Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"ghost writers"

Ahmadiyya leadership admitted (in the 1930’s) that MGA used lots of editors and ghost writers

Intro
I have written many times about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his team of writers.  I continue to find more and more data on this topic.  Recently, we have the following references:

The quotes

“His holiness, the Promised Messiah, wrote his book of Tabligh, which is included in his book Aina-e-Kalamat-e-Islam in Arabic. During the course of its writing, he used to send the manuscript to the philosopher of the community, Nuruddin, for proof reading. After this, he used to send it to ustad Abdul Karim so that he may translate it in Persian.”
(Al-Fadl, January 15, 1929)

“His holiness (Mirza) used to send manuscripts of his Arabic books to his first Caliph (Nuruddin) and also to Ustad Mohammad Ahsan. The first caliph used to return the manuscripts after reading them, mostly as he took them. As for Ustad Muhammad Ahsan, he exerted his utmost effort and at some places used to change words for correction.”
(Seerat-ul-Mahdi, Vol. 1, P. 91)

Mirza Ghulam even asked others to submit articles to be included in his book. Here is a letter Mirza composed to Chiragh Ali:
“I have been much pleased to receive your letter. From the very beginning, it has been my desire to serve Islam. Your book has encouraged me tremendously… If you have any articles, send them over to me… Your article about confirmation of prophethood has not reached me so far, although I have waited for it long. Therefore, I bother you once again to send me your article without delay. I would like you to write another article for me about affirmation of the reality of Quran, so that I may be able to include it in my book Baraheen-e-Ahmadiyyah.”
(Seyar-ul-Musannifin, Letter to Chiragh Ali;
As reported in Qadiyaniat-An Analytical Survey)

The scans
 

 

 

MGA’s ghost writers argue on the prophethood of MGA in 1900

Intro

I wanted to post a reference from the writings of Mahmud Ahmad in 1915 as he argued that MGA was in fact a prophet, however, without law.

The reference

“At last that event did take place. In the year 1900, Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim, the preacher of the Friday sermon, gave a sermon in which he, used the words Nabi (Prophet) and Rasul (Messenger) for the Mirza. This caused great irritation to Maulavi Sayyid Muhammad Ahsan Amrohawi. When Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim came to know of this, he gave another Friday sermon in which be addressed the Mirza, requesting him to contradict his belief, if he was wrong in considering him to be a prophet and Messenger of God. After the Friday prayers were over, Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim caught hold of the skirt of the Mirza’s apparel and requested him to correct him in his beliefs if they were erroneous. The Mirza turned around and said that he, too, held the same belief. Meanwhile, Maulavi Muhammad Ahsan had been greatly agitated by the sermon and in anger was pacing the floor of the mosque. On Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim’s return, he began to quarrel with him. When their voices rose very high, the Mirza came out of his house and recited the Qur’anic verse: “O ye who believe! Don’t raise your Voice above the voice of the Prophet.”

(This event is based on the report of a speech of Sayyid Sarwar Shah Qadiani at an annual conference held in Qadian, and published in al- Fadhl, Vol. X, No. 51, dated january.4,1923)

(See also Haqiqat al- Nubuwat, p 124.[published in 1915])

Conclusion
MGA had multiple ghost-writers.  In this case, Maulvi Amrohi (who was the first payed Ahmadi-mullah), he didn’t know that MGA had finally claimed prophethood and Maulvi Abdul Kareem was ordered to pronounce it.  They proceeded to argue, then MGA quoted the Quran and thus claimed prophethood openly for the first time (summer 1900). However, he remained silent for an additional 1 1/2 years or roughly 14+ months.

Later on, after “Correction of an Error” was published, Maulvi Amrohi wrote a rebuttal to an inquiring mind who accused MGA of claiming prophethood, however, Maulvi Amrohi very tactfully only denied independent prophethood, he never even mentioned the “The Ummati-Nabi”.  Fast forward to 1914, Maulvi Amrohi nominated Mahmud Ahmad as Khalifa and sided with him in his first year of his Khilafat.  He even read Mahmud Ahmad’s 2 books on the subject of prophethood, i.e. Qaul al Fasl and Haqiqatun Nubuwwat, however, in the summer of 1915, he seems to have had a change of heart and denounced MGA’s claim of prophethood and deposed Mahmud Ahmad as Khalifa.  He then sided with the Lahori-Ahmadis and died in 1919 in this state.

