Absorbed in veracity, martyr of love Abu al-Mughith al-Hussein b. Mansur al-Hallaj was an enamored and intoxicated votary of Sufism. He had a strong ecstasy and a lofty spirit. The Sufi Sheikhs are at variance concerning him. Some reject him, while others accept him. Among the latter class are Umru b. Uthman, Abu Yaqub Nahrajuri, Abu Yaqub Aqta, Ali b. Sahl Isfahani, and others. Those who reject him are Ibn Ata, Muhammad b. Khafif, and Abu al-Qasim Nasrabadi. But all the moderns accept his eminence and spiritual stature and include him among the Auliya (saint). Some such like Junaid, Shibli, Jurairi, and Husri have suspended their judgment about him.

Some accuse him of magic. In our days the Grand Sheikh Abu Said, Sheikh Abu al-Qasim Gurgani and Sheikh Abu al-Abbas Shaqani looked upon him favorably, and in their eyes he was a great Sufi. Abu al-Qasim Qushayri remarks that if Hallaj was a genuine spiritualist he is not to be rejected from Allah on the ground of peoples’ condemnation and if he was rejected by the Truth, his popularity with the people was of no use to him. Therefore we leave him to the Judgment of Allah, and honor him according to the signs of the Truth which we have found him to possess.

But of all the Sheikhs only a few deny the perfection of his merit, the purity of his spiritual state, and abundance of his ascetic practices. It would be an act of dishonesty to omit his biography from this book because only few have pronounced his outwardly behavior to be that of an infidel, and disbelieved in him and charged him with trickery and magic. They suppose that Hussein b. Mansur Hallaj is that Hasan b. Mansur Hallaj heretic of Baghdad who was the master of the famous infidel

of Baghdad, Muhammad b. Zakarriya and the companion of Abu Said Qarmati. But the Hussein whom we are discussing here was resident of village Bayda of Faris. The reluctance or rejection shown by some Sheikhs was not due to any dispute on his religious conduct but was due to his prevailed conduct and behavior.

At first he became a disciple of Sahl b. Abdullah, whom he left without obtaining his permission. Then he attached himself to Umru b. Uthman to whom also he left without seeking his permission. Then he sought to associate himself with Junaid, but he did not admit him. This led to his non-acceptance by other Sheikhs also and this was all because of conduct and not due to any other reason.

Shibli said about him, “Hallaj and I are one; my madness saved me, while his intelligence destroyed him?” Had his religion been suspected, Shibli would not have said: “Hallaj and I are one.” And Muhammad b. Khafif said, “he is divinely learned man.” There are many such praises uttered by Sheikhs. The annoyance and abhorrence on part of Sufi Sheikhs led him to solitude. He is the author of brilliant compositions and allegories and polished sayings in theology and jurisprudence. I have seen about fifty works by him at Baghdad and its neighboring districts, and some in Khuzestan, Faris and Khurasan. I found his writings like as the novices talks at the

initial stage of the path. Some of them are of high caliber, some pathetic, some easier, and some more unseemly than others. When Allah bestows His splendor on anyone, he endeavors to describe what he has seen with the power of ecstasy and help of Divine grace, his words are obscure, especially if he expresses himself with haste and self-admiration then they are more disgusting to the imaginations, and incomprehensible to the minds of those who hear them, and they appreciate the utterance. At such stage because of ignorance some deny it and some follow it but their following is also such like denial. On the other hand, persons of true spirituality and insight visions, make no effort to describe such states and do not occupy themselves with self-admiration on that account, and are careless of praise and blame alike, and are undisturbed by denial and acceptance.

It is absurd to charge Hallaj as a magician. According to the Sunnites, magic is real just as miracles are real. The manifestation of magic in the state of perfection is infidelity, whereas the manifestation of miracles in the state of perfection is excellence of Marifat, because the former is the result of Allah’s anger, while the later is outcome of His being pleased. I will explain this more fully in the chapter on affirmation of miracles. By consent of all Sunnites who are gifted with wisdom, no Muslim can be a magician and no infidel can be held in honor, for contraries never meet.

