Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Tehreef e Qur'an (Genral Discussion)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

As salam o aliakum

Lets begin with the Question,

What is the strongest evidence that book in two covers (not Qur'an) has been protected from Omision while we see countless authentic traditions saying that this verse was revealed like this and those hadiths have some extra portions.

As far as I have seen, this book we have right now is a portion of what was revealed. 

What do you guys say on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see how such a thread can benefit anyone on this forum other than flare up tempers and give ammunition to the opponents of the Shia by supporting their claim that Shia believe the Qur'an is محرّف Mu'harraf.

The most esteemed Shia scholars and narrators throughout the generations have studied this issue for decades and reached the conclusion that there is no Tahreef in Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2019 at 2:52 PM, 786:) said:

Let’s look at the threads of the OP:

aliyun waliullah in tashahud

sajda to other than Allah

Qur'an is incomplete

keep in mind he has been trying to prove all of these bizarre ideas. BEWARE

it looks like again I hurt your inner wahabi lolz

By the way, when the topic "sajda to other than Allah" was closed, I already had a comment before that in which I said when the brother presented ahadiths from masoomeen that sajda is prohibtied, I said finally discussion is over with conclusion that sajda to other than Allah is prohibited.

I never did sajda to anyone else, I was only quoting arguments of party who do sajda to Imams etc. My father is strictly against such things. But you always have to criticize me for nothing.
lets come back to the topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2019 at 12:55 PM, starlight said:

Certainly We revealed the Reminder and certainly We shall preserve it.” (The Holy Qur’an 15: 9) 

إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ
 

indeed Allah has revealed the dhikr, and he is protecting it.
there is no question about its protection, 

I would like to question, were hadiths of Masoomeen (عليه السلام) not revealed to them by Allah Almighty?
if yes then this verse addresses whole Dhikr sent down to us from our lord, and indeed its protected because for everyone, light of guidance is there,
but my question is has tehreef not taken place in hadiths? 
and hadiths were also revelation from Allah Almighty to Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ?
but we see that hadiths have additions, omissions and fabrications but that doesn't mean hadiths aren't protected.
The true message of Allah almighty is still there and clear to one who seeks guidance.
now you will say that Syed Ali is saying there are additions in Qur'an? No way.
Becuase Qur'an is a miracle and no one till today, has found any contradictions in it and was left along with Ahlebait (عليه السلام) as brother mentioned:

On 10/13/2019 at 2:12 PM, Mahdavist said:

In the famous narration of the two weighty things the Holy Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) leaves behind the Qur'an and the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) for us to follow and adhere to.

Wallahu a'lam 

in Qur'an (Book of Allah) and Ahlebait (عليه السلام), there can not be any contradiction (nauzobillah) neither any addition but there message can be hidden, and can be twisted.

There are tons of things that we weren't able to recieve from Masomeen (عليه السلام).

This is what I am talking about,
Allama Baqir Majlisi says that hadiths talking about tehreef (ommisions) are mutawatir on both sides (Ahle-Sunnah && Shias).
There are many hadiths like :
Imam (عليه السلام) used to recite this verse like this.
Imam (عليه السلام) said this verse was revealed like this.

And these hadiths aren't going against Qur'an in anyways, rather explaining its meaning and protecting the revealed verses. and ensuring the protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In one of our books (Sulaym If I recall correctly) I read that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) in Kufa was asked by one of his people if the compilation of Uthman is perfect or not and he replied "Its sufficient to take you to paradise".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Darth Vader said:

In one of our books (Sulaym If I recall correctly) I read that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) in Kufa was asked by one of his people if the compilation of Uthman is perfect or not and he replied "Its sufficient to take you to paradise".

regardless of the authenticity of book(kitab sulaim bin qais) , I accept this narration and agree 100% to what you quoted.

But that doesn't mean if you leave ahlebait (عليه السلام), then Qur'an will still take you to paradise.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one can have doubt on single word of Qur'an, and no one can reject single verse of Qur'an.
because this book was left along with ahlebait (عليه السلام) as I said,

if Ahlebait (عليه السلام) were physically here and we were able to see them, then how can one doubt what they say?
similarly Qur'an is physically present and we cannot have doubt on single word of Qur'an,

but when Ahlebait (عليه السلام) were physically present, there are neumeruos occasions when they spent there lives, in jails. and no one was allowed to meet them, 
people attributed false things to them and twisted meanings of their hadiths. 

similarly you can say that Qur'an 5:3 wasn't revealed at ghadeer e khum,
but you can't make additions to the verse itself(addition of words of man).

but you can print all chapters seperately, (30 books) .
you can have print of ayahs on an A4 page.

you can burn Qur'an down
you can throw Qur'an away (like we have seen many non-believers (may Allah curse them) doing these things)

but still protection of Qur'an is there, and guidance is avaliable to all of us, with the teachings of Imams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 1:28 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

But that doesn't mean if you leave ahlebait (عليه السلام), then Qur'an will still take you to paradise.

