Ibadi standards of testing the hadith part 2

“Oh my Lord Advance me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)


Before providing an answer to the question of why people sometimes disagree on accepting and rejecting some of the traditions in spite of the fact that they have laid down generally accepted principles on which they are supposed to base their arguments and the foundations of their analyses and interpretations, it is equally important that we have a look at the division of hadith. Generally, the rule, as seen in the article no. one holds that a tradition is treated as weak if narrated by a weak narrator and sound if narrated by a reliable one. But when we come to the world of practice and reality, we find that there are a lot of traditions which have been related by the reliable but do not make sense. Reversely, there is a considerable amount of other accounts told by weak narrators but sound a voice of reason.

The reason for this is simple and clear:

A narration by a weak narrator whose weakness has resulted from his poor memory is considered to be weak. But a forgetful narrator does not always forget: occasionally he remembers a lot of things and narrates them correctly.

A narration by a liar is classified with the fabricated hadith, but a liar does not always speak a lie.

A narrator with a strong memory, accepted with the observance and consideration of other necessary conditions of acceptability; however, even a man of strong memory might sometimes forget things and relate them incorrectly.

A narration by a pious one is equally accepted on the condition that other stipulations of acceptability have been available. But a pious narrator may speak the untrue not purposely but as a result of illusion or absent-mindedness at the time of narrating a hadith, and because of his fame as religious people take his delivery for granted.

It is for this reason that when you read books by Muslim scholars, especially those authored on explaining the hadith of the Blessed Messenger (saw) you find statements such as: “The sanad of this hadith is weak but its matn (text) or its meaning is sound”, or adversely: “The sanad of this hadith is acceptable but its meaning is illogical or unacceptable”.

It is clear, hitherto, that, unlike the Qur-an, when we deal with the Prophetic hadith we deal with one of the most sophisticated but complicated subjects. As such, in order to reach reality, accounts must undergo a scientific-analytical criticism or preferably, scientific critical analysis not only in terms of their sanads but also in terms of their mutun (texts). The latter (The analysis of a text) is more important because finally, it provides you with the reality of a hadith whereas the former (the analysis of sanads) is merely a probable explanation very much like a theoretical approximation of a natural phenomenon. In other words, a hadith may have a weak sanad though it has been truly uttered by the Blessed Messenger (saw).

This means that the problem occurred during the process of transmitting it from one narrator to another where one or more of the transmitters lost one or more qualities for acceptability. It is logical, therefore, to claim, as scholars do, that the sanad of a particular hadith is genuine but the meaning of its text is wrong. While, on the other hand, it is logically unacceptable to say that the matn of a certain Hadith is sound and acceptable but its meaning is unsound and incorrect! It is possible that one may accurately transmit inaccurate information and one may inaccurately transmit accurate information. Transmission is in relation to the narrators where as matn corresponds to the information being transmitted. In this sense, we can divide hadith into three parts:

A) A hadith whose sanad is weak but its matn is acceptable.
B) A hadith which is weak in terms of both its sanad and matn.
C) A hadith whose sanad is strong but its matn is unsound: not compatible with one or more principles.

This is one of the most important things to know for those who study the authenticity or the inauthenticity of any hadith. If not taking this fact into consideration, a researcher into the Prophetic traditions will always be faced with the risk of coming up with the wrong conclusion because instead of searching for the reality he will go for theories and base his analysis upon that. It remains to be seen, which methodology are we to undertake in surveying the texts of the hadith in order to know the really authentic from the unauthentic ones? Before doing so, let us advance a few illustrations of:

A hadith whose sanad is weak but its matn is acceptable.
A hadith which is weak in terms of both its sanad and matn.
A hadith whose sanad is strong but its matn is unsound: not compatible with one or more principles.

To be continued in the article no. 3.

Shaykh Juma Al-Mazrui (May Allah continue to bless him and bless us by him.)


