The Creed of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah

[Sarbaz Khan]

ډير ښکلي او واضحه جوابونه دي. خداي دي کامياب لره سنګره.

[Roshina]

Although at the moment, I can't afford to write a detailed response to your post, I couldn't help but noting one thing in your reply (and I have not read your entire post just yet, so forgive me if you've already answered what I'm about to ask, but):

However I advice you not to resort to reactionary and childish name-calling.

Oh, I'm sorry about that. Where did I use any name-calling?

The fact that you have insufficient knowledge on the subject should not allow you to use derogatory tone to others.

I do not doubt that I don't know EVERYTHING about Islam just yet (no, wait, not just yet; NO one knows *everything* about Islam), but my knowledge of Islam may be anything but insufficient, wrora. I asked you in another thread, to which you may or may not have replied since I haven't checked it yet, what sources you are using to study Islam and if you're studying it from just one or two angles or may different (even opposing ones). I do look forward to your answer to those kinds of questions. Perhaps we could share with each other the names of books/articles/scholars/authors/etc. whom we use to study Islam. That would be very appreciated, in fact, I'd think. As many members of PashtunForums know, I'm actually an Islamic Studies student, so, as anyone would expect, my entire life surrounds Islamic books/theses/dissertations/articles/journals/everything on Islam, the people I hang out with almost 24'7 are Islamic Studies professors or grad/undergrad students, I've only one class this semester that is unrelated to Islam (it's called Personal Self Defense - Women Only), and twice weekly, my papers deal with SOME topic in Islamic thought. I guess that would explain my almost excessive involvement in the Religion thread as opposed to any other, lol.

So, be careful when you call my knowledge "insufficient," k, wrorai? Just because you misunderstand my points doesn't mean what I'm saying is a result of "insufficient" knowledge.

Also, just in case I appear to be "boasting" that I'm studying Islam, or I make myself appear an arrogant girl who thinks she knows better or more about Islam than anyone else here, lemme clarify: I said all that only to tell you that it's my major. Just as some of us are more involved in biology or engineering or mathematics or philosophy or English or something else equally important to Islamic Studies, I made the choice of taking the Islamic Studies path because the one taught at my university is, in my opinion, the best and couldn't be better. We are taught Islam from many, many possible directions, not just one; we are not told what's right and what's wrong, but we're presented many, many different viewpoints (within Islam) and are permitted to choose whatever we want for ourselves. And, of course, I find nothing more fulfilling for myself than learning Islam and everything associated with it. I plan to become a professor at an institution that has an excellent Arabic and Islamic Studies department as well (and since women are lacking in the field, I am 128.75% sure I will succeed in it, ka khair wee, whether as a lecturer or author of several books on Islam, hermeneutics/interpretations, and women's and non-Muslims' rights in Islam. That's just to say ... be on the lookout for this :D ... jokes, of course ... but not really, lol).

You may view the thread Promoting Study of Islam at Stanford and read a couple of my posts to learn more about the curriculum at my university and perhaps see why it fascinates and attracts me to this extent. (No, I'm not at Stanford.) Of particular interest to you might be my post # 16 and post # 30.

So it's not to make myself appear any better than anyone else. No, never would I ever claim to be better than or know more about ANYTHING than someone else, no matter how much knowledge I may have about that particular topic or field.

BUUUUT, bro, that's what you get for saying that Qrratugai's knowledge of Islam is "insufficient" No one calls my knowledge insufficient; I just don't tolerate it. So in the future, try to be careful. I, Qrratugai, do NOT talk on ANY matter unless I am perfectly confident that I know what I'm talking about and have sources to back up anything I say. And you, too, need to provide sources for your arguments as well, even if it's something like "Islam is a simple religion" -- 'cause I tell ya, maaayn, there are toooonnns of things in Islam that prove that claim false.

Oh, and I'm also sorry that you think I use a "derogatory" tone, although next time you conclude my post as such, you should give specific examples of WHAT brought you to that conclusion, wrora That way, I know how to be careful when saying what. For instance, you could say something like "your using this term/phrase implies that you see such people as ..." or "This style of thinking is so derogatory" or something like that. Know what I mean?