The conclusion is from the ahl al bayt (عليه السلام). Leaving them would have left the matter inconclusive and Qur'an a misguidance on its own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 3:38 AM, realizm said:

:salam:

A voluntarily provocative question but :

If I wanted to print a new Qur'an with modified verses, what would happen to me ?

You can't. Its one of the 1400 years old challenges of the Qur'an to all unbelievers to try and produce just 10 verses like it. If it could be even remotely mimicked, you know, they would have made thousands of versions of it. Our emperors bishops and medieval kings would have also made 17000 different versions by now like the Christians did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 3:38 AM, realizm said:

:salam:

A voluntarily provocative question but :

If I wanted to print a new Qur'an with modified verses, what would happen to me ?

that won't effect the present Qur'an anyways. 
lets take an example if you make one,
how are you going to distribute it?
you will be caught and killed soon anyways.

there exists not even a single manuscript of Qur'an today that differs with the other.

just like a fabricated hadith is caught immediately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tahrif of the Qur'an Ansari

 Mohammed Bagher

http://www.trans-move.com/FA/File/sa/temp/NTFFAXKL.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 3:38 AM, realizm said:

:salam:

A voluntarily provocative question but :

If I wanted to print a new Qur'an with modified verses, what would happen to me ?

It would be picked up and identified easily because the Qur'an has been intact and preserved in the minds and hearts of those who have learnt it and in this day and age also in tons of hard and soft copies. 

Wallahu a'lam 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:salam:

@Darth Vader  @Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

@Mahdavist

True answers but in reality that would not prevent me from issuing a few copies, even if they contain minor variations (like omitting a worsd here and there) and distribute them, would it ?

That means at some moment in time some distorsion may have occured. 

The only proof we have is the word of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the confirmation by the A'immah (عليه السلام).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting addition to this discussing, if someone can give me an answer, would be the types of Qur'an. There are multiple scripts of the Qur'an, each slightly different (I.e. Hafs Qur'an and Warsh Qur'an), does this not count as something in the Qur'an being changed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 12:45 PM, realizm said:

:salam:

@Darth Vader  @Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

@Mahdavist

True answers but in reality that would not prevent me from issuing a few copies, even if they contain minor variations (like omitting a worsd here and there) and distribute them, would it ?

That means at some moment in time some distorsion may have occured. 

The only proof we have is the word of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the confirmation by the A'immah (عليه السلام).

The proof lies with the muslimeen themselves and more specifically those who memorized the Qur'an because they are the means through which the Qur'an has reached us. In a sense you can consider it like a narration with very strong tawatur. 

Your modified copies would very easily be identified and would therefore not survive the test of time.

Wallahu a'lam 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 7ssein said:

An interesting addition to this discussing, if someone can give me an answer, would be the types of Qur'an. There are multiple scripts of the Qur'an, each slightly different (I.e. Hafs Qur'an and Warsh Qur'an), does this not count as something in the Qur'an being changed?

I wouldn't say so because these differences are typically in the details of harakaat which doesn't change the basic script itself but rather how one is pronouncing it. This does of course have a minor impact on the meaning but the core text remains intact which means that ultimately the difference would lie at the level of tafseer rather than the Qur'anic script itself.

Wallahu a'lam 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 12:45 PM, realizm said:

:salam:

@Darth Vader  @Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

@Mahdavist

True answers but in reality that would not prevent me from issuing a few copies, even if they contain minor variations (like omitting a worsd here and there) and distribute them, would it ?

That means at some moment in time some distorsion may have occured. 

The only proof we have is the word of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the confirmation by the A'immah (عليه السلام).

that makes me remember a narrations from the Sahihs where such an example is found in hadith, a sahabi testified that the verse was like 'x' and today in Qur'an we have 'y'
if I find I will quote however its un-authentic for us thus of no use

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2019 at 11:13 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

As salam o aliakum

Lets begin with the Question,

What is the strongest evidence that book in two covers (not Qur'an) has been protected from Omision while we see countless authentic traditions saying that this verse was revealed like this and those hadiths have some extra portions.