Hussein, as long as he lived, remained virtuous and pious. He always showed humility in his prayers, diligence in devotion and dikr (praise of Allah) and continual fasting. His sayings on the subject of Unification are of excellent nature. If his actions were magic, all this could not possibly have ensued from him. Consequently, they must have been karamat (miracles), and karamat are vouchsafed only to a true saint. Some theologians reject him on the ground that his sayings refer to transmigration and union. But the fault lies with the expression, not in the meaning. A person overcome with ecstasy has not the power of expressing himself correctly. Besides, the meaning of the expression may be difficult to apprehend, so that people mistake the writer’s intention, and repudiate not his real meaning but a notion which they have formed for themselves.

I have seen in Baghdad and its surroundings a number of heretics who pretend to be followers of Hallaj and make his sayings an argument for their profanity and call themselves Hallajis. They spoke of him in the same terms of exaggeration as the Shiites apply to Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). I will refute their doctrines in the chapter concerning the different Sufi sects.

Since Hallaj was an ecstatic and not firmly settled, therefore, it is not recommended to follow his sayings. A man needs to be firmly settled before his sayings can be considered authoritative. Although Hallaj is dear to me and I have lot of love for him in my heart, yet his path is not soundly established on any principle, and his state is not fixed in any position and his experiences leads to fear of evil. When my own visions began I derived much support from him, that is to say, in the way of argument and evidence. I have already composed a book in explanation of his sayings and demonstrated their sublimity by proofs and arguments. Furthermore, in another work, entitled Minhaj al-din, I have given some detail of his life from beginning to end and now I have given some account of him in this place. How can a doctrine whose principles require to be confirmed with so much caution be followed and imitated? But Truth and idle fancy never agree. The followers of desires are continually seeking to fasten upon some erroneous theory. As he said: “Tongues are eager to speak, but there is destruction in their speaking.” Such expressions are entirely harmful and futile in their meaning. If the meaning exists it is not lost by expression, and if it is non-existent it is not created by expression. Expression only produces an unreal notion and leads the student mortally astray by causing him to imagine that the expression is the real meaning.

Healthy union is that which takes place in a man when he is in the state of rapture and ecstasy. In such state, the man is under direct watch of Allah Who causes him to receive and fulfill His commandments and adorns him with mortification. Sahl b. Abdullah, Abu Hafs, Abu al-Abbas Sayyari (the author of the doctrine), Abu Yazid, Shibli, Abu al-Hasan Husri, and a number of great Sheikhs used to be continually under such state until the hour of prayer arrived; then they returned to consciousness, and after performing their prayers became enraptured again. This is to say that as long as you are in the state of separation, you are you, who would be fulfilling the command of Allah, but when Allah draws you to Himself, He has the best right to see that you perform His command, and for two reasons He keeps watch over you:

- firstly, in order that the sign of servantship is firm with you,

- secondly, in order that He may keep His promise that He will never let the Shariat of Muhammad (peace be upon him) be abrogated.

In broken union one gets so much absorbed in following the Divine command that he becomes distressed and bewildered, so that he falls into the class of lunatic. Then he is either excused from performing his religious obligations or rewarded for performing them, and the state of him who is rewarded is sounder than the one who is excused. In short, there is no particular maqam (station) or any peculiar state for jama (union), as it is the concentration of one's thoughts upon the object of one's desire. Some include it to maqamat (stations) and some refer it to part of states and in either case the desire of the united person is attained by negating his desire, “separation is parting and union is unification,” and this holds good in everything. As Jacob concentrated his thoughts of Yusaf, so that he had no thought but of him or Majnun concentrated his thoughts on Laila, so that he saw only her in the whole world, and all created things assumed the form of Laila in his eyes.