And I'm ESPECIALLY excited to talk about Ibn al-Wahab, because he is one of the most recent topics/people we studied in a class called Contemporary/Modern Islam (can you BELIEVE he's considered a reformer and modern "Scholar"? :O I know, I am still not over the shock yet!). So, you can't imagine, I'm DYING to talk about him, his "creed," his philosophies -- everything about him, really. Maududi, toooo! I've to give a lecture on him on Friday, in fact, so we could talk about him some time after that, as I'll be more prepared.

One more thing ... just glimpsing through your post, I read that Ibn Sina said such and such. As I've mentioned previously, please remember to provide sources for ANY claim you make about ANYONE. For example, where did you read that Ibn Sina said that? He may or may not have said it, but you need to give us the source so we can check it out ourselves. I don't believe anything people say unless it either just makes sense (to me) or is logical/reasonable, OR it's buttressed by authentic sources. You could ask what "authentic sources" means, and I woudln't know - other than by judging the author of the source, I guess.

As for what is Islam and how my definition seems to be too broad according to your understanding of the religion, I'll just say: Believe it or not, but Islam ITSELF is one of the most convoluted concepts studied in religious thought That is, the question is asked -- and never answered convincingly -- about what IS Islam? Who ARE Muslims? So for me and you to just sit here and decide is, in my opinion, rather interesting, 'cause while we're talking about here, using our extreeeeeeeemely limited knowledge of Islam and people's views of Islam (people meaning those who have studied Islam thoroughly from head to toe) are having a similar discussion! How cool is THAT?! So, again, what IS Islam?

Nor, expect a reply from me in a couple of days because at the moment, I have final exams and papers to submit. I'm sure you understand.

Manana for your diligent replies! I look forward to many more discussions with you (on Islam), ka khairee.

[Abu Hurayrah]

BUUUUT, bro, that's what you get for saying that Qrratugai's knowledge of Islam is "insufficient" No one calls my knowledge insufficient; I just don't tolerate it. So in the future, try to be careful. I, Qrratugai, do NOT talk on ANY matter unless I am perfectly confident that I know what I'm talking about and have sources to back up anything I say.

There is a narration from the later generations, it is said that once a man came to Saalim ibn Abdullah ibn Umar, (Saalim was an Aa'lim, Taa'bi'i and follower of the Sahaba) and he said to him: '' Saalim, you are a bad man !!''
And Saalim replied by saying ''You are the only one who truly knows me''

[شمله ور خراساني]

Although at the moment, I can't afford to write a detailed response to your post, I couldn't help but noting one thing in your reply (and I have not read your entire post just yet, so forgive me if you've already answered what I'm about to ask, but):


Oh, I'm sorry about that. Where did I use any name-calling?



I do not doubt that I don't know EVERYTHING about Islam just yet (no, wait, not just yet; NO one knows *everything* about Islam), but my knowledge of Islam may be anything but insufficient, wrora. I asked you in another thread, to which you may or may not have replied since I haven't checked it yet, what sources you are using to study Islam and if you're studying it from just one or two angles or may different (even opposing ones). I do look forward to your answer to those kinds of questions. Perhaps we could share with each other the names of books/articles/scholars/authors/etc. whom we use to study Islam. That would be very appreciated, in fact, I'd think. As many members of PashtunForums know, I'm actually an Islamic Studies student, so, as anyone would expect, my entire life surrounds Islamic books/theses/dissertations/articles/journals/everything on Islam, the people I hang out with almost 24'7 are Islamic Studies professors or grad/undergrad students, I've only one class this semester that is unrelated to Islam (it's called Personal Self Defense - Women Only), and twice weekly, my papers deal with SOME topic in Islamic thought. I guess that would explain my almost excessive involvement in the Religion thread as opposed to any other, lol.

So, be careful when you call my knowledge "insufficient," k, wrorai? Just because you misunderstand my points doesn't mean what I'm saying is a result of "insufficient" knowledge.

