلام وَوَفيات المشاهير وَالأعلام)

He was executed this year in Baghdad. After jurists and scholars issued a Fatwa declaring him an infidel. Whoever looks into his entire affair will know that the man was a liar, a fabricator, a deceiver, and a pantheist (Hulool). He used eloquent words to subjugate the souls of the ignorant common people. To the extent that they claimed divinity in him. I wrote about him in al-Hawadith. Abu Hamid al-Ghazali made excuses for him in the book “Mishkat al-Anwar.” And interpreted his statements in good terms. (Imam Shams al-Deen al-Dhahabi 748H, Tarikh al-Islam). 

Another cause for concern regarding Imam al-Ghazali’s view on al-Hallaj is that he spoke strongly against him in his Ihyaa. He also passionately condemned Sufi phrases that became known as Shath.

وأما الشطح فنعني به صنفين من الكلام أحدثه بعض الصوفية أحدهما الدعاوي الطويلة العريضة في العشق مع الله تعالى والوصال المغني عن الأعمال الظاهرة حتى ينتهي قوم إلى دعوى الاتحاد وارتفاع الحجاب والمشاهدة بالرؤية والمشافهة بالخطاب فيقولون قيل لنا كذا وقلنا كذا ويتشبهون فيه بالحسين بن منصور الحلاج الذي صلب لأجل إطلاقه كلمات من هذا الجنس ويستشهدون بقوله أنا الحق وبما حكي عن أبي يزيد البسطامي أنه قال سبحاني سبحاني وهذا فن من الكلام عظيم ضرره في العوام حتى ترك جماعة من أهل الفلاحة فلاحتهم وأظهروا مثل هذه الدعاوي. (إحياء علوم الدين)

As for al-Shath, we mean by it two types of speech that were introduced by some Sufis. One of them is the vast and broad claims of love of Allah (Most High). And having reached, such that it removes the need for outward deeds. Until some claimed al-Itihad (unity) and the lifting of the veil. Seeing with sight and speaking directly with speech. So they say: We were told such-and-such, and we said such-and-such. Thereby imitating al-Hussain bin Mansour al-Hallaj, who was crucified for his uttering words of this type. They cite his saying, “I am the truth.”

And what was narrated of Abu Yazid al-Bistami that he said: Transcendent am I, Transcendent am I. This form of speech causes great harm to the common people. Such that a group of the people of success abandoned their success and made such claims. (Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali 505H, Ihyaa).  

Imam al-Ghazali later went on to emphasise the correctness of the Fatwa to execute al-Hallaj. Thus, it is very surprising to see him defend and make excuses for al-Hallaj. Undoubtedly, the approach of making excuses for insults against Allah (Most High) and his Prophet ﷺ erodes religious sanctity. Which is an unmitigated disaster for the Ummah.

It may be due to stances like this that senior Imams, like Imam Qadi Iyad, strongly opposed the Tasawuf works of Imam al-Ghazali and warned against them. However, the majority of Ahl al-Sunnah value his contributions to Tasawuf but point out errors when teaching his works.

Most Sufis rejected al-Hallaj

Although Imam al-Ghazali deviated from the near consensus that had been established regarding the view on al-Hallaj, most Sufis rejected him. It is correct to say that other later scholars did seem to align with Imam al-Ghazali. However,  many maintained the established view.

لَمْ يَزَلِ النَّاسُ مُنْذُ قُتِلَ الْحَلَّاجُ مُخْتَلِفِينَ فِي أَمْرِهِ. فَأَمَّا الْفُقَهَاءُ فَحُكِيَ عَنْ غَيْرِ وَاحِدٍ مِنَ الْأَئِمَّةِ إِجْمَاعُهُمْ عَلَى قَتْلِهِ وَأَنَّهُ كَانَ كَافِرًا مُمَخْرِقًا مُمَوِّهًا مُشَعْبِذًا، وَكَذَلِكَ قَوْلُ أَكْثَرِ الصُّوفِيَّةِ مِنْهُمْ. (البداية والنهاية)

Since al-Hallaj was killed, people have been disagreeing about him. As for the jurists, it was reported on the authority of more than one of the scholars and Imams that they unanimously agreed on executing him. And he was executed an infidel. He was an infidel, a fabricator, a deceiver, a charlatan. That is what most of the Sufis said about him. (Imam Ibn Katheer 774H, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihaayah).

The Fitnah of false miracles

One of the main reasons uneducated Muslims were misled by al-Hallaj was the false miracles he would present. Regrettably, too many Muslims focus on perceived Karamaat (miracles) rather than the teachings of religious leaders. This opens up the doors to charlatans. And vast numbers of Muslims go astray.