 

 

 

MGA lost the debate with MOLVI MUHAMMAD BASHIR BHOPALI (1891)

Intro
MGA and his team only did written debates, this was how MGA got help from his team of ghost writers and debaters.  In today’s research, we have uncovered new data in terms of the debate that MGA lost in 1891, and at his own house in Qadian.  Dard mentions this incident on page 297-299.

The story

MIRZA DEBATE WITH MOLVI MUHAMMAD BASHIR BHOPALI

In October 1891 When Mirza was in Dehli and had recently escaped from the debate with Molvi Nazir Hussain in the Jamia Masjid Dehli, Molvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali who was a high ranking Scholar and one of the disciples of Molvi Nazir, challenged Mirza Ghulam Qadiani for a debate.

Mirza Bashir Ahmad MA son of Mirza Qadiani in his book Seeratul Mahdi Volume 2 at page No 90-91 giving the accounts of this debate, writes:- “after 3 or 4 days of Jamia Masjid incident, Hazrat Masi e Moud had a debate with Molvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali at his house (the house that MGA was staying at in Delhi). It was decided that both parties would exchange 5 papers of arguments and answers with each others but when Hazrat Masih e Moud saw that Same old arguments which were refuted earlier, were being repeated by Molvi Muhammad Bashir and no new argument is being advanced from the opponent, he ended the debate on 3 papers. Hazrat Masih e Moud did not care the humiliation and mockery of the opponents. This debate has been published with the title of Al Haq Dehli. Readers can see Hazrat sb ended the debate when Molvi sb had exhausted all his arguments and he was only doing repetition.”

See here also: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/15/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-debate-with-batalvi-summer-of-1891-was-stopped-by-the-british-govt-on-mgas-behalf/

 

On the contrary, the actual detailed accounts of this debate has been published in the contemporary Magazines , Al Haq Assarih and Tarikh e Mirza pages 42-44. This has been compiled by Muhammad Rafiq Dilawari, author of Book Raees e Qadian, pages 341-344. Author RQ says that some body sent the Ishtihar dated 6 October 1891 published by Mirza Qadiani, for scholar of Dehli, to Molvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali as well, who sent a reply to the Ishtihar to Mirza Sahib whereby accepting his all terms and conditions for debate. The debate was agreed on the following terms and conditions:-

1,Government security would be provided.
2.It would be a written debate. Each party would write his arguments in the session and would hand over signed copy to other for reply.
3. Issue of Life of Hazrat Essa a.s would be taken up first. If Life of Essa a.s is proved Mirza would leave his claim of Masih. And descending of Masih a.s would be discussed.
4. Any party quitting the debate without its final settlement, would be considered as the loser one.

However on arrival of Molvi Muhammad Bashir in Dehli, Mirza Qadiani in violation of earlier agreed terms and conditions added the new conditions that :
(a) the burden of proof would lie on Molvi Muhammad Bashir because he would be a claimant of life of Essa a.s.
(b) the debate would be held at Mirza,s residence with no public proceedings would be held.
(c) In all 10 persons would be allowed to participate. However Molvi Abdul Majeed and Molana Muhammad Hussain Batalvi would not be allowed under any circumstances.
(d) Debate would be limited to 5 papers only.

