Ahle Sunnat have been following one of the four imams for about a thousand years. If you ask any sunni about the differences among these imams, they will say that those differences do not matter, as they are only the furoo. This reply is ok. Because in the absence of a divine person, it is reasonable to do ijtehad, just like those four imams did.
It is obvious that each one of them went wrong SOMEWHERE. They did the best they could, but only one ruling can be correct at one time, and hence the three are wrong, even if we can not decide which one is correct and which one is not.
However, if we have someone claiming to be in contact with God then his first and one of the most important task should be get rid the ummah of this confusion, and tell everyone in clear terms where each of the four imams went wrong.
This is important because these rulings have severe implications on people’s lives and society in general, as anyone can imagine.
Mirza wrote one book after another to explain how he is the Promised Messiah, Imam Mahdi, Prophet’s Image, etc. I am looking at a single book he might have written which combines the rulings of four imams, and thus tell the true rulings of Islam.
The four Imams did not go "wrong" anywhere. All were right in their respective opinion, due to its legitimacy through seerah (different time periods and situations).
Fiqh Ahmadiyya (can be read online at Ahmadiyya Muslim Community - Fiqah-e-Ahmadiyya and bought at Fiqa Ahmadiyya (Ibadaat)) summarizes Mirza Sahib’s teaching regarding fiqh.
There are offices within Jamaat Ahmadiyya where Ahmadi scholors of Quran and Hadiths write opinions on contemporary issues in order to enhance the school of thought. The institution of Majlis-e-Shurah at many different levels also help in this regard.
There are offices within Jamaat Ahmadiyya where Ahmadi scholors of Quran and Hadiths write opinions on contemporary issues in order to enhance the school of thought. The institution of Majlis-e-Shurah at many different levels also help in this regard.
I was not talking about contemporary issues, but very basic issues of fiqh. For example, should we fold our arms when praying or keep them straight.
Out of four fiqh's of ahle sunnat, which fiqh did Mirza follow?
There are four masalik instead of one due to disagreement on rulings. But only one of them can be right at one time. Now since Mirza said he was a prophet hence he should have combined the teachings of four imams. He should have said that Imam Abu Hanifa was right on this issue and Imam Malik was right on that one.
I am looking for such a book.
If you had clicked on the links above, it would have shown you the one about Ibadaat, (folding arms, how many rakat etc.) There is no specific book by him that jots down which fiqh is wrong in which way, rather such clerifications are spread out throughout his work, and thus were later compiled into fiqh-e-Ahmadiyya.
Often a person, sometimes Ahmadi, sometimes not, would ask a question regarding fiqh and he would answer it which was then noted down a collection of 10 volumes known as Malfozat. Though the volumes of Malfoozat encompass much more than fiqh.
I remember Prince Abbas raising the very same question loooong time ago in some other forum. Fiqh Ahmadiyya was not available online then. But I think he should read the books first and then ask the question.
Do I need to read ALL the book to get answer of this simple question?
I have seen this question at more than one places, but did not see any good reply from any Ahmadi. Hence asking this question here.
Prince Abbas, If you think he should have done nothing but wrote a big book on how each and every fiqh went wrong or is right at in what particular matter than it's your opinion/wish. Allah's prophets do what they are told to do by Allah, not what they think some one wants from them.
If you question Mirza Sahib (as), you should also question Hazrat Isa (as). Because taking the same arguments, someone can say Jesus (as) should have just clarified in his teachings exactly where the old testament has been modified from the original text/teaching and be done with it. Rather than going on and on about turning the other cheek, loving thy neighbor etc.
^ I thought Mirza was a non-shariat bearing prophet?!
While Islam's Prophet was making his own shariat, as ordered by Allah, Mirza could not do it.
In fiqhi problems, Mirza either should have followed the BEST ruling from the four masalik, or followed any one of them in almost all rulings. There's no other option.
Your question is absurd. On one hand you understand that the Promised Messiah (as) was a NON-law bearing prophet, yet you wonder why he did not "make" his own shariah.
I think you should read pages 9-14 of Fiqh Ahmadiyya volume 2.
I think you misunderstood my question. I did not ask why Mirza did not "make" his shariah. I asked why he did not "combine" the four masalik. And if he did not combine them then which maslak did he follow.
