Almost 100 organizations around the globe will protest

[Fanisha]

Waryaa ,Ducaqabe Inabti soo digii dooda badhtamaha ugu jirey xageed u oronaysaa maxaa laga doodayey. lol

 

 

Xiinfiniin,OO heedhe hadii adiga marka lagula doodayo aad dad ka aflagaadaynayso, waa dhibaato (for SOL) wallaalo.

Waar seefla boodnimada is ka daa oo dood fiican la kaalay.

[Castro]

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

Actually I haven’t called in my heavy artillery yet. So be afraid. Respect is mutual, so keep that in mind.

Xanaa manaa, xaar baa nin dilay. Ha kaa saarto.

[Dhimbil]

I don't understand, if you want Islamic Law on a public court, go to Islamic country, simple!

[xiinfaniin]

Originally posted by Saluugla:

Waryaa ,

Ducaqabe

Inabti soo digii dooda badhtamaha ugu jirey xageed u oronaysaa maxaa laga doodayey. lol

 

 

Xiinfiniin

,OO heedhe hadii adiga marka lagula doodayo aad dad ka aflagaadaynayso, waa dhibaato (for SOL) wallaalo.

Waar seefla boodnimada is ka daa oo dood fiican la kaalay.

Oo adna xaggee ka timid Walaal? Maxaad dood fiican u taqaan? aflagaadose maxaad u taqaan?

Walaal tani waa dood diineed. Nabigaaga ninkii u gefaa muxuu kuu la haray? mise waxba maad aqrine dhexdaad ugasoo dhacday?

Midda kale meeshaan arrin adagi ma taallo qofkas ta arrrin u aragtidiisa ka dhiiban karo weeye marka:

 

Xagun labada d-a-a-r-o-o-d ku daran ha isxakabin meele!

 

Ama sida Castro yeel. that it is an option too .

[Fanisha]

Inabti Xiin, halkaan ka imi muhiim maaha. Kasoo qaad gallery-gii Ngonge sheegayay inaan ka imi. Dood waxaan u aqaan inaan la is aflagaadeyn. Aflagaado waxaan u aqaan, charlatan iyo imposter.

[Haaraahur.]

Socod badane with all due respect how can you expect a debate when you don’t even acknowledge the basic tenets of Islam?

 

Living in the west is not a rosy and lofty as make it seem to be. Scratch the surface and you will see! You can’t separate the state from the religion it is like asking the head to be separated from the body! In your ignorance you were encouraging Muslim people to set rivals with the One GOD. ALLAAH Knows better than you how to govern His subjects. We live in our world starving for Islam especially the state.

 

Man made laws are responsible for the misery of today’s world. The rich are getting richer and the poorer even more poor as each year passes. You say the west have become more successful at whose expense may I ask? What difference does it make if a few people live in luxury at the expense of the vast majority of mankind? How can you be considered successful if you are drinking someone’s water, eating someone’s food, enjoying someone’s sweat and tears while you watch that person starve in front of you?

 

Arrogant as ever the few chosen elite have made laws devoid of any reason and justice!

 

People can be arrested for no reason and prosecuted, tortured, and executed without the need of evidence! Water, food, medicine has become privatised so only people with money can drink, eat and treat themselves! Land and natural resources also have become monopolised leaving many homeless, destitute and in despair. The trade system only benefits one side. One side only sells and the other buys at an unreasonable price. The list can go on and on. My point is man made laws are capricious and only serve certain people.

 

The Interest (riba) has impoverished many a nation and indebted them for ever. Hardly anyone is spared from debts today! Men, women and children. The Insurance companies living fat off people’s insecurities about what might happen or not happen to them in the future (al qadaa wal qadar). IMF and World Bank are “legally†robbing other people’s lands and growing their products there when the natives are starving according to some secret contract signed behind doors with the puppet governments. War is fought to subjugate, to test chemical arsenals on people and animals and mostly to bring profit. War sells!

 

Men are suffering!

Women are suffering!

Children are suffering!

Animals are suffering!

The entire planet is in crisis!