As far as I have seen, this book we have right now is a portion of what was revealed. 

What do you guys say on this?

Are you Shia?

Basic Shia belief is that the role of  Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is to  deliver the message and the role of the  Imams (عليه السلام) is to protect the message.

So are you saying the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) failed to deliver the message correctly or the Imams (عليه السلام) failed to protect the message?

Or are you Allah failed in his promise to protect the message from corruption?

Please clarify:

A) Allah failed

B) Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) failed

C) Imams (عليه السلام) failed

D) Corruption of your own mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

Where is the option for:

E) People failed

People failing would be a reflection of Allah failing orthe Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) failing or the Imams failing.

Allah promised to protect the message (from the people).

Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) delivered the message (to the people).

Imams protect the message (from the people).

So if people altered the message then Imams failed, Prophet failed, Allah failed because none of them could do their jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

People failing would be a reflection of Allah failing orthe Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) failing or the Imams failing.

Then what is the point of mentioning B or C, since all can return back to A? 

Quote

Allah promised to protect the message (from the people).

You can't use the Qur'an to prove that the Qur'an has no tahreef - that is a basic logical fallacy.

4 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

So if people altered the message then Imams failed, Prophet failed, Allah failed because none of them could do their jobs.

I don't get it - do you not believe the Ghaybah, which is the complete absence and cut off of direct access to the hujjah of Allah on Earth, who can even tell us the true tafsir of the Qur'an and so on, all happened because the people failed? So if the hujjah can go into ghaybah because of people's shortcomings, a Ghaybah which has caused so much distress and lack of clarity on religious matters, then what is so crazy about a few verses missing from the Qur'an? Even if you believe that tahreef in words did not happen, do you not believe tahreef in meaning has happened already? So what difference does it make if the words are missing or not, when even if the words are not missing, the meanings are already altered by the people (let's say, the majority of the Muslim non-Shi'a world today).

Please offer some clarity to your actual arguments for why there is no tahreef in the Qur'an (I.e. absolutely no verses are missing).

Wasalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

Please offer some clarity to your actual arguments for why there is no tahreef in the Qur'an (I.e. absolutely no verses are missing).

I wish to share a reason brother. It is baseerah. If anyone remotely of any scholarly authority acknowledges of just one or insignificantly small tahreef in say pronunciation of a word then you will find ignorant masses ready to disregard and abandon the Qur'an entirely. Already the night seems at its darkest moments. Take the OP for and his new religion for instance. Imagine how many people will be misguided or kind of apostate silently in their hearts because of the opportunists who will spread illiteracy into throngs of coming generations who will be lead by punjabi zakirs. Why on Earth do you want to give such people more dominion over unfortunate people.

As Hz Ameer (عليه السلام) said, its sufficient. Think about it. There is nothing to gain from casting a doubt on it, but too much to lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The claim that all the different Qira'at were all said by the Prophet and that they are all mass transmitted etc. are claims that were made later in history, and the Qurra' themselves (the famous seven readers and other readers like al-'Amash) did not think that their readings were divine, and even Ibn Mujahid himself (the person who made the 7 readings official), did not think the readings were divine. Ibn Mujahid himself treated the readings like differences of opinion in fiqh:

Quote

Ibn Mujahid  observes that the scholars’ disagreement on the different Qira'at is similar to their disagreement on the ahkam... later scholars stipulated the acceptance  of “all” seven and the ten Readings without rejecting a single individual  reading that belongs to these canonical systems. The seven and the ten  Readings are held to be of divine nature, I.e. they are all Qur’anic, including the individual variants that the Readers disagreed upon... I do not believe that this was the position of Ibn Mujahid. If the disagreements on ahkam and Qlra’at are of similar nature, such disagreements ought to be the outcome of ijtihad on the part of the scholars. Such ijtihad,  both in ahkam and Qira’at, is not based on opinion only; it is also based  on athar, I.e. Prophetic traditions and accounts on behalf of the Companions and the Successors. Scholars disagree on ahkam because they disagree on interpreting the traditions. They also disagree on the different criteria  and standards according to which they derive their legal rulings and establish their precedence. The above statement by Ibn Mujahid drives me to  conclude that he believed the same process must have taken place with  Qira’at as with ahkam. The Qur’an readers, just like the fuqaha’, scrutinized the traditions and the athar and chose a corpus from which they  adopted certain readings they believed to be the most probably correct,  or in other words the closest to the Shari'ah. No one argues that “all” the  different legal rulings by the four legal schools are canonical and absolute, and that the differences among the madhahib are of divine nature.  In other words, no one claims that the Prophet himself declared and practiced all these different and often contradictory ahkam. By the same token,  no one should argue that the Prophet read the Qur’an in all the seven and the ten Readings, as later Muslim scholars vehemently argued. (Transmission Of Various Readings Of Qur'an By Shady Hikmet Nasser, Pg. 49-50)