Although this was a violation of earlier terms and conditions yet Molvi Bashir accepted it. Molvi sb went to the House of Mirza and he wrote Five arguments in support of Life of Essa a.s on paper read it to the audience there and handed over a signed copy to Mirza Qadiani. Instead of writing reply in the session Mirza did not write its reply and said Ok you may leave now to come at 10 o’clock tomorrow. but when they reached next day to receive reply Mirza did not come out of house and send some one telling that the reply is not ready yet and you may leave for now. Molvei sahib will be informed as soon as the replies are ready. Peoples agitated this attitude to be a violation of the terms and condition but Mirza remained adamant. At 2 o clock they were again called by Mirza and a reply was handed over with the directions that rejoinder may be prepared at home and be delivered to him once it is ready. It continued like this for five days wherein 3 papers were exchanged. On the sixth day Mirza Qadiani announced that his father in law is seriously ill and he was quitting. Peoples said this is against the law which he himself had laid down but Mirza did not agree. Since Molvi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi and other ulema knew his level of learning, they had prepared a condemning article which was read over in Mirza, s presence peoples laughed at him made a mockery of him still it did not make any impact.

Actual reason for Mirza,s escape from debate was that as a claimant of Masih, Mirza had created two walled defence first wall being Death of Hazrat Essa a.s and the second one being descending of Essas a.s. Molvi Muhammad Bashir had destroyed his both walls and now Mirza Was to prove how he became Masih e Moud which eventually made him run for life.
(Screen shots of relevant pages Seeratul Mahdi and RQ attached)

SCANS





During the writing of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, MGA masked his beliefs, he was already asserting that Esa (as) died

Intro
MGA was very sneaky.  All of his claims were revealed slowly and with intentNew information tells us that MGA actually claimed that he was the “promised-messiah” as early as 1889 (see Friedman).  Ahmadiyya leadership has lied about this for years and years and years, they have always edited MGA’s writings to work out the inconsistencies.  Just recently, we posted an essay wherein MGA asserted that Inni-Mutawafeeka, wa Raffa as I shall give you full reward and shall raise you towards Me.   This was on page 398, MGA quoted 3:55 again on page 434, just 36 pages later, this time he defines it as per Sir Syed, and per the opinion that he took in 1891, in Izala Auham.

Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, Vol-4, page 434
MGA writes out a revelation that he claims came from his GOD to him, this revelation that MGA received is actually 3:55 of the Quran.  MGA claimed over 30+ revelations from his God which were actually verses of the Quran, this behavior of MGA caused him to be declared as a Kafir by the ulema.

یا عیسٰی انی متوفیك و رافعك اليَّ )و مطھرك من الذین كفروا( 2۔ وجاعل الذین اتبعوك
فوق الذین كفروا الٰی یوم القیٰمة۔ ثلۃ من الاولین و ثلۃ من الاٰخرين۔

“”O ‘Isa, I shall give you full reward or cause you to die and shall raise you towards Me, meaning that I shall raise your status or will raise you from the life on earth towards Me, and I shall
grant predominance to your followers over those who disbelieve, until the Day of Judgment.””

See Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 4, online english, page 434, edition, https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya-Part-4.pdf

MGA gives his commentary on what this revelation means directly underneath it
“””This means that I shall give supremacy to those who follow your beliefs and religion over others in arguments, reasoning, and blessings, until the Day of Resurrection.”””

Or die???  and raise your status?
Per Ahmadiyya leadership, in this era, MGA believed that Esa (as) was alive and allah lifted Esa (As) physically into heaven.  However, as can be easily seen, MGA was already trying to change the meanings of this verse, i.e. 3:55.

MGA missed a sentence when he quoted the verse 3:55
MGA made mistakes all the time, this is probably why he took on ghost writers like Nooruddin, Mufti Sadiq, Maulvi Abdul Kareem and the Amrohi.  Did MGA really miss a sentence or was this verse revealed differently to MGA?  It’s a mystery.  The urdu edition of BA-4 still has 3:55 quoted and as missing the sentence.  Nonetheless, the publishers in 2016, under the order of Mirza Masroor Ahmad have add this note:

“””The Promised Messiah as has written about و مطھرك من الذین كفروا in Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 5, Urdu edition, p. 73 (Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 21, p. 94): ‘This sentence was inadvertently missed in Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya; it means: “And shall clear you of all the accusations and calumnies of the disbelievers.” This revelation has been revealed many times.’”””

