He established a clandestine organization to topple the Abbasids, who crucified him three times, cut him, and burned him .. The wretched Sufi or a rogue heretic?

Abdul Quddus Al Hashemi

Three signs of those who met him were among the great men, and he had the right to eternity: excessive admiration from his lovers and his disciples; excessive hatred from those who deny him and those who deny him; and an atmosphere of secrets and mysteries surrounding him as if he was one of the paranormal creatures with whom the prescribers were confused ..., and they return those Power is sometimes due to divine miracles, and sometimes to magic and fortune-telling. ”This is the trilogy of eternity that was set forth in the law of Abbas al-Akkad (d. 1964 AH) in his book,“ The Return of Abi Al-Ma’ari ”, and we see it together in the personality that made us the subject of our article: Al-Hussein bin Mansour Al-Hallaj Al-Farsi ( D 309H).

We intended in this article to reveal the state of Al-Hallaj, and to make a reader of his biography an approach that will follow him, so that he does not constitute a difference to him or the difference of their sayings and opinions in Abu Mansour. The essence of our article is that Al-Hallaj is a Sunni Sufi, and leader of a clandestine political movement, which intends to depose Bani al-Abbas and overturn their caliphate. And we will start by mentioning the difference of opinions in it, then we will expose his belief and the reason for the turmoil of people in it, then take a look at his political life and the problem that occurred in people in understanding his movement and correspondence.

Confused perception
Those who denounced al-Hallaj were exaggerated by a group of scholars during his time, and they said: “The pilgrim was killed by the sword of Sharia over the heresy.” And he wrote in his “heretic” flags such as the Golden Imam (d. 748 AH) - who is the author of the advanced phrase - who says about Al-Hallaj: I combined his statements in two parts. ". Before him, Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) classified 'the categorical of the place of the pilgrims categorized as the place of al-Hallaj'; then came in our French orientalist era Louis Massignon (d. 1962 AD), making it a second Christian after Isa bin Maryam, peace be upon him.

The books of the classes on al-Hallaj narrated paranormal miracles in which the mind was confused until some of them made him a "god", and mysterious conditions and sayings attributed to him were hidden even from his family; his son Hamad bin Al-Hallaj said: "Then he called people to something that I did not know the truth of his matter." He also narrated Ibn Bakoy al-Shirazi (d. 428 AH), the last of whom is perhaps the first to single out for al-Hallaj an authorship of his translation and news. Al-Dhahabi Ibn Bakoye described this as "the righteous imam of the modern Sheikh of Sufism."

Al-Hallaj was a talisman of our heritage and a very bewildering figure for his students, and we do not find a text that tells this confusion about his matter as a golden text he mentioned in his translation, in which he displays the three possibilities of people's attitude towards him, with his tendency to prove his heresy.

Al-Dhahabi says: “Oh Abdullah, organize the bee of Al-Hallaj, who is one of the heads of Carmatians and advocates of heresy, fair and scrupulous ...; if you prove that this person’s merits are the enemies of Islam, a lover of the presidency is eager to appear false and right, so he is absolved of his bee. And you - God forbid - prove to you that he was ... rightly guided, guided, and renewed your Islam and sought help from your Lord to help you to the truth ...; if you doubted and did not know his truth and disavowed what was thrown at him, rest yourself, and God did not ask you about him at all.

And our gold is generally accused of the dialectical figures of the people of Sufism. With a golden rule in the event of those who differed in it, he did not blame himself with mercy on Al-Hallaj and ask for forgiveness for him. And ignore what his line - just before his previous text with two lines - where he says: "Whoever is a sect from the nation misleads him, and a group of the nation praises and praises him, and a third sect stands in it and scares him to demean it; he is one who should be presented from it, and delegated his command to God, And to ask forgiveness for him in the sentence, because his Islam is authentic with certainty, and his error is doubtful; thus, you rest and purify your heart from the yield of the believers.

Testimonies
Al-Hallaj is a Sunni Sufi, and whoever claimed to be a Sufi mystic, a Sufi philosopher, or a Qarmati, he mistook and turned away the interpretation, and ignored clear evidence; this is the lawsuit we make here and infer it in several ways:

The first of these is the sources of his narration, because they are Sunni sources, and there is no dispute in their Sunnah with the testimony of al-Dhahabi himself. The first sheikh who taught him was Sahl bin Abdullah Al-Tastari (d. 283 AH). Al-Dhahabi said about him in the 'Biographies of the Nobles Flags': “The sheikh of those who know .. Sufi ascetic .. has useful words, good preaching, and a firm foot [on the way]” . Then he was a student of Amr ibn Othman Al-Makki (d. 300 AH), who Al-Dhahabi described as: “The Imam Al-Rabbani, the Sheikh of Sufism Abu Abdullah Al-Makki Al-Zahid.” He was also among the elders of al-Hallaj Abu al-Qasim al-Junaid al-Baghdadi (d. 298 AH), known for his standing in Sunni Sufism.