There are many such examples. One day, when Abu Yazid was in his cell, some one came and asked that was Abu Yazid there. Abu Yazid answered, “There is none except Allah in the cell. Some Sheikh related that a dervish came to Mecca and remained in contemplation of the Kaba for a whole year. During that time he neither ate nor drank, neither slept, nor cleansed himself. The contemplation of that house which Allah has referred to Himself became the food of his body and the drink of his soul. The reality in all these cases is the same, viz. that Allah divided the one substance of His love and bestowed a particle thereof, as a peculiar gift, upon every one of His friends in proportion to their love with Him. Then He lets down upon that particle the shrouds of humanity, the dress of nature, curtain of temperament and veil of spirit, in order that by its powerful working it may transmute to its own quality all the particles that are attached to it. Accordingly lover is raised to the status of beloved and his all acts reflect the same. This state is named jama union alike by those who regard the inwardly meaning and those who regard the outwardly expression.

Hussein b. Mansur (al-Hallaj) says in this sense:

“I am there in Thy service! O my Lord and Master!

I am there in Thy service! O my Beloved and object!

O star of my being, O goal of my desire

O pivot of my speech, my hints and my gestures!

O all of my all, O my hearing and my sight,

O my whole, my element and my particles!”

Therefore, it is not praiseworthy for one to affirm his existence when he has borrowed qualities, and an act of dualism to pay any heed to the phenomenal universe. Both the worlds are despicable to his soaring thought. Some have been led by their dialectical subtlety and their admiration of phraseology to speak of “the union of union”. This is good expression, but if you consider the meaning, it is better not to affirm “union of union” because there should be separation first; only then application of union would be correct and when there is union, it would be out of the result of separation, therefore, one union cannot be imposed on another union. The expression, therefore, is liable to be misunderstood, because one who is “united” does not look forth from himself to what is above or to what is below him and even independent of self also. At the time of ascension when the whole universe was displayed to Prophet (peace be upon him) he did not pay heed to anything because he was at maqam (station) of “union of union” and one who is united does not contemplate separation. Hence Allah said, “(His) sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong!” (Q 53:17). In my early days I composed a book on this subject and entitled it “Kitab al-bayan lahal al-iyan (The book of Exposition for Persons of intuition)”, and I have also discussed the matter at length in the book “Bahr al-qulub (The Sea of Hearts)”. For the sake of brevity, enough is what has been said. Among Sufis this is the doctrine of Sayyaris which I have explained and this is among those doctrines which are popular and approved by them.

I now turn to the opinions of those heretics who have connected themselves with the Sufism and have adopted their phraseology as a mean of disseminating their heresy and are busy in hiding their indignity and falsehood in the cover of the names of Sheikhs. My aim by mentioning them is to expose their errors in order that novices may not be deceived by their pretensions and may guard themselves from mischief.

The Hululis

Allah has said: “Apart from Truth, what (remains) but error?” (Q 10:32). There are two reprobate sects who claim their alliance to Sufism and notwithstanding their moral corruptions erroneously exhaust themselves in their friendship. One sect refers them to Abu Hulman of Damascus and the traditions which his followers relate of him do not agree with what is written about him in the books of Sufi Sheikhs. The Sufis regard Abu Hulman as one of them but these heretics attribute to him the doctrines of incarnation, union, and transmigration of spirits. I have seen criticism on them in the book of Muqadmi, and the theologians also have the same opinion of them. Allah knows what the reality is.

The other sect refers their doctrine to Faris, who pretends to have derived it from Hussein b. Mansur (al-Hallaj). None of the followers of Hallaj except this group holds such tenets. I saw Abu Jafar Sadlani with four thousand men, who all were followers of Hallaj and they all cursed Faris on account of this doctrine. Moreover, in the writings of Hallaj there is nothing but profound theosophy.

I say that we need not to know who Faris and Abu Hulman were or what they said, but anyone who holds a doctrine conflicting with Tawhid (Unification) and true theosophy has no part in religion at all. If the religion, which is the root and essence, is not firmly based, Sufism which is the branch and offspring of religion, how could it be sound and safe, for revelation, miracles and evidences are only manifested to Unitarians and religious persons.

The adherents of these doctrines have erred in regard to ruh (spirit), therefore, now I will explain its nature and principles according to the laws of Sunnah and in the course of my explanation I will bring forth the sayings, misgivings and erroneous opinions of the heretics in order that your faith may be strengthened, as the subject is relatively complicated. 

