Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

Meet Dr. Lilian, founder of the non-profit Global Connection For Women. Dr. Lilian shares how we can all get involved in humanitarian work and be intentional with our own missions. #LiftBlackVoices https://t.co/kGghdnCF1U Source: https://twitter.com/facebook/status/1364335971114754049 Uploader: Facebook

This booklet describes the origin of Saptagram, a grassroots organization in Bangladesh and its development into a movement to empower deprived, landless women. The organization was founded in 1976 by a woman history professor, and one of its most original features is a gender-oriented syllabus. The booklet's introduction outlines the aims of the organization, which focuses on making poor rural women socioeconomically self-reliant. The subsequent chapters discuss different aspects of the movement, such as: (1) tackling gender disparities; (2) using the group approach to confront problems; (3) demystifying the lives of women; (4) involving women in economic activities; (5) adopting sericulture (silkworm production) as a comprehensive income-generating project; (6) focusing on preventive health care; (7) designing a female-oriented literacy program; (8) recruiting teachers; (9) including women at all levels of the organization; (10) recruiting suitable field staff; (11) encouraging self-sufficiency; and (12) securing sources of funding. The impact of the movement on women, and the challenges and perspectives for the organization's future are also discussed. In addition, four features are included that describe the basic economic indicators of Bangladesh, examples of social action taken by groups of women, a story used in the adult education course, and a day in the life of a Saptagram member. Contains a 14-item bibliography. (BAC)

The Lean Startup Erick Ries Bangla Verson       ntroduction top me if you've heard this one before. Brilliant college kids sitting in a dorm are inventing the future. Heedless of boundaries, possessed of new technology and youthful enthusiasm, they build a new company from scratch. Their early success allows them to raise money and bring an amazing new product to market. They hire their friends, assemble a superstar team, and dare the world to stop them.   Ten years and several startups ago, that was me, building my first company. I particularly remember a moment from back then: the moment I realized my company was going to fail. My cofounder and I were at our wits' end. The dot-com bubble had burst, and we had spent all our money. We tried desperately to raise more capital, and we could not. It was like a breakup scene from a Hollywood movie: it was raining, and we were arguing in the street. We couldn't even agree on where to walk next, and so we parted in anger, heading in opposite directions. As a metaphor for our company's failure, this image of the two of us, lost in the rain and drifting apart, is perfect.   It remains a painful memory. The company limped along for months afterward, but our situation was hopeless. At the time, it had seemed we were doing everything right: we had a great product, a brilliant team, amazing technology, and the right idea at the right time. And we really were on to something. We were building a way for college kids to create online profiles for the purpose of sharing ... with employers. Oops. But despite a promising idea, we were nonetheless doomed from day one, because we did not know the process we would need to use to turn our product insights into a great company.   If you've never experienced a failure like this, it is hard to describe the feeling. It's as if the world were falling out from under you. You realize you've been duped. The stories in the magazines are lies: hard work and perseverance don't lead to success. Even worse, the many, many, many promises you've made to employees, friends, and family are not going to come true. Everyone who thought you were foolish for stepping out on your own will be proven right.   It wasn't supposed to turn out that way. In magazines and newspapers, in blockbuster movies, and on countless blogs, we hear the mantra of the successful entrepreneurs: through determination, brilliance, great timing, and-above all-a great product, you too can achieve fame and fortune.   There is a mythmaking industry hard at work to sell us that story, but I have come to believe that the story is false, the product of selection bias and after-the-fact rationalization. In fact, having worked with hundreds of entrepreneurs, I have seen firsthand how often a promising start leads to failure. The grim reality is that most startups fail. Most new products are not successful. Most new ventures do not live up to their potential.   Yet the story of perseverance, creative genius, and hard work persists. Why is it so popular? I think there is something deeply appealing about this modern-day rags-to-riches story. It makes success seem inevitable if you just have the right stuff. It means that the mundane details, the boring stuff, the small individual choices don't matter. If we build it, they will come. When we fail, as so many of us do, we have a ready-made excuse: we didn't have the right stuff. We weren't visionary enough or weren't in the right place at the right time.  After more than ten years as an entrepreneur, I came to reject that line of thinking. I have learned from both my own successes and failures and those of many others that it's the boring stuff that matters the most. Startup success is not a consequence of good genes or being in the right place at the right time. Startup success

