c





  



by Let's Learn Al-Quran on Monday, January 17, 2011 at 6:18am

With The Name of "ALLAH" The Most Beneficial And Merciful.

Praise Be To ALLAH Who Begets Not Nor Is Begotten.

Note: This is in the reply of article named "QURAN IS CORRUPTED PROVED WITH
REFERENCES (ALL SUNNI HADITHS)" written by "Engr Peter Paul"

I would like to start my reply with a request to Christian Brothers and Sisters.

Please do not try to become hero by insulting Islam. Stop discussing us and our religion. Allah
forbade us Muslims to make fun of other people's religion else I would give a strong reply that
your generations would remember me but I fear Allah. And please for God's sake stop thinking
that if you have read Quran or few Ahadith you have become a expert in Islam. Islam is a very
very deep subject people require ages to learn it. And why you people are so much afraid of
Islam? You create fake IDs and pretend like you are ex-Muslim and try to trap Muslims but still
fail. If you visit any Islamic website or facebook page you will see mostly we Muslims discuss
our own religion and never disgrace other people's beliefs, faith etc. But on the other hand you
guys always try to disgrace Islam but Islam is still fastest growing religion in the world. We don't
need to create fake IDs on facebook and pretend like many people are leaving Christianity and
becoming Muslim. ALHAMDULILLAH you can see real examples in your life. :-) And you
people say you are true followers of Jesus (peace be upon him) and jesus taught peace and love?
Then why do you always try to disgrace Islam? You people insult other's beliefs and faith and
think you are doing a very good job, you are a very good Human being, you are following Jesus
(peace be upon him)?

If Christianity is the true religion then why so so many young Christians are becoming Atheists
after reading Bible? And many of them end up by becoming Muslim? Huh? Just go to facebook
fan page of Atheist and see yourself what those youngsters say about your CORRUPT BIBLE.

Now let's come to the answer.

You might be thinking that you have raised some very good points and no Muslim can answer
them, if you thinking so then I would say "STOP DREAMING BOY"

Regarding the Ahadith that you have quoted about suckling, nursing and the ahadith narrated by
Anas (radi Allah anho), and the Ahadith about Rajam, and the Hadith narrated by Abu Harb b.
Abu al-Aswad about two valleys of Gold, and regarding your hadith of Ayesha (radi Allah anha)
abour Surah Ahzab etc, Let me clear your misconception about these ahadith first.

Have you ever heard about 44(Abrogating and the Abrogated)?

Surely not, because if you knew about it you would never raise these childish points. So let me
tell you about "Al-Nasikh Wal-Mansoukh" because this is the answer to your above mentioned
points.

The Arabic words 'nasikh' and 'mansukh' are both derived from the same root word 'nasakha'
which carries meanings such as 'to abolish, to replace, to withdraw, to abrogate'. The revelations
from Allah as found in the Qur'an touch on a variety of subjects, among them beliefs, history,
tales of the prophets, day of judgement, Paradise and Hell, and many others. Particularly
important are the ahkam (legal rulings), because they prescribe the manner of legal relationships
between people, as Allah wishes them to be observed.

While the basic message of Islam remains always the same, the legal rulings have varied
throughout the ages, and many prophets before Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be
upon him) brought particular codes of law (shari'a) for their respective communities.

The word nasikh (an active participle) means 'the abrogating', while mansukh (passive) means
'the abrogated'. In technical language these terms refer to certain parts of the Qur'anic revelation,
which have been 'abrogated' by others.

Naturally the abrogated passage is the one called 'mansukh' while the abrogating one is called
'nasikh'.

The Qur'an on Naskh The principle of naskh (abrogation) is referred to in the Qur'an itself and is
not a later historical development:
4 !"#$%&$'%$%$
()*+,$#%-4

c./0123

4#*&%  'c4,"5&'6#,*

$*7##*4

c02/0103

How it came about When the message of Islam was presented to the Arabs as something new,
and different from their way of life, it was introduced in stages. The Qur'an brought important
changes GRADUALLY, to allow the people to adjust to the new prescriptions.

