A brother, senior to me in age and practice of Islām, whom I regard to be wise and sincere exclaimed to me, “I did not know that ʾal-Imām ʾ-ash-Shāfiʿī (رحمه الله) was tortured and beheaded, and his body left to rot for five years!”
This was news to me. I responded that it is well known that he underwent difficulty but died of natural causes in Cairo. The following passage provides a good summary of this, together with references:

مرض الإمام الشافعي قبل وفاته مرضاً شديداً، وخلال مرضه دخل عليه تلميذه المزني “فقال: كيف أصبحت؟ قال: “أصبحت من الدنيا راحلاً، وللإخوان مفارقاً، ولكأس المنية شارباً، وعلى الله جلّ ذكره وارداً، ولا والله ما أدري روحي تصير إلى الجنة فأهنِّئها، أو إلى النار فأعزّيها”، ثمّ بكى،[١] وتوفي رحمه الله ليلة الجمعة بعد صلاة العشاء، في آخر يوم من شهر رجب، وكان يبلغ من العمر عند وفاته أربعة وخمسين عاماً،[٢] ودفن في القاهرة في الأول من شهر شعبان، يوم الجمعة عام 204هـ/ 820م، وكان له ولدان وبنت، وكان قد تزوج من امرأة واحدة.

https://mawdoo3.com/متىتوفيالإمام_الشافعي

ʾal-ʾImām ʾash-Shāfiʿī became severely ill before his death. During his illness his student, ʾal-Muzanī, visited him and asked, “How are you this morning?” He replied, “I have become a traveller away from this world, a departer from brothers, a drinker from the goblet of death, an arriver by Allāh Whose Mention is Most Majestic. Yet, by Allāh, I do not know if my soul is heading to Paradise that I may congratulate it, or Hell that I may condole it.” He then wept.
He, may Allāh’s mercy be upon him, died on the Night of Friday, after ʿIshāʾ prayers, on the last day of Rajab. He had attained 54 years at the time of his death. He was buried in Cairo on Friday, 1st of Shaʿbān 204 Hijrī (820). He had two sons, a daughter and had married only one woman.

My translation

The brother assured me that he had seen his version in a reliable documentary. He showed me a few minutes, seemingly convinced that that was correct and asked me to check further.

The Series

The documentary was in fact an Arabic television series on ʾal-ʾImām ʾAḥmad (رحمه الله). The brother had shown me a scene in which an old man was executed and crucified, in the belief that that was ʾal-Imām ʾ-ash-Shāfiʿī (رحمه الله). Yet in the next scene, the actor playing ʾal-ʾImām ʾAḥmad (رحمه الله), prays for “Khuzāʿī”. ʾal-Imām -ʾash-Shāfiʿī (رحمه الله) had several titles, but he was not directly linked to the Khuzāʿah tribe, for anyone to call him “Khuzāʿī”.
Furthermore the episode is called, “Imam al – Khuzaie’s debate”. The movie site IMDB also clarifies that in this episode (28), it is ʿal-ʾImām ʾal-Khuzāʿī that is beheaded.
In short, this was a simple human error. The brother mistook the actor (Mahmoud Khalili) playing ʾal-ʾImām ʾal-Khuzāʿī (رحمه الله) for the actor (Akef Najam) playing ʾal-ʾImām ʾash-Shāfiʿī (رحمه الله). (Pictures in the links).

Yet what troubles me, is that if a sincere, religious, educated person can be so convinced through a movie, what then do the Ertugul fanatics have running through their heads because of an entirely fictional series? Is it too much to expect of Muslims that they be able to assess the difference between fact and fiction, especially when it seems ever more important that we prepare for the coming of the worst deceiver, ʾad-Dajjāl? If you cannot tell fact from fiction today, how do you expect to unravel his lies?
Anyway since I spent so much unnecessary time going through the bog of Qatar TV (not Turkish TV this time). I might as well share something about the real ʾal-ʾImām ʾal-Khuzāʿī (رحمه الله) – minus the actors and music.

ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr ʾal-Khuzāʿī (رحمه الله)

The following is from the ʾal-Bidāyah wan Nihāyah of ʾIbn Kathīr (رحمه الله), whom I believe was not a Hollywood scriptwriter. Herewith a summarised translation:

In [231] was the murder of ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr ʾal-Khuzāʿī. May Allāh have mercy on him and make his resting place a noble one….In 201 the public pledged to him to uphold ordering good and forbidding evil when immorality and deception became rife in Baghdād during the absence of [King] ʾal-Maʾmūn.
This man, ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr, was of the people of knowledge, religiosity, pious deeds and exertion; a leader of the Muslims and the ʾAhlus Sunnah and those who order good and forbid evil. He championed the doctrine that Qurʾān is the Allāh’s Speech, Revealed and not Created. Whereas Hārūn ʾal-Wāthiq was the worst fanatic in believing that the Qurʾān is a creation. He called to this belief night and day, privately and publicly. He believed that it was enough for his audience to accept this solely since his father was ʾal-Maʾmūn and his uncle, ʾal-Muʿtaṣim. They should not require any further proof or explanation, or argument or clarification, and nothing from the Sunnah or the Qurʾān itself.