فِي هَذِهِ السَّنَةِ قُتِلَ الْحُسَيْنُ بْنُ مَنْصُورٍ الْحَلَّاجُ الصُّوفِيُّ وَأُحْرِقَ، وَكَانَ ابْتِدَاءُ حَالِهِ أَنَّهُ كَانَ يُظْهِرُ الزُّهْدَ وَالتَّصَوُّفَ، وَيُظْهِرُ الْكَرَامَاتِ، وَيُخْرِجُ لِلنَّاسِ فَاكِهَةَ الشِّتَاءِ فِي الصَّيْفِ وَفَاكِهَةَ الصَّيْفِ فِي الشِّتَاءِ، وَيَمُدُّ يَدَهُ إِلَى الْهَوَاءِ فَيُعِيدُهَا مَمْلُوءَةً دَرَاهِمَ عَلَيْهَا مَكْتُوبٌ: قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ، وَيُسَمِّيهَا دَرَاهِمَ الْقُدْرَةِ وَيُخْبِرُ النَّاسَ بِمَا أَكَلُوهُ، وَمَا صَنَعُوهُ فِي بُيُوتِهِمْ، وَيَتَكَلَّمُ بِمَا فِي ضَمَائِرِهِمْ فَافْتُتِنَ بِهِ خَلْقٌ كَثِيرٌ وَاعْتَقَدُوا فِي الْحُلُولِ، وَبِالْجُمْلَةِ فَإِنَّ النَّاسَ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافَهُمْ فِي الْمَسِيحِ، عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ، فَمِنْ قَائِلٍ إِنَّهُ حَلَّ فِيهِ جُزْءٌ إِلَهِيٌّ، وَيَدَّعِي فِيهِ الرُّبُوبِيَّةَ، وَمِنْ قَائِلٍ إِنَّهُ وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى، وَإِنَّ الَّذِي يَظْهَرُ مِنْهُ مِنْ جُمْلَةِ كَرَامَاتِ الصَّالِحِينَ وَمِنْ قَائِلٍ إِنَّهُ مُشَعْبِذٌ، وَمُمَخْرِقٌ، وَسَاحِرٌ كَذَّابٌ، وَمُتَكَهِّنٌ، وَالْجِنُّ تُطِيعُهُ فَتَأْتِيهِ بِالْفَاكِهَةِ فِي غَيْرِ أَوَانِهَا. (الكامل في التاريخ)

In this year, al-Hussain bin Mansour al-Hallaj the Sufi was killed and burned. In the beginning he was exhibiting asceticism and Sufism. He would present Karamaat (miracles). Bringing forth to the people the fruits of the winter in the summer and the fruits of the summer in the winter. And he would extend his hand to the air and bring it back full of Dirhams (coins), on which was written: Say, He Allah is One. He called them the Dirhams of power. And he would inform the people of what they had eaten, and what they had done in their homes. He would inform them of what was in their hearts, so many people were misguided by him and believed in Hulool (pantheism).

Ultimately, the people differed regarding him as they differed regarding the Massiah (peace be upon him). Some said that a portion of divinity is in him and claimed divinity for him. And there are those who said he is a Wali of Allah (Most High). Thus, that which appears from him is from the Karamat of the righteous. And there were those who said he was a charlatan, a deceiver, a sorcerer, a liar and a fortune teller (Mutakahin). The Jinn would obey him and bring him fruit out of season. (Imam Ibn Athir 630H, al-Kamil).

Involved with sorcery

Imam Ibn Katheer confirmed that al-Hallaj went to India to learn sorcery. And he said he would call people to Allah (Most High) through it. Of course, such practices are completely prohibited. And sorcery is Kufr according to many Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah. This is yet another reason why the Ahl al-Sunnah had such a negative view on al-Hallaj.

وصح أنه دخل إلى الهند وتعلم بها السحر وقال: أدعو به إلى الله. (البداية والنهاية)

It is established that he entered India and learned sorcery there and said: I call to Allah (Most High) with it. (Imam Ibn Katheer 774H, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihaayah).

Do not defend Kufr

In the following Nass Imam al-Dhahabi strongly warns against making excuses for Kufr statements. Rather we should stick to the established view on al-Hallaj. He was astray and executed due to his Kufr.

وإنّ فتحنا باب الاعتذار عن المقالات وسلكنا طريقة التّأويلات المستحيلات لم يبقَ في العالم كفرٌ ولا ضلال وبَطَلَت كُتُبُ المِلَل والنِّحل واختلاف الفِرَق. (تاريخ الإسلام وَوَفيات المشاهير وَالأعلام)

If we open the door to excusing such statements and follow the path of impossible interpretations, there will be no disbelief or misguidance left in the world. And the books of sects, paths, and the differences of groups will be futile. (Imam Shams al-Deen al-Dhahabi 748H, Tarikh al-Islam). 

Conclusion

The authentic view of Ahl al-Sunnah on al-Hallaj is that he was guilty of blasphemy and executed for Kufr. There was a consensus upon this by the scholars of his time and those after him. However, centuries later some scholars deviated from this position.

I would urge every Muslim to hold to the consensus opinion. Since the divergent opinion often seeks to explain or make excuses for extreme blasphemy. This is not befitting of a Muslim who prioritises the sanctity of the Holy name of Allah (Most High). And stands in defence of the blessed Prophet ﷺ.

And Allah Most High Knows Best.

–Answered by Shaykh Noorud-deen Rashid (01.12.24)