Filed under Uncategorized

About the Ibadi Standards of Hadith Part 1

“Oh my Lord Advance me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)

الْحَمْدُ ِللهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِيْنَ وَالْعَاقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِيْنَ وَلاَ عُدْوَانَ إِلاَ عَلَى الظَّالِمِيْنَ, وَأَشْهَدُ أَنْ لا إله إلا الله وَحْدَهُ لا شَرِكَ لَهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُوْلُهُ وَصَفِيُّهُ مِنْ خَلْقِهِ وَخَلِيْلُهُ بَلَّغَ الرِّسَالَةَ وَأَدَّى الأَمَانَةَ وَنَصَحَ الأُمَّةَ وَكَشَفَ اللهُ بِهِ الغُمَّةَ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَعَلَى آلِهِ وَصَحْبِهِ وَسَلَّمَ


The standards and criteria for accepting and rejecting hadith in the Ibadhi School of law are not different from those laid down by the four surviving Sunni schools commonly known as the Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanafi and Hanbali – they are the same and common. But the fact that there has been a shortcoming in the implantation of those principles, explains why we sometimes come into a strong clash of opinions as to whether a particular hadith is authentic or not.

We, in the Ibadhi School, though regarding the genuineness of sanad (chain of narrators) of a hadith as one basic condition for its acceptability, yet do not strictly authenticate it on the basis of its sanad being sound only, an extensive study of its matn (text) must be run to avoid four major incompatibilities, namely:
The contradiction between the hadith and the Qur-an.
The contradiction between two hadiths one of which is authentic or more authentic.
The contradiction between the hadith and the consensus held by all Islamic denominations.
The contradiction between the hadith and the human logic and observation.

But, again, for a hadith to be regarded as contradictory or contrary to one of these things, it is further stipulated that it is impossible to reconcile them. In case it is possible to do so by either giving them one common interpretation or by giving to each of them a meaning suitable to it, here the defect of contradiction is considered to not exist anymore.

Generally speaking, we have five major conditions, related to the sanad, for a hadith to be accepted as an authentic one, and four conditions pertaining to its matn (text) as will be explained in a future article insh’Allah. The sanad-related conditions are:

1) Itsalu al-sanad (The connectedness of the chain of transmitters). That is the chain of the narrators must be coherent in that every one narrator must receive it directly from the narrator before him without the existence of a gap between any of them.

2) ‘Adalatu al-Ruwat. The word Ruwat is a plural form of the word Rawi which means a narrator, whereas, the word‘Adalatu literally means: justice, fairness, equitability, equitableness, impartiality, unbiasedness, straightness, straightforwardness, uprightness, honesty. However, in this technical sense, it is used with a particular reference to four qualities:

A) Being a Muslim. No account by a non-Muslim is accepted. We do not take our religion from the Non Muslims. This is a huge point of departure from other schools of jurisprudence when it comes to ascertaining the veracity of the hadith literature.

B) Attaining the age of puberty (Baligh). The narration by children under the age of puberty is rejected.

C) Mental healthiness. Any narrative related by the crazy and all those who suffer from a mental disorder is regarded as null and void.

D) Reliability in terms of being religious and pious. People who are engaged in the commitment of major sins, consistently practicing minor ones, or doing trivial, silly things which render them unrespectable, are disqualified.

3) Al-Dhabtu al-Taam. That is a narrator should be reliable in that he must have enough knowledge in the Arabic language to understand the hadith properly when receiving it and must have a strong memory capability to recall it when handing it down to another narrator as correctly as related to him. The quality of al-Dhabtu al-Taam falls into two categories:

A) Dhabtu sadri. Literally, means: “hearty apprehension”, which is the memorization by heart where a narrator can store a hadith in his brain and tell it whenever he wants to do so without any difficulty or hardship in recalling it.

B) Dhabtu al-Kitab. This refers to the documentation of ahadith. That is a narrator writes it down from the time he hears it from the narrator before him, and when handing it down to another he should read it from the book which he wrote it in. (This point is very fundamental to the Ibadhi school because other approaches show laxity in this regard.)

