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

45 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

:) It seems to me that it is not even clear to you what you want to ask. Never have I seen person like you, jumping here & there instead of asking straight forward what has been mentioned in our hadith books I.e., there is a tehreef in Qur'an and several words have been omitted from its text and/or shuffled purposefully. In other words, it is mentioned in many ahadith that tehreef has been done in the book present among us in two covers (according to your definition). 

So are these ahadith contradicting the Qur'an? 

People can present verses from Qur'an, specifically this:

 

All you have to say is that the "dhikr" here in above verse is Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) therefore the book among us in two covers, can be a victim of tehreef. But what you have to say for the following verse:

 

Here "dhikr" is something other than the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). It is the Qur'an, the Book present among us in two covers, and it is free from corruption and it is well protected in the purified breasts
 


The Book among us in two covers, its revelation & its collection both, are completely in accordance with the divine commands & plans. 

The Book of Allah and Ahlebait (عليه السلام) will not seperate from each other and the one who applies pick and choose methodology is the one who will suffer and guidance will not reach him

Share this post


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

And not only this book was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), also all the hadiths we have are also sent down by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).
since Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) wouldn't even say a word but with command of Allah.

Hadith are not the tanzeel, but are the ta'veel. 

It is mentioned in Qur'an that ta'veel can be corrupted but not the tanzeel. 

It can be understood from the case of Prophet Yusuf (عليه السلام), Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) taught him the "ta'veel" but that is not a thing which can be said as tanzeel. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

Hadith are not the tanzeel, but are the ta'veel. 

It is mentioned in Qur'an that ta'veel can be corrupted but not the tanzeel. 

It can be understood from the case of Prophet Yusuf (عليه السلام), Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) taught him the "ta'veel" but that is not a thing which can be said as tanzeel. 

 

now you came to the topic na.
but hadiths indeed are commands of Allah and are dhikr that was sent down by Allah like hadith e qudsi are as well along with other hadiths

please clear this here .
if a riwayah says, that this ayah was revealed like this,
and in present book some part is missing,
how come it not be omissions ?
I just don't get it.
this is for what this discussion is.
rather than blaming each other, clear the doubts

Also you cleared one thing why hadith can be corrupted.
but that doesn't mean hadith isn't protected becuase if you leave hadiths, I dare say all system collapse.

 

Share this post


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

now you came to the topic na.
but hadiths indeed are commands of Allah and are dhikr that was sent down by Allah like hadith e qudsi are as well along with other hadiths

please clear this here .
if a riwayah says, that this ayah was revealed like this,
and in present book some part is missing,
how come it not be omissions ?
I just don't get it.
this is for what this discussion is.
rather than blaming each other, clear the doubts

Also you cleared one thing why hadith can be corrupted.
but that doesn't mean hadith isn't protected becuase if you leave hadiths, I dare say all system collapse.

 

The point you seem to be missing is that the Qur'an is entirely authentic whereas collections of hadith are not. 

The narrations that suggest that there were more verses in the Qur'an contradict each other because they are not consistent on the amount of verses. There is therefore no strong basis to support the claim that there are omissions in the Qur'an. Sayed al Khoie explains this well in chapter 7 of al bayan fi tafsir al qur'an: Link

In summary:

Qur'an: authentic, complete, unchanged

Hadith: subject to scrutiny (ranging from strong to fabricated with everything in between)

Wallahu a'lam 

 

Share this post


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

image.thumb.png.e44284bbd778323d034b963ae244791d.png

I Challenge you if you are truthful
bring single comment in which I said,
this or that is wrong in Qur'an (Nauzobillah)

Stop being an emotional kid. let open Surah maida for the people here:

lol, okay.

While you doubt the placement of the Ghadeer reference in 5:3 and find it strange, you are also saying the misplacement of the Ghadeer reference is not wrong. Do I have it right?