8(50: There are three verses in the Qur'an concerning the drinking of wine. Wine drinking
was very widespread in pre-Islamic times and, although a social evil, highly esteemed. The three
verses which finally led to the prohibition of intoxicating substances were revealed in stages
(4:43, 2:219; 5:93-4).

8(5.:

Narrated Mujahid (regarding the verse):

Those of you who die and leave wives behind, they (their wives) shall await (as regards their

marriage) for four months and ten days (2: 234).

The widow, according to this verse, was to spend this period of waiting with her husband's
family, so Allah revealed: Those of you who die and leave wives (i.e. widows) should bequeath
for their wives, a year's maintenance and residence without turning them out, but if they leave
(their residence) there is no blame on you for what they do with themselves, provided it is
honourable (i.e. Lawful marriage) (2: 240).

So Allah entitled the widow to be bequeathed extra maintenance for seven months and 20 nights
and that is the completion of one year. If she wished, she could stay (in her husband's home)
according to the will, and she could leave it if she wished, as Allah says: Without turning them
out, but if they leave (the residence) there is no blame on you.

So the idea (i.e. four months and ten days) is obligatory for her. 'Ata' said: Ibn 'Abbas said: This
verse i.e. the statement of Allah ... without turning one out ... cancelled the obligation of staying
for the waiting period in her late husband's house, and she can complete this period wherever she
likes.

'Ata' said: If she wished, she could complete her 'idda by staying in her late husband's residence
according to the will or leave it according to Allah's statement:

'There is no blame on you for what they do with themselves.'

'Ata' added: Later the regulations of inheritance came and abrogated the order of the dwelling of
the widow (in her dead husband's house) so she could complete the 'idda wherever she likes. And
it was no longer necessary to provide her with a residence.

Ibn Abbas said: This verse abrogated her (i.e. the widow's) dwelling in her dead husband's house
and she could complete the 'idda (i.e. four months and ten days) (wherever she liked, as Allah's
statement says: ...'without turning them out ...'

[Bukhari, VI, No. 54.]

This report explains clearly which part of the revelation is nasikh and which is mansukh.
Mujahid was one of the well known tab'iun and Ibn 'Abbas was a Companion of the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

Three Kinds of Naskh in the Qur'an

[Ibn Salama, al-nasikh wa al-mansukh, Cairo, 1966, p.5.]

The scholars have divided abrogation into three kinds:

0" *&$*#%#55&*$%#
." *&*#%*$%#$55&*

9" *&55&*$%#$*#%*.

The first few ahadith which you quoted, narrated by Ayesha (radi Allah anha) are example of
first kind of NASKH. i.e The ruling (application) of those verses and those verse themselves
were abrogated.

"A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten
clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five
sucklings and Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found)
in the Holy Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims)."

[Muslim :: Book 8 : Hadith 3421]

You took this hadith and showed as we Muslims have changed the Quran, but you don't have
Islamic knowledge at all that's why you didn't get the point here. In this hadith and othe hadith
like this, it is meant that Allah revealed verses in which ten suckling make marriage unlawful,
then it was ABROGATED to five, before the death of prophet Muhammed (peace and blessings
be upon him) it was totally abolished (munsukh). Now it's application and recitation is munsukh
(abrogated) by Allah so how would you find it in Quran? Similar ahadith which you quoted they
were also Munsukh (abrogated) by Allah that's why they are not in the Quran now. And same
case is with the verse in the hadith narrated by Anas (radi Allah anho).

Now let's talk about the hadith of NAJAM that you quoted. That hadith falls in the second (2nd)
category of Naskh. Meaning that verse's recitation was abroagted by Allah but it's ruling
(application) is not abrogated, it's still there.

And the hadith you quoted in which goat ate Quranice verse is not a authentic hadith, that is
fabricated hadith. I will discuss that later in detail.

And the hadith you mentioned about Two valleys of Gold, that was also abrogated.
Regarding your point that is BISMILLAH part of Quran or not? Yes there is difference in
opinion of scholars regarding this matter but it doesn't mean that Quran is Corrupted. Those
scholars who says Bismillah is not part revealtion they agree that it is compulsory to recite
Bismillah before every Surah except Surah Bara'ah (Al-Tawba), and those who say it is part of
revelation, they also agree with this, and you can see Bismillah is present in start of every Surah
except Al-Tawba.

