Hussain bin Mansur Hallaj
Hussain bin Mansur Hallaj (309 AH) was a heretic and a pantheist. There is consensus and agreement among the scholars of truth regarding his disbelief and heresy. His fundamental belief was that Allah has indwelt everything. This belief was the foundation of Wahdat al-Wujud (Unity of Existence). Due to his disbelief and heresy, the scholars deemed his blood lawful and he was executed.
Hafiz Ibn Hajar, may Allah have mercy on him (852 AH), writes:
لا أرى يتعصب للحلاج إلا من قال بقوله الذي ذكر أنه عين الجمع، فهذا هو قول أهل الوحدة المطلقة، ولهذا ترى ابن عربي صاحب الفصوص يعظمه ويقع في الجنيد.
“I see that the only person who shows bias in favor of Hallaj is the one who holds the same belief as him. It was mentioned to him that Hallaj insisted on the union (between Creator and creation). This is the belief of those who hold to absolute unity (Wahdat al-Wujud). That is why you will see the author of ‘Al-Fusus’, Ibn Arabi, honoring him and disrespecting Junayd.”
Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi, may Allah have mercy on him (597 AH), writes:
اتفق علماء العصر على إباحة دم الحلاج.
“All the scholars of that time agreed on the permissibility of the blood of Hallaj.”
Hafiz Ibn Kathir, may Allah have mercy on him (773 AH), writes:
قد اتفق علماء بغداد على كفر الحلاج وزندقته، وأجمعوا على قتله وصلبه، وكان علماء بغداد إذ ذاك هم علماء الدنيا.
“The scholars of Baghdad agreed that Hallaj was an unbeliever and heretic, and they reached a consensus on killing him and hanging him on the gallows. At that time, the scholars of Baghdad were considered the leading scholars of the world.”
Abu Hamid Allama Ghazali, may Allah have mercy on him (505 AH), writes:
أما 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 الإنحاد 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، فإن هذا الكلام يستلنه الطبع إذ فيه البطالة من الأعمال مع تزكية النفس بدرك المقامات والأحوال، فلا تعجز الأغنياء عن دعوى ذلك لأنفسهم ولا عن تلقف كلمات مخبطة مزخرفة، ومهما أنكر عليهم ذلك لم يعجزوا عن أن يقولوا هذا إنكار مصدره العلم والجدال ، والعلم حجاب ، والجدل عمل النفس، وهذا الحديث لا يلوح إلا من الباطن بمكاشفة نور الحق، فهذا ومثله مما قد استطار في البلاد شرره وعظم في العوام ضرره، حتى من نطق بشيء منه، فقتله أفضل في دين الله من إحياء عشرة.
By shath, we mean two types of speculative theology, which some Sufis have fabricated. One of these is the claim of love for Allah and the loud proclamation of union with Him, which makes outward acts (prayer, fasting, etc.) unnecessary, to the extent that many people have reached claims of unity (Wahdat al-Wujud), the lifting of the veil between Creator and creation, witnessing Allah Almighty, and direct speech with Him. Thus, they say that it was said to us (by Allah Almighty) and we said thus. In this regard, they resemble Husayn ibn Mansur al-Hallaj, who was crucified for making such statements, and they present the same argument from Mansur in أنا الحق that “I am Allah.” Similarly, they also use the statement of Abu Yazid al-Bistami as their proof, who said: سبحاني سبحاني “I am pure, I am pure.” This type of speculative theology has proven very harmful among people, to the extent that a large group of those on the path of salvation abandoned their path and began making such claims. The reason is that this type of speculative theology is very appealing to the nature because it claims purification of the self along with spiritual states and stations despite abandoning actions. You cannot stop these misguided people from making such claims for themselves and uttering slick words based on foolishness. Whenever they were objected to on this matter, they said that the origin of this denial is speculative knowledge and debate; knowledge is a veil and debate is the action of the self, and these things emerge from the inner self through the illumination of Allah Almighty. This and other such absurdities have spread in the regions of the Levant, and their harm among the common people has greatly increased, to the extent that in Islam, killing someone who utters such nonsense is better than saving the lives of ten people.