4) Adamu al-shudhudh. Literally, the Arabic word ‘adamu, means the absence, while the word shudhudh means: abnormality, deviation, irregularity, or perversity. In its technical concept, the word al-shudhudh is taken to refer to a hadith narrated by a reliable narrator but has gone contrary to the narration by another narrator who is more reliable than he. In this, the former is referred to as hadith shaadh (a kind of inauthentic hadith), whereas the latter is referred to as hadith mahfudh being classified with the authentic ones. In a nutshell, being free from the contradiction of narration between the less reliable and the more reliable is another necessary condition for a hadith to be accepted. Otherwise, in a situation like this, only the narration of the more reliable will be regarded.

5) Adamu al-‘illa. The meaning of the word ‘Adamu, has been previously explained. As for the word illa, literally means blemish, stain, defect, flaw, fault, shortcoming, imperfection. A hadith is said to have ‘illa when seemingly it is authentic, but it contains a certain defect or a shortcoming hiding only to be realized later after deep research and consideration. The illa might be in the sanad or the matn of a hadith or both. Only the men and women of high knowledge, often the specialists, are capable of detecting the illa.

These are basic conditions that all Islamic schools, including the Ibadhi School, generally agree on. The question that arises here is that: if people hold a unanimous consensus on the validity of these principles why then they disagree on accepting and rejecting some accounts and traditions – why not apply these principles to the hadith when studying them, whichever goes parallel with the principles is accepted and whichever contradicts them or one of them is refuted? Why not take this position? Instead, you will many times find that while there are those who accept a certain tradition, for example, there are many others who reject the same tradition on the grounds that it is not authentic. It seems a more analytical survey is needed to discover the reasons behind that.

From the respected Shaykh Juma Al-Mazrui (May Allah continue to bless him and benefit us by him).

To be continued in the article no. 2 insh’Allah.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized




Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem,

Dear respected readers. Insh’Allah Prima-Qur’an will continue…

I do apologize as I have been really out of sorts as of late (and in reality I still am).

This year 2021 I lost my one and only brother. My father has lung cancer and he will not last much longer. There have been a myriad of other issues as well.

I have felt disconnected from my faith and the community as a whole.

However, Allah-willing I will continue to write and to publish. I will give you (the respected readers, the researchers, the truth seekers) I will give you my all.

When I have nothing left to give … I’ll give that too!

Wa salam.


Filed under Uncategorized

Ramadan Mubarak to all from Prima-Qur’an

Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem,

As salamu ‘alikum wr wb! Dear respected readers wishing you all a very blessed and a very happy Ramadan! May all of your fasting, prayers and good deeds be accepted!

This Ramadan is brought to you by… Golden Grahams, Cinnamon Toast Crunch and Chocolate Milk!

Please make sure that at least once during Ramadan rather it is for Suhur or for your Iftar you have either Cinnamon Toast Crunch or Golden Grahams Cereal with Chocolate Milk! Legit it’s soooo good!

For those of you who have to work late until or don’t have anyone in your life you can totally vibe with this!!!

You deserve it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWbJriEOJgo

Have a blessed Ramadan! Please don’t ask other people why they are not fasting because that is like super creepy n stuff…..so you do you yeah?

Love youuuuuzzz!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

No evidence no comment approval.

From now on if you want to comment on historical narratives do provide the source of your information so that your bias is known to all.

Secondly change your IP address and name all you want a troll is still a troll.

Be good!

Remember folks shake 3 times and wash your hands!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Atheism between Lawrence Krauss and Elon Musk:

“Or were they created by nothing, or are they ˹their own˺ creators?” (Qur’an 52:35)

It seems that the Atheism community has of late retreated to two basic positions.

  1. That the Universe comes from nothing.
  2. That we (creation) have created other creations.

Both of these positions are highly problematic from every conceivable angle.

Let us first deal with proposition number 2. We as a creation have been created by other creations.


@2:34 “The odds we are in base reality is one in billions. Tell me what’s wrong with that argument?” The questioner from the audience persist: Is the answer yes? Elon Musk answers: “Probably. Is there a flaw in that argument?”

@:3:10 “Arguably we should hope that that’s true. Because otherwise if civilization stops advancing then that maybe do to some calamitist (word?) event that erases civilization. So maybe we should be hopeful that this is a simulation cause otherwise.” (interrupted by co-host) – “because they could reboot it.” he offers.

Elon continues with is thought…. “Either we are going to create simulations that are indistinguishable from reality or civilization will cease to exist.” “Those are the two options.”