And you said that "the Quran is said to be the Uthmanic Quran", NO you are wrong, during
caliphate of Uthman (may Allah be please with him) Quran was written down in a particular
script, and that Script was choosen by Uthman (radi Allah anho) that is why that Script is known
as 7 

.

Your next point was about suspiciousness of Muhammed (peace and blessings of Allah be upon
him) about his companions. The Hadith you quoted does not prove that Islamic teachings are
corrupted. You are just focusing on one side of the matter, you should learn how we Muslims
have protected our religion from innovations. If you go to Makkah and Medina you can still find
pure Islam, mostly innovations are practiced in Pakistan and india and other asian countries. And
there is also a hadith narrated by Muslim that near the end of time True (pure) Islam will only be
found in Hijaz (Makkah and Medina). So your claim that Companions of prophet Muhammed
(peace and blessing s be upon him) have corrupted Islam is FALSE. We Muslims have protected
our religion unlike you christians who celebrate pagan's Xmas and New year.

Regarding yor point about difference in wording of Quran, I would say you should learn Arabic
before making such points. There are Seven styles of reciting Quran and all of them are allowed.

It was proven that the Messenger of Allaah (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) said:
³This Qur¶aan has been revealed in seven styles, so recite whichever is easiest.´ And the scholars
said: they are close in meaning but different in wording.

When µUthmaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) heard of the differences among the people
and Hudhayfah (may Allaah be pleased with him) came to him and said ³Save the people,´ he
consulted the Companions who were still alive at this time, such as µAli, Talhah, al-Zubayr and
others, and they suggested compiling the Qur¶aan in one style, so that the people would not
differ. So he compiled it (may Allaah be pleased with him), and he formed a four-man committee
for that task, headed by Zayd ibn Thaabit (may Allaah be pleased with him). So they compiled
the Qur'aan in one style, and copied it and distributed it to the various regions so that the people
could rely on it and so as to put an end to disputes.

With regard to the seven recitations or ten recitations, they are present in what was compiled by
µUthmaan, and have to do with adding a letter or omitting a letter, or elongating or shortening a
vowel. All of that is included in the one style that µUthmaan (may Allaah be pleased with him)
compiled. The intention behind that was to preserve the word of Allaah and protect people from
differences that could harm them or cause fitnah among them. Allaah has not enjoined reciting it
in the seven styles, rather the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) said: ³Recite
whichever is easiest.´ So the people¶s agreeing upon one style is a good action for which
µUthmaan and the Companions (may Allaah be pleased with them) are to be appreciated, because
it made things easier for people and prevented a cause of dispute among the Muslims. End
quote.

[Majmoo¶ Fataawa al-Shaykh µAbd al-µAzeez ibn Baaz (9/362)]

Regarding your point that different version of Quran was present, It is a lie. You are twisting the
things. Few companions of Prophet Muhammed (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had
their personal diaries like Ibn Abbas had his own personal diary in which he used to write
Quranic Surahs (chapters) and Ahadith for his ease and few other companions also had diaries.
(read abi Dawood) But different version was NOT present. I would discuss this point in more
detail in my next article about compilation of Quran.

In answer to your remaining points let me tell about classification of Ahadith, because it contains
answer of your remaining points.

ALHAMDULILLAH We Muslims have preserved life of our beloved Holy prophet Muhammed
(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), each and everything of his life is noted in books,
how he used to eat, how he used to sleep, how he used to walk and all other major and minor
things are recorded. Each and every narration of his saying in recorded ALHAMDULILLAH.
But right after the death of prophet Muhammed (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)
some hypocrites tried to fabricate things to prophet Muhammed (peace and blessings be upon
him), so the recorders of Ahadith did research of each and every narration and classified Ahadith
into following four Categories.

0!&"
.7!:#"

9;4'!"

<*#!=$&"

Now if you quote me Hadith, I must check out that wether that Hadith is Saheeh or Da'eef as we
Muslims only follow Saheeh and Hassan ahadith and learn Da'eef and Mawdoo ahadith just for
inforamtion. There are many Da'eef and Mawdoo ahadith which you quoted and they don't carry
weight. for Example the hadith tha you qouted from Ayesha (radi Allah anha) that a goat ate
Quranice verse is Da'eef and according to some scholars it is mawdoo.