Includes index

"Books on bee culture" : 1 p. at end

Includes index

London, Printed by R[obert] Everingham [1645-1705] for the Author, and are to be sold by T. Parkhurst at the Bible and three Crowns in Cheap-side, and N. Simmons at the Princes Arms in S. Paul's Church-yard 1677-1681 Bi(bli)ographics If born earlier Andrew Yarranton’s profile would have easily matched that of a so called ‘ merchant adventurer ’. Even his death was unusual. John Aubrey (1626-1697) reports in Brief Lives : “Capt. Yarrington [Yarranton] dyed at London about March last. The cause of his death was a beating and throwne into a tub of water.” (1) The French historian Paul Mantoux (1877-1956) sketched Yarranton as “ an officer in the army of the Long Parliament, an ironmaster, a linen-cloth manufacturer, an engineer, an agriculturist and an economist, he united the wild schemes of an adventurer with the broad views of a man of genius .” (2) Yarranton’s achievements as economist have been acknowledged by Patrick Edward Dove (1815-1873) who published in 1854 a book titled: Account of Andrew Yarranton, the founder of English political economy . (3) While few would probably share Dove’s assessment today this different assessment does not to take away anything from Yarranton’s achievements (and failures), his mental attitude and the immensely practical drive revealed in his book. The two volume title is still considered one of the hallmark publications of English practical mercantilism. While mercantilism never was a coherent theory per se its common denominator was foreign trade with the goal of a trade surplus and (at least initially) the accumulation of precious metal. Part of the long title of the volumes ‘ To Out-do the Dutch without Fighting… ‘ refers to this mercantilist goal. But in essence Yarranton seems to have been an ‘inexhaustible projector’. Many of his projects failed for a variety of reasons. Despite this Paul Mantoux summarizes his endeavors as follows: “ Yarranton was bold enough to believe that his country could prevail over rival nations without fighting, that a well-used peace was better than a successful war, and that the true glory of a State consisted in the work, wealth and civilization of its inhabitants .” (4) Yarranton’s unusual end indicates that his life was not without conflict and enemies. He was arrested several times for treason. Some of the conflicts are retold in Samuel Smiles’ (1812-1904) biography of Yarranton in ‘ Industrial Lives ’ (5) & (6) Literature: (1) AUBREY , John, Brief Lives. Chiefly of Contemporaries set down by John Aubrey between the Years 1669 & 1696. Edited by Andrew Clark. Oxford 1898, VOL. II. (I-Y), p. 316, available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/briefliveschiefl01aubr (2) MANTOUX , Paul Joseph, The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century – An outline of the beginnings of the modern factory system in England. Translated (from the French) by Marjorie Vernon, [1961] reprint 2006, p. 121, partly available online at https://books.google.de/books?id=VIkRpyE4u80C&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false (3) DOVE , Patrick Edward, Account of Andrew Yarranton, The Founder of English Political Economy. Edinburgh, 1854 available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/accountandrewya00dovegoog (4) [2] MANTOUX , Paul Joseph, p. 122 (5) SMILES , Samuel, Industrial Biography: Iron Workers and Tool-Makers, Boston 1864, Chapter IV. Andrew Yarranton, pp. 85-104. Available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/industrialbiogr06smilgoog Also see the rather critical assessment of Yarranton by: (6) ALFF , David, The Wreckage of Intentions – Projects in British Culture, 1660-1730, Philadelphia 2017