13 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:
and list Goes on
what I was saying that 5:3 was revealed at the most important event, (Ghadeer
and Qur'an is clear isn't it? 
Then any rational mind, can he tell by reading it that it is talking about Ghadeer?
Why?
Because you are reading selective portion and if you apply this methodology, you will
surely be distracted even by reading verses of this book
same goes for 5:67

If you take the whole Qur'an, then you will understand the meaning of verses
and that Qur'an isn't only this book its Muhammad o Aale Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)
along with this book.
I was saying there are hadiths pointing to omissions and this was what I was trying to discuss
but no way ,
there is no way you can say that I'm weakening Qur'an or if there are omissions then its incomplete
because we have teachigns of ahlebait (عليه السلام) which are also revelation and they are Qur'an as well and everything is complete
and protected by Qur'an (12th Imam (عليه السلام)), authenticity and protection can not be bought under question nauzobillah,
we are only referring to omisions
like there were names of Imams in Qur'an,
but today they arent there so its an omission for example,
but we have them in hadiths from AHlebait (عليه السلام) don’t we?
Therfore message is complete and protected and Imams never failed to protect it
stop twisting things both of you

Omissions from the Qur'an means it is complete. Do I have it correct?

Share this post


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

@ShiaMan14 and @Logic1234

Salute to both of you guys.
How irelevent have you been in this entire topic, its clear to the people who have some sense.

Basically, you want to confuse the people by pointing to my usage of word Qur'an.
At some places (if you have some sense you can see) I mean Book of Allah
and at some places, Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and Aima (عليه السلام) along with book.

In routine, we call the book Qur'an which indeed it is so please stop confusing the people.
also I have written answers to the questions you repeated, they are baseless .
I will not repeat answers as I have no time for that.

You started this topic with "book in two covers" referring to what every Muslim refers to as the Qur'an.

Hadith Thaqlayn is pretty explicit that the Prophet was leaving behind 2 weighty things namely Qur'an and Ahlul Bayt. He didnt say or imply Qur'an+Muhammad+Aimmah are the same so neither should you.

Just for reference, a Qur'an with omissions means it is incomplete.

Share this post


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

but hadiths indeed are commands of Allah and are dhikr that was sent down by Allah like hadith e qudsi are as well along with other hadiths

I need to see your evidence for that, what is the evidence that ahadith of Ma'sumeen (عليه السلام) are the tanzeel? 

Also, I would like you to answer a question I have asked earlier:
 

Quote

Please explain your point in light of the following verse:


يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ ۖ تَبْتَغِي مَرْضَاتَ أَزْوَاجِكَ ۚ وَاللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ 
66:1 

What do you think, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) first revealed to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to declare honey haram on himself then revealed this verse? And then Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) decided to exclude the earlier part from the book and keep this first verse of chapter 66 in the book? 

Please explain this case, Do you believe that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has first "sent down the hadith" on Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to declare the honey haram on himself? Then He sent another revelation asking him as to why he has declared a thing haram on himself which was made halal by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Anyone who says the Qur'an has been corrupted, listen to the first hadith the Shaykh mentions from Usuul Al-Kafi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2019 at 1:12 PM, ShiaMan14 said:

You started this topic with "book in two covers" referring to what every Muslim refers to as the Qur'an.

Hadith Thaqlayn is pretty explicit that the Prophet was leaving behind 2 weighty things namely Qur'an and Ahlul Bayt. He didnt say or imply Qur'an+Muhammad+Aimmah are the same so neither should you.

Just for reference, a Qur'an with omissions means it is incomplete.

Hey hey wait.
He said Book of Allah and my Itrat Ahlebait (عليه السلام)

no where in hadith thaqalyn, Qur'an and Ahlebait (عليه السلام) is mentioned.
Its Book of Allah and my Itrat Ahlebait (عليه السلام)

read em correctly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2019 at 11:10 PM, Logic1234 said:

I need to see your evidence for that, what is the evidence that ahadith of Ma'sumeen (عليه السلام) are the tanzeel? 

Also, I would like you to answer a question I have asked earlier:
 

Please explain this case, Do you believe that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has first "sent down the hadith" on Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to declare the honey haram on himself? Then He sent another revelation asking him as to why he has declared a thing haram on himself which was made halal by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? 

Actually, when people like you have no answer, they start confusing other people less I knowledge compared to them.

