 Save 10% with my code Bobby10 on raw, organic, grass-fed and grass-finished, freeze-dried organ meats from grassland nutrition. Link in the description box. All right guys, welcome back to the channel. If you're new, my name is Bobby. Guys, today we're going to revisit Sheikh Hamza Yusuf with his video The Four Madabs in Islam. As I said previously, opinions on Sheikh Hamza Yusuf are torn. Some people believe that he is absolutely accurate in a beautiful scholar. Others on the other hand believe that he is misguided. Nevertheless, up until now the videos that I reviewed were full of value and I appreciated them. So with no further ado, let's have a look. This is a country where tradition has been maintained. It's broken down in many places. People are very confused. But if you come to Turkey, there's much less confusion about what religion is. And the reason for that is that they protected Turkey is pretty secular and liberal after all. They had a huge communist revolution. But after that Islam came back. Nevertheless, it is a modern-day country bordering the Balkans on the edge of Europe. And that area in general is more traditional than the West. That is for this tradition. Their ulama did not allow these alien forces to come in and divide and conquer them. Because Allah says we forget that it's a prohibition to become sectarian in the Qur'an. It's a prohibition. There's Allah says, how did the Muslims do that? They had no synods. They had no magisterium. They had no councils. How did they do that? If you look at the Jews, the Jews have certain rabbinical councils that meet together and decide what's orthodoxy and what's not. If you look at the Christians, they had councils. They had the Council of Nicaea, the Council of Chaldea. They had the Council of Alexandria. They had all these different councils. They come together and they meet and their bishops discuss what's going to be doctrine and they hash it out. The bishops discuss what the creed will be in the Islamic theology. This would be called Akhida and this is a complex topic in Islam. It is not as linear as it is within Christianity. So let's hear what he has to say. And then they come to certain agreements and some of them disagree. They become heretics or heterodoxy. And that's how the Muslims had none of that. There's no councils. There's no synods. There's no magisterium. How did they come to these agreements? This is a miracle of Islam. The providential hand that is taking care of this religion is so evident to anybody that's willing to openly look at it. How did they agree that there were, the Sunni community agree there are four basic Medhabs? How did they agree to that? Despite the fact we had dozens of Medhabs. What happened to Leith? It's very interesting. I really want to know. These were great fuqaha. But their ways died out. Where's Imam Reuza'i? Where's Abu Dawud al-Zahiri? Why Malik Abu Hanifa, Shafi'i and Ahmad? Why these four? These are the people that Allah, and it's not that the others were less than them. But for whatever hikmah Allah chose these four to be the canonical schools of the Sunni tradition and the Jafari and the Shi'a tradition, this is a miracle of Islam to do this and to have them accept each other. The fact that they had four Nihrab in the Kaaba is a miracle of Islam, that they weren't fighting each other. And if the Maliki was laid for his prayer, he would... It's really, really interesting. I'm trying to wrap my head around this while listening to this video. As I said previously, every single time I react to videos, I watched them for the very first time. So this is the first time that I hear this. And I'm genuinely extremely impressed by this description, because it is true. I come from an Orthodox Christian perspective. And yes, we had the Council of Nicaea and many other councils to follow. They are the church fathers discussed and the people that disagreed were the Heretics. He's absolutely correct there. This is how those rulings have been established. This is how the creeds have been established. But in Islam it is absolutely different. It's actually mind boggling. I have to laugh out loud here just thinking about it, that this must be some sort of divine intervention, or at least this is how it is displayed here, that people simply came up with certain doctrines, certain schools of thought and they became the dominant school of thought without any council. Really think about this. This is extremely fascinating. I'm sorry, if the Shafi was laid for the Tahrir prayer, he would pray with the Malikis. If the Shafi, the Hanafi, and the Hambadi were laid for their Asr prayer, they would pray with the Hanafis. If they were laid for their Fajr prayer, they would pray with the Hanafis. And this wasn't because they were sectarian. They had one Mihrab in Medina. People say, oh look, they got to a point, there was so much sectarianism, they had four Medhat. No, it was pre-microphone. Kaaba is a big place. There was space for everybody, and that was the Sa'at of Sudoor. They had big breasts, and they let everybody pray there. Each Medhat was honored. The Hanafi obviously got the biggest one, because the majority were Hanafi, and the Shafi at one point, also very big. The Malikis small, and then the Hambadi was very small because there were very few Hambadis, but each was honored. And then in the Aqidah, you look at the Aqidah schools that were transmitted. Lots of debates, how did they agree on these things? Undeniably, there were periods of fitzah, and we went through similar problems that other religions have had, but how did they arrive to these agreed upon things? This is not to deny that there are people dissenters. There are, and if they were, if they were of a caliber that the other Ulama recognized their right to