 

 

You see how many anti-globalisation students are demonstrating everywhere against this system devoid of justice chanting the slogans “a new world is possibleâ€. Mind you these are the very people born and raised in the “successful†west. But what they don’t have is a practical aim? How we can make another world possible? This is where Islam comes in the picture. Islam gives you a direction and guidance to solve these ever increasing problems. We need GOD To take us through this road full of thorns after all we belong to Him and soon we shall return to Him. We need GOD. We need GOD. We need GOD.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

^^ Waa kaa haray. Adeer anigu cid walba lama doodo.

Ok.

 

Muslims believe that their Prophet is not a fallible man!

Huh? :eek:

 

If the prophet was not fallible then he was infallible. Are you saying he was God?

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

Though the prophet was, as a human, capable of making mistakes He was not, good Castro, erroneous in his divine reports.

 

His 'divine reports' were direct messages from Allah to pass it on to us. No one is suggesting he failed in that duty tasked upon him by Allah. But as you said he was a simple human being, capable of making mistakes in direct contradiction of your earlier statement that he was infallible.

 

His (Axaadiith) were not a mere collection of mortal rants; they were, as the Qur’an affirms, another form of revelation

 

What is the purpose of another 'form' of revelation when we already have all of Allah's revelations in the Quran? And where does it say in the Quran we have to follow the 'hadiths'. I know it says we have to follow and obey the prophet (scw) but that is not the same thing as obey and follow the hadiths, is it?

 

The reason I’ve withdrawn from this thread is not because Socod-badane is misinformed about the basics of the subject he chose to debate rather it is because he sounds to me a charlatan of sort. And I don’t deem wise to engage a virtual dual with imposters, saaxiib.

 

You are better served by showing all reading this thread why you think I'm a charlatan/impostor then merely calling me one.

 

For you to come out for the rescue of this sinking soul

 

Sinking soul? So now you're Allah?

 

 

What does it mean to assert that the words of the prophet are the interpretations of fallible man?

 

Exactly what it says. Show how the prophet (scw) was not a fallible human being.

 

What does it imply in the context of his argument?

That the hadiths don't have the legitimacy and the authority the Quran has becuz it merely the words of a human being.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Ducaqabe:

SB, I really don’t know what we’re debating here. I think I lost track of the discussion. Let me see. Your initial argument was that Sharia law is outdated, unfair, and accessory to Islamic living. You went ahead and brushed off the importance of the meaning of the term.

 

For two reasons. First, who has the authority to define what the Sharia law means? Can you point me to anyone other then perhaps a prophet of Allah or a person Allah has chosen and given extra perception and insight, who can say I can define for you this law, some of it based on the word's of Allah? I don't think there is such person. Anyone can come up with with a definition of Sharia law.

 

Second, and more importanlty, it is irrelevant in deciding whether sharia law is:

 

A) Fair

B) Outdated

C) supplementary to Islamic living

 

I fail to see the logic behind the instances that mere definition of the Sharia law will somehow redeem it and answer all criticisms leveled against it. Definitions are useful if the debate was about the theoretical bases of the Sharia. But we are attempting to see if it is practical or not. Definitions are words, words on paper are useless in telling us whether a particular law is useful/practical or not. Only events in the real world, once the law is put into practice, that determines whether it is useful, outdated, fair/unfair etc. In this regard, facts of history are on my side.

 

Surprisingly enough, you still claim Sharia is a man made law, contrary to modern day society.

 

But the sharia law IS written by men. Alot of hadiths are rejected as non-sahih, are you saying that we rejected Allah's words? The sharia law is based largely on hadiths.

 

How can one debate about a subject that’s he/she has no knowledge of?

 

Do you need to study communism to know it is not practical system?

 

Likewise, I could not engage a debate with Fidel about communism for I’m ignorant about the subject. Such debate would be useless for Fidel, you might agree.

 

It depends on the nature of the debate. If it is about whether communism can be put into practice as intended, then just about anyone can he have debate with Fidel cause all one needs to do is point out the long list of contingent historical facts that show communism has been a failure in that regard.

 

Fact:

Quran is the word of Allah, addresses all aspects of life, including the past, present, & the future. It deals with legal issues, gives solutions for day-to-day problems, ife after death, etc. It ain’t only about praying and doing charity work. It’s beyond that.

 

The Quran doesn't answer every daily question. Not every legal issue. It talks alot about legal, day to day issues but not everything...we figure that out on our own. What does the Quran say about flying, space travel, the internet...nothing. Don't be so rigid and simplistic about Quran...it is a source of inspiration/guidance.