Another of his sheikhs is Abu al-Hasan al-Nuri (d. 295 A.H.), who al-Dhahabi said in al-Sir: “The sheikh of the sect in Iraq, and I tease them with the truths of truths, and he has precise phrases related to him who deviated from Sufism” Al-Nuri was arrested during the time of the Caliph al-Mutadid (d. 289 AH) on charges of heresy, when when al-Nuri was presented to Judge Ismail bin Ishaq al-Maliki (d. 282 AH) and discussed, the judge said: If these people are heresies, there is no unified in the land !! !! We know that the heresy In most cases, it was a ready charge in the treasury of the state, in which all opponents were thrown, which will become clear to us from Al-Hallaj's biography as well.

Second: The validity and Sunnah of the sponsors of Al-Hallaj. According to al-Dhahabi, al-Salami (al-Nisaburi, author of the Layers of Sufism) who died in 412 AH) said: “Most of the Sheikhs responded al-Hallaj and his exile, and he refused to have a foot in Sufism, and Ibn Ataa (d. 309 AH), Ibn Khafif (d. 371 AH), and Nasr al-Adabadi accepted it.” (D. 367 AH) "Who are these sheikhs who accepted al-Hallaj in the ranks of the imams of Sufism and refused to accuse him of heresy and disbelief? Here is their translation with the imams of the hadiths, the first of whom is al-Dhahabi himself:

The first of them, male and death, is Abu al-Abbas Ibn Ata al-Baghdadi, whom Al-Dhahabi criticized for his defense of al-Hallaj, but he nevertheless described him as the "despised and ascetic servant." According to Al-Dhahabi, Ibn Atta was "tested because of al-Hallaj," and his death because of the authorities torturing him was a punishment for his support of al-Hallaj. Rather, al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (d. 463 AH) says in the 'History of Baghdad': Ibn Ata was asked about the article of al-Hallaj and he said with his article, so [that] was the reason for his killing!

The second was Ibn Khafif, who was Muhammad Ibn Khafif al-Dabi al-Shirazi al-Shafi’i, the sheikh of Ibn Bakweh, whom we presented as the first to dedicate a book to translating al-Hallaj. Ibn Asaker - in his book 'showing the lie of the false one' - reported on al-Salami that he described Ibn Khafif and said: "Today he is the sheikh of the Sheikhs ..., there is no age left for the people, nor does he complete the time and time ..., and he met Hussain bin Mansour (= Al-Hallaj ), And he is one of the most knowledgeable of the Sheikhs in the sciences of al-اهرāhir, adhering to the sciences of Sharia from the Qur’an and Sunnah. ”

Al-Dhahabi described Ibn Khafif in the 'Al-Sir' as: “Sheikh Al-Imam Al-Arif Al-Faqih Al-Qidwa… Dhu al-Funun… Sheikh of Sufism”, and that he “combined knowledge, work, height of bond, adherence to the Sunnah, and the enjoyment of longevity in obedience.” As for al-Sabki, he says about him - in 'Shafi'i classes': “He attained what no one of creation has attained in the knowledge and prestige of the private and the public, and he has become one of his time intentional from the horizons .., blessed is he who means it.”

Desperate defense
When you learned this case of Ibn Khafif, it is necessary for you to know his opinion on the Hallaj that he met; he said about him: “A Muslim man, if what I saw from him in confinement was not monotheism, then there is no monotheism in this world !!” The Junaid mentioned al-Hallaj badly in his council - and we will explain to you that the reason for the conversion of the soldier from the position of the teacher to Hallaj to the place of his detachment came to him, so a light son defended al-Hallaj, and he says: "O Sheikh, do not go long! Do not answer the supplication and tell the secrets from the Neringat (= A kind of lightness movements and tricks similar to magic (magic and magic).

And according to Ibn Katheer in 'The Beginning and the End': “I sing to Abu Abdullah Ibn Khafif the saying of al-Hallaj:
Glory be to He who showed His humanity ** A secret of a deep Hisology
Then he appeared in his creation as visible ** in the form of a eating and a mustache
Even his creature has seen him ** like the moment of the eyebrow with the eyebrow
Ibn Khafif said: Who should say this, may God curse! He was told: This is from al-Hallaj's hair, so he said: It may be said of him !!

And the third of the three Al-Nasrabadi, and he is Abu Al-Qasim Ibrahim bin Muhammad Al-Nasrabadi who said in his defense of Al-Hallaj: “If after the two Sadducees he is united, then [is] Al-Hallaj”, according to what Al-Salami Al-Nisaboori quoted him as saying in the 'layers of Sufism'. There al-Nasarabadi was described as "the sheikh of Sufism in Nishapur, who had the tongue attached to the book and the Sunnah." Al-Dhahabi said of al-Nasrabadi that he is the "Imam of the Hadith, the leading example, the preacher of Sheikh Sufism."

And who also recommended al-Hallaj: Abu al-Abbas Ibn Sreej (d. 306 AH), the Shaykh of al-Shafiyah in Baghdad, who was nicknamed “al-Shafi’i al-Saghir”, as al-Sibki said in “Tabaqat al-Shafi’iyya”, and Ibn Surayj and his position in the Sunnis were more months than inferred to it. Ibn Suraij refused to engage in the early campaign led by Imam Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Dawood al-Ashabhani al-Dhahiri (d. 297 AH) to persuade the authorities to disbelieve al-Hallaj and the necessity of killing him, which is evidenced by the transmission of al-Dhahabi - in 'al-Sir' - to the saying of al-Salami: I heard Ali bin Saeed al-Wasiti Kufa says: No one was stripped of Al-Hallaj and forced the Sultan to kill him, just as Ibn Daoud stripped him!

Ibn Zenji (d. 334 AH) - in his letter 'mentioning the killing of al-Hallaj' - Ibn Surayj's testimony in al-Hallaj was mentioned as follows: He said: Al-Wasiti: I said to Ibn Surayj: What do you say about al-Hallaj? He said: As for me, I see him as a keeper of the Qur’an aware of him, skilled in Jurisprudence, knowing the hadith, news and sunnah, fasting forever, standing up at night, preaching and crying, and speaking with words I do not understand; I do not judge his disbelief. " Ibn al-Wardi al-Ma’ari al-Kindندي (d. 749 AH) reported in his history that “Abu al-Abbas bin Sreej said about him (= al-Hallaj): This is a hidden man as he is and I say nothing about it.”

Hanbali endorsement
Third: The translators of him: Perhaps Abu Abdul Rahman Al-Salami - in the 'Layers of Sufism' - and Ibn Bakweh are the first to translate to Abu Mansour Al-Hallaj. As for the translation of al-Salami in its layers, it is devoid of everything that requires judgment on heresy and atonement, as it is free from the story of the paranormal and dignities, and only the difference of the people of Sufism is mentioned in the manner that we mentioned earlier.

As for Ibn Bakoy, he supported him high in the story about Al-Hallaj, as he transmits his life from the narration of his son Hamad. It is a novel devoid of paranormalities and dignities, and if all these paraps were found - which are crowded with late translation books - the boy would have been careful to mention the honor of his father. Then we find the matter in those who are overwhelmed by the tendency of myths, or atonement and the relation to solutions and union.

Fourth: His words are about himself: Ibn al-Sa’i (d. 674 AH) - in his book 'Akhbar al-Hallaj' - quoting the pupil of al-Hallaj Ahmad bin Fatik al-Sufi mentioned that al-Hallaj used to say: “Whoever thinks that the divine mixes with humanity, or humanity with the divine has disbelieved” . And he said:
I am the secret of truth! What is the right I ** but I am the right to differentiate us
He said in his trial council: "My back is a fever, and my blood is forbidden, and it is not permissible for you to interpret Ali, my belief in Islam, and the doctrines of the Sunnah, for God is God in my blood."

Fifthly: The speech of a follower who spoke to him about the validity of his belief, as mentioned in 'Akhbar Al Hallaj' also said Ibrahim Al Halawani: “I served Hallaj ten years, and I was one of the closest people to him. From what I often heard people fall into, they say that he is a heretic who imagined myself Then I tested him: I said to him one day, Sheikh, I want to know something from the doctrine of the subconscious! He said ....: Oh son! I remember for you something from my investigation apparent of the law: I did not denote the doctrine of one of the imams altogether, but I took from all the most difficult and most difficult doctrine, and I Now on that. " We also find that Abu al-Qasim al-Qushairi (d. 465 AH) - who is the imam of the mayor of the Al-Tisnun people - transmits in his 'al-Qushayriyah' a long text of al-Hallaj in the unification of God.

