Al-Bidayah wa an-Nihayah - Ibn Kathir - (12/29)

Al-Bidayah wa an-NihayahIbn Kathir

He kept company with a number of the foremost Sufi shaykhs—among them al-Junayd ibn Muḥammad, ʿAmr ibn ʿUthmān al-Makkī, and Abū al-Ḥusayn al-Nūrī.

Al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī says:
“The Sufis are divided over him. The majority denied that al-Ḥallāj belonged to them at all and refused to count him one of their own. Those of the earlier Sufis who did accept him were Abū al-ʿAbbās ibn ʿAṭāʾ al-Baghdādī, Muḥammad ibn Khafīf al-Shīrāzī, and Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad al-Naṣrābādī al-Nīsābūrī; they deemed his state sound and recorded his words, to the point that Ibn Khafīf said, ‘Al-Ḥusayn ibn Manṣūr is a God-taught scholar.’ (1)

Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī—whose name is Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥusayn—said: ‘I heard Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad al-Naṣrābādī being reproached for something that had been reported from al-Ḥallāj concerning the spirit, and he answered his critic, “If there is a true monotheist after the Prophets and the Ṣiddīqs, it is al-Ḥallāj.”’ (2)

Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān also said: ‘I heard Manṣūr ibn ʿAbd Allāh say, “I heard al-Shiblī declare, ‘Al-Ḥusayn ibn Manṣūr and I were one and the same; only he disclosed while I concealed.’” It is also related from al-Shiblī, on another chain, that when he saw al-Ḥallāj crucified he said, “Did We not forbid you from (mixing with) all creation?” (3)

Al-Khaṭīb continues: ‘Those Sufis who rejected him accused him of sleight-of-hand in his deeds and of zandaqah (heresy) in his beliefs. (4) He still has followers to this day who affiliate themselves to him and go to extremes regarding him. (5) Al-Ḥallāj was eloquent, sweet-tongued, (6) and he composed poetry in the Sufi style.’ (7)

I (the author) say: Ever since al-Ḥallāj was executed, people have remained divided about him. As for the jurists, it is reported from more than one of the leading scholars (8) that they were unanimous in judging him worthy of death, holding that (9) he was an unbeliever, a charlatan, a deceptive conjurer. The same verdict was delivered by most of the Sufis as well. Yet there is a group—mentioned earlier—who spoke of him only in general terms; they were beguiled by his outward appearance and failed to perceive his inner reality, and it was as though he had

(1) al-Tārīkh al-Baghdādī (History of Baghdad), vol. 8, p. 112. (2) In the printed edition: “li-al-ladhi.” (3) The biography of al-Ḥallāj by al-Sulamī appears in al-Uṣūl al-Arba‘a (p. 19). In al-Shiblī’s Kitāb al-Kalimah there is an allusion to Qur’an 15:70: “Qālu awalam nannahakum ‘ani al-‘ālamīn” (“They said, ‘Have We not forbidden you against all peoples?’”). (4) In the printed edition: “fī ‘aqīdatihi wa-‘aqdihi.” (5) In the printed edition: “wa-yughālūna fīhi wa-yughlūn.” (6) In the printed edition: “wa-qad kāna al-Ḥallāj fī ‘ibāratihi ḥulw al-manṭiq” (“and al-Ḥallāj’s style was eloquent”). (7) In the printed edition: “al-ṣūfiyah” (the Sufis). See al-Tārīkh al-Baghdādī, vol. 8, p. 112. The wording in our manuscript agrees with al-Khaṭīb’s phrasing. (8) In the printed edition: “min al-‘ulamā’ wa-l-a’immah” (“from among the scholars and imams”). (9) In the printed edition: “wa-annahū qatala kāfiran wa-kāna kāfiran” (“and that he killed a disbeliever, and he himself was a disbeliever”).

وقد صحب جماعة من سادات مشايخ الصُّوفية، كالجُنيد بن محمد، وعمرو بن عُثْمان المكِّي، وأبي الحسين النُّوري. قال الخطيب البغدادي: والصُّوفية مختلفون فيه، فأكثرهم نفى أن يكون الحلَّاج منهم، وأبى أن يعدَّه فيهم، وقَبِلَهُ من متقدِّميهم: أبو العَبَّاس بن عطاء البغدادي، ومحمد بن خفيف الشِّيْرازي، وإبراهيم بن محمد النَّصْرَأباذي النَّيْسابوري، وصحَّحُوا له حاله، ودوَّنوا كلامه، حتى قال ابن خفيف: الحسين بن منصور عالمٌ ربَّاني (١) . وقال أبو عبد الرحمن السُّلَمي - واسمه محمد بن الحسين - سَمِعْتُ إبراهيم بن محمد النَّصْرَ أباذي وعُوتب في شيء حُكي عن الحلاج في الرُّوح فقال لمن (٢) عاتبه: إن كان بعد النَّبيين والصدِّيقين موحِّدٌ فهو الحلَّاج. قال أبو عبد الرحمن: وسمعت منصور بن عبد الله يقول: سمعت الشِّبلي يقول: كنت أنا والحسين بن منصور شيئًا واحدًا، إلا أنه أظهر وكتمتُ. وقد رُوي عن الشِّبْلي من وجه آخر أنه قال، وقد رأى الحلاج مصلوبًا: ألم ننهك عن العالمين (٣) ؟ قال الخطيب: والذين نفوه من الصُّوفية نسبوه إلى الشَّعبذة في فعله، وإلى الزَّندقة في عقد (٤) . قال: وله إلى الآن أصحابٌ ينسبون إليه ويَغْلُون فيه (٥) ، وقد كان الحلاج حسن العبارة، حلو المنطق (٦) ، وله شِعْر على طريقة التصوف (٧) . قلت: لم يزل النَّاس منذ قُتل الحلاج مختلفين في أمره، فأما الفقهاء فقد حُكي عن غير واحد من الأئمة (٨) اجتماعهم على قتله، وأنه (٩) كان كافرًا ممخرقًا، مموِّهًا مشعبذًا، وكذلك قول أكثر الصُّوفية فيه، ومنهم طائفة - كما تقدَّم - أجملوا القول فيه، وغرَّهم ظاهرُه، ولم يطَّلعوا على باطنه، وكأنه قد

(١) تاريخ بغداد (٨/ ١١٢). (٢) في (ط) للذي. (٣) ترجمة الحلاج للسلمي في الأصول الأربعة (١٩) وفي كلمة الشبلي إشارة إلى الآية الكريمة (٧٠) من سورة الحجر: ﴿قَالُوا أَوَلَمْ نَنْهَكَ عَنِ الْعَالَمِينَ﴾. (٤) في (ط) في عقيدته وعقده. (٥) في (ط) ويغالون فيه ويغلون. (٦) في (ط) وقد كان الحلاج في عبارته حلو المنطق. (٧) في (ط) الصوفية. وانظر تاريخ بغداد ٨/ ١١٢، وما في نسخنا المخطوطة يوافق عبارة الخطيب. (٨) في (ط): من العلماء والأئمة. (٩) في (ط): وأنه قتل كافرًا، وكان كافرًا.