London, Printed by R[obert] Everingham [1645-1705] for the Author, and are to be sold by T. Parkhurst at the Bible and three Crowns in Cheap-side, and N. Simmons at the Princes Arms in S. Paul's Church-yard 1677-1681 Bi(bli)ographics If born earlier Andrew Yarranton’s profile would have easily matched that of a so called ‘ merchant adventurer ’. Even his death was unusual. John Aubrey (1626-1697) reports in Brief Lives : “Capt. Yarrington [Yarranton] dyed at London about March last. The cause of his death was a beating and throwne into a tub of water.” (1) The French historian Paul Mantoux (1877-1956) sketched Yarranton as “ an officer in the army of the Long Parliament, an ironmaster, a linen-cloth manufacturer, an engineer, an agriculturist and an economist, he united the wild schemes of an adventurer with the broad views of a man of genius .” (2) Yarranton’s achievements as economist have been acknowledged by Patrick Edward Dove (1815-1873) who published in 1854 a book titled: Account of Andrew Yarranton, the founder of English political economy . (3) While few would probably share Dove’s assessment today this different assessment does not to take away anything from Yarranton’s achievements (and failures), his mental attitude and the immensely practical drive revealed in his book. The two volume title is still considered one of the hallmark publications of English practical mercantilism. While mercantilism never was a coherent theory per se its common denominator was foreign trade with the goal of a trade surplus and (at least initially) the accumulation of precious metal. Part of the long title of the volumes ‘ To Out-do the Dutch without Fighting… ‘ refers to this mercantilist goal. But in essence Yarranton seems to have been an ‘inexhaustible projector’. Many of his projects failed for a variety of reasons. Despite this Paul Mantoux summarizes his endeavors as follows: “ Yarranton was bold enough to believe that his country could prevail over rival nations without fighting, that a well-used peace was better than a successful war, and that the true glory of a State consisted in the work, wealth and civilization of its inhabitants .” (4) Yarranton’s unusual end indicates that his life was not without conflict and enemies. He was arrested several times for treason. Some of the conflicts are retold in Samuel Smiles’ (1812-1904) biography of Yarranton in ‘ Industrial Lives ’ (5) & (6) Literature: (1) AUBREY , John, Brief Lives. Chiefly of Contemporaries set down by John Aubrey between the Years 1669 & 1696. Edited by Andrew Clark. Oxford 1898, VOL. II. (I-Y), p. 316, available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/briefliveschiefl01aubr (2) MANTOUX , Paul Joseph, The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century – An outline of the beginnings of the modern factory system in England. Translated (from the French) by Marjorie Vernon, [1961] reprint 2006, p. 121, partly available online at https://books.google.de/books?id=VIkRpyE4u80C&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false (3) DOVE , Patrick Edward, Account of Andrew Yarranton, The Founder of English Political Economy. Edinburgh, 1854 available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/accountandrewya00dovegoog (4) [2] MANTOUX , Paul Joseph, p. 122 (5) SMILES , Samuel, Industrial Biography: Iron Workers and Tool-Makers, Boston 1864, Chapter IV. Andrew Yarranton, pp. 85-104. Available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/industrialbiogr06smilgoog Also see the rather critical assessment of Yarranton by: (6) ALFF , David, The Wreckage of Intentions – Projects in British Culture, 1660-1730, Philadelphia 2017