A century and a half after the killing of al-Hallaj, we found great imams defending al-Hallaj even from within the Hanbali school. This Imam Ibn Aqil al-Hanbali “classified in praise of al-Hallaj a part of his youth’s time in which his words were interpreted and his poems were interpreted and apologized to him,” according to the tribe of Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 654 AH). ) In 'The Mirror of Time'. Rather, Ibn Aqeel himself admitted to his support for al-Hallaj and that he “retreated” from that when the Abbasid “followed” him under pressure from his colleagues in the Hanbali school of thought.

According to the document on this “recitation” - whose text was preserved by Ibn al-Jawzi in the 'regular' quoting Ibn al-Aqil's line - the latter's saying: “I believed in al-Hallaj that he was from the people of religion, asceticism and dignity, and I supported this in part of his currency, and I repent to God Almighty From him, and that he was killed unanimously by the jurists of his time, and they were injured in it and he erred. " Even though Ibn Aqeel’s text - even if we accept his issuance from him without coercion - does not include a judgment of heresy or infidelity over al-Hallaj, but only describes him as "a mistake."

Causes of turmoil
If you told me: Why did the turmoil happen in the case of the man ... and the matter is as you remember it from his Sunnah ?! I told you that this was due to the fact that Al-Hallaj was surrounded by mystical and political life: when you realized the truth of these two ambiguities, know that most of what was narrated about Al-Hallaj - and scholars have shaped - is outside of these two sections.

As for the first ambiguity, the fact that al-Hallaj was a man of Sufism was a situation for him and disclosures that could not be well expressed and transferred to the language of the people understandable to them, as the mysteries of the people of Sufism and their witnesses - in the case of what they describe as "annihilation and the manifestation of the truth" - stipulate the description, so when the person crossed About it in the human language derived from their world “and Shatah” occurred in a problem, and therefore Ibn Khaldun said - in the topic of Sufism from his book “The Introduction” - that “the phrase about the foundations is difficult to lose the [linguistic] status of it.”

Especially the hadith of Sufism on the conditions of “annihilation and the manifestation of truth” that Ibn Al-Qayyim (d. 751 AH) describes in the “runways of those who walk” by saying: “The annihilation that the people refer to and work on: that the talks go in the witnesses of the servant, and absent in the horizon of nothingness as it was before That there is, and the Almighty remains true as it has not been removed, then the image of the viewer and his drawing are also absent, so there is no image or drawing left for him, then the witnesses are also absent, so he does not have witnesses, and the truth becomes the one who watches himself, as was the matter before finding the components, and its truth is that He who perishes who was not, and he remains who remains. "

Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) describes - in the entirety of his messages - this case, and he says: "And he may expose to some those who know in the place of annihilation, pluralism, and Islam (= loss of perception due to mystic attraction) and sugar - by the strength of the seizure of the conscience and remembrance of it - from the case in which it is absent from Himself and others. " In this also Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH) - in some of his books such as 'Mishkat al-Anwar' - apologized to al-Hallaj in his expression of the state of annihilation: "Whoever has achieved Sufism and the knowledge of things standing on it [that is, God Almighty], and that things cannot be found without him; He said: There is nothing in the meal except God, and he said: I am the right to exaggeration in monotheism. So the Sufi’s statement about these conditions necessitates accusation against him during the years.

The second ambiguity is the ambiguity imposed by the nature of the secret political movements; we see that Al-Hallaj was what might be called the 'stream of political Sufism', which his companions intend to wrest rule from Bani Abbas and return it to the family of Ali in the beginning, and then he later calls for himself. The covert action requires some ambiguity in the movements, correspondence, and coding that only its affiliates understand.

Black propaganda
We have followed the narrations that openly interrupt and challenge him, and we found most of them against his opponents. The number of these opponents has increased. Some of them were employees of the state over which Al-Hallaj revolted, and they recounted it as a matter of "black propaganda". Among these are Abu al-Qasim al-Tannoukhi (d. 342 AH), al-Sulli (d. 335 AH), and Amr bin Othman al-Makki. The latter took up the district of Jeddah and became an employee of the state after he was the sheikh of al-Hallaj, and he was writing to al-Amsar by expiation for al-Hallaj.

And some of them were angry at the forefront of al-Hallaj and became famous when he “fell to the people with great acceptance until all those in his time envied him”, as his son Hamad said. Among this category is Abu Ya`qub al-Nahjuri (d. 330 AH), who tells Hamad bin al-Hallāj the reason for his envy to his father. He says: “And al-Hallāj came second to Mecca and put on the patch and towel, and he left with him in that trip he created many [of his followers], and his envy Abu Ya`qub al-Nahjouri spoke. In it what he spoke!