Thus did ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr arise, calling the people to ordering the good and forbidding evil, to accept that the Qurʾān is Allāh’s Speech not creation, and other matters besides that. People flocked to him in their thousands. In particular there were two men. ʾAbū Hārūn ʾas-Sarrāj who took up the cause in the eastern parts and Tālib in the west.
During Shaʿbān of that year the people secretly pledged to ʾAḥmad to order the good and forbid evil and to revolt against the king due to his innovations and his propaganda about the creation of the Qurʾān. It was arranged that on the 3rd of Shaʿbān, a Friday night, a drum would be beaten, signalling that those who had pledged should gather at an agreed spot. ʾAbū Hārūn and Ṭālib spent much gold on these people. These included two drunkards of Banū ʾAshras. They were drinking amongst their people on Thursday night and thought it to be the appointed night, although it was still one night away. They stood and began beating drums to gather the people. Nobody came and the plan unravelled. The royal representative sought them out and tortured them so they immediately confessed about ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr. He then sent ʾAḥmad and his main supporters to the king in Surramanraʾā.

When brought before ʾal-Wāthiq, the Khalīfah, never interrogated him about the people’s pledge. He ignored the entire matter and instead asked, “What do you say about the Qurʾān?”
He replied, “It is Allāh’s Speech?”
“Is it a creation?” asked ʾal-Wāthiq.
The ʾImām repeated, “It is Allāh’s Speech!” He expected death and stood firmly, his face shining.
ʾal-Wāthiq then asked, “What do you say about your Lord? Will you see him on the Day of Resurrection?”
“O Amīr ʾal-Muʾminīn,” replied the ʾImām, both the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth attest to that. For Allāh Most High says, ‘So bright will faces be on that day, gazing at their Lord.’ Also Rasūlullāh ṣallallāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam said, ‘You will indeed see your Lord on the Day of Resurrection just as you see this moon and will have no difficulty in His vision.’”
ʾal-Wāthiq exploded, “Destruction be upon you! Can He be seen like a body with limits? Can place encompass Him, and an onlooker limit Him? I disbelieve in a god with such a description!”
Although the authenticity of this final sentence is disputed.

ʾAḥmad then continued, “Sufyān narrated going back to Rasūlullāh ṣallallāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam, ‘The heart of Adam’s son is between two fingers of the fingers of Allāh Who changes it.’ Thus Nabī ṣallallāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam also used to say, ‘O Changer of Hearts! Keep my heart firm upon Your religion.’”
ʾal-Wāthiq then asked those around him, “What do you say about him?’
There was much discussion until ʿAbdurraḥmān bin ʾIsḥāq spoke. He had been Ahmad’s friend, but now said, “His blood is permissible to shed.”
Abū ʿAbdillāh the Armenian, the companion to the Judge, ʾAḥmad bin Abī Dāwūd, said, “O Amīr ʾal-Muʾminīn, give me his blood to drink.”
ʾal-Wāthiq said, “As you wish, so shall it be.”
The Judge, ʾAḥmad bin Abī Dāwūd, intervened, “O Amīr ʾal-Muʾminīn, as he is a disbeliever he should be asked to recant. Perhaps he has some disease or mental deficiency.”
ʾal-Wāthiq then said, “When I stand, let none of you stand with me. For I take responsibility for what may be my mistake.”
He then sprang at ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr with the sword that used to belong to [the Companion], ʿAmr bin MaʿdīKarub ʾaz-Zubaydī (raḍiyallāhu ʿanhu) and struck his neck. It remained hanging so he struck his head with a second blow and then stabbed his belly and ʾAḥmad collapsed dead. Indeed we belong to Allāh and to Him we shall return.

Only then did Sīmā the Damascene completely remove his head. His body was crucified, still chained while his head was taken to Baghdād to be displayed in the eastern part some days and the western part some days.

The following proclamation was attached to his ears, “This is the head of the kāfir, mushrik, misguided ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr. He is amongst those personally killed at the hands of Allāh’s Slave, Hārūn, the ʾImām, ʾal-Wāthiq billāh, the Commander of the Believers, after proof had been established to him that the Qurʾān is a creation, and negating any kind of comparison between Allāh and the description of the creation. He was given full opportunity to repent and was accommodated to return to the truth. He refused and remained stubborn and clear. So all praise be to Allāh for speeding him to Hell and painfully punishing him for his disbelief. These are the reasons the Commander of the Believers deemed his blood permissible to shed and cursed him.”

This was done to a most senior scholar of the world, a student of Ḥammād bin Zayd, Sufyān bin ʿUyaynah, Hushaym bin Bashīr and ʾal-ʾImām Mālik. He was also a prolific writer. As for his chief followers, ʾal-Wāthiq had 27 of them chained in prison and they were not allowed any sustenance. What horrid tyranny!

Jaʿfar bin Muḥammad ʾaṣ-Ṣāʾigh narrates, “My eyes saw and they were NOT blind! My ears heard and they were NOT deaf! When ʾAḥmad bin Naṣr ʾal-Khuzāʿī was beheaded, his head called out, “Lā ʾilāha ʾillallah!”
This recitation was also heard coming from the strung-up head, “ʾAlif Lām Mīm. Do people they will be left saying, ‘We believe,’ and they will not be tested?” [ʾal-ʿAnkabūt: 1-2]

He remained crucified from 231 to 237. The head and body were then gathered and buried in ʾal-Mālikiyyah Cemetery in Baghdād.

سليمان الكندي
Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi