Shortly after the emigration to Abyssinia, the Muslims came back to Makkah. So much so it's narrated that they came back in the month of Shawwal (شوال). They emigrated in Rajab but came back just 3 months later. There were about 15 people who emigrated, and they all came back. What happened to cause them to change their mind and come back to the very land of torture?
Introduction
This incident is the famous incident some have called 'the incident of the satanic verses'. We need to discuss what exactly was this incident, and why did the sahaba return.
The sahaba's decision to return was prompted by a single rumor, namely, the alleged acceptance of Islam by the Quraysh.
Now, anybody who has moved —even in modern times— understands that relocating to an unfamiliar land can be a challenging experience. Despite the fact that the sahaba didn't face persecution during their stay in Abyssinia, the process of acclimatization to a distinct language and culture posed its own difficulties. Thus, when the rumor circulated that the Quraysh had embraced Islam, the sahaba, yearning to return to Makkah, readily embraced the news. Driven by a deep longing to return, they hastily packed their belongings and embarked on the journey back to Makkah, unable to confirm the accuracy of the rumor. However, their hopes were shattered when they discovered the rumor to be unfounded during their journey back.
And this prompts us to inquire into the origins of the rumor. What was its basis? How did it come about? And analyzing this compels us to delve deeper into the incident known as 'the incident of the satanic verses.'
Before we delve into the details, it is essential to acknowledge that this incident is subject to various interpretations. So let us talk about the different versions of the story that exist. And to keep our discussion concise, we will focus on three versions:
______________
Version 1
This is the version reported in Sahih Bukhari, thus the most authentic. And it says in this hadith that in the month of Ramadan (the month is not mentioned in Bukhari, but we learn this from Ibn Ishaq), in the 5th year of the dawah, the Prophet PBUH recited Surah al-Najm (سورة النجم) in its entirety. Surah al-Najm is a very powerful and eloquent surah. The momentum and the excitement builds up, especially toward the end. And its power affected the entire congregation —Muslim and non-Muslim— such that when the Prophet PBUH recited the last verse, "Prostrate to Allah and worship Him," the Muslims fell into sajdah, and the Quraysh were so emotional that they too fell into sajdah. And thus, for the first time, Muslim and non-Muslim *all* united behind the Prophet PBUH — except for al-Walid ibn al-Mughira (or in another version, it's said Umayyah ibn Khalaf) who put sand to his head and said, "This is good enough for me."
And by the time this news reached the 15 sahaba in Abyssinia, the rumor had been exaggerated and become "the Quraysh have all accepted Islam."
This is the version narrated in Bukhari. A simple story.
Unfortunately, we don't have enough time to thoroughly discuss Surah al-Najm. But do recognize that it is such a powerful and eloquent surah. Each verse builds excitement, leading to a powerful conclusion that even the Quraysh couldn't help but be overwhelmed by its impact and join the Prophet PBUH in prostration. In the last few ayahs, Allah says:
أَمْ لَمْ يُنَبَّأْ بِمَا فِي صُحُفِ مُوسَىٰ
وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ الَّذِي وَفَّىٰ
أَلَّا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَىٰ
وَأَن لَّيْسَ لِلْإِنسَانِ إِلَّا مَا سَعَىٰ
وَأَنَّ سَعْيَهُ سَوْفَ يُرَىٰ
ثُمَّ يُجْزَاهُ الْجَزَاءَ الْأَوْفَىٰ
وَأَنَّ إِلَىٰ رَبِّكَ الْمُنتَهَىٰ
وَأَنَّهُ هُوَ أَضْحَكَ وَأَبْكَىٰ
وَأَنَّهُ هُوَ أَمَاتَ وَأَحْيَا
وَأَنَّهُ خَلَقَ الزَّوْجَيْنِ الذَّكَرَ وَالْأُنثَىٰ
مِن نُّطْفَةٍ إِذَا تُمْنَىٰ
وَأَنَّ عَلَيْهِ النَّشْأَةَ الْأُخْرَىٰ
وَأَنَّهُ هُوَ أَغْنَىٰ وَأَقْنَىٰ
وَأَنَّهُ هُوَ رَبُّ الشِّعْرَىٰ
وَأَنَّهُ أَهْلَكَ عَادًا الْأُولَىٰ
وَثَمُودَ فَمَا أَبْقَىٰ
وَقَوْمَ نُوحٍ مِّن قَبْلُ ۖ إِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا هُمْ أَظْلَمَ وَأَطْغَىٰ
وَالْمُؤْتَفِكَةَ أَهْوَىٰ
فَغَشَّاهَا مَا غَشَّىٰ
فَبِأَيِّ آلَاءِ رَبِّكَ تَتَمَارَىٰ
هَٰذَا نَذِيرٌ مِّنَ النُّذُرِ الْأُولَىٰ
أَزِفَتِ الْآزِفَةُ
لَيْسَ لَهَا مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ كَاشِفَةٌ
أَفَمِنْ هَٰذَا الْحَدِيثِ تَعْجَبُونَ
وَتَضْحَكُونَ وَلَا تَبْكُونَ
وَأَنتُمْ سَامِدُونَ
فَاسْجُدُوا لِلَّهِ وَاعْبُدُوا
"Or has he not been informed of what was in the scriptures of Moses
And [of] Abraham, who fulfilled [his obligations]
That no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another
And that there is not for man except that [good] for which he strives
And that his effort is going to be seen
Then he will be recompensed for it with the fullest recompense
And that to your Lord is the finality
And that it is He who makes [one] laugh and weep
And that it is He who causes death and gives life
And that He creates the two mates — the male and female
From a sperm-drop when it is emitted
And that [incumbent] upon Him is the next creation
And that it is He who enriches and suffices
And that it is He who is the Lord of Sirius
And that He destroyed the first [people of] 'Ad
And Thamud — and He did not spare [them]
And the people of Noah before. Indeed, it was they who were [even] more unjust and oppressing.
And the overturned towns He hurled down
And covered them by that which He covered.
Then which of the favors of your Lord do you doubt?
This [Prophet] is a warner like the former warners.
The Approaching Day has approached.
Of it, [from those] besides Allah, there is no remover.
Then at this statement do you wonder?
And you laugh and do not weep
While you are proudly sporting?
So prostrate to Allah and worship [Him]"
[53:36-62].
It is truly a captivating surah with constant rhetorical questions — and on top of that, imagine the Prophet PBUH reciting it. It was so powerful that when the Prophet PBUH reached the end and fell into prostration, even the Quraysh fell into prostration with him.
And so version 1, the Bukhari version, is the authentic version. No question about it. It doesn't need any far-fetched tale to explain it. It was narrated by Ibn Abbas, "The Prophet PBUH recited Surah al-Najm, and he prostrated, and the Muslims and the mushriks —jinn and ins (إنس - humans)— all prostrated with him; except for al-Walid ibn al-Mughira (or in another version Umayyah ibn Khalaf) who took sand and put it on his head and said, 'This is sufficient for me.'"
In this version, there is no mention of shaytan.
______________
Disputed Versions (Version 2 and Version 3)
Version 2 and version 3 revolve around reports that are not found in the famous books of hadith. They are not found in the 6 Books or Musnad Imam Ahmad, not even in Ibn Ishaq or Ibn Hisham. They are found usually in the more obscure works — books that collect everything; the tertiary works. Such as al-Tabari's Tafsir and al-Wahidi's (الواحدي) (d. 1076 CE) Asbab al-Nuzul (أسباب النزول - Circumstances of Revelation