 

It’s impossible to take one and leave the other.

 

Except when they disagree...then we take the Quran's word.

 

The hadiths, prophets words, action & things were done in his presence that he approved of, are all revelation from Allah.

 

I don't agree for the simple reason that this assertion elevates the prophet (scw) to the status of Allah, is that what you're saying? How can everything he said be revelation of Allah? That would mean he had insight into Allah's mind? Allah and the prophet (scw) like the christian's concept of trinity. It doesn't make any sense. Expand on what you mean cause I don't get it.

 

Quran calls us to take whatsoever the prophet (read: sunnah) gave us. It goes beyond that and commands us to follow the prophet (read: sunnah) if we love Allah.

 

Commanding us to follow the prophet (scw) is not the same thing as doing everything he said and did, is it? I can name things the prophet asked muslims to do that you don't. Why? I'm talking about what he commanded muslims to do in sahih hadiths.

 

If what he said is so diving, why did the muslims throw away so much hadiths as non-sahih? And I hope you do know that sahih hadith is only AUTHENTIC, it doesn't mean it is true.

 

You probably disagree but any Sharia law that is not in accordance with the Qur’an and Sunnah can be challenged.

 

That seems to be the history of muslims cause no two countries practice the Sharia law the same way. Everyone practices it their own way...once again reinforcing my point that religion and state should be separated. Let everyone decide for themselves what is islamic and proper and what is not.

 

Would you deny Quran and Hadith come to us through the prophet scw? Why take one and reject the other?

[qb]

 

Because the Quran is the direct words of Allah, the hadiths are the purpoted words of the prophet (scw). Find me where in the Quran Allah said we should follow the hadiths we have TODAY and I'll accept them without any reservation.

 

[qb]Is it not safe to say Allah spoke to us through the tongue of the prophet scw? If not, why not deny the Quran also?

 

No, he didn't. The angel gabrial passed Allah's messages to the prophet who passed them to us.

 

By the way, there’s a group that negates the Ahadith of the prophet scw at all.

 

It is understandable why some would reject the hadiths because they are so unreliable. Its hearsays based on someone said who heard it from someone else who hear it from someone else. That is why so many of them have been dismissed as non-sahih. But I aint of them, cause I accept some hadiths. I listen to music and think it IS islamic since no where did Allah say its haram.

 

You may play with words, but the prophet was MACSUUM.

Then if you REALLY believe that, then you should do everything he said and suggested you should do, right? Would you?

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Roob:

Socod badane with all due respect how can you expect a debate when you don’t even acknowledge the basic tenets of Islam?

 

What basic tenets of Islam? You mean the five pillars? I accept them fully without any reservations. I also accept the Quran to be the final word. But what those words mean should be my right and the right of every muslim to decide. I don't think anyone is closer to Allah then the rest of us, we are all equal.

 

Living in the west is not a rosy and lofty as make it seem to be.

 

Actually it is. It is helluva better then any Islamic country. The West and Westerners have in general treated me better then muslims have (somali muslims are so nice to each other, aren't they? )...I have no reason to dislike the West and its way of life. They let me live my life as I choose and allow me to practice my religion as I choose (which I won't be able to do in Sharia law run Islamic country where some men designate themselves as Allah's spokesperson). On top of that they give me oppurtunities in life I would not get in any Islamic in the forseable future.

 

You can’t separate the state from the religion it is like asking the head to be separated from the body!

 

Comparing apples and oranges. Religion and state are two different subject for many reasons with one reason above all being that to run state and to progress, you have to innovate and be dogmatic. You can't innovate or change the word of Allah. How do you run Islamic state where EVERYONE has to pray five times a day and be able to run modern services like hospitals, police and fire stations with disruption to vital services? You simply can't.

 

In your ignorance you were encouraging Muslim people to set rivals with the One GOD.

[/qu]

 

How so? Last I checked it wasn't me who was saying let's worship the prophet's (scw) like Allah's words, was I?

 

[qb]ALLAAH Knows better than you how to govern His subjects.

 

And you know what Allah knows better then me and others. Right? There are select group of ppl, ppl blessed with extra perceptive senses, that tell the rest of, the dumb and deaf, what Allah's wants.

 

Man made laws are responsible for the misery of today’s world.