Among them is al-Junaid al-Baghdadi, who was the sheikh of the Sufi sect. We should not lose sight of the instinct of envy between scholars and sheikhs, and remember the golden rule that the preachers of Imam Ibn al-Jawzi gave us to us by saying in 'The Hunting of the Thoughts': “If someone who thinks of you sees you as an example for him - and I have been exalted on him - then he must be affected, and perhaps envy. Brothers of Joseph, peace be upon them of this race !!

And Junaid - in our estimation - that he was on the pyramid of the organization of political Sufism, and Al-Hallaj was a follower of this organization at first; he was receiving orders from Junaid in managing his affairs. Hamad bin Al-Hallaj tells us what Ibn Bakoye narrates about him: “Then my father disagreed with Junaid bin Muhammad, and he offered him what harm there was for what happened between Abu Ya’qub [Al-Nahjuri] and Amr [al-Makki], so he ordered him to be silent and considerate, so be patient.”

Then, after the return of al-Hallaj from Mecca, his followers increased and his influence increased, and he seems to have been reckless and more daring than Al-Junaid's line of secrecy and slowness. When the soldier saw him with a follower and a tendency to the presidency, he accused him of making allegations and denying him, so Al-Hallaj rode himself. His son Hamad said: "He returned to Baghdad with a group of the Sufi poor. He went to Junaid bin Muhammed and asked him a question, but he did not answer him, and he attributed it to being claiming what he asked, so he was brutalized, took my mother and returned to Sestor (= a city now located in western Iran)." There he covered the greatness of al-Hallaj and his popular base was extended.

Political movement
Sufism had - during the second half of the third century AH - a clear Alawi mood, and this is due to two things; first: their scientific support - or if you like the ways - that they take to Ali bin Abi Talib, may God be pleased with him. Their attribution - in what they mention - revolves around the soldier who is the sheikh of the sect and the leader of the underground movement, as we thought. The soldier took the method on the authority of Siri al-Suqati (d. 253 AH) on the authority of Ma`ruf al-Karkhi (d. 200 AH) on the authority of Dawood al-Ta’i (d. 162 AH) on the authority of Habib al-Ajmi (d. 119 AH) on the authority of Al-Hasan Al-Basri (d. 110 AH) on the authority of Ali, may God be pleased with him. Abu Bakr al-Shibli (d. 334 AH) was taken from al-Junaid, and from al-Shibli Abu al-Qasim al-Nasrabadi was taken, and al-Hallaj accompanied al-Junaid and became a student of it.

And secondly: The bulk of this group of Sufis is from Khurasan, and they are, as is well known, the solid nucleus upon which the da'wa of the Al-Bayt family was founded, and with them the Abbasid state was established. Al-Hallaj was among this political movement, but he saw for himself acceptance and fame, and he overcame the kinetic hierarchy, and this was what angered his Sheikh Al-Junaid in what we had learned from the news of their difference after his return from Mecca, which he entered with “four hundred men” of his followers, according to Al-Thahabi’s account.

Also, one of the signs of Junaid's political movement is that he was boycotting the officials who work for the Abbasid government, and this is what happened to him with Amr bin Othman al-Makki after he became the judge of Jeddah, so Junaid denies him, according to al-Dhahabi in 'Al-Sir'. Our statement of the political activism of Al-Hallaj is not from our own, but rather is something that is well known to him among the applicants, and flags of them were referred to as his contemporaries, “Sheikh of Sufism” Ibrahim bin Shaiban (d. 337 AH), Al-Nadim the owner of the 'index' (d. 384 AH), and the imam of Al-Haramain Al-Juwaini (d. 478 AH) ).

Imam of the Two Holy Mosques - while Ibn al-Jawzi narrated it on him in 'Hunting Al-Khater' then Ibn Khalkan (d. 681 AH) in 'Deaths of Notables' - said, "A group of trustworthy people looking for insider searches mentioned that al-Hallaj and al-Janabi al-Qarmati (= Abu Sa`id al-Janabi, killed 301 AH) And Ibn Al-Muqana (wanted Al-Muqana, who is one of the titles of Ali bin Muhammad Al-Basri, leader of the Zinj Revolution in Iraq, killed 270 AH) went to the heart of the state, and was exposed to the corruption of the kingdom, and the sympathy and appeal of hearts. Accompany it with death and failure to realize the security of the people of Iraq from deception "!!

Al-Nadim said - in 'al-Fihrest' - that al-Hallaj "used to show the religion of the Shiites to the kings, and the doctrines of Sufism to the public ... to express their words and claim all knowledge .. He was a reckless daring bridges to the sultans, committed to the greatness and the coup of states." Al-Nadim added that Al-Hallaj "at the beginning of his command was calling for complacency from the family of Muhammad, so he was sought after and was taken to the mountain (= an area in Iran) and struck with a whip." Ibrahim Bin Shaiban said, as in 'Akhbar Al-Hallaj' by Ibn Al-Sa’i: “You and the case! Whoever wants to look at the fruits of the case, let him look at Al-Hallaj and what happened to him !!”