Also, just in case I appear to be "boasting" that I'm studying Islam, or I make myself appear an arrogant girl who thinks she knows better or more about Islam than anyone else here, lemme clarify: I said all that only to tell you that it's my major. Just as some of us are more involved in biology or engineering or mathematics or philosophy or English or something else equally important to Islamic Studies, I made the choice of taking the Islamic Studies path because the one taught at my university is, in my opinion, the best and couldn't be better. We are taught Islam from many, many possible directions, not just one; we are not told what's right and what's wrong, but we're presented many, many different viewpoints (within Islam) and are permitted to choose whatever we want for ourselves. And, of course, I find nothing more fulfilling for myself than learning Islam and everything associated with it. I plan to become a professor at an institution that has an excellent Arabic and Islamic Studies department as well (and since women are lacking in the field, I am 128.75% sure I will succeed in it, ka khair wee, whether as a lecturer or author of several books on Islam, hermeneutics/interpretations, and women's and non-Muslims' rights in Islam. That's just to say ... be on the lookout for this :D ... jokes, of course ... but not really, lol).

You may view the thread Promoting Study of Islam at Stanford and read a couple of my posts to learn more about the curriculum at my university and perhaps see why it fascinates and attracts me to this extent. (No, I'm not at Stanford.) Of particular interest to you might be my post # 16 and post # 30.

So it's not to make myself appear any better than anyone else. No, never would I ever claim to be better than or know more about ANYTHING than someone else, no matter how much knowledge I may have about that particular topic or field.

BUUUUT, bro, that's what you get for saying that Qrratugai's knowledge of Islam is "insufficient" No one calls my knowledge insufficient; I just don't tolerate it. So in the future, try to be careful. I, Qrratugai, do NOT talk on ANY matter unless I am perfectly confident that I know what I'm talking about and have sources to back up anything I say. And you, too, need to provide sources for your arguments as well, even if it's something like "Islam is a simple religion" -- 'cause I tell ya, maaayn, there are toooonnns of things in Islam that prove that claim false.

Oh, and I'm also sorry that you think I use a "derogatory" tone, although next time you conclude my post as such, you should give specific examples of WHAT brought you to that conclusion, wrora That way, I know how to be careful when saying what. For instance, you could say something like "your using this term/phrase implies that you see such people as ..." or "This style of thinking is so derogatory" or something like that. Know what I mean?

And I'm ESPECIALLY excited to talk about Ibn al-Wahab, because he is one of the most recent topics/people we studied in a class called Contemporary/Modern Islam (can you BELIEVE he's considered a reformer and modern "Scholar"? :O I know, I am still not over the shock yet!). So, you can't imagine, I'm DYING to talk about him, his "creed," his philosophies -- everything about him, really. Maududi, toooo! I've to give a lecture on him on Friday, in fact, so we could talk about him some time after that, as I'll be more prepared.

One more thing ... just glimpsing through your post, I read that Ibn Sina said such and such. As I've mentioned previously, please remember to provide sources for ANY claim you make about ANYONE. For example, where did you read that Ibn Sina said that? He may or may not have said it, but you need to give us the source so we can check it out ourselves. I don't believe anything people say unless it either just makes sense (to me) or is logical/reasonable, OR it's buttressed by authentic sources. You could ask what "authentic sources" means, and I woudln't know - other than by judging the author of the source, I guess.

As for what is Islam and how my definition seems to be too broad according to your understanding of the religion, I'll just say: Believe it or not, but Islam ITSELF is one of the most convoluted concepts studied in religious thought That is, the question is asked -- and never answered convincingly -- about what IS Islam? Who ARE Muslims? So for me and you to just sit here and decide is, in my opinion, rather interesting, 'cause while we're talking about here, using our extreeeeeeeemely limited knowledge of Islam and people's views of Islam (people meaning those who have studied Islam thoroughly from head to toe) are having a similar discussion! How cool is THAT?! So, again, what IS Islam?

Nor, expect a reply from me in a couple of days because at the moment, I have final exams and papers to submit. I'm sure you understand.

Manana for your diligent replies! I look forward to many more discussions with you (on Islam), ka khairee.

I am going to find you the book in which the statement of Ibn Sina are stated where he declares the prophet Muhammad sal allahu alayhi wasallam a liar.

If you want to study Islam DON'T go to Western Universities who provide courses under the name "Islamic Studies". What they call "Islamic Studies" is useless trash.

I considered doing another Bachelor course in Islamic Studies at Leiden University. But once I got to know what their curriculum is, I withdrew my application immediately.

The books want you to study and papers and essays to read are written by non-Mulims or Muslim heretics.

There are a great many Muslims who have become Kaafirs after studying "Islamic studies" in western universities.

This because they omit facts and only focus on suspicious and questionable sources and statements by heretics who contradict clear and evident aspects of the religion.