^^^Footnote on page 434

The same reference from the 2009 edition of Tadhkirah, page 127
“””[Arabic] O ‘Isa [Jesus] I shall give you full reward or cause you to die and shall raise you towards Me, meaning that I shall raise your status or will raise you from the life on earth, and shall clear you of all the accusations and calumnies of the disbelievers and shall raise your followers above those who disbelieve, till the Day of Judgment. This means that: ‘I shall give victory to your followers and companions over others in arguments, reasoning, and blessings.’ There is a group from among the first ones and a group from among the last ones. In this revelation this humble one is meant by the word ‘Isa.”””

[Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah, part 4, pp. 556–557 sub-footnote 4,
Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 1, pp. 664–665 sub-footnote 4]

MGA’s private letters to Mir Abbas Ali on 3:55–from the 1883–1884 era
“””The revelation (3:55) has been repeated so many times that Allah alone knows the count. Sometimes I received it continuously from mid-night till the Fajr time.”””
[Maktubat-e-Ahmadiyyah, vol. 1, p. 67, Letter no. 35, dated November 20 to Mir ‘Abbas ‘Ali Shah]

As a result of receiving 3:55 as a revelation sooooo many times, MGA was urged by Noorudin to claim to be Maseel-e-Masih, aka “The like of the Messiah”
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/14/mga-confuses-all-of-his-readers-in-1891-as-he-claimed-to-be-the-promised-messiah/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/17/nooruddin-urged-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-to-make-the-claim-of-being-like-the-messiah-1882-1884-era/

MGA never wrote that Esa (as) was alive in heaven
It should be noted that MGA never technically wrote that Esa (As) was alive in heaven, ever.  He never wrote it.  He did write that he Esa (As) would return, however, he didn’t give specifics.

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/12/dard-lied-about-mgas-views-on-esa-as-pre-1891/

Later on, in 1907, MGA explains that his God was trying to tell him that he was the Messiah, but MGA refused to accept
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mga-explains-how-he-misunderstood-his-prophethood-in-1880-and-realized-it-later-on/

MIrza Ghulam Ahmad vs. Batalvi–1891-1892 era, MGA sent 10 Lanats on Batalvi

Intro
After claiming to be the Messiah in 1891, Batalvi turned on MGA and his team of ghost writers.  Batalvi began his beef with MGA which lasted til MGA died.  MGA even made predictions that Batalvi would eventually join Ahmadiyya and etc, however, like all of MGA’s predictions, those also failed.

A summary of this situation, written by a friend

MIRZA’S FAILED PROPHESY AND 10 CURSES TO MOLANA MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN BATALVI

In his book Aina Kamalat e Islam at page 601-604, Mirza Ghulam Qadiyani writes that Molana Muhammad Hussain Batalvi always criticise me and says i am an uneducated man , incompetent in Arabic language knowledge. He also says that Molvi Nooruddin is only a Hakim and Molvi Ahsan Amrohi is only a munshi. (Clerk). So he Mirza challenged Batalvi to have a contest of writing tafsir of 80 verses from Quraan and writing poetry (Naat). Few months ago the date of which i don,t remember, I saw an article by Muhammad Hussain Batalvi wherein Batalvi calls me dajjal, liar and dishonest. Beside this he says I am ignorant of religious knowledge. He insulted me like this repeatedly.

Then I cried before Allah swt for help, after this prayer I received Ilham “UDOONI ASTAJIB LAKUM” meaning pray to Me I will accept . So i prayed for victory against Batalvi, my heart got cleared I understood that my prayers have been answered. The Ilham “ INNI MAHEENUN MAN ARAD AHANTIKA
(I will humiliate those who intend to humiliate you) seems to have materialised. For this contest i prayed before Allah to destroy the liar. I have prayed for the contest fixing a time period of 40 days.

Now if i lose and my prayers are not answered then non acceptance of my prayer will prove my ilham as lie. I may be treated as liar and shall be prepared to accept any punishment. If Batalvi loses the contest his ignorance and humiliation shall be revealed to the world. But if he runs away from the contest he would receive 10 curses from Allah swt. After writing this MGQ writes words “Laanat” 10 times in his book.