The revolutionary cell - which the Sufis abandoned from the followers of al-Junaid and Abu Bakr al-Shibli, who used to say: “I and Hussein ibn Mansur (= Al-Hallaj) were one thing except that he was shown and kept silent” - consisting of al-Hallaj, the head of the movement, and his deputy, Abi al-Abbas bin Atta. Who was solid in his support of al-Hallaj until he was killed because of it, as mentioned above.

This is in addition to the aforementioned Abu al-Qasim al-Nasrabadi, who had a revolutionary and militant record against the Abbasid state, where al-Salami says in the 'Sufi classes': “With the greatness of his place, how many times have he been beaten, insulted, and how much has he been imprisoned ?!”. Muhammad ibn Khafif also mentioned the one who was among the sons of the princes, as Al-Dhahabi says, and he visited him once in prison. Al-Hallaj said to him, “Say to Abu al-Abbas Ibn Atta, keep these cards.” I mean the secret correspondence that was going on between them, and some say will come about it.

Rather, al-Hallaj managed to reach his organization to the circle near the head of the authority, as he attracted to his membership some of the chief officials of the court of the Abbasid caliph al-Muqtadir Allah (d. 320 AH), until his minister Hamid bin al-Abbas al-Khurasani (d. 311 AH) discovered that he (= al-Hallaj) presented him to a group Among the servants, deceivers, and companions of Al-Muqtadir, and on the servants of Nasr Al-Hajib, and Hamad bin Muhammad Al-Katib, "as the tribe of Ibn Al-Jawzi says in the 'Mirror of Time' and the gold in 'Al-Abar'.

Golan in
the countries took al-Hallaj circling the countries and gathering followers for his secret call, and he was most moving in Khorasan and beyond the river and did not choose the Arab countries, and this is consistent with what we mentioned from the tendency of Ajam Khorasan to call to the family of the house until they were his fuel. He was also passing through Bahrain on his way to Makkah to coordinate his movements with the Carmatians, which is supported by the fact that the authorities arrested Al-Hallaj in the year 301 AH, “We call on him: This is one of the Carmatians’ advocates, so know him! ”As narrated by the tribe of Ibn al-Jawzi in the Mirror of Time.

We decide that there was coordination between the Alawite secret movements, especially those of a Sufi nature. The beginning of the Carmatians was the movement of a mystic man in what Ibn Al-Atheer (d. 630 AH) tells - in his 'complete' history - where he says: "This year (= 278 AH) In the blackness of Kufa they are known as Qarmatians, and the beginning of their command - it was mentioned - was that a man among them ... [was] showing asceticism and austerity ..., so he stayed for that period ... until he disclosed that [about him] in his place, then informed them that he was calling for an imam from The family of the Prophet, and he remained there until many of them answered him.

So it becomes clear to us that Al-Hallaj's travels to Mecca and his travels in Bahrain - which were then under the control of the Carmatians - evidence of the political cooperation that took place between the two parties, and perhaps with the Fatimid movement in the Islamic Maghreb through its known connections with the Carmatians at the time, despite the separation of the two movements organizationally. We emphasize here that the kinetic coordination between these political movements does not necessarily require an intellectual affinity between them, but rather the unity of the political goal is sufficient.

Al-Hallaj was - during his extensive moves - changing his "dynamic name" as mentioned by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi - in his history - a narration about Hamad bin Al-Hallaj: "Amr bin Othman [Al-Makki] still writes books in his door to Khuzestan and speaks of greatness until he is deprived and thrown The clothes of Sufism, he wore cloak and took in the company of the people of the world, then he went out and was absent from us five years to Khorasan and beyond the river, and entered Sijistan and Kerman, then he returned to Persia and began to speak to the people, and calls the creation to God Almighty, and he was known as Abu Abdullah Al-Zahid, and he classified They have ratings. "

Then he adds that "when he returned [to Iraq] they were writing him from India with 'the sick', and from the country of Masin (as well as in the sources and perhaps it is: China) and Turkistan with the" hated "(= the vaccinated), and from Khurasan with the" distinguished ", and from Persia in Abu Abdullah al-Zahid, and from Khuzestan as “Sheikh Hallaj al-Asrar” (i.e. revealing it), and there were people in Baghdad who called him the “Al-Muttalim” (= the discerning sense due to the mystic attraction), and in Basra a people called it “Al-Mujir”.