#1) The Math: How did Elon Musk come to the conclusion that it is one in billions and not one in millions or one in trillions?

#2) The Question of Evil is unresolved or in Elon’s worldview there really is no evil at all. We are in a simulation rather it’s a video game for cheap thrills, or some advanced scientific research; constructs are created that have the understanding that they some how have real feelings and real lives and their lives have real meaning.

In Elon Musk worldview there is a 1 in one billion chance that he is actually intelligent, actually has feelings, and actually loves Amber Heard. A 1 in a billon chance that he is actually a self motivated self driven person. However, the odds are against that. In Elon’s worldview he is simply written that way. Which brings us to the issue of free will and and fatalism. More on that in a moment.

Now this is not an argument against Elon’s simulation worldview; however, it does make atheist arguments against the problem of evil backfire. What does Samuel Haris say about Elon’s view that the perceived atrocities of srebrenica and the holocaust are all a simulation?

Which things brings to a very crucial point that anyone reading this needs to ponder. Does advancement in technology mean a more compassionate worldview? A more compassionate society? After all we are now talking about a civilization that create simulations were beings are raped, molested, burned alive and have countless horrors inflicted upon them. Does this civilization learn in real time? You would have to assume so. Which argues that our simulation is more akin to a video game than to some massive scientific understanding for observation and data collecting. Why? Because how many times do you need to murder to get the achieved and desired scientific data?

It’s little wonder that Elon Musk doesn’t have that spark in his eyes as someone who is truly alive. To me the man looks massively depressed and this is the outcome of his worldview.

Now on to Free Will and Fatalism.

As mentioned in Elon’s worldview there is a 1 billion chance that he is actually intelligent, has actual feelings, actually loves someone and /or is a self driven person. However, the odds are against that.

The thought that Elon didn’t complete:

“Arguably we should hope that that’s true. Because otherwise if civilization stops advancing then that maybe do to some calamitist (word?) event that erases civilization. So maybe we should be hopeful that this is a simulation cause otherwise.”

Here Elon reveals his fear. Civilization must should continue. So it is best to hope that this is a simulation because he reasons that this civilization has managed to find ways to cheat otherwise cataclysmic events.

Which begs the question how does he not know that a cataclysmic event hasn’t already happened to said civilization and we are simply a running program on some outpost that will last as long as said generator continues to run.

Yet, this worldview with all it’s speculation and and hype and ultimately the depression that it brings doesn’t answer the question: Who created those who put us in the simulation?


The interesting thing about the concept of nothing is that it is an abstract concept that we human beings understand but cannot grasp. Rather or not we are in a simulation or not we simply cannot imagine, conceptualize, visualize nothingness.

We understand the concept of nothing. Nothing simply means the absence of absolutely anything. If you were to close your mind and try and conceptualize or visualize nothing it is an impossibility. We will always posit something, rather it is a clear black space or a clear white space, something akin to an empty room. Yet, there it is the black space, the white space, the empty room, there is always something rather than nothing.

The comments about this book can be best summarized by an Amazon review which I will place here:

Paul Artale
1.0 out of 5 stars False AdvertisingReviewed in the United States on November 3, 2018

“The author, an ardent materialist, fails to deliver on his promise to the reader. His ‘reason’ simply boils down to “eternal quantum-fluctuations” did it (the common evolution-of-the-gaps idea).

Experimental observation of the initial ‘Big Bang’ event and the cascade of subsequent hypothesised events such as cosmic inflation [a miraculous “negative false vacuum energy” on a universal scale], star formation [from the self-collapsing hydrogen gas clouds], galaxy formations [no explanation given] etc., are non-existent.

For example, on p. 17: “we can extrapolate…when the universe was about one second old…all observed matter was compressed in a dense plasma whose temperature should have been 10 billion degrees”. This is a modern creation myth having nothing to do with the scientific method.

By faith he assumes many things, e.g., that the universe has no edge and is homogeneous from every location and in every direction. Further, space is somehow ‘endowed’ with energy for the ‘free lunch’ to create everything, but the begged-question of who this mysterious endower is left off.