London, Printed by R[obert] Everingham [1645-1705] for the Author, and are to be sold by T. Parkhurst at the Bible and three Crowns in Cheap-side, and N. Simmons at the Princes Arms in S. Paul's Church-yard 1677-1681 Bi(bli)ographics If born earlier Andrew Yarranton’s profile would have easily matched that of a so called ‘ merchant adventurer ’. Even his death was unusual. John Aubrey (1626-1697) reports in Brief Lives : “Capt. Yarrington [Yarranton] dyed at London about March last. The cause of his death was a beating and throwne into a tub of water.” (1) The French historian Paul Mantoux (1877-1956) sketched Yarranton as “ an officer in the army of the Long Parliament, an ironmaster, a linen-cloth manufacturer, an engineer, an agriculturist and an economist, he united the wild schemes of an adventurer with the broad views of a man of genius .” (2) Yarranton’s achievements as economist have been acknowledged by Patrick Edward Dove (1815-1873) who published in 1854 a book titled: Account of Andrew Yarranton, the founder of English political economy . (3) While few would probably share Dove’s assessment today this different assessment does not to take away anything from Yarranton’s achievements (and failures), his mental attitude and the immensely practical drive revealed in his book. The two volume title is still considered one of the hallmark publications of English practical mercantilism. While mercantilism never was a coherent theory per se its common denominator was foreign trade with the goal of a trade surplus and (at least initially) the accumulation of precious metal. Part of the long title of the volumes ‘ To Out-do the Dutch without Fighting… ‘ refers to this mercantilist goal. But in essence Yarranton seems to have been an ‘inexhaustible projector’. Many of his projects failed for a variety of reasons. Despite this Paul Mantoux summarizes his endeavors as follows: “ Yarranton was bold enough to believe that his country could prevail over rival nations without fighting, that a well-used peace was better than a successful war, and that the true glory of a State consisted in the work, wealth and civilization of its inhabitants .” (4) Yarranton’s unusual end indicates that his life was not without conflict and enemies. He was arrested several times for treason. Some of the conflicts are retold in Samuel Smiles’ (1812-1904) biography of Yarranton in ‘ Industrial Lives ’ (5) & (6) Literature: (1) AUBREY , John, Brief Lives. Chiefly of Contemporaries set down by John Aubrey between the Years 1669 & 1696. Edited by Andrew Clark. Oxford 1898, VOL. II. (I-Y), p. 316, available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/briefliveschiefl01aubr (2) MANTOUX , Paul Joseph, The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century – An outline of the beginnings of the modern factory system in England. Translated (from the French) by Marjorie Vernon, [1961] reprint 2006, p. 121, partly available online at https://books.google.de/books?id=VIkRpyE4u80C&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false (3) DOVE , Patrick Edward, Account of Andrew Yarranton, The Founder of English Political Economy. Edinburgh, 1854 available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/accountandrewya00dovegoog (4) [2] MANTOUX , Paul Joseph, p. 122 (5) SMILES , Samuel, Industrial Biography: Iron Workers and Tool-Makers, Boston 1864, Chapter IV. Andrew Yarranton, pp. 85-104. Available as Community Text at https://archive.org/details/industrialbiogr06smilgoog Also see the rather critical assessment of Yarranton by: (6) ALFF , David, The Wreckage of Intentions – Projects in British Culture, 1660-1730, Philadelphia 2017