 

That is not entirely true. I live in Canada, there is no misery here. There is prosperity and productivity. Don't make blanket statement without facts to back up. The problem is not whether Allah's laws are perfect or not, they are, but implementing them.

 

The rich are getting richer and the poorer even more poor as each year passes.

 

The Sharia law will not get rid off poverity. Poverity will be with us till the end of the world.

 

You say the west have become more successful at whose expense may I ask?

 

Who cares?

 

What difference does it make if a few people live in luxury at the expense of the vast majority of mankind?

 

Last I checke the Sharia law was for muslims and not for 'mankind'. How can the sharia law be of any use to ppl who aren't muslims?

 

How can you be considered successful if you are drinking someone’s water, eating someone’s food, enjoying someone’s sweat and tears while you watch that person starve in front of you?

 

Again, mischaracterization of the West to make cheap points. Canada doesn't steal anyone's water, they export water sometimes. They also are net food exporter, guess to who? Africa, as part of Canada's aid program.

 

Arrogant as ever the few chosen elite have made laws devoid of any reason and justice!

 

Where is the justice in cutting the hand of man who stole a loaf of bread and doing the same to a man who stole a billion dollars? There is no justice in my opinion but that is what the Sharia law says should be done to both men as both are guilty of the acting of stealing.

 

People can be arrested for no reason and prosecuted, tortured, and executed without the need of evidence!

 

What coutries do this? I would say some muslims, actually alot of muslims countries. And very few western countries. I know for sure ppl don't get arrested for NO reason here in Canada. Torture is not permitted and Canada has no capital punishment.

 

Water, food, medicine has become privatised so only people with money can drink, eat and treat themselves! Land and natural resources also have become monopolised leaving many homeless, destitute and in despair. The trade system only benefits one side. One side only sells and the other buys at an unreasonable price. The list can go on and on. My point is man made laws are capricious and only serve certain people.

 

Sure, man made laws can be capricious but the can also be very practical and meat the legal demands of the society. It is not black and white.

 

The Interest (riba) has impoverished many a nation and indebted them for ever.

 

Logically and morally, I see nothing wrong with interests. If you pay rent for an apartment or a car, why not pay rent for money, which is what interest is? Is interest outlawed in Quran or Hadiths?

 

Hardly anyone is spared from debts today!

 

Then don't take loans. When you take loans, you agree to pay the money back and to rent it while still using it. You pay interests which is your rental charge and at the end of your loan period, you return the money borrowed.

 

War is fought to subjugate, to test chemical arsenals on people and animals and mostly to bring profit.

 

Where are you getting all of this? Chemicals are being tested on ppl to make money? Where?

 

War sells!

 

And sex. War makes money. No one likes war except those that are to benefit the most.

 

Mind you these are the very people born and raised in the “successful†west.

 

Of course, BECUZ they live in the West and not Islamic countries. How many muslims protest for the plight African's with AIDS?

 

Islam gives you a direction and guidance to solve these ever increasing problems.

 

Is that why somalis, 100% muslims, hate and kill each other? To say Islam will solve your problems is simplistic and lazy out of things. Islam alone is not, it wasn't enough for us Somalis. It is what values muslims TRUELY hold dear and not what they claim to do. Too many ppl hide behind Islam.

 

We need GOD To take us through this road full of thorns after all we belong to Him and soon we shall return to Him. We need GOD. We need GOD. We need GOD.

Yes, we do need God.

[Baashi]

Very well SB, my hunch is that all humans are fallible. Here I agree in part! However, our prophet’s sayings and conducts are infallible because Mohamed’s actions (pbuh) have been informed and guided by Allah’s divine directives. Therefore, the prophet’s recorded and validated sayings are a source of law. For the prophet's conduct and sayings are moral example for the Muslims to emulate.

 

Now if I understood you correctly you are not saying that Muslims are not obligated to heed the prophet’s narrations and approvals! I mean I can understand if one questions the authenticity of a particular Hadith (need validation) when in doubt but to argue that Muslims are free to reject the Sharicah because it rests its authority on the Qur’an in conjunction with Hadithis is akin of challenging the authority of the prophet himself. Do this and you are challenging, by logical extension, the Qur’an (the very basis of Islam) itself for it reached us through the prophet Mohamed. What will then become of your conviction in Islam being the true religion worthy of practice?