These verse answer all your question straight away,

Qur'an 53:


By the star when it descends, [1]
Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred,[2]
Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination.[3]
It is not but a revelation revealed,[4]
Taught to him by one intense in strength -[5]

Everything he speak is revealed to him by Allah, Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) doesn't speak by himself its only command of Allah
You know this verse but you... I don't have words for you.

You just want to prove others wrong by confusing people and hiding all this.

hadith and the Book both are revelation revealed upon Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), sent upon Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) by Allah that's what I am saying.
And that points to the your faulty tafseer of verse that we have sent down this dhikr and we shall protect it.

There is no doubt about its protection and that guidance has reached us and thats the meaning of protection
Else hadiths also have had omissions if thats your tafsser why are they not protected since they also are dhikr revealed to Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) by Allah.

Answer of this question is upon you and I know you can't do anything but twist arguments and confuse people and hide things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Kaya said:

^ Anyone who says the Qur'an has been corrupted, listen to the first hadith the Shaykh mentions from Usuul Al-Kafi.

There is big difference between corruption and omission.
This is how you people twist these arguments.
Nauzobillah
no one believes Qur'an has been corrupted nauzobillah istigfaar

Share this post


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

Actually, when people like you have no answer, they start confusing other people less I knowledge compared to them.

Answer for what? You claimed that ahadith are tanzeel, I have asked you a question and an evidence for this claim.

I am well aware of the verse "wama yantiqo an'il hawa", try applying this verse on the case presented in my question (66:1). Do you really think that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) revealed to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to declare honey haram on himself, then He again sent revelation asking him as to why he has declared honey haram on himself while Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has made it halal? 

 

2 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

You just want to prove others wrong by confusing people and hiding all this.

hadith and the Book both are revelation revealed upon Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), sent upon Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) by Allah that's what I am saying.
And that points to the your faulty tafseer of verse that we have sent down this dhikr and we shall protect it.

Accusations!!! Please just prove that hadith & kitab both are tanzeel. I am seeking the evidence that all. 

Faulty tafseer???  In fact I am not doing the tafseer. I am just pondering over the verses of Qur'an. 

نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ  means what? Do you think that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is mentioning the nazool of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) & by "وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ" He means the protection of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? 
 

2 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

There is no doubt about its protection and that guidance has reached us and thats the meaning of protection
Else hadiths also have had omissions if thats your tafsser why are they not protected since they also are dhikr revealed to Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) by Allah.

Answer of this question is upon you and I know you can't do anything but twist arguments and confuse people and hide things

Repeated accusations! Please provide evidence that the hadith are tanzeel, that is what I need from you at the moment. 

Share this post


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

There is big difference between corruption and omission.
This is how you people twist these arguments.
Nauzobillah
no one believes Qur'an has been corrupted nauzobillah istigfaar

Salam. 

I agree that there is a difference between omission and corruption. 

Can you link to the main Shi'a hadith books for any proof about omission? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kaya said:

Salam. 

I agree that there is a difference between omission and corruption. 

Can you link to the main Shi'a hadith books for any proof about omission? Thanks

agreed. here is one of the oldest and authentic source Tafseer Al Qummi, can be found on alfeker.net
image.png.864a1b44a99018da28d5622b4d334ec8.png

Imam says verse descended as 
Refer Back to Allah and Rasool and Ulil Amr
The green is in present Qur'an while Red isn't.
Its not like we base our daleel on this hadith to prove our stance from this verse.
even an ordinary guy like me can give Sunnis jaw breaking reply on verse 4:59
but we are talking about omission here.

Share this post


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

agreed. here is one of the oldest and authentic source Tafseer Al Qummi, can be found on alfeker.net
image.png.864a1b44a99018da28d5622b4d334ec8.png

Imam says verse descended as 
Refer Back to Allah and Rasool and Ulil Amr
The green is in present Qur'an while Red isn't.
Its not like we base our daleel on this hadith to prove our stance from this verse.
even an ordinary guy like me can give Sunnis jaw breaking reply on verse 4:59
but we are talking about omission here.