 ( from Kashf al-Mahjub Lt Col (R) Muhammad Ashraf Javed, http://www.quran4u.com/Revelation%20of%20Mystery%20(Kashf%20Al-Mahjub).pdf )

Doctrine of al-Hallaj on the Divine Attributes

as narrated by al-Qushayri (376-465 AH)

Shaykh Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami – Allah have mercy on him! – told us: I heard Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Ghalib say: I heard Abu Nasr Ahmad ibn Sa‘id al-Isfanjani say: al-Husayn ibn Mansur said:

“You must categorically consider all to be contingent, for pre-existence belongs to Him [alone].

“All that appears through body is necessarily an accident (‘arad).

 “That whose assemblage comes about through cause-and-effect (al-adât) is held together through its powers (quwâhâ).

 “All that comes together at one time, goes into dispersion at another time.

 “All that something else causes to subsist is characterized by dependency.

 “All that imagination can possibly apprehend can be pictured.

 “All that is contained is subject to ‘where.’

 “And all that has a genus is the object of a modality.

 “No ‘above’ shades Him – Exalted is He! – nor does any ‘below’ carry Him.

 “No limit/direction faces Him (walâ yuqâbiluhu hadd) nor does any ‘at’ (‘ind) beset Him.

 “He is not confined by any ‘behind’ nor limited by any ‘before’.

 “No ‘before’ caused Him to appear nor did any ‘after’ cause Him to vanish.

 “No ‘all’ gathered Him.

 “No ‘He is’ brought Him into existence (lam yûjidhu kân).

 “No ‘He is not’ can cause Him to be missed (walam yufqidhu lays).

 “His description: He has none (wasfuhu lâ sifata lahu).

 “His act has no cause (‘illa).

 “His being has no duration (amad).

 “He is transcendent beyond the states of His creatures: there is not for Him the least   deliberation (mizâj) in His creation, nor working (‘ilâj) in His acts.

 “He is clearly separate from them by His pre-existence (bâyanahum biqidamih) just as they are clearly separate from Him by their contingent nature (kamâ bâyanûh bihudûthihim).

 “If you ask ‘When?’ – His being is before Time.

 “Should you say, ‘hû’ – the letters hâ’ and wâw are but His creation.

 “And if you say, ‘Where?’ – His existence precedes Place.

 “So letters are His Signs (fal-hurûfu âyâtuhu);

 “His existence is the affirmation of Him (wujûduhu ithbâtuh);

 “Gnosis of Him is the upholding of His Oneness (ma‘rifatuhu tawhîduh);

 “and His Tawhîd is to distinguish Him clearly from His creatures.

 “Whatever you imagine in your imaginings, He is different from that (mâ tusawwiru fil-awhâmi fahuwa bikhilâfih).

 “How can that which He Himself began analyze Him? (kayfa yahullu bihi mâ minhu bada’ahu).

 “Or how can that be part of Him which He Himself gave rise to? (aw ya‘ûdu ilayhi mâ huwa ansha’ahu).

 “The pupils of the eyes cannot see Him.

 “Nor can conjectures apprehend Him.

 “His nearness is His generosity (qurbuhu karâmatuhu).

 “His distance is His contempt (wabu‘duhu ihânatuhu).

 His elevation is without ascent (‘uluwwuhu min ghayri tawaqqul).

 His coming is without displacement (wamajî’uhu min ghayri tanaqqul).

 (He is the First and the Last and the Manifest and the Hidden) (57:3), the Near (al-qarîb), the Far (al-ba‘îd), (There is nothing what­soever like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing) (42:11).

(from the Chapter on the Exposition of the Beliefs of This Fold [the Sufis] on Questions of Doctrine

(Faslun fî bayân i‘tiqâd hâdhihi al-tâ’ifa fî masâ’il al-usûl)

from al-Qushayri’s  Risala ila al-Sufiyya

Translated with Notes by DR. G.F. Haddad, http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/Hallaj_doctrine.htm )

My God, I fear you, for I am a sinner,
And I hope in you, for I am a believer;
I depend upon your generosity, for I am inadequate in myself;
I have confidence in your mercy, for I ask pardon;
I continue my prayer to you, for I think well of you

 – attributed to Mansur al-Hallaj