The particular chain given in Sunan Ibn Majah finds one of the narrators Muhammad bin Ishaq
narrating it using the word Ϧϋ ('an) which is rather an ambiguous way of narration and renders
the narration weak when used by a narrator known for practicing Tadlis [practice of subtly
missing a link] and Muhammad Ibn Ishaq is indeed such a narrator. Thus through particular
chain of narration in Sunan Ibn Majah the narration is weak and unauthentic due the above
mentioned defect though it has other issues as well as mentioned in the lines to follow. This is
clarified by Shaykh Muhammad Taqi Usmani in Takmala Fath Al-Mulhim 1/69 pub. Darul Ahya
Al-Turath Al-Arabi, Beirut.

In Musnad Ahmad the same narration is given through the same chain but with an explicit way
of narration i.e. it does not have the defect like the narration in Ibn Majah¶s collection. But the
narration is exposed to more criticism because many other narrators have related from 'Aisha
(RA) about the suckling/breastfeeding but no one has narrated the words found in this chain even
though the narrators in those cases are more reliable and consistent than Muhammad bin Ishaq.
And due to thefact of these words being narrated solely by him and in defiance to other much
more reliable narrators, scholars have questioned its authenticity. Shaykh Shu¶aib Arnaud has
classified it as Da¶if in his classification of Musnad Ahmad. See Musnad Ahmad 6/269 Hadith
26359.

Even if the narration were authentic it no way questions the claim of Qur¶an being totally
preserved and here are my evidences for this;

One of the two allegedly lost verses as per this narration was about stoning i.e. punishment of
married adulterers. But other narrations prove that a commandment was revealed about stoning
but the Holy Prophet (PBUH) did not allow it to be written as a part of the Qur¶an implying that
it was not meant to be Qur¶an integral part. Following narrations testify to this;

It is reported in a narration from Kathir bin Salt that: Zaid (b. Thabit) said: 'I heard the
Messenger of Allah say, 'When a married man or woman commit adultery stone them both (to
death)', (hearing this) Amr said, 'When this was revealed I came to Prophet and asked if I could
write it, he (the Prophet) disliked it.' (Mustadrik Al-Hakim, Hadith 8184. Hakim called it Sahih)

About this 'verse' Kathir bin Salt says that he, Zaid bin Thabit and Marwan bin Hakam were
discussing as to why it is not written in the Quranic manuscript and Umar bin Khattab was
present with them and listening to their discussion he said he knew it better then them and told
them that he came to Messenger of Allah and said: "'O Messenger of Allah, let the verse about
stoning be written for me.' He (the Prophet) said, 'I can't do this.'" (Sunan Al-Kubra Baihiqi
8/211 & Sunan Al-Kubra Nasai Hadith 7148. Albani (in Sahiha 6/412) said Baihiqi pointed to its
authenticity)

A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten
clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it *$%# (and substituted) by five
sucklings ... (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2634)

This narration explicitly says that verse about ten &%*$%#. For further queries
about this issue and the narration from Sahih Muslim see THIS.

Having known that neither of them was meant to be part of the Qur¶an; even if we accept the
narration in question we will have to say that perhaps 'Aisha (RA) had kept them with her as a
historical record and nothing more. Thus even if the goat actually ate them up no part of the
Qur¶an was lost.

Moreover 'Aisha (RA) lived through the whole period of Qur¶an compilation during the time of
Abu Bakr (RA) and Usman (RA) while she was unanimously considered an authority for herself
so if she had any thought about some verses missing she would have brought it to attention of
other Companions of the Prophet (PBUH). Infact we have evidence of Usman (RA) making
special endeavor of consulting 'Aisha (RA) and her records for verifying the official compilation.
See Ibn Shabba¶s Tarikh Al-Madina p.997. Despite all this she never raised the issue supporting
our conclusion that no part of the Qur¶an was lost even if the narration is considered reliable.