dissent, they would acknowledge it. But if they were heretics, they would call it what it was. Haraseya is a Greek word, zandaka is used in Arabic, but haraseya in Greek means to choose for yourself. A heresy is where you pick and choose your religion. You don't accept what's transmitted, what's agreed upon. And so in the Aqidah, this is what they came to the Ash'ari, the maturidi. The Ottoman Daulah was maturidi. The Muhammed Al-Fatiha, he came into the city and conquered the city. The Prophet praised him. He said, He said, What a blessed Amir is their Amir, and what a blessed army is their army. He was, by consensus, Hanafi, maturidi and Naqshbandi. So the Prophet was praising a Hanafi, maturidi and Naqshbandi. And people say, Astaghfirullah, would the Prophet praise a Muqtada? He would never praise a Muqtada, and yet we know he praised the conqueror of this city. He said, Nima is the way the Arabs say the best, that's the best Amir, their Amir. And he would never praise worldly things, not like he was a great general, which he was. No, he was praising his iman. He was praising his Aqidah. He was praising his practice, because he was imamun aadal. But what is the Aqidah? I'm really wondering here, because the Aqidah is the creed. If we look at the Council of Nicaea, we can see a full description of the creed, what it means to be an Orthodox Christian. However, what would be the Aqidah within those schools? I really want to know. Please let me know in the comment section, so I can find this out. Seven are given the shade of Allah on the day of judgment, when there's no shade, except Allah's shade. The first, imamun aadal, a just ruler. That's how high their Maqam is, a high ruler. The zikr of the Umar is aadal. That's their zikr, to practice justice. They don't have to do a lot of subha, even though he did, or do a lot of tilawa, even though he did. Qiyamal, they don't have to do any of that. If they're just, that's their zikr, and they reach these high Maqams. So that means who he praises. So this transmission, and then the third area, this is iman, Islam and ihsan. How did they agree on the way of imam al-junayt? Imam al-junayt, imam by consensus, imam al-taifatain. No Sunni can, Dr. Umar, you're here, he's a much greater scholar than I am. You know, I've suffered a lot, not even put my name under scholarship, but student of knowledge. But Dr. Umar, Imam al-junayt, anybody disagree on him from the Sunni tradition? Do you know? Nobody. Even Taimiya praises him, everybody praises him. He's imam al-taifatain. He was a great scholar in... That is interesting at the same time contradictory. No, he just said that there is a certain person that has been praised by Ibn Taimiya, but now the Sunnis do not praise him. So what is going on there? If we're talking about divine intervention, we're talking about the right path of Islam revealed by God. Why did then Ibn Taimiya say good things about this person, but the Sunnis nowadays say bad things? I don't understand. In his Madhab of Thawri, he was a great scholar, and he was a great Sufi, and his tasawwuf spread because one of his students was the single most important narrator of Abu Dawud's Musnad. So when Abu Dawud, the Sunan of Abu Dawud, when he went to Mecca and began transmitting the hadith, he taught imam al-junayt's teaching there, and it spread all over the world. So in Morocco, the little children, they learned fi'aqtar al-ash'ari, wa fiq'i ma'arik, wa fattariqat al-junayt al-sadik, and that's what they all learned, the aqeed of imam al-ash'ari, the fiq' of imam ma'arik, and the way of imam al-junayt. And this was Islam, iman and ihsan. And people say, you know, where is tasawwuf in Islam? Where's the word? It's a technical term. It's a technical term, just like mantaq, kalam, fiq, fiq is a technical term. People forget that. All the hadith in which the Prophet uses fiq, he did not mean jurisprudence. He meant understanding. He gives him an understanding of the religion. They use it later, and the books of fiq always begin with that hadith because it's tafa'unan, tabarrokan. But the original meaning of that, you look in the commentaries of hadith, it meant you fahimuhu fiddin. And the sahaba knew that rubahamiri fiqin, they said be faqee. Sometimes somebody who walks around with a lot of information in his head isn't a faqee. They have all the outward, what imam al-kazari calls an all right. This is it for today's video. It cuts off here, extremely interesting, but the same time I'm left with more question. At the beginning of the video, as you saw, it was pre-mind blown, because it was interesting to me that there are no councils within Islam, that there is no orthodox perception of what a creed is. This was really fascinating to me and pointed towards divine intervention, so to speak. But then ultimately when he said that the Sunnis disagree even with Ibn Taimiya on certain subjects, this was extremely strange to me, because this proves the divine intervention argumentation here. Please let me know in the comment section what you guys think about this presentation of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf here and moreover, as I said previously, what the Akhida is in those certain schools. Does the Akhida differ as well? Is the creed the same throughout Sunni Islam? Is it differing within those schools, Hanafi, Maliki and whatnot? Please let me know in the comment section, because this video, as I said, left me with more questions. All right guys, but this is it for today's video. If you liked it, leave the thumbs up. If you haven't subscribed already, guys, please do so. And if you want to support this channel, all the links are in the description box below. Thank you so much for your ongoing support. As always, may God bless you all. Much love and peace.