He also writes:
من هنا نشأ خيال من ادعى الحلول والاتحاد وقال: أنا الحق، وحوله يدندن كلام النصارى في دعوى اتحاد اللاهوت والناسوت أو تدرعها بها أو حلولها فيها على ما اختلف فيهم عبارتهم، وهو غلط محض.
“From here arises the idea of the person who claims incarnation and union and says that I am Allah. The Christian theology regarding the union with the divine in the human or hiding in it or incarnating in it is almost the same, although their expressions differ in this matter. This belief is completely wrong.”
Allama Dhahabi, may Allah have mercy on him (748 AH), writes:
تدبر يا عبد الله، نحلة الحلاج الذي هو من رؤوس القرامطة، ودعاة الزندقة، وأنصف وتورع، واتق ذلك، وحاسب نفسك، فإن تبرهن لك أن شمائل هذا المرء شمائل عدو للإسلام، محب للرئاسة، حريص على الظهور بباطل وبحق، فتبرأ من نحلته، وإن تبرهن لك والعياذ بالله أنه كان، والحالة هذه . محفا هاديا ، مهديا، فجدد إسلامك، واستغت بربك أن يوفقك للحق ، وأن يثبت قلبك على دينه، فإنما الهدى نور يقذفه الله في قلب عبده المسلم، ولا قوة إلا بالله.
“O servants of Allah! Reflect upon the belief of Hallaj, who was a leader of the Qaramita (an extremist and dangerous sect of the Rafidah) and a powerful advocate of atheism and irreligion. Act with justice and impartiality, avoid this, and hold yourself accountable. If it becomes clear that the traits of this person are those of someone who favors an anti-Islamic government and desires dominance through a mixture of falsehood and truth, then immediately renounce his belief! And may Allah forbid, if despite this situation you still see him as rightful, guided, and a guide, then renew your Islam and seek help from your Lord that He grants you the ability to follow the truth and keeps your heart steadfast on His religion, because guidance is a light that Allah places firmly in the heart of His Muslim servant. The strength and power to avoid misguidance and attain the truth is given only by Allah.”
Defense of this belief:
Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi writes:
“Just as the tree of Mount Sinai involuntarily became the manifestation of the word إني أنا الله by the command of the Truth, similarly Mansur also involuntarily became the manifestation of the word أنا الحق by the command of the Truth.”
They also write:
“Another possible meaning is that I did not reveal this secret; the Beloved Himself revealed it, meaning that the speaker is the same as أنا الحق, just as the speech حق أنا الله appeared from the tree of Mount Sinai.”
Furthermore, they write:
“One degree of this manifestation is also called Tajalli (manifestation), just as there was Tajalli in the tree of Mount Sinai. If the speech becomes clear in a perfect human being, then what remains after that?”
They also say:
“When the voice of أنا الحق came from the tree of Moses (peace be upon him), no one denied it, so why deny it from Mansur?”
You have translated verse 30 of Surah Al-Qasas as:
“From this blessed place, a voice came from a tree: ‘O Moses! I am Allah, the Lord of the worlds.'”
Thanvi Sahib’s teacher, Janab Muhammad Yaqub Nanotvi Sahib, says:
“This dominance had already become like the Tree of Mount Sinai, which manifested إني أنا الله.”
Maulana Zafar Ahmad Thanvi writes:
“One interpretation could be that at that time Ibn Mansur’s tongue was the spokesperson of the Word of Truth. From his tongue came أنا الحق just as from the Tree of Moses came the voice of إني أنا الله رب العالمين. Obviously, the tree did not call itself Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, but at that time it was the spokesperson of the Divine Word. Similarly, the same can be thought about Ibn Mansur, and it often happens in the dominance of circumstances and events that Allah Almighty speaks through the tongue of a mystic, which the seekers and people of spiritual states can understand. So it can be certain that from Ibn Mansur’s tongue came أنا الحق, but it is not certain that Ibn Mansur himself said ‘I am the Truth.'”