The faith of other devoted atheists in the power of ‘nothing’ to create everything will find little nourishment in this book.

A single star for some historical and scientific educational value the reader can salvage.”

Or just look at the way some physicist try to explain the question we have all had. “What is the universe expanding into?” https://phys.org/news/2013-11-universe.html

Look where they say:

“A better analogy is the surface of an expanding balloon. Not the 3 dimensional balloon, just its 2 dimensional surface. If you were an ant crawling around the surface of a huge balloon, and the balloon was your whole universe, you would see the balloon as essentially flat under your feet.”

Imagine the balloon is inflating. In every direction you look, other ants are moving away from you. The further they are, the faster away they’re moving. Even though it feels like a flat surface, walk in any direction long enough and you’d return to your starting point.”

However, we know the balloon is inflating into the available space around it. No available space no inflation.

All of these alternative theories… that we are a simulation -but what created those who created the simulation?

A universe out of ‘almost’ nothing, but what created these “eternal quantum fluctuations” why posit an eternal quantum fluctuations and yet this is not allowed for Allah to be eternal?

Islam offers two things.

  1. A meaningful existence.
  2. A cogent argument for the existence of the Creator.

Say Allah is One
Independent of all things, though all things are dependent upon him.
He does not bring forth like kind and he did not come forth from like kind.
There is nothing like unto this Oneness. (Qur’an 112:1-4)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Politics of Hamza Yusuf and His Appointment as Adviser to the Trump Administration.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

My Belief In An Eclectic Qur’an

“We have given you the seven (l-mathani) consistency duplicated AND the glorious Qur’an.” (Qur’an 15:87)

My belief that the Qur’an that we have today is eclectic. However, that is nuanced. The term eclectic means drawling from several sources. So if someone ask me are you saying that the Qur’an is drawling from ‘several sources’?

My answer to that is an emphatic, “No!”. The Qur’an is from Allah (swt) given the Angel Gabriel and communicated to the Blessed Messenger (saw).

So that is regards the ultimate source. That being said, I do believe that the Qur’an we have in our possession is an eclectic Qur’an. I believe that Qur’an to be a composition of the various authorized modes of reading the Qur’an.

“We have given you the seven (l-mathani) consistency duplicated AND the glorious Qur’an.” (Qur’an 15:87)

It is interesting that the text here says the seven consistently duplicated or supported AND the Qur’an. Yet, traditionally this is understood as a reference to surah al fatiha. So is al fatiha part of the Qur’an or not? Is it something separate from the Qur’an?

Though this argues in favour of the Maliki and Hanafi view that basmallah is not a verse in front of al fatiha, it argues against the position of Shafi’i, Ahmed, the Ibadi, the 12er Shia and the Zaydi that the basmallah is a verse in front of al fatiha.

When we look at the other example of where mathaniya is used we see something quite interesting.

“Allah has sent down the finest report in a (mathaniya) consistently duplicated Book. The skins of those who dread their Lord tingle with it; then their skins and hearts are softened up for remembering Allah. Such is Allah´s guidance; He guides anyone He wishes by means of it, while anyone whom Allah lets go astray will have no one to guide him.” (Qur’an 39:23)

What is interesting is that this above verse tells us that mathaniya is the Qur’an. That this mathaniya is consistently duplicated. In other words, it’s message does not contradict other parts of its’ message.

“Will they not then ponder on the Qur’an? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein major incongruity. .” (Qur’an 4:82)

So it is my understanding that these mathaniya the refer to the 7 Ahruf of the Qur’an. I understand Ahruf as ways forms and modes.

Abdullah ibn Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Gabriel, upon him be peace, taught me to recite the Quran in one reading and I requested another. I continued to ask for more until he stopped at seven readings.

Ibn Shihab said, “It reached me that these seven readings are united in the matter. There is no difference in what they allow and forbid.”