I talked about Prophet of Islam making/creating shariat because chacha_ghalib asked which faqih did Prophet of Islam followed. I told him he did not follow any faqih because he was the creator of shariah (shariat-bearing prophet), but Mirza either had to combine the four masalik or follow some faqih because he was not the creator of shariah (non-shariat bearing prophet).
Prophet of Islam was giving laws, but Mirza did not give any new law (as per Ahmadis), rather he explained and rejuvenated Islam (as per Ahmadis). So comparison of Prophet of Islam with him is absurd.
I think you misunderstood my question. I did not ask why Mirza did not "make" his shariah. I asked why he did not "combine" the four masalik. And if he did not combine them then which maslak did he follow.
I talked about Prophet of Islam making/creating shariat because chacha_ghalib asked which faqih did Prophet of Islam followed. I told him he did not follow any faqih because he was the creator of shariah (shariat-bearing prophet), but Mirza either had to combine the four masalik or follow some faqih because he was not the creator of shariah (non-shariat bearing prophet).
Prophet of Islam was giving laws, but Mirza did not give any new law (as per Ahmadis), rather he explained and rejuvenated Islam (as per Ahmadis). So comparison of Prophet of Islam with him is absurd.
just take a deep breath and read my post again... it was in answer to your question in the post just above mine... you asked which maslak did hazrat Mirza Sahib (as) follow and i said that he followed the maslak of Rasool Ullah (saw)
chacha ghalib i think you are giving answer of a question which prince abbas did not ask.
If he had asked ’ Which sect mirza sahab followed ? ’ then your answer would be proper.
Dont think you are alone , aj kal ke hip-hop musalman bhi is sawal ka yehi answer detey hain
If i think i am correct then he is asking which 'interpretation of shariah ’ did mirza sahab followed
I think He did not follow either of them and made a new one :k: or his follower made one
No matter who made em , they are quite comprehesive set of rules and ahmadies follow them obediently
One of the salient feature of this interpertation is ‘chanda to jamat’ obligatory for every working man ( dont know about women) 10% of his earning. This for propagation of their religion.
^ I am not criticising , just giving example. Its all good :k:
^ The mandatory one are three zakaat (on savings), and 1/16th and 1/120th which is for all earning members, men and woman on their net income. One can do what is considered wasiyyat by pledging from 1/10 -to- 1/3rd of his/her net income.
There are other chadajaat that are not mandatory, for example, Tahrik-e-Jadid (international missionary work) , Nusrat Jahan Scheme (schools/hospitals in remote parts of africa), Waqf-e-Jadid (villages of Pakistan/India/Indonesia tarbiyaat work), Maryam Shadi Fund (getting poor people married), Sayyidna Bilal Fund, Tahir Foundation .. its a pretty long list. At the end of th eday, most Ahmadis do give about 10% of their income in the name of Allah.
All four masalik strived to be the maslak of Prophet of Islam. But since neither of the four imams were prophet or messenger, therefore any one of them can not be termed the complete maslak of Prophet of Islam.
Hence the need for Mirza to combine the four masalik.
Too bad he didn't do it. Probably because working on fiqh was not helping his personal goals of proving himself a prophet.
you really have a beef with ahmadies, right? Brother Hip Hop Muselmaan please watch out.
What does that mean > which interpretation of shariah did he follow? There is only one shariah, the shariah of God, others are joot, no one invented a new law. No one brought a new law.
Which new law/shariah did we invent CODE RED?
What makes you think he brought a new law?
Leave all the facts, just ONE simple question!
Where would be difference if Jesus is coming down, between Muslims and Christians? Aren’t both believing that Jesus will come. When God brought the Qur’an to Muhammad (saw), he said my law is completed, after that there will be no one.
Jesus came back in the shape of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to collect all the lost sheeps of Islam!
There is one another thing, I’m working for this jamaat, know lotta people, know how they work. More than 50 % show dikaane ke liye uddar kaam karte hain, means nuksaan ponchahte hain.
God said, “I catch the liar by the neck and cut his cervical artery when he speaks things about me I didn’t say”. Nothing happened. Mirza Sahib died in peace after laying the foundation.
Yeh Ahmadi Jaamat waaqi Khuda chalaara hai and a few committed members.