Qadiyanis propagated this 40 days prayer of Mirza far and wide at that time. Every follower of Mirza was anxiously waiting for a heavenly calamity or accident to fall upon Molana Muhammad Hussain Batalvi days in and days out. As the time goes by without any such news many were of the opinion that Batalvi could fall prey to such a mishap at the eleventh hour.
Finally the 40 days time line passed but to the disappointment of qadiyanis nothing happened to Batalvi. Qadiyanis felt very sad to know that neither Mirza,s Ilham proved true nor his prayers were answered .

After this Batalvi wrote in his Magazine IShaatussunnah :

“Dear readers it is 30th April 1892 today , three days have passed after the expiry of 40 days time line. I am flourishing and am better than Mirza in health, wealth and in children. May be Mirza would justify his failed prophesy by telling his Mureeds that It was meant a metaphoric AZAB would fall on me on qayamah or he could say look Batalvi felt great distress during fasting or see Batalvi ,s son has suffered from cold and cough and in this way my prophesy has fulfilled with extreme grace.””

The scans


When Athim didn’t die in 15 months, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and company made excuses

Intro
As we all know, MGA and his team of ghost writers made many excuses when Athim didn’t die in the 15 months as predicted by MGA.  I wanted to give a quote from MGA, this is from after the prophecy had expired.  The time period of this prophecy is to have began on 5th June 1893, ending fifteen months later on 6th September 1894.  The quotes in the below are from 1895.

The quotes
“What opened unto me tonight is that when I prayed to Almighty God with much humility and passion that ‘O Allah decide this matter between us and we are humble people and we cannot do anything without Your decision,’ He gave me the sign as a glad tiding that the party out of the two groups who is intentionally lying and is rejecting the True God and is making a humble man into god, shall be thrown in to the Hawiya in fifteen months time. He shall face great disgrace (the term fifteen months is according to the number of days of the debate, each day equalling a month). This is subject to him not reverting to the truth. And for the one who is upon the truth and is following the True God, this sign shall manifest his honour. And when this prophecy is fulfilled, some blind people shall begin to see and some lame people shall begin to walk and some deaf people shall begin to hear…” The Holy War, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 6 p. 292, Also called “jung-e-muqaddas”.  This was translated by the Ahmadi mullah who wrote this article.

“Indeed, as far as I understood the meaning of the revelation, it was that the person for the opposing party who is debating in support of falsehood, the meaning of Hawiya for him is the punishment of death. However, the revealed word is only Hawiya, and is subject to a condition that the person does not turn to the truth. And this condition of not inclining to the truth is a revealed condition as I had clearly written this in the revealed text. It is absolutely true and is according to the revelation that if Mr Abdullah Atham’s heart, as it was prior to the prophecy, intended to degrade Islam and did not take any part in turning to the truth by accepting the greatness of Islam, then he would have died within this time period. However, God Almighty’s revelation has told me that Abdullah Atham has, by admitting the awe and might of Islam, to an extent turned towards the truth, which has resulted in delaying the fulfillment of the prophecy of his death and a complete entry into the Hawiya.”. Anwarul Islam, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 9, p. 2.  

Noor-uddin secretly disagreed with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad on the birth of Esa (as)

Intro
As we all know, there was lots of controversy on this topic within Ahmadiyya.  Further, MGA barely wrote anything..his ghost writers wrote everything, hence the contradictions.  In this case, we have new evidence, and translations from Mujadid-e-Azim, which is mostly in Urdu and hence hidden from the educated parts of the world.  Nonetheless, take a look at these essays: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=birth+of+esa

Also see here: http://www.muslim.org/sa-case/evidence/s16.htm

New Quotes
 “Once Hazrat Mirza asked Shaikh Qamar-ud-Din of Jhelum to show him the verses of the Quran from which the Shaikh had concluded that Jesus had a father. At first, the Shaikh sahib, out of respect for Hazrat Mirza, remained silent. But upon Hazrat Mirza repeating the question, he mentioned the arguments from the Quran that he knew. Hearing the arguments, Hazrat Mirza said: ‘Your arguments are certainly strong, but until God gives me to understand this point, I will follow the views of the majority of Muslims’. … Hazrat Mirza said to Hakim Fazal Din [who had complained about Shaikh sahib’s belief]: ‘How can you declare as heretic someone who bases his arguments on the Quran?’” (Mujaddid e Azam Vol.2 Pg.1342).