Even al-Tabari, the famous mufasir, rejected around 90 variants from the so-called mass transmitted readings, and he preferred some variants over others. 

In terms of mass transmission, from my understanding there seems to be two issues- 1) the chains from the transmitters to the Readers (like Shu'ba and Hafs narrating from 'Asim, Warsh and Qalun narrating from Nafi' etc.) and 2) the chains from the Readers to the Prophet. 

With regards to the first issue, then there is no mass transmission from the transmitters to the Readers. Shady Nasser proposes many arguments for why this is the case. One of them being the fact that if a Reading was mass transmitted, then variants within one Reader would not have existed. For example, see here for variants between Shu'ba and Hafs, although they both take from 'Asim.

With regards to the second issue, then there is an even bigger problem. The Readers themselves never claimed that their Reading was from a chain that went back to the Prophet. All they did was construct their own Reading and they selected what they thought was most correct from the multiple variants that they received from multiple teachers. See this thread for more.   

The problem with a letter by letter preservation of the Qur'an can go further back than this. For example, if we go to the compilation of the mushaf during the time of the caliphs. You can read this narration for the compilation of a private mushaf under Abu Bakr. You can refer to this narration to see that under the khilafah of Uthman, the private Qur'an that was compiled during Abu Bakr's khilafah then became the canonised version, and all other mushafs that people had were burned. 

If you read these two narrations, then the issue is clear. Under Abu Bakr's kilfafah, the soon to be canonised version of the Qur'an was compiled by one person- Zayd bin Thabit. But, how do we know Zayd bin Thabit didn't make a mistake when compiling this Qur'an? How do we know that the committee during Uthman's khilafah didn't make mistakes when making copies of this mushaf? It is simply impossible to prove that the mushaf that Zayd bin Thabit compiled was perfect, and had no mistakes.

This should be no problem for us though. The Hujiyya of the Qur'an is established for us, since the Imams made use of it. 

Edited by Follower of Ahlulbayt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

Then what is the point of mentioning B or C, since all can return back to A? 

Sure but that's like blaming Allah for all evil since He has permitted Shaytan to live.

In layman's terms:

A = bad design

B = Good design but bad implementation.

C = Good design and implementation but bad support system post-implementation.

21 hours ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

You can't use the Qur'an to prove that the Qur'an has no tahreef - that is a basic logical fallacy.

I get the logical fallacy but the Muslim faith in a tehreef-free Qur'an comes from the Qur'an ie Allah. So if that's the starting point, the people who believe in tefreef have to bring the proof, not the ones who believe it to be error free.

21 hours ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

I don't get it - do you not believe the Ghaybah, which is the complete absence and cut off of direct access to the hujjah of Allah on Earth, who can even tell us the true tafsir of the Qur'an and so on, all happened because the people failed? So if the hujjah can go into ghaybah because of people's shortcomings, a Ghaybah which has caused so much distress and lack of clarity on religious matters, then what is so crazy about a few verses missing from the Qur'an? Even if you believe that tahreef in words did not happen, do you not believe tahreef in meaning has happened already? So what difference does it make if the words are missing or not, when even if the words are not missing, the meanings are already altered by the people (let's say, the majority of the Muslim non-Shi'a world today).

Please offer some clarity to your actual arguments for why there is no tahreef in the Qur'an (I.e. absolutely no verses are missing).

Wasalam

Discussion about tehreef in meaning only is not part of this discussion. OP is referring to actual addition/omission from the Qur'an.