If you want to learn about Islam because you are Muslim and you want to know your religion, don't take your religion from Kufaar and heretics.

Sahih that Ibn Sirin (d. 110) said, "This knowledge (i.e. Hadith) is the Religion, so be careful from. whom you take your religion."

Helping to destroy Islam

It is reported that Al-Fudayl b. ‘Ayyâd – Allâh have mercy on him – said, “Whoever helps an adherent of bid’ah (heretic) has helped in the destruction of Islam.”
Abû Nu’aym, Hilyatu Al-Awliyâ` Vol. 1 p398.
It is reported that Abû Ishâq Al-Hamdânî and Ibrâhîm b. Maysarah said, “Whoever respects an adherent of bid’ah has helped in the destruction of Islam.”
Reported from Al-Hamdânî by Al-Âjurrî, Al-Sharî’ah Vol. 5 p260; and from Ibn Maysarah by Al-Lâlakâ`î, Sharh Usûl I’tiqâd Ahl Al-Sunnah Vol. 1 p265.




If you care for your religion

It is reported that Ibn Mas’ûd – Allâh be pleased with him – said, “Whoever wants to honor his religion and do good to it should avoid mixing with the ruler or sitting with the followers of desires (heretics, people of bid’ah), for sitting with them is more contagious than scabies.”
Ibn Waddâh, Al-Bida’ p136.


Attend the Refutations of Bid’ah

It is reported from ‘Abdullah b. Mas’ûd – Allah be pleased with him – that he said:
For every bid’ah with which Islâm is plotted against, Allah has a beloved worshipper (walî) who refutes and repels it and speaks about its signs, so take the full opportunity of attending such places, and trust in Allah.
Ibn Waddâh, Al-Bid’ah p5.

[Badlun]

I have seen many friends calling themselves ahle sunna wal jumma but they are not ahle hadith but brelvis. I like one think in them that they are very pacific people, never involved in terrorism like wahabis or salafis or ahle hadith or deobandis, and are fond of mysticism, sufism and other peaceful aspects of the religion of Islam. Following is one link where they describe themselves.

http://www.jamatahlesunnat.ca/intro.htm

Will any friend explain who are the real ahle sunna wal jamma? Or all Sunnis including ahle hadith, deobandi , brelvis etc excluding shias not Ahle sunna wal Jamma ?

[شمله ور خراساني]

Oh, I'm sorry about that. Where did I use any name-calling?

]

You did the name calling by using the word "wahhabi".


The writings of Ibn Sina are very difficult for me to find. However, I have the refutation is Ibn Sina and his likes by none other than Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah!
Read them. I think you will find them very interesting.

part one : http://www.megaupload.com/?d=CGWN5RE3


part two : http://www.megaupload.com/?d=312NUAP7

[شمله ور خراساني]

I have seen many friends calling themselves ahle sunna wal jumma but they are not ahle hadith but brelvis. I like one think in them that they are very pacific people, never involved in terrorism like wahabis or salafis or ahle hadith or deobandis, and are fond of mysticism, sufism and other peaceful aspects of the religion of Islam. Following is one link where they describe themselves.

http://www.jamatahlesunnat.ca/intro.htm

Will any friend explain who are the real ahle sunna wal jamma? Or all Sunnis including ahle hadith, deobandi , brelvis etc excluding shias not Ahle sunna wal Jamma ?

Barelvis worship the prophet sal allahu alayhi wasallam. I use to pray at their mosque in Birmingham. They have weird practices. They leave on spot clear in the row during the prayer and they claim that the prophet sal allahu alayhi wasallam joins them in prayer.

They also believe that the prophet sal allahu aleyhi wasallam was made out of light. Hence their obsession with noor etc.

And no. As you have read in the description above, they cannot be ahlul sunnah wa al jam'ah. Because they have grave defects in their creed and their practices have more similarity with Hinduism like their obsession with symbolism and visiting of shrines and worshipping graves.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Aren't technically all Muslims ahle sunnah?

No. Sadly it is not the case. Majority of Muslims somehow adhere to deviant sects and have beliefs and doctrines alien to original Islam as it was revealed.

[Roshina]

@ Sangar wror: Sorry I can't discuss this thoroughly still yet, since I'm still working on some papers and exam-studying, BUT I was reading your posts in response to mine and saw that you misunderstood many things I said. So, here, I'd like to clarify my thoughts to ya.