Source: (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 4705, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 819)

Umar ibn al-Khattab reported: I heard Hisham ibn Hakim reciting the Surat al-Furqan in a way different from how I recited it and how it was taught to me by the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him. I was about to argue with him, but then I waited until he finished and I tied his shirt around his neck and took him to the Prophet. I said, “Indeed, I heard this man recite in a way different from what you taught me!” The Prophet said to me, “Bring him to me.” Then, Prophet said to him, “Recite.” He recited and the Prophet said, “As it has been revealed.” Then, the Prophet said to me, “Recite.” I recited and the Prophet said, “As it has been revealed. Verily, the Quran has been revealed in seven dialects. Recite whichever of them you find easy.

Source: (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 2287, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 818)

Abdullah ibn Mas’ud reported: A man was reciting a verse which I had heard differently from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him. I took his hand and brought him to the Prophet and he said, “Both of your recitations are goodDo not differ, for the nations before you were destroyed by their differences.

Source: (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 2279)

May apologies I don’t necessarily make the best charts but this is how I understand the Qur’an preservation and why I say the Qur’an we have today is an eclectic Qur’an.

The Qur’an I believe has one source. That source is Allah (swt).

The Qur’an was initially transmitted as Qur’an (A) Qur’an (B) Qur’an (C) Qur’an (D) Qur’an (D) Qur’an (E) Qur’an (F) Qur’an (G) not that each set (A-G) was absolutely different from one to the other but that where Allah (swt) deemed necessary it was revealed in a way, mode, or style more suitable for the particular people.

However, think about when we say the words ‘The’ and ‘Qur’an’. The is definitive article in English and Qur’an is a noun- a reference to a revelation that is compound unity. The Qur’an is a collective. It is a collection. This is true not only for it orally, but also in the way it was revealed. Qur’an A,B,C,D,E,F,G are all Qur’an. Some would say why not call it Qur’ans (plural) but this would not be proper.

To me this explains variants in the Qur’an manuscripts. Those that are authentically preserved and transmitted show that. The vast majority of the Muslim world uses the 1924 Qur’an produced by scholars from Al Ahzar (May Allah bless them for their efforts).

Now the problem that sceptics/atheist/agnostics will have is that we do not necessarily have complete “original” physical copies of transmitted Qur’an A,B,C,D,E,F,G.

Uthman and the Qur’an.

One of the things that is certain is that when Uthman burned the Qur’an that many of the companions need not wish to hand over to him their codices. In fact this whole exercise seems more or less like an exercise in power on behalf of Uthman than anything noble and Allah (swt) knows best.

The standard story we are told is that apparently some newly converted Muslims were arguing over ways of pronouncing the Qur’an. So we are somehow led to believe that Uthman wanted to stop people arguing about differences of the Qur’an by burning physical copies of collections of a revelation that is primarily transmitted orally!!

What on Earth was Uthman thinking? How does burning physical copies of a revelation that is primarily transmitted orally stop the variant readings from being recited or the styles of recitation of being followed? No one has ever seem to be able to answer this with a straight face.

I will have more on Uthman and some insights from an Ibadi perspective (not Sunni or Shi’a narrative) on why some companions found him to be treacherous in the latter part of his reign and that many companions that this act of essentially putting himself as an authority over the Qur’an was deeply problematic theologically speaking.

One of the things that should put hearts and minds at rest is this. These variant readings that Atheist, Agnostics and Ex Muslims go on and on about, well, what actually they say?

Do they have different teachings?

Do they blatantly contradict each other?

Are they giving us different sets of data?

My answer to all of that is that they do not. I believe that the Qur’an was faithfully transmitted. When I say THE QUR’AN I mean Qur’an (ABCDEFG) and that as long as we have any part of (ABCDEFG) as a transmission we have the Qur’an.

Certainly the idea of the Qur’an being transmitted in a linear way is hardly defensible. Yet, if we have a proper understanding that the Qur’an is not just one this or one that, the questions that sceptics bring up amount to a nothing burger. Allah (swt) knows best.


Filed under Uncategorized

Update for Prima Qur’an come 2021

I hope this entry reaches you all in the best of health and faith.

I will get straight to it. I may not have the financial resources to maintain the primaquran.com site for the year of 2021. Therefore almost all of the links and url addresses will be thrown off. What ever you wish to take, book mark, screen shot, save and so forth please do that now.

I will try and remedy this in the near future Allah-willing.


Filed under Uncategorized