Ja hadithe, fetwat dhe komente e teologeve islamik qe faktojne se ne ISISlam eshte hallall, kurveria, pedofilia, gerantofilia, nekrofilia, homoseksualizmi, zoofilia etj etj! Evry Muslim is allowed to have sex with his female slave. If he does not have female slave and wife is not at home then he must release his lust with sheep or gopat- Dr. Zakir Naik. Man can have sex with animals such as sheep, camels,goats and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his organzm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village. But selling the meat to a neighbouring willage is reasonable.- Ayatollah Khomeini. Ibn Qayyim then goes on to make permissible the use of a dildoe by women. Ibn Qayyim writes:“If a woman does not have a husband, and her lust becomes strong, then some of our scholars say: It is permissible for the woman to take an akranbij( dildo, concumber, banana etc), which is a piece of leather worked until it becomes shaped like a penis, and insert it in herself. She may also use a cucumber”. Ibn Qayyim writes: “If a man makes a hole in a watermelon, or a piece of dough, or a doll, or a leather skin, or a statue, and has sex with it, then this is the same as what we have said about other types of masturbation [i.e., that it is halaal in the same circumstances given before, such as being on a journey]. In fact, it is easier than masturbating with one’s hand”. Sunni Imam Abu Bakar al-Kashani (d. 587 H) records in his authority work ‘Badaye al-Sanae’ Volume 2 page 216: “If he had sexual intercourse with an animal, that will not make his hajj void” Fatawa Qadhi Khan, Page 820, the learned Hanafi scholar Allamah Hassan bin Mansoor Qadhi Khan sets out those acts that do not invalidate one’s fast, and he includes: “Sex with animals, dead people and masturbation, does not invalidate one’s fast provided ejaculation does not occur” Imam Fakhruddin Hasan Bin Mansoor al-Uzjandi al-Farghani, commonly known as Qazi Khan, was a Hanafi Mufti and scholar; compiler of a large number of essential juristic works and commentaries of Hanafi Fiqh. In his famous work Al-Fatawa Al-Hindiyyah Volume 1, page 15 states the following ruling: “And penetrating an animal or a dead body and a child that cannot bear penetration does not make Ghusl obligatory if he does not ejaculate as mentioned in Al-Muhit, but the correct opinion is that if he is able to penetrate the small child in the place of intercourse and does not cause her ifdhaa (i.e. tearing the tissue between vagina and anus and making them one canal), then she counts as a woman that can bear intercourse as it is mentioned in Al-Siraj Al-Wahhaj”. "Those scenarios wherein an obligatory bath is not required at page 119: 4. If a man inserts his penis into the sexual organ or anus of a corpse or an animal or if he inserts their penises into his own anus there is no obligation on him to perform the compulsary bath PROVIDED he doesn't orgasm. Similarly if a woman inserts into her vagina or anus the penis of a corpse or an animal, a dead body, a stick, fingers or any other foreign object there is no obligation on her to perform the compulsary bath PROVIDED she doesn't orgasm 5. If an underage boy has intercourse with a woman, the obligatory bath won't be required from either of them, provided the woman is mature (has attained puberty) 6.If a man inserts his penis into his own anus he does not have to perform the obligatory bath 7.If a man has sex with an underaged girl there is no obligation to perform the compulsary bath provided he doesn't orgasm and the girl is so young that intercourse doesn't cause her vaginal and anal canal to merge into one Ashraf 'Ali Thanwi was an Indian scholar of the Deobandi Hanafi sect. Though this is a generally Hanafi ruling in his works he has issued this fatwa; 1.aforementioned fear in a very minor, then mere insertion of the penis does not render Ghusul obligatory. 5. If person has sexual intercourse with a minor girl, Ghusul (Bath) will not become obligatory on her. But in order to get her into the habit, she should be made to bath. Ibn Najim Al-Hanafi recorded: If a man enters his penis into the vagina of a complex neutral (hermaphrodite/kusrah), Ghusl is not obligatory upon them, because it is possible the neutral (hermaphrodite/kusrah) is actually a man and that vagina could be like a cut in his body. Allamah Hassan bin Mansoor Qadhi Khan writes in his book of fatwa, Volume 4, p. 820: Of things which are haram but for which there is no Islamic penalty, these include… marrying your wife’s sister, or her mother, or a woman who is already married. Hanafi work, Fatwa Alamgiri: “If someone marries five women at a time or marries a fifth woman while already having four wives or marries his sister in law or mother in law and then performs intercourse with her and then says that I knew that it is haram for me or performs nikah al mutah with a woman then there will be no plenty of adultery on him in all of these situations though he confessed that he knew it was haram on him” al Bidaya: “One day ‘Ali attacked Amr ibn Aas, he threw a spear and Amr fell to the ground, Amr fell to the ground and he then exposed his buttocks. ‘Ali then turned away his face [people said] this was Amr bin Aas. ‘Ali replied he showed me his anus and this made me merciful to him. When Amr ibn Aas returned, Mu’awiya said ‘You should praise Allah and your anus”. Allamah Abu Hanifa Ahmed bin Dawud Dinori in ‘Akhbar al Tawaal’ has reported the flashing incident in the same manner, with the words of Mu’awiya to his beloved Commander as follows: “You should shower praises on Allah (swt) and that black anus that saved your life today” Abu Fadhl Ahmad bin Husayn bin Yahya bin Saeed al Madani: “Abu Fathah narrates ‘On one occasion I had the opportunity to see a dead body and I said ‘He is not dead but alive’. People asked ‘How do you know?’ I replied ‘When a man dies his anus goes cold, and I have made this comment in light of this fact, verily he is alive’. Upon saying this all of those present placed their fingers in the body’s anus and concluded he is not dead but is alive”.