Regarding your last point about difference of opinion between Ali (radi Allah anho) and Uthman
(radi Allah anho), it is very normal that Companions had difference in opinion. But it does not
mean that they changed Quran and Islam. These are fabrication attributed to them.

NOW ALHAMDULILLAH I HAVE ASNWERED ALL YOUR QUESTION. NOW YOU

GONNA REPLY ME.

You Christians believe that Bible is pure, not corrupted, without any error etc. So I am gonna
highlight few errors and you tell me if Bible is word of God then why there are so many errors
and contradictions?

#7;%

Lot and his two daughters left Zoar and settled in the mountains, for he was afraid to stay in
Zoar. He and his two daughters lived in a cave. One day the older daughter said to the younger,
³Our father is old, and there is no man around here to give us children²as is the custom all over
the earth. Let¶s get our father to drink wine and then sleep with him and preserve our family line
through our father.´

That night they got their father to drink wine, and the older daughter went in and slept with him.
He was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.

The next day the older daughter said to the younger, ³Last night I slept with my father. Let¶s get
him to drink wine again tonight, and you go in and sleep with him so we can preserve our family
line through our father.´ So they got their father to drink wine that night also, and the younger
daughter went in and slept with him. Again he was not aware of it when she lay down or when
she got up.

So both of Lot¶s daughters became pregnant by their father.

[Genesis 19:30-36]



7;
):;7 :>77; :7
-7
7:; 7 -

$&&/$ #&/

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.

GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.

GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.

GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.

GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.

GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

GE 1:28 God encourages reproduction.

LE 12:1-8 God requires purification rites following childbirth which, in effect, makes childbirth
a sin. (Note: The period for purification following the birth of a daughter is twice that for a son.)
GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation.

GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.

(Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of omniscience.)

GE 2:4, 4:26, 12:8, 22:14-16, 26:25 God was already known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah)
much earlier than the time of Moses.

EX 6:2-3 God was first known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) at the time of the Egyptian
Bondage, during the life of Moses.

GE 2:17 Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit.

GE 5:5 Adam lived 930 years.

GE 2:15-17, 3:4-6 It is wrong to want to be able to tell good from evil.

HE 5:13-14 It is immature to be unable to tell good from evil.

GE 4:4-5 God prefers Abel's offering and has no regard for Cain's.

2CH 19:7, AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike.

GE 4:9 God asks Cain where his brother Able is.

PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden
from his view.

GE 4:16 Cain went away (or out) from the presence of the Lord.

JE 23:23-24 A man cannot hide from God. God fills heaven and earth.
GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood.

GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood.

NU 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood.

GE 6:6. EX 32:14, NU 14:20, 1SA 15:35, 2SA 24:16 God does change his mind.

NU 23:19-20, 1SA 15:29, JA 1:17 God does not change his mind.

GE 6:19-22, 7:8-9, 7:14-16 Two of each kind are to be taken, and are taken, aboard Noah's Ark.

GE 7:2-5 Seven pairs of some kinds are to be taken (and are taken) aboard the Ark.

Ô5?&'&$/Ô 5?

The creation account in Genesis divided time into days and the days into evening and morning
for three days before the sun was even created (1:1-19). "There was evening and there was
morning," we are told, "one day... a second day... a third day," but as any astronomer knows,
evening (night) and morning (daylight) result from the earth's rotation with respect to the sun.
With no sun, there would have certainly been evening or night, but there could have been no
morning.

On the fourth day when God created the "two great lights" (the sun and the moon), he created the
stars too. This creation of the rest of the universe was treated by the Genesis writer(s) as if it
were little more than an afterthought: "he made the stars also" (v:16). To the prescientific mind
that wrote this, it probably made sense. To him (her), the earth was undoubtedly the center of the
universe, but today we know better. The solar system of which earth is only a tiny part is itself an
infinitesimal speck in the universe. Surely, then, the creation of the stars would not have
occurred so quickly and suddenly if six days were needed to create the world. Scientists now
know that the creation of stars is an evolutionary process that is still ongoing. Matter coalesces;
stars ignite, shine, and eventually burn out or explode. From the existence of heavy elements in
our solar system, astronomers generally agree that it formed from debris left over from a
supernova that occurred billions of years ago. The prescientific Genesis writer knew none of this,
however, and that is why he viewed the creation of the universe as an Elohistic afterthought. No
modern, scientifically-educated writer would have made that mistake.