Salam, 

Could there be another explanation for this? Is Tafseer Al Qummi fully reliable?

And what difference would such an omission make anyway? You yourself mentioned verse 4:59 which mentions Allah, Rasool and Ulil Amr. So the concept still exists in that verse. Such an omission would not lead to anything different in terms of theology. 

If the Qu'ran contained omissions during the time of the 12 Imams (عليه السلام), I am sure they would mention it frequently, and we would see it in books like Usuul Al-Kafi, Nahjul Balagha, etc. Do you have any concrete examples from authentic hadith books? There should be many because this is an important topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kaya said:

Salam, 

Could there be another explanation for this? Is Tafseer Al Qummi fully reliable?

And what difference would such an omission make anyway? You yourself mentioned verse 4:59 which mentions Allah, Rasool and Ulil Amr. So the concept still exists in that verse. Such an omission would not lead to anything different in terms of theology. 

If the Qu'ran contained omissions during the time of the 12 Imams (عليه السلام), I am sure they would mention it frequently, and we would see it in books like Usuul Al-Kafi, Nahjul Balagha, etc. Do you have any concrete examples from authentic hadith books? There should be many because this is an important topic

Thats exactly what I was saying if you remember.

omission wouldn't make a difference! Yes.
because deen and ahkam are protected by Allah.
Tafseer Al Qummi is indeed doubted by Scholors but if it was attributed to Ali bin Ibrahim surely AL Mansoob was written behind its back while we don't see that written.
Also great great fuqaha have trusted this book as well. It is said that Author died before compeltion of this book and it was completed by his student, but above narration seems to be from Ali Bin Ibrahim since he is narration from his father but maybe a learned one can explain it better. however fuqaha have trusted this book as well.
Also its not Al-Mansoob Ali Bin Ibrahim Al Qummi

Share this post


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

Thats exactly what I was saying if you remember.

omission wouldn't make a difference! Yes.
because deen and ahkam are protected by Allah.
Tafseer Al Qummi is indeed doubted by Scholors but if it was attributed to Ali bin Ibrahim surely AL Mansoob was written behind its back while we don't see that written.
Also great great fuqaha have trusted this book as well. It is said that Author died before compeltion of this book and it was completed by his student, but above narration seems to be from Ali Bin Ibrahim since he is narration from his father but maybe a learned one can explain it better. however fuqaha have trusted this book as well.
Also its not Al-Mansoob Ali Bin Ibrahim Al Qummi

Thanks for the reply brother. I think that the issue requires further investigation, perhaps more quotes from other hadith books?

Wassalam :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kaya said:

Thanks for the reply brother. I think that the issue requires further investigation, perhaps more quotes from other hadith books?

Wassalam :)

 

you can google them, if I were to locate each and every hadith, it would take alot of time and effort to do so
plus I am reading about T.S reply to Shia pen on Fadak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2019 at 1:44 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Hey hey wait.
He said Book of Allah and my Itrat Ahlebait (عليه السلام)

no where in hadith thaqalyn, Qur'an and Ahlebait (عليه السلام) is mentioned.
Its Book of Allah and my Itrat Ahlebait (عليه السلام)

read em correctly 

Last I checked "Book of Allah" = Qur'an.

Regardless, he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) definitely didn't call it "book between 2 covers".

Weak try to digress . 

Edited by ShiaMan14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi:

When Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was struck by the sword, his words were, "By the Lord of Kaaba, I am successful!". Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was clearly unsuccessfully in completing the Qur'an because ayahs were omitted according to you, so was he successful?

When Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) made peace with Muawiya, the first condition was that Muawiya would rule in accordance with the Qur'an and Sunnah. Why didn't Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) make the agreement to complete the Qur'an and then act in accordance to it?

Are there any sermons of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) from the time he left Madinah to his martyrdom in Karbala where he spoke about sacrificing his life for the completion of the Qur'an I.e. re-include all the missing ayahs that you are alleging have been omitted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2019 at 7:19 PM, ShiaMan14 said:

@Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi:

When Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was struck by the sword, his words were, "By the Lord of Kaaba, I am successful!". Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was clearly unsuccessfully in completing the Qur'an because ayahs were omitted according to you, so was he successful?

When Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) made peace with Muawiya, the first condition was that Muawiya would rule in accordance with the Qur'an and Sunnah. Why didn't Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) make the agreement to complete the Qur'an and then act in accordance to it?

Are there any sermons of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) from the time he left Madinah to his martyrdom in Karbala where he spoke about sacrificing his life for the completion of the Qur'an I.e. re-include all the missing ayahs that you are alleging have been omitted?

Bismillah.

Its famous amoung the Shias that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) compiled the Qur'an and was rejected by the people out there.
Clearly he was successful my dear. Imam Hassan o Hussein (عليه السلام) themselves were rejected by people and people refused to accept them

thus people failed not the Imams.

I have seen this argument that:
"Its not possible that while Ali (عليه السلام) was present, tehreef may be done in Qur'an (Book)"

This argument is true since Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) also sacrificed his life to protect the deen from additions of Yazeed L.A
But on "Additions" , if its about omission then Wilayah and Imamah that Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) told everyone openly about was rejected and omitted from deen but
Imam Ali (عليه السلام) never fought with anyone on this matter. since it was also tehreef in deen. but it wasn't an addition.

Else I demand an answer from you why didn't Ali (عليه السلام) fight for wilayah and Caliphate and Imamah,
Since they were completely rejected by people which were main part of Deen Islam and tehreef occuered there as well. while

we see other Imam Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) fighting against people who did tehreef in deen?

When you deciede to reject and leave something, its upto you, Caliph of Allah isn't there to force you, but when youd ecide to chagne the things and add to them,

then Caliph of Allah throw away his life to protect the religion.

Omission doesn't effect the Qur'an in anyways and its protections and its completeness.

Share this post


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

Bismillah.

Its famous amoung the Shias that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) compiled the Qur'an and was rejected by the people out there.
Clearly he was successful my dear. Imam Hassan o Hussein (عليه السلام) themselves were rejected by people and people refused to accept themthus people failed not the Imams.

I knew you would say that because you are running out of things to say. 

Imams were rejected = agreed.

You still haven't answered why Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) didn't include it in the Peace Treaty nor did Imam Hussain call for it in his sermons.

Imam Ali did compile the Qur'an and it was rejected = agreed. But much like he refused to pay allegiance to Caliph Abu Bakr, why did he not reject their Qur'an?

20 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

thus people failed not the Imams.

How can people fail when it was not their responsibility to protect the Qur'an? The responsibility to protect the message resided and resides with the Imams.

20 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

I have seen this argument that:
"Its not possible that while Ali (عليه السلام) was present, tehreef may be done in Qur'an (Book)"

This argument is true since Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) also sacrificed his life to protect the deen from additions of Yazeed L.A
But on "Additions" , if its about omission then Wilayah and Imamah that Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) told everyone openly about was rejected and omitted from deen but
Imam Ali (عليه السلام) never fought with anyone on this matter. since it was also tehreef in deen. but it wasn't an addition.

Else I demand an answer from you why didn't Ali (عليه السلام) fight for wilayah and Caliphate and Imamah,
Since they were completely rejected by people which were main part of Deen Islam and tehreef occuered there as well. while

we see other Imam Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) fighting against people who did tehreef in deen?

When you deciede to reject and leave something, its upto you, Caliph of Allah isn't there to force you, but when youd ecide to chagne the things and add to them,

then Caliph of Allah throw away his life to protect the religion.

So the role of the Imams is to protect the Qur'an from additions only. Omissions are okay  so we could be following 50% Islam & sharia and it would be perfectly okay??? 

20 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Else I demand an answer from you why didn't Ali (عليه السلام) fight for wilayah and Caliphate and Imamah,

Because the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) instructed Imam Ali (عليه السلام) not to fight for caliphate. He was still the WaliAllah and Imam.

20 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Omission doesn't effect the Qur'an in anyways and its protections and its completeness.

I guess another miracle of the Qur'an is that it is COMPLETE while being INCOMPLETE.

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...