,
Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri Sahib says:
إنه إذا صح للشجرة أن ينادى فيها ب إني أنا الله ، فما بال المتقرب بالنوافل أن لا يكون الله سمعه وبصره كيف وأن ابن آدم الذي خلق على صورة الرحمن ليس بأدون من شجرة موسى عليه الصلاة والسلام.
“When in the tree it is possible to call out with the words ‘Allah is in اني آنا الله)‘, then how can it not be possible for Allah to become the ear and eye of a person who attains closeness to Allah through Nawafil (voluntary prayers), because the son of Adam, whose creation is according to the form of the Merciful, is not inferior to the tree of Musa (Moses), peace be upon him?”
On this, I will only say that none of the Ahl al-Sunnah agree with this. It would have been far better to follow the path of the Salaf of the Ummah than to interpret it this way.
Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari, may Allah have mercy on him (324 AH), writes:
زعمت الجهمية كما زعمت النصارى أن كلمة الله تعالى حواها بطن مريم رضي الله عنها وزادت الجهمية عليهم، فزعمت أن كلام الله مخلوق حل في شجرة، وكانت الشجرة حاوية له، فلزمهم أن تكون الشجرة بذلك الكلام متكلمة، ووجب عليهم أن مخلوقا من المخلوقين كلم موسى صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأن الشجرة قالت: يا موسى إني أنا الله لا إله إلا أنا فاعبدني، فلو كان كلام الله مخلوقا في شجرة لكان المخلوق قال: يا موسى إني أنا الله أنا فاعبدني، وقد قال تعالى: (ولكن حق القول منى لاملكن جهنم من الجنة والناس اجمعين) ، وكلام الله من الله تعالى، فلا يجوز أن يكون كلامه الذي هو منه مخلوقا في شجرة مخلوقة، كما لا يجوز أن يكون علمه الذي هو منه مخلوقا في غيره، تعالى الله عن ذلك علوا كبيرا.
Like the Christians, the Jahmiyyah also believed that the Word of Allah was contained within Mary, may Allah be pleased with her, in her womb. The Jahmiyyah went even further and said that the Word of Allah was a created being, which entered a tree, and the tree absorbed this Word within itself. Thus, it becomes necessary for the Jahmiyyah to say that the tree itself was the speaker with this Word, and that a created being spoke to Prophet Musa (Moses), peace be upon him, and the tree itself said, “O Musa! I am the God; there is no god but me, so worship me.” If this Word of Allah was created inside the tree, then it was a created being who said this to Musa (peace be upon him), whereas Allah’s command is:
ولكن حق القول منى لا ملئن جهنم من الجنة والناس أجمعين.
“But My word has proved true: I will fill Hell with jinn and men all together.”
The Word of Allah is from Allah Almighty Himself, therefore it is not permissible to say that the speech which was from Allah was created in a creature, in a tree, just as it is not permissible to say that the knowledge of Allah Almighty, which is from Him, was created in something else. Allah Almighty is far above such absurdities.