The creation of the stars is the subject not only of scientific error in the Bible but also of textual
contradiction. Clearly, the Genesis writer(s) said that God made the stars on the fourth day
(1:16). By then, the earth had been created, light (somehow without the sun or stars) had been
created, the gathering together of dry land had occurred, and vegetation had been created. One
could surely say that by then the foundations of the world had been laid, yet Yahweh Elohim
presumably told Job that the stars already existed when the foundations of the earth were laid:

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Declare if thou hast understanding.
Who determined the measures thereof, if thou knowest? Or who stretched the line upon it?
Whereupon were the foundations thereof fastened? Or who laid the cornerstone there-of, when
the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (38:4-7).

Granted the "singing of the morning stars" is clearly a poetical expression, but that does not
explain away the problem. How could it be said in any sense, poetical or otherwise, that "the
morning stars sang together" at a time when stars didn't even exist? Obviously, then, the Genesis
writer(s) and the author of Job had different perceptions of when stars were created.

The Genesis writer(s) didn't understand the nature of darkness either. He said that God created
light (somehow before the sun and stars were made) and then "divided the light from the
darkness" (1:3-4). Light, however, is not something that can be separated from darkness. Light is
an electromagnetic radiation from an energy source like the sun or stars, and darkness is merely
the absence of light. Without light, there will automatically be darkness. No god is needed to
separate or divide light from darkness. We know that today; the prescientific Genesis writer(s)
didn't.

The Genesis writer's genetic knowledge was no better than his understanding of astronomy.
Inchapter 30, he told of Jacob's scheme to increase his wealth while he was still in the employ of
his father-in-law Laban. The two had reached an agreement whereby Jacob would be given all
striped, spotted, and speckled lambs and kids subsequently born in Laban's flocks. Laban then
removed all the striped, spotted, and speckled animals from his flocks and put them in his sons'
care at a three-day distance from the flock Jacob attended. Not to be outsmarted, Jacob devised a
plan:

Then Jacob took fresh rods of poplar and almond and plane, and peeled white streaks in them,
exposing the white of the rods. He set the rods that he had peeled in front of the flocks in the
troughs, that is, the watering places, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when
they came to drink, the flocks bred in front of the rods, and so the flocks produced young that
were striped, speckled, and spotted (30:37-39, NRSV).

We know today that the color characteristics of animals is purely a matter of genetics, so a
modern, scientifically-educated person would never write anything as obviously superstitious as
this tale of Jacob's prosperity. The Genesis writer(s), however, knew nothing about the science of
genetics, so to him the story undoubtedly made good sense.

At last I would like to quote news of BBC that was published at Monday, 6 October 2008.

"5$$+#*$$%#%#%&#5'

'(&#&+021+%(#+#'''((#
@4'-4

Watch this video even Christians researchers say that bible is CORRUPT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cK3Ry_icJo

I would like to end with a Quranic Verse,

+@ AB

4*****##+/4'(

4''&*'($5&C('*##*
#'%+($+4

+@.9.<D

#'+#$*#'(((
5#&D#&+*5!'+"
$#'+!#$"!.9"'+&#'++&
'=*'#*&55#'*E&=

|
¢
||
|
|
||
| |
 |
|
| ||
|
|
|
|

|
|
|| | 
|||
|
||
|
|
|| |
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
 
||

|!"#!$%|
|
& 
| |
 ||| ||| |'|'|
'|(| |
 || )|
|

| |
|
*|
|
| || ||'

|
|
+|
|
(| |
 ||)  |)||( |
|

||
|
*|
|
|
|'

||
|
||
|'

||, ''+|
|
|
| ||| | ||
|
 
||

|!-%|
|
 |
.|||
|/
)|||
| '
| |
| '
||, ''|
|
(| 
| |
 ||
|
|
|
| ||
|)
||.||'
| |)|'|
( | |
| '
||, ''|
|
0)