It seems to me you are leaning towards Option C - that the Qur'an had tehreef post the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Based on your reference to the Ghaybah, is it correct to assume you are saying the Qur'an was altered (addition/omission) during the Ghaybah only?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Follower of Ahlul Bayt said:

This should be no problem for us though. The Hujiyya of the Qur'an is established for us, since the Imams made use of it. 

A true believer should need nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should clear one thing that falsehood cannot come near Qur'an/Ahlebait thus its impossible for Qur'an to have additions.

 

When it comes to omision, I was saying that their teachings indeed were hidden by the people. And people wanted to twist the teachings in order to benefit them, thus they deviated from right path and rejected the order of Allah. Therefore people failing can not mean that Allah failed to deliever message.

 

The message of Allah is there when understood by traditions of Ahle Bait (عليه السلام). but it wouldn't make sense according to a common person since he like of one reads Qur'an 5:67 he might think that before and after this verse, talk is about a different topic not Ghadeer. 

 

However we have traditions from their books that Abdullah Ibn Masood (عليه السلام) said we used to recite this verse in days of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) like this:

O Messenger Proclaim the message that has been sent down upon you "That Ali is Mola of Momineen"  (Tafseer Dur Mansoor under 5:67 tafseer)

 

And many examples from our books as well.

 

I am only refering to ommisions

And there are countless traditions like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to make one thing clear that 

 

NO ONE HERE IS DENYING IMPORTANCE OF Qur'an SINCE WE ARE ORDERED TO FOLLOW THIS BOOK AND THIS BOOK HAS NO CONTRADICTIONS OR ADDITIONS AND IS WORD OF Allah AND HADITHS CONTRADICTING Qur'an ARE FABRICATIONS.

 

We are just talking about omisions. And I refered to them as tehreef.

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

A true believer should need nothing more.

Along with Traditions of Ahle-Bait (عليه السلام)

Else there is no guidance in Qur'an for you if you leave the sayings of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and Aima (عليه السلام)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2019 at 1:11 AM, Darth Vader said:

I wish to share a reason brother. It is baseerah. If anyone remotely of any scholarly authority acknowledges of just one or insignificantly small tahreef in say pronunciation of a word then you will find ignorant masses ready to disregard and abandon the Qur'an entirely. Already the night seems at its darkest moments. Take the OP for and his new religion for instance. Imagine how many people will be misguided or kind of apostate silently in their hearts because of the opportunists who will spread illiteracy into throngs of coming generations who will be lead by punjabi zakirs. Why on Earth do you want to give such people more dominion over unfortunate people.

As Hz Ameer (عليه السلام) said, its sufficient. Think about it. There is nothing to gain from casting a doubt on it, but too much to lose.

This guy everytime targets Ulima from other than Iraq / Iran.

Stop this non-sense here and stick to the topic, I will make a seperate topic on who is mis guiding the people, blindly following opinion of some person or hadith or event told on mimbar?

I will make a topic later but stop this here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2019 at 1:11 AM, Darth Vader said:

I wish to share a reason brother. It is baseerah. If anyone remotely of any scholarly authority acknowledges of just one or insignificantly small tahreef in say pronunciation of a word then you will find ignorant masses ready to disregard and abandon the Qur'an entirely. Already the night seems at its darkest moments. Take the OP for and his new religion for instance. Imagine how many people will be misguided or kind of apostate silently in their hearts because of the opportunists who will spread illiteracy into throngs of coming generations who will be lead by punjabi zakirs. Why on Earth do you want to give such people more dominion over unfortunate people.

As Hz Ameer (عليه السلام) said, its sufficient. Think about it. There is nothing to gain from casting a doubt on it, but too much to lose.

Also this Qol of Ameer (عليه السلام) has a meaning. If you want to say Hasbuna Kitab Ullah, then why do you criticize wahabi people on this?

And if you want to say along with Ahlebait (عليه السلام) then my dear we are using narrations of ahle bait (عليه السلام) to point towards omissions in Qur'an.

None of us believes that book of Allah isn't having guidance (Nauzobillah)

None of us believes that Book of Allah has additions. (Nauzobillah)

Also what do you want to say by (new religion)?

Broden your mind by reading books other than Tauzeeh Ul Masail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Along with Traditions of Ahle-Bait (عليه السلام)

Else there is no guidance in Qur'an for you if you leave the sayings of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and Aima (عليه السلام)

So if all or most of the traditions of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) vanish, then the Qur'an itself stays it would be pointless book without giving guidance? Who is the one who is the Guide, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) or Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام)? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...