 

My guess is that you are confusing Hadiths with Fiq. I’m not a learned fella (and I stand corrected if I err here) but Hadiths are recorded and validated sayings of prophet Mohamed pbuh whereas fiq is opinions of the classical jurists. The latter can be challenged by knowledgeable and enlightened culima.

 

FYI there is an ayah in the Qur’an that commands the faithful to obey whatever the prophet asks them to do and vice versa. It goes like this: Maa aataakumu rasuulu fakhuthuuhu, wamaa nahaa cankunm fantahuu. Nomads plz correct me and if you would please find the chapter and verse numbers for SB.

 

Allahu Yaclam.

[NGONGE]

Xiin

I don’t recall wanting to reform Islam, saaxib. Still, if it makes you happy to believe that I did, so be it.

 

The Nomad above as you accurately suspected displayed signs of talking utter and pure humbug. He believes that Sharia law is outdated, yet, as he demonstrated in this argument with you, he does not understand the definition of Sharia law, nor does he acknowledge the authenticity of its sources! The prophet, he claims, is a fallible man.

Castro agrees with him on this. With Castro though it’s merely a play on words! Castro’s interpretation here is, if I understood it correctly, equal to the meaning of the word ‘mortal’. Though that is also a correct interpretation, it only confuses matters and departs from the original discussion into our favourite pastime of semantics.

 

Now, to return to the topic in hand. The essence of Socod Badane’s argument is that state and religion should not mix (I wonder if his understanding of the 'state' is as good as that of 'sharia'?). He believes that Sharia law is outdated and needs ‘upgrading’.

 

 

He admits that he knows nothing about Sharia law but still urges us to get rid of it!

 

 

quote:

 

Originally posted by Ducaqabe:

 

 

With all due respect my friend, your knowledge of Sharia is limited.

 

I know. But I'm judging it based on the results from where it was implemented by more learned ppl then me.

Now, let us move from the trivial and uninformed into the interesting and educational. What is Sharia law? What are its sources?

 

 

Xiin provided a link that gives a definition of Sharia law (would have been better if he had posted it really). Here, not even Socod Badane could claim to not know the meaning.

 

Is it the Quran that people question? Is it possible to do so and remain Muslim?

Is it the hadeeth? Did the same mouth not utter both? Is it possible to question authentic ahadeeth?

 

Let us assume that such a thing is possible. What next? Islam being followed according to the Quran alone! How will it be understood and interpreted? Will each individual have his/her own way of reading it? How will it be Islam? Can one mix and match and still expect the same results? Socod Badane believes in the Pillars of Islam but does not believe in the Hadeeth! How does he suggest Muslims should pray? How Zakat should be paid? Will knowing the details of Ramadan be necessary? Without the guidance of the hadeeth, what criteria does he propose? Ijtehad? What skills should one have to interpret the Quran? Would you need to be able to read Arabic or does a simple translation sound ok?

 

Socod Badane accepts that these Ahadeeth are authentic but argues that they might not be true! This makes one wonder if he understands the ‘science’ of Hadeeth! He cites the rejection of some weak ahadeeth as evidence of his argument. The cheek!

 

It’s very late now and this area of discussion would take a lot of my time if I were to attempt to write on it. What I will recommend is that Socod Badane (or any that doubt the validity of hadeeth) read up on the subject and find out the criteria that were used to accept some ahadeeth and reject some. There was a lot more scrutinising than the simple ‘I don’t like the look of this hadeeth’ methodology that Socod is using.

 

 

The third source used by Sharia is the consensus of the scholars. Surely this, at least, is where the Sharia detractors should be in total agreement! The scholars would have applied experience, reason and logic to arrive at their verdicts. What sane person could refuse that? Even if one refuses, one will still have to come up with a better alternative. Surely, a reasonable, logical and just alternative is not likely to be refused by the scholars (and if it is, they’ll have a very good reason for doing so).

 

The final source is the qiyas. Again, that too relies on reason and common sense. Could the critics of Sharia law go against common sense? Isn’t that what they’re after in the first place?

 

It seems to me that two of those sources are articles of faith that no person claiming to be a Muslim can deny and remain (at least in the traditional sense) a Muslim. The other two sources are issues of consensus and comparison and here too, one can’t imagine any sane, normal and rational person rejecting these methods.