||

|, ''| '
|1
|  | |
||
|2|1
 '
 ||
) |)|
|/
)| | |
|2|1
 '
 ||
|)|) | |

|
| |
|

||
|2|1
 '
 |)  |
|


|
|
3|

|| |

| | | |

| |
|' ||
| ||
|/
)| |
|
'
||, ''| |

|/
)| | 
|
| ||
|' ||
| ||
|/
)|
|
|  |
|
 | | |

| |
|1'|

|
|/
)| |
| '
||, ''| |4 |)|

|2|1
 '
 | |
| |
|1'|)  |
||)
|) |
| ||'
| |)|
'|( |
|
 
|56|

|556#557%|
|
¢
||
|
|
||
| |
 |
| | |
|
|
|
 
|6|

|5$$%|
|
8.
| |
||  |)
||.||'
|'
| || |1 ||) | | |
|
 
| |)
|
| 
||

|( |
|
(| ||

| |
|/
)| |
| '
||, ''|3||||
|
|/
)|
|
|
 
|
|  ||

|
| '
||, ''| |
|0

)| 
||
|
|)

|| || | |||
|/
)|
| |
|  |) |
|
1
|
||
|/
)|)

| ) |
|)||, ''|
|
3|||||
 |
|
|/
)|)

| |
|
|
|
 
|7|

|77#7!%|
|
0

|| .| |/
)|
|, ''|)||)| ) | |) |
| 
||


 |)  |
|)||
|
||||
 |||
|| |
|
 |
| |  |
|/
)|)

| ) |
|)|
|, ''|
||
|| |
|
&)||)|| ||

|

|
| | ) |
|.|
| )
|
|)||
, ''|) |
| 
| |

| '

|) |
|.|
|
1  |
|
 | ||
|
|
|)  |
|/
)||) |
|
|& |  |
|

|
|
| |
| 
| |) |
| 
|
|
 
|7|

|7!%|
|
¢ |)|
|
||)
|'|
| 
|  || 
|/
)||
|/
)| 
|
| +|
|
¢ |)|
|
|'|| |.+|
|
1
|
|'||


|
| 
| |
|
'||
|/
)||
|  | ) | |
) |
| 
| |
|
|
|
 
|6|

|!9%|
|
| |
|)  ||
|

.| |
' 
|3| ||.||
|
 
|"|

|76#79%|
|
1  | |
|
| |
| 
|

|| | 
|'
|| | 
|
|
| |
.|'
|| | 
|

||| | 
| |
| |
.| |
|
0 |3|(|*)|
|


||'|||
|
|
|
||
|
|| | ||
| | |
|
|
'|| | 
||0 ||
  | | | 
|
|
||| |1||: ||3|(|*)|
|
|: |
||  || 
|"|

|75%|| ||
|
|| 
|"|

|76#79%|
|
(| |
|;  |
;||||/
)|.
|, ''| |
||4
||/
)|||
/
)
|) |)

| ||
| ||
|
|
, ''|)
 | |#:||)| ||| ||)
|
|.
| '| |

|
||
|'
|28|12(0||)
|
| |
|1 |
|
'
|
| ||
|
|
|
1 ||
| ||, ''|||


||||  ||||
|) '|


||
|
¢ |)|, ''|||  |||1 || |
+|
|
&|)

||
|
|
| | )|
|
|
|
|(|
.|
|
 || |
|'
|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| 
| |.)|)  |
|
 |||
||
'| |
.| ||
|
2
)
| )||<|| | |
'| 
||
.||
 |  |
|
| |
+|
|
 
|"|

|7-%|
|
|(| ||,|)

|
|  ||
|
|
||
|

|||(| |
|'|
|=)|
)

| | |
|
0)||)
|.)+|1
|
|
||3||
|
|| 
|/
|'
| |
|
3
|)
| 
|' |  |

|
| '
||  |  |
|
 | |)  |)
| 
| |
|
3|
|
|| 
| |' |
| 
|

|
|
||/
|'
|)  |
| |
| |
|
|' | )|
| |
| |
|'
|| 
|
| |
|
/
|

|
|||
|
| 
|
|
|)|.
| |
|||
| 
 |
  || 
|) ||<||
| |'
||
|
¢

|
| 
 |
  |)
| 
|) ||<|| | |
|('
|