”Molvi Nooruddin held the same belief and he once told me that ‘The only reason I stay silent about this issue is because MGA believes otherwise.’  (Footnote) But after the death of MGA, Molvi Nooruddin became the Khalifa and he specifically instructed Molvi Muhammad Ali to write that Jesus had a father in his English commentary of the Qur’an” (Mujaddid e Azam Vol.2 Pg.1342).  

The scans

In 1907, Ahmadiyya newspapers were still asserting that Piggot would die before MGA

Intro
As my readership knows, we have been discussing the story of “Piggot and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad” in the Facebook discussion forum.  The Ahmadi that we have been discussing this with, he knew nothing about this entire story before we mentioned it to him, however, he won’t admit to this fact or any fact for that matter.  Ahmadis are taught to be defensive and never admit to anything in any conversations with their critics or even those who are neutral.  Anyhow, this Ahmadi didn’t conduct his own research, he searched the internet and found the “cover-up” job by Ahmadiyya leadership, wherein it is falsely asserted that Piggot repented from his claims of Godhood after 1904, and thus MGA’s death prediction from 1902 was averted.  However, this is a false argument.  Piggot never repented.  Nonetheless, Ahmadiyya leadership went out of its way to doctor-up a false and misleading interview with Dr. Shweiso and Nick Barratt, wherein they used slick camera techniques and voice-overs to make it look like these people agreed with the Ahmadiyya position, i.e. that Piggot repented.  However, its a total lie, orchestrated by Ahmadiyya leadership in an attempt to vindicate Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Ahmadiyya leadership was silent on Piggot from 1907 to roughly 2007
Akber Chaudhry and Ak Shaikh opened this issue and brought out the facts in this video, they totally exposed the Ahmadiyya position.  This prompted Ahmadiyya leadership to conduct a cover-up job on this matter.

If Piggot repented, why didnt MGA make an annoucement to that effect? 
Obviously, Piggot never repented from his claims of being God in the Christian sense of the word.  However, he was afraid of the British blasphemy laws and thus he took precautions that kept him from getting arrested.  That is all.  However, he still continued to assert that he was the God of Christians.

Review of Religions from 1907 proves that Ahmadiyya leadership didnt think Piggot repented
I have posted the reference to the ROR of 1907, which proves that Ahmadiyya leadership (MGA included) did not think that Piggot had repented at any point.  Nonetheless, this single reference proves that neither MGA nor any of ghost writers thought that Piggot had repented.  Case Closed!

The scan

The academic reference
http://www.aaiil.org/text/articles/reviewofreligions/1907/reviewreligionsenglish_190704.pdf

See pages 250-251

Read more here: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Piggot

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad quotes Ibn Arabi in the 1900-1903 era and some weird comments on prophethood..

It is alleged that MGA said: 

”Ibn e Arabi has written that Law Bearing Prophethood has ended but Non Law bearing is still open, but I believe that all kinds of Prophet hoods have come to an end, except the one which is attained by being the resemblance of Prophet Muhammad (saw)”
(Malfuzat Vol.2 Pg.254)

However, Malufzaat was published almost 50 years MGA died
MGA never taught his followers anything, in a public setting or behind closed doors.  All MGA ever did was give instructions to his closest ghost writers, and behind closed doors.

Data on Malfuzat
Malfuzaat vol. 2 was Published in Rabwah, 1960, in Urdu, covering the period from 1900 to 1901. See “Hidden Treasures of Islam“.  This book gives summaries of all of MGA and his teams writings and etc.

They correspond this Malfuzat entry with the Al-Badr magazine (1st April 1903)
”Once a woman claimed Prophethood. When she was shown the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), where he said ”There is no Prophet after me”, she replied ”Only Prophethood for men has come to an end, women can still become Prophets”

Scan work

Up ↑