They also write:
قد قال الله تعالى: (وما كان لبشر أن يكلمه الله إلا وحيا أو من وراء حجاب او يرسل رسولا فيوحى بإذنه ما يشاء) ، فلو كان كلام الله لا يوجد إلا مخلوقا في شيء مخلوق لم يكن لاشتراط هذه الوجوه معنى، لأن الكلام قد سمعه جميع الخلق ووجدوه – بزعم الجهمية – مخلوقا في غير الله تعالى، وهذا يوجب إسقاط مرتبة النبيين صلوات الله عليهم أجمعين. ويجب عليهم إذا زعموا أن كلام الله لموسى خلقه في شجرة أن يكون من سمع كلام الله عز وجل من ملك أو من نبي أتى به من عند الله أفضل مرتبة من سماع الكلام من موسى، لأنهم سمعوه من نبي، ولم يسمعه موسى من الله عز وجل، وإنما سمعه من شجرة، وأن يزعموا أن اليهودي إذا سمع كلام الله من النبي عليه الصلاة والسلام أفضل مرتبة في هذا المعنى من موسى صلى الله عليه وسلم، لأن اليهودي سمعه من نبي من أنبياء الله، وموسى سمعه مخلوقا في شجرة، ولو كان مخلوقا في شجرة لم يكن مكلما لموسى من وراء حجاب، لأن من حضر الشجرة من الجن والإنس قد سمعوا الكلام من ذلك المكان، وكان سبيل موسى وغيره في ذلك سواء في أنه ليس كلام الله له من وراء حجاب.Then it will be said to them: If you claim that the meaning of Allah Almighty speaking to Moses is that He created speech with which He spoke in the tree, and that Allah created speech in the arm, because the arm said to the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him: “Do not eat me, for I am poisoned,” then you must accept that the speech which the Prophet, peace be upon him, heard was the speech of Allah Almighty.
Allah Almighty has said:
وما كان لبشر أن تكلمه الله إلا وحيا أو من وراء حجاب أو يرسل رسولا فيوحى بإذنه ما يشاء.
It is not possible for any human being that Allah speaks to him except through revelation, or from behind a veil, or by sending an angel, then He reveals to him whatever He wills by His permission. If the speech of Allah Almighty were found to be created in any creature, then there would be no meaning in conditioning it with these restrictions, because according to the Jahmiyyah, sometimes all creatures hear it in a created state in some other entity besides Allah Almighty. This belief necessarily diminishes the status and rank of the noble Prophets.
When Jahmiyyah people claim that the speech which Allah Almighty spoke to our master Musa (peace be upon him) was created in a tree, then it will be necessary for them to accept that those who heard this speech from an angel or messenger who brought it from Allah are superior to our master Musa (peace be upon him) in terms of hearing the speech, because those people must have heard it from a prophet, whereas Musa (peace be upon him) did not hear it from Allah Almighty but heard it from a tree. Also, this claim will necessarily imply that if a Jew heard Allah’s speech from his prophet (peace be upon him), then he would be superior to Musa (peace be upon him) in this matter, because the Jew heard it from a prophet of Allah, and Musa (peace be upon him) heard it in the form of being created in a tree. If Allah’s speech was created in a tree, then Allah Almighty did not speak to Musa (peace be upon him) from behind a veil, because whoever, whether jinn or human, was present at that place would have heard the speech from that same place. Thus, the means for Musa (peace be upon him) and others would be the same, that they did not hear the speech from behind a veil. Then these Jahmiyyah will be asked: since your claim is that Allah Almighty’s speech to Musa (peace be upon him) means that He created the speech in a tree and then spoke to Musa (peace be upon him) through it, then Allah Almighty must have also created speech in the flesh of a jackal, because the flesh of the jackal told the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) not to eat it because it was poisonous. Therefore, according to you, it will be necessary that the speech which the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) heard was the speech of Allah Almighty.
Imam Ajri, may Allah have mercy on him (360 AH), writes:
إن قال منهم قائل: إن الله تعالى خلق كلاما في الشجرة، فكلم به موسى قيل له: هذا هو الكفر، لأنه يزعم أن الكلام مخلوق، تعالى الله عز وجل عن ذلك ويزعم أن مخلوقا يدعي الربوبية، وهذا من أقبح القول وأسمجه، وقيل له: يا ملحد، هل يجوز لغير الله أن يقول: إنني أنا الله؟ نعوذ بالله أن يكون قائل هذا مسلما، هكذا كافر يستتاب، فإن تاب ورجع عن مذهبه السوء وإلا قتله الإمام، فإن لم يقتله الإمام ولم يستتبه وعلم منه أن هذا مذهبه هجر ولم يكلم، ولم يسلم عليه ولم يصل خلفه، ولم تقبل شهادته، ولم يزوجه المسلم كريمته.