Al-Khatib also informs us that Al-Hallaj was constantly changing the type of his clothes: "He used to wear surveys at times, and at times he walked with two dyes, and he wore armor and turban, and he also walked in the body of the uniform of soldiers." As for Al-Dhahabi, he records - in his book 'The Lessons' - the volatility of his speech according to the nature of the inhabitants of every country. "If he knows that the people of a country see retirement, they become Mu'tazilites, or they see Shi'ism as Shiism, or they see teething indentation." These texts indicate the activity of al-Hallaj in collecting and agitating against the Abbasid state, and the different attire of his garments and titles and the diversity of his speech indicate the inclusion of his movement in the military and civil dimensions and for all classes of people. On the occasion of the multiplicity of names of Hallaj.

Encrypted correspondence and
here we come to a door in which there was a lot of confusion and mistake on Abu Mansour al-Hallaj, so he led to his ratio to atheism, heresy and solutions, which is - in our opinion - far from that. The tribe of Ibn al-Jawzi - in the Mirror of Time - spoke of "patches found in the house of al-Hallaj that contain symbols", and he also had a special language "coded" (= coded) in his correspondence with his followers, and the fact that this language was borne out on misunderstanding and confusion Great.

We have found texts indicating this meaning, including what was mentioned by Al-Tanoukhi the son (d. 384 AH) in the 'Lecture of the Lecture' from his saying: “There were wonders in the existing books (= messages for Hallaj) from his correspondence [to] his powerful companions to the respects, and recommending them to what people call to him And what he orders them to transfer from one state to another and arranged to a level until they reach the ultimate goal, and to address every people according to their minds and understandings, and according to their response and their criticism, and the answers to the writers of his writers with symbolic words that only those who wrote them and those who wrote to him ... Some of them have a picture in which the name of God Almighty is written on a coronation, and inside that correction is written: 'Ali, may peace be upon him M '; writing that stands only on her reflection.

Ibn Katheer quotes - in 'The Beginning and the End' - on the authority of Al-Salami in his chain of narration, the sheikh of the Sufis Abu Bakr Ibn Mumchad Al-Dinwari Al-Zahid (d. 350 AH) who said: “There was a man with a dinar with him in the evening, and he was not leaving it at night or during the day (it seems that he is one of the followers of Al-Hallaj carrying correspondence So, they searched the desert and found a book in it (= Message) entitled: “From the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, to so-and-so and so-and-so.” So he was sent to Baghdad, and Al-Hallaj was asked about it, so he acknowledged that he wrote it, and they said to him: You called the prophecy and began to claim divinity and deism! But this is the eye of our plural. Is the writer but God, and I and the hand of a machine! So he argued with them to verbal quarrels, and he carried the meaning on saying the doctrine of algebraic that the subject is God.

Hence the use of these honorific words from God’s most beautiful names to express a political purpose. We have found a dictionary of “deciphering” the symbols of secret messages in the story of Muhammad ibn Ali al-Shalamaghani (d. 323 AH) known as 'Ibn Abi Al-Azaqar,' one of the revolutionary Shiites who came out after Al-Hallaj killed on the state of Bani Abbas. Where Ibn Al-Atheer tells us some of their terminological “nodal” and “kinematic” conventions, based on what has been found from their correspondence, which may help us in reading some of the letters of al-Hallaj and understanding his poems.

Ibn Al-Atheer says that from their belief that "God created opposites to denote the opposite (= expression of the word and a will against it) ... and that God is the name of a meaning, and that whoever needs people is God (= converting the word 'God' from a word / contractual term to Symbolic / organizational term), and for this meaning, everyone must be called a god; and that every one of his rituals says: He is the Lord of who he is .. without his degree (= coding in internal secret speeches between members of the organization), and that the man among them says: I am the Lord of so-and-so So-and-so is my Lord, until the end is done to Ibn Abi Al-Azaqar (= Al-Shalamghani, the head of the organization), and he says, I am the Lord of Gods !!

It seems to us that Ibn Al-Atheer fell into the apparent understanding of this text which tells some of the codes of the people; it is clear that the significance of the text - looking at its companions, who are a secret political opposition movement chased by the authority - refers to a procedural language in the correspondence, and does not denote belief and religion. And when we accompanied these codes in understanding the correspondence of Al-Hallaj, it became clear to us that they were able to explain what was formed of his correspondence and the aspired meanings that the reader finds in his “patch”, and we understand at the time that they are not belief texts but rather verbal camouflages dictated by pressing security conditions.