 

One can speculate as to the reasons for such assaults on Sharia laws. One can point the finger at conspiracy theories, hidden enemies and weak Muslims. None of those really matter though. Islam will always be attacked, always be misinterpreted (by those within and those without) and always be resisted.

 

It will, nonetheless, carry on as it did for the past 1400 years. The only point of contention is how many will it keep in its folds as time moves on? How many will trip over every time Islam is attacked?

 

 

Many of us find Socod Badane’s ignorant (don’t get too upset, Socod. It was by your own admittance) rejection of the hadeeth irritating, annoying and very offensive. However, such views are only allowed to spread because they’re hardly ever tackled or challenged. The boy clearly demonstrates that he’s not a charlatan. For charlatans are cunning and skilful in the subjects they discuss. This one is leaving himself open to ridicule by admitting his ignorance! A western mannequin?

 

 

PS

I wrote this in a hurry and might revise it in the morning.

[Jacpher]

Of course, I strive to do every sunnah of the prophet within my ability. I’m not in doubt of the sunnah my brother. If I were I would also be in doubt of the Qur’an and Islam. Logic tells me I received both from the same messenger.

 

I’m afraid the ayah Baashi mentioned won’t do any good for you. It’s in Surat Al-Hashr. I hope your next argument won’t be the verse does not clearly say ‘follow hadiths’ although it clearly commands that we follow whatsoever the prophet brought to us. Like it or not, whatever the prophet spoke of was revelation from Allah. In sura Al Najm, it states the prophet does not speak of his desire. There’s another Ayah Al-Nisa that goes beyond this. The ayah indicates we would not be believers if we don’t let the prophet scw judge our disputes and be satisfied with his decision with no resistance. Such resistance shows lack of faith in Islam. Such thing would nullify our Islam. The Quran time and again uses these words ‘follow’ & ‘obey’ the prophet. Perhaps, they mean or sound different to you.

 

Malak Jabriel (as) read the Quran to the prophet and the prophet read it to his companion and so fourth. Same thing with ahadith, the companions of the prophet are trustworthy and loyal to this deen. Allah praised their truthfulness in the Quran. If you doubt them, why not doubt the authenticity of the Quran? The order is which the suras are listed? Remember your earlier claim, hadith were written by men, thus not reliable. So does the Quran? Another claim of yours, sharia can’t be implemented due to some countries abusing it, so is democracy. The so-called developed nations at times abuse democracy and alter it to their advantage. Your simple logic falls apart.

 

Would you happen to doubt that you’re the son of you parent? How could you be sure? You don’t know for a fact you are theirs? We all simply depend on what our parents and others tell in this matter. The companions of the prophet are more credible than our parents. They are indeed. Allah in the Quran endorses their trust for the prophet and the deen. How can one dismiss them and their successors (Culumaa)?

 

And to answer your question regarding the permissibility of music in Islam, find the answer in the surat luqman. Read the tafsiir of the ayah very carefully. Separation of religion and state is contrary to Islamic teachings. As simply as that.

 

Saluugla: Ina-eedo, waxaan kahday doodaan marba waji yeelaneysa.

[Bakar]

"While a prophet is under divine moral guidance, he is fallible. Infallibilty is akin to divinity. Prophets are human who do not capitulate to intentionally commiting sin but they are fallible."

 

 

"What is the purpose of another 'form' of revelation when we already have all of Allah's revelations in the Quran? And where does it say in the Quran we have to follow the 'hadiths'. I know it says we have to follow and obey the prophet (scw) but that is not the same thing as obey and follow the hadiths, is it.."

 

 

If you are not following his saying, then how else would you follow? Hadiths are his actions and hence it is the actions of the prophet (PBUH) we have to at least emulate. Remember! There is verse that say, I am paraphrasing, our prophet never spoke from his desire. Then, can we deny his infallibility? Since he was a messenger of Allah, what other rule or source of information did he convey? Was he not Rahmata Lil Calimeen? He never had lower motives, and that makes him infallible.

[xiinfaniin]

NGONGE; There you laid bare all the basics of Sharia Law, but you may, as well, be clapping with a one hand. Baashi is 'playing to the gallery' as well. Will see if the lost boy wants to learn.

 

But the piece you penned is worthy the praise, saaxiib.