Ja hadithe, fetwat dhe komente e teologeve islamik qe faktojne se ne ISISlam eshte hallall, kurveria, pedofilia, gerantofilia, nekrofilia, homoseksualizmi, zoofilia etj etj! Evry Muslim is allowed to have sex with his female slave. If he does not have female slave and wife is not at home then he must release his lust with sheep or gopat- Dr. Zakir Naik. Man can have sex with animals such as sheep, camels,goats and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his organzm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village. But selling the meat to a neighbouring willage is reasonable.- Ayatollah Khomeini. Ibn Qayyim then goes on to make permissible the use of a dildoe by women. Ibn Qayyim writes:“If a woman does not have a husband, and her lust becomes strong, then some of our scholars say: It is permissible for the woman to take an akranbij( dildo, concumber, banana etc), which is a piece of leather worked until it becomes shaped like a penis, and insert it in herself. She may also use a cucumber”. Ibn Qayyim writes: “If a man makes a hole in a watermelon, or a piece of dough, or a doll, or a leather skin, or a statue, and has sex with it, then this is the same as what we have said about other types of masturbation [i.e., that it is halaal in the same circumstances given before, such as being on a journey]. In fact, it is easier than masturbating with one’s hand”. Sunni Imam Abu Bakar al-Kashani (d. 587 H) records in his authority work ‘Badaye al-Sanae’ Volume 2 page 216: “If he had sexual intercourse with an animal, that will not make his hajj void” Fatawa Qadhi Khan, Page 820, the learned Hanafi scholar Allamah Hassan bin Mansoor Qadhi Khan sets out those acts that do not invalidate one’s fast, and he includes: “Sex with animals, dead people and masturbation, does not invalidate one’s fast provided ejaculation does not occur” Imam Fakhruddin Hasan Bin Mansoor al-Uzjandi al-Farghani, commonly known as Qazi Khan, was a Hanafi Mufti and scholar; compiler of a large number of essential juristic works and commentaries of Hanafi Fiqh. In his famous work Al-Fatawa Al-Hindiyyah Volume 1, page 15 states the following ruling: “And penetrating an animal or a dead body and a child that cannot bear penetration does not make Ghusl obligatory if he does not ejaculate as mentioned in Al-Muhit, but the correct opinion is that if he is able to penetrate the small child in the place of intercourse and does not cause her ifdhaa (i.e. tearing the tissue between vagina and anus and making them one canal), then she counts as a woman that can bear intercourse as it is mentioned in Al-Siraj Al-Wahhaj”. "Those scenarios wherein an obligatory bath is not required at page 119: 4. If a man inserts his penis into the sexual organ or anus of a corpse or an animal or if he inserts their penises into his own anus there is no obligation on him to perform the compulsary bath PROVIDED he doesn't orgasm. Similarly if a woman inserts into her vagina or anus the penis of a corpse or an animal, a dead body, a stick, fingers or any other foreign object there is no obligation on her to perform the compulsary bath PROVIDED she doesn't orgasm 5. If an underage boy has intercourse with a woman, the obligatory bath won't be required from either of them, provided the woman is mature (has attained puberty) 6.If a man inserts his penis into his own anus he does not have to perform the obligatory bath 7.If a man has sex with an underaged girl there is no obligation to perform the compulsary bath provided he doesn't orgasm and the girl is so young that intercourse doesn't cause her vaginal and anal canal to merge into one Ashraf 'Ali Thanwi was an Indian scholar of the Deobandi Hanafi sect. Though this is a generally Hanafi ruling in his works he has issued this fatwa; 1.aforementioned fear in a very minor, then mere insertion of the penis does not render Ghusul obligatory. 5. If person has sexual intercourse with a minor girl, Ghusul (Bath) will not become obligatory on her. But in order to get her into the habit, she should be made to bath. Ibn Najim Al-Hanafi recorded: If a man enters his penis into the vagina of a complex neutral (hermaphrodite/kusrah), Ghusl is not obligatory upon them, because it is possible the neutral (hermaphrodite/kusrah) is actually a man and that vagina could be like a cut in his body. Allamah Hassan bin Mansoor Qadhi Khan writes in his book of fatwa, Volume 4, p. 820: Of things which are haram but for which there is no Islamic penalty, these include… marrying your wife’s sister, or her mother, or a woman who is already married. Hanafi work, Fatwa Alamgiri: “If someone marries five women at a time or marries a fifth woman while already having four wives or marries his sister in law or mother in law and then performs intercourse with her and then says that I knew that it is haram for me or performs nikah al mutah with a woman then there will be no plenty of adultery on him in all of these situations though he confessed that he knew it was haram on him” al Bidaya: “One day ‘Ali attacked Amr ibn Aas, he threw a spear and Amr fell to the ground, Amr fell to the ground and he then exposed his buttocks. ‘Ali then turned away his face [people said] this was Amr bin Aas. ‘Ali replied he showed me his anus and this made me merciful to him. When Amr ibn Aas returned, Mu’awiya said ‘You should praise Allah and your anus”. Allamah Abu Hanifa Ahmed bin Dawud Dinori in ‘Akhbar al Tawaal’ has reported the flashing incident in the same manner, with the words of Mu’awiya to his beloved Commander as follows: “You should shower praises on Allah (swt) and that black anus that saved your life today” Abu Fadhl Ahmad bin Husayn bin Yahya bin Saeed al Madani: “Abu Fathah narrates ‘On one occasion I had the opportunity to see a dead body and I said ‘He is not dead but alive’. People asked ‘How do you know?’ I replied ‘When a man dies his anus goes cold, and I have made this comment in light of this fact, verily he is alive’. Upon saying this all of those present placed their fingers in the body’s anus and concluded he is not dead but is alive”.

308, [32] p. 27 cm

308, [32] p. 27 cm