You agree that there is only one Islam.

No, I do not agree with this. I have never stated this anywhere, and I've always in every thread on Islam stressed this point: Islam has MILLIONS of different interpretations, and we are no one to decide which is "right" and which is "wrong."

And that the best way to know Islam is to know the prophet sal allahu alayhi wasallam and his teachings.

Um... no. The best way to know Islam is to know, thoroughly study, and fully understand the Quran. The "way of the Prophet" (i.e., hadiths) is actually not that simple, since the process of determining the authenticity of hadiths is always questionable, and even those hadiths that are accepted as "authentic" are still open to debate, since not all of them are congruent with Quranic teachings.

And you also agree that the first generation of Muslims had first hand knowledge of the teachings of Islam. And therefore their interpretation of Islam should be the most accurate.

No, I do not agree with this.
If that was the case, then Caliph Omar would not have attempted to limit the amount of dowry a husband could bestow on his wife at the time of her wedding; he also would not have introduced triple talaq as an Islamic form of marriage. Caliph Abu Bakr would not have killed all those who left Islam (I'll show this later), and he would not have denied Fatima her right to inheritance after the Prophet's death.

Although that might seem as trivial to some of us, it's a great way for me to decide that the khalifas were not the ideal Muslims, or should be our examples. The Prophet was, but not his companions.

Further, I am a strong advocate of ijtihad. So I don't believe that the interpretations of the past are the "close to correct" ones. They were certainly great and appropriate for their times, but much of them don't apply to today's time, especially if they're merely the teachings of the companions or the scholars and have no Quranic basis.

I believe that we need to re-read/re-interpret the Quran in each time and find justice within it as fit for the time and society we're living in, considering Islam itself never defines justice; it only talks of its importance. Hence, the principle of justice is something that's open to discussion/debate and needs to change with time, since not all societies and times view justice in the same way, and since Islam doesn't define it, it shouldn't be "bad" for us to define it in our own times/terms that are compatible with or society and time.

My point: Islamic principles are eternal, but the definitions aren't, particularly since the definitions are not in Islam itself but are found only in the teachings of our classical scholars -- not even Muhammad's teachings.

One more thing - people who don't believe in hadiths have perfect justification, one of the main ones being the question of authenticity of hadiths and the fact the Quran itself constantly tells us that it's *completely* and that when Allah says "Obey me and the Prophet," WHY should "Obey me" = the Quran, and "Obey the Prophet" = Sunnah? Did the Prophet not teach only what God told him to teach? Are his practices any different from what the Quran has taught? The Quran isn't specific on ANY matter, and it's only because it's supposed to be eternal and universal.

Lemme paste here something I wrote on this on another forum (free-minds.org) where this one dude was saying that Muslims who believe only in the Quran are this and that. And although I myself accept some hadiths, I 106% understand WHY the Quran-only Muslims don't believe in ANY haidths at all. The ahle-hadith have no good enough argument to claim that hadiths are important; even their claim that the Quran doesn't discuss HOW we're to pray and when can be refuted (I'll show how this is so later on, ka khairee. It's a very important point, since most Muslims use ONLY this argument in support of their beliefs in hadiths.... and they don't realize that it was actually al-Shafi (died 820 C.E.), founder of one of the 4 main schools of thought in Sunni Islam, who came up with the idea that hadiths are JUST as important as is the Quran. As one member here pointed out, Abu Hanifa (d. 765 C.E.), founder of the Hanafi School in Sunni Islam, accepted only a few hadiths - and rightly so! Considering what a reasonable man he was, it all makes sense why he'd reject most of them... but then again, during his time, the science of hadiths had only just begun, and Bukhari wasn't even born yet. (Bukhari lived from 810-870.)

Anyway, if you're interested, here's my response to the dude; you don't have to read the whole thing, but it's still to show that the ahl-e-hadith folks have no convincing arguments IF one is to seriously and critically think about them. Unfortunately, though, most Muslims have fallen for their arguments, which proves that they don't think before accepting everything as correct and "necessary."

What typical polemics against those who prefer Quran to hadiths. Not cogent enough for me to give it a thought, bro.