Al-Hallaj was aware of the seriousness of this secret language and the possibility of its confusion in the public, so he warned those who had seen some of those around him. In “Al-Hallaj News” by Ibn Zanji that Ali bin Mardoy told his sheikh, Al-Hallaj: “Take from my words what your knowledge reaches, and what you deny your knowledge, strike He has my face and is not attached to him, so he will go astray. In addition, he used to excuse the sheikhs who face him in the literal sense of his secret correspondence, and it does not cost him to defend them before them: "And he said to the sheikhs: You want to debate me? I know that you are right and I am false!"

The way of the end
It seems that Al-Hallaj after his return from the third trip of the pilgrimage in about 290 AH transferred his project to the confrontation with the Abbasid authority, taking advantage of the general conditions that the Abbasid Caliphate was witnessing throughout its geographical area, as it was facing the Carmatian revolution in eastern Arabia since the year 278 AH, and a strong appearance And growing of the Fatimid movement in the Islamic West since about 280 AH. However, once he announced the confrontation with the authority, some of his Sufi sheikhs, such as Abu Bakr al-Shibli and Abu Muhammad al-Jariri al-Sufi (d. 311 AH), denied him to him, both of whom were among the top companions of al-Junaid.

Then he had to resist a defamation campaign launched by his opponent, Ibn Daoud al-Dhahiri, and was not interrupted until the death of the latter in the year 297 AH. In the narration of al-Khatib al-Baghdadi about Hamad bin al-Hallaj that his father "performed a third pilgrimage and adjacent two years and then returned and changed what it was in the first, and acquired the property in Baghdad and built a house, And he called people to a meaning that I only stood on a portion of, until Muhammad bin Dawood and a group of scholars came out to him and praised his image "at the authority."

When Hamed bin Al-Abbas received the ministry in the year 306 AH, he saw expediting the eradication of the danger of the stalking, so he pursued his followers, searched their roles, and extracted their correspondence, and he was instructed to read them to the scholars of the Sultan to extract from them what condemned the Hallaj. It was agreed that they read Judge Abi Omar Al-Maliki (d. 320 AH) in one of the messages of Al-Hallaj that if a person wants to perform Hajj and is not able to do so, then he may go around his house and then honor thirty orphans. When the judge heard that, he turned to al-Hallaj, saying: "Where did you get this from?" Al-Hallaj said from the book Hassan al-Basri 'Ikhlas', and he said: You lied, you are permissible of blood !!

So the Minister opened a door to get rid of Al-Hallaj by judicial order! He said to the judge: "Write this!" In other words, make him an official decision, so the judge took the objection because he did not find it obligatory to kill him, but the minister would not have missed an opportunity like this, even though Al-Hallaj reminded them that he was a believer, and it is not permissible for them to take charge of killing him !! But the minister continued to press the judge until he extracted a judicial decree from him on something he had said before!

The minister went to the caliph to tell him about his work, and the caliph's answer was late for him and he feared that the opportunity was lost, so he sent him another message in it that what happened in the trial council "was widespread and spread, and when he did not follow him, killing the Hallaj people was fascinated by him and no two disagreed on him!" This was sufficient to encourage the caliph to ratify the ruling.

Then it was a perfect political measure that the method of execution is not traditional, but that it contains terrorism, which deters other than Hallaj from the behavior of his method. He ordered the caliph to whip "a thousand whip, so he perishes, otherwise his neck will be beaten," according to Dahabi. Al-Hallaj was brought out under heavy guard from the police, who feared that the masses would take him out, according to Al-Tanukhi. Al-Hallaj flogged a thousand whips, but he did not groan, but was repeating "nobody," and when they saw this, they ordered to cut off his limbs, "His hands and feet were cut off, his head was groaned, his body was burned and his ashes were thrown in Tigris, and the head was erected two days in Baghdad ... and then carried to Khurasan" !!

Al-Hallaj was executed - for the three or six who stayed in Dhu al-Qi'dah in the year 309 AH - in the same way that the Zinj revolutionaries and their chief Ali bin Muhammad al-Basri were executed in 270 AH. Indeed, history books say that al-Hallaj was crucified three times: two of them when he was arrested in 301 AH and he was crucified - which is - Al-Hay - on the eastern and western sides of Baghdad, to intimidate the public, but he was not killed; and the third time he was executed. Thus, Al-Hallaj went as a result of his political adventures and his attempt to overthrow the government to establish a state based on the principle of sponsorship and the generalization of the Sufi experience. His friend Al-Shibli stood at him at the end of his hours to show him the wrong path he had taken. He said: “And he saw Al-Hallaj crucified: Did he not wear you from the worlds?” !!