“If anyone among them says that Allah created speech in a tree and spoke to Moses, peace be upon him, through it, it will be said to him, this is disbelief, because their claim is that divine speech is created. Allah is free from that. That person thinks that the created is claiming lordship. This is the most vile and worst statement. Further, it will be said: O atheist and godless one! Is it permissible to say for anyone other than Allah, ‘I am Allah’? We seek refuge in Allah that such a person be a Muslim. He is a disbeliever; he will be made to repent. If he repents and returns from his bad religion, then fine; otherwise, the ruler of the time should kill him. If the ruler of the time does not kill him and he is not made to repent and his religion becomes known, then he will be disassociated from, no conversation will be held with him, no greeting will be given, no prayer will be led by him, his testimony will not be accepted, and no Muslim will marry his daughter.”
Hafiz Bahaiqi, may Allah have mercy on him (458 AH), writes:
لو كان كلام الله لا يوجد إلا مخلوقا في شيء مخلوق لم يكن لاشتراط هذه الوجوه معنى لاستواء جميع الخلق في سماعه من غير الله ووجودهم ذلك عند الجهمية مخلوقا في غير الله، وهذا يوجب إسقاط مرتبة النبيين صلوات الله عليهم أجمعين، ويجب عليهم إذا زعموا أن كلام الله لموسى خلقه في شجرة، أن يكون من سمع كلام الله من ملك أو من نبي أتاه به من عند الله أفضل مرتبة في سماع الكلام من موسى، لأنهم سمعوه من نبي ولم يسمعه موسى عليه السلام من الله ، وإنما سمعه من شجرة، وأن يزعموا أن اليهود إذ سمعت كلام الله من موسى نبي الله أفضل مرتبة في هذا المعنى من موسى بن عمران صلى الله عليه وعلى نبينا وسلم؛ لأن اليهود سمعته من نبي من الأنبياء وموسى صلى الله عليه وعلى نبينا وسلم سمعه مخلوقا في شجرة ولو كان مخلوقا في شجرة لم يكن الله عز وجل مكلما لموسى من وراء حجاب ولأن كلام الله عز وجل لموسى عليه السلام لو كان مخلوقا في شجرة كما زعموا لزمهم أن تكون الشجرة بذلك الكلام متكلمة، ووجب عليهم أن مخلوقا من المخلوقين كلم موسى وقال له: (إنني أنا الله لا إله إلا أنا فاعبدني) ، وهذا ظاهر الفساد.
If the Word of Allah is found only as a created thing within some created entity, then imposing any of these conditions is meaningless, because all created beings are equal in hearing it from someone other than Allah, and according to the Jahmiyyah, it is created in something other than Allah. This diminishes the status and rank of the Prophets. When they claim that Allah’s speech to Musa (peace be upon him) was created in a tree, it becomes necessary for them to accept that those who heard this speech from an angel or a prophet who brought it from Allah are better and superior in hearing it than Musa (peace be upon him), because they heard it from a prophet, whereas Musa (peace be upon him) did not hear it from Allah directly but from a tree. Moreover, they must claim that when the Jews heard Allah’s speech from Allah’s prophet Musa (peace be upon him), they were superior in hearing it than Musa ibn Imran (peace be upon him), because the Jews heard it from one of Allah’s prophets, Musa (peace be upon him), whereas Musa (peace be upon him) heard it from a created tree.