Before I go further, I want to make it clear that I DO believe in some hadiths but not all. My criteria are that they must NOT be anti-women or sexist (you'll see how I define sexist/anti-women as I write more posts in this forum), racist, making grand generalizations, and so forth. Examples of hadiths I can't accept as authentic even if I'm given lectures about how I MUST accept it as authentic because "scholars" said so:

- the hadith on how, had God willed, He would've made women prostrate to their husbands
- hadiths that talk about how great the Syrians (or another such group of people) are, or how one race is better than another (I read this recently in Muslim's al-Sahih; will provide the exact book and hadith number later)
- the hadiths on how the Prophet killed the people of Khaybar without warning them because, somehow, "the message of warning them before attacking them applied only in the early times of Islam" (again, will give hadith number later; can't at the moment)
- the hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah (oh that guy!) claiming that any woman who refuses sex to her husband is cursed by some 70 thousand angels all night long, or at least until her husband is pleased with her
- the hadith that women are lacking BY NATURE in intellect and religion

You get the idea, yeah?

That was to say that there are certain hadiths I don't accept, and no one can do anything to change my mind about that, alhamdulillah! There are others, however, that I find unnecessary but can accept them anyway. For instance, the hadith on how heaven lies beneath the mother's feet. (There's a biiiiiiig difference between a "mother" and a "woman" What status does a woman hold in hadiths? Of course your children have to treat you kindly and all, but what about your husband? How's he supposed to deal with you?)
And I must resist delineating the millions of contradictions in hadiths. Man oh man.

Anyway. Considering your post, I wanna say ... I wish we'd read things a bit more critically, ignoring the status of the author. You see, bro, just by a mere skim, I find a million holes in the arguments presented in the post you have shared.

Firstly, what makes you think that the sources you're giving us should be trusted? WHY should I trust them? What about them is so "Islamic" necessarily that I should accept what they're saying?
Your sources are pretty much:
Quote from: Thereformer1 on April 23, 2010, 08:16:20 PM

http://www.quransearch.com/rk_news_paper_article.htm

http://www.themodernreligion.com/anti_muslim_main.htm

Pseudo-Islamic Cults
http://www.themodernreligion.com/anti_mu…

http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091119162558AAid4ie

C'mon now We can do better than this, man.

Secondly,
Quote from: Thereformer1 on April 23, 2010, 08:16:20 PM
"The Submitters are followers of the late Rashad Khalifa, a man who claimed to be a Messenger of Allah."

Wah! Such generalizations! Have you studied Rashid Khalifa yourself, by the way? And how many scholars do you know, contemporary as well as classical, who have rejected all or most hadiths?
I can't believe we're falling for the claim that all Quran-only Muslims are followers of a man who was born in 1935! You seriously mean to tell me that before the 20th century, this "Quranist cult" referred to in the comment you've pasted didn't exist? C'mon, now.
And, by the way ... he didn't take out verseSSSS from the Quran. He believed that one verse in Surah Taubah, the 10th chapter, should be "removed," if you will, because it called Prophet Muhammad "al-raheem" (or "al-rahmaan," is it?). His argument was that this is the ONLY verse that refers to the Prophet by a name of God, since no one besides Allah can be called al-raheem, al-rahman, etc.
[I think there was one other verse, but his reason for it was a good one, although I don't remember which verse it was and what his rustication was. I'll have to look into that.]

Thirdly,
Quote from: Thereformer1 on April 23, 2010, 08:16:20 PM
"the Qur'an itself orders us to follow the Sunnah of Rasulullah Muhammad SAW. And we know his sunnah through the hadith. The "Qur'anists" reject the hadith and in turn the "Qur'anists" are rejected by Muslims."

Is this a reference to the Quranic verses in which God tells us to follow "God and the Prophet"? If so, WHY has this command come to mean that God represents the Quran while Prophet Muhammad represents the hadiths? Are they supposed to be different? Doesn't this "justification" for hadiths negate the Quranic verses that the Prophet does only what GOD tells him to do? Weren't all of his actions supposed to be in compliance with the teachings of the Quran?

The Quran doesn't give details for anything - and rightly so. How else would we be able to claim it's a universal and eternal Text? If it was so specific, then we'd all pretty much be living in 7th century Arabia, no?

The rest of your post, I'll respond to later, ka khairee, wrora.

Thanks for your patience! I'm sure you understand, if you're a student as well.

[Roshina]

--- Double post by accident. ---