either term is used on its own, it includes the other. Thus, anyone whose observance of the Sharia lacks an inward reality is not a true believer, and anyone whose inward reality does not accord with the Sharia with which Allah sent Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is not a Muslim, let alone one of Allah’s God-fearing allies.

The term “Sharia” may also refer to the conclusions reached by jurists through their independent judgment, while “reality” may refer to what Sufis inwardly taste and experience in their hearts. Undoubtedly, both groups exercise their own judgment: sometimes they are right, and sometimes they are mistaken. Neither is permitted deliberately to oppose the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. The judgments of the two groups may agree; otherwise, neither group is obliged to follow the other unless the latter presents evidence from the Sharia that makes agreement with it obligatory.

Some people portray al-Hallāj as having been executed on the basis of a juristic judgment that contradicted the inward reality experienced by these Sufis. Many people believe this, but it is not so. Rather, he was executed for unbelief, and both groups agreed to his execution. This included his claim that he could produce something better than the Quran to rival it, and his claim that anyone who missed the Hajj could build a house, circumambulate it, and give a sum he prescribed in charity, thereby discharging the obligation of Hajj. There were other matters as well that constitute unbelief by the agreement of the Muslims who bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah: their scholars, worshippers, jurists, fuqarā’, and Sufis.

And (a group says): “He was executed because he divulged the secret of divine oneness and spiritual realization—a secret not