If this speech had been produced in a tree, then Allah Almighty would not have been speaking to Musa (peace be upon him) from behind the veil, but in that case, it would necessarily follow that the tree was speaking to Musa (peace be upon him), and thus it would be necessary that one of the creations spoke to Musa (peace be upon him) and said to him, “I am Allah, worship Me,” and this is clearly a false statement.
Allama Ibn Abi al-Izz Hanafi, may Allah have mercy on him (792 AH), writes:
ما أفسد استدلالهم بقوله تعالى: (نودي من شاطي الواد الأيمن فى البقعة المبركة من الشجرة) على أن الكلام خلقه الله تعالى في الشجرة، فسمعه موسى منها وعموا عما قبل هذه الكلمة! وما بعدها، فإن الله قال: (فلما أتها نودي من شاطي الواد الايمن) ، النداء هو الكلام من بعد، فسمع موسى عليه السلام النداء من حافة الوادي، ثم قال: (في البقعة المبركة من الشجرة) أي أن النداء كان في البقعة المباركة من عند الشجرة، كما يقول: سمعت كلام زيد من البيت، يكون من البيت لابتداء الغاية، لا أن البيت هو المتكلم ولو كان الكلام مخلوفا في الشجرة لكانت الشجرة هي القائلة: (يموسى إني أنا الله رب العلمين) ، وهل قال: إني أنا الله رب العالمين، غير رب العالمين؟ ولو كان هذا الكلام بدأ من غير الله لكان قول فرعون: أنا ربكم الأعلى صدقا إذ كل من كلامين عندهم مخلوق قد قاله غير اللها وقد فرقوا بين الكلامين على أصولهم الفاسدة: أن ذاك كلام الله خلقه الله في فرعون! فحرفوا وبدلوا واعتقدوا خالفا غير الله.
How corrupt is the argument of those (Jahmiyyah) who claim from the statement of Allah Almighty:
(نودي من شاطي الواد الأيمن في المقعة المبركة من الشجرة) that Allah created the speech in the tree, and then Musa (peace be upon him) heard it from it! They have become blind to the context before and after this statement of Allah Almighty, because Allah’s statement is:
(فلما أنها نودي من شاطي الواد الأيمن) Calling out means to speak from a distance, and Musa (peace be upon him) heard the speech from within the valley, then the statement continued:
(في البقعة المبركة من الشجرة) means that God was near the blessed spot by the tree, just as a person says that I heard Zaid’s speech from the house; the word “house” is used to indicate the beginning and the end, not that the house itself was speaking. If this speech were created and produced in the tree, then the tree itself would be the one saying, “O Moses, I am indeed the Lord of the worlds.” Did anyone other than the Lord of the worlds say, “I am the Lord of the worlds”? If this speech appeared from someone other than Allah, then Pharaoh’s statement was true when he said, “I am your greatest lord!” Because both speeches are considered created by the Jahmiyyah, and both are attributed to someone other than Allah, but according to their corrupt principles, they differentiated between these two speeches by saying that the speech of Allah was produced in the tree, and this was the speech produced by Pharaoh! They resorted to distortion and alteration and held the belief that there is a creator besides Allah.
Warning:
It is attributed to Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Mas’ud رضي الله عنه:
رأيت الشجرة التي نودي منها موسى عليه السلام، سمرة خضراء.
“I have seen the tree from which Musa عليه السلام was spoken to; it was green.”
Its chain of narration is very weak.
According to Sufyan bin Waki’, it is “weak.”
Imam Abu Mu’awiyah and Imam A’mash رحمتہ الله are both “mudallis” (those who conceal their sources), and they did not specify the hearing.
Abu Ubaidah did not hear it from his father, as Hafiz Ibn Hajar رحمتہ الله writes.
إنه عند الأكثر لم يسمع من أبيه.
“According to the majority, Abu Ubaidah did not hear it from his father (Ibn Mas’ud رضي الله عنه).”
Therefore, Hafiz Ibn Kathir رحمتہ الله‘s statement about it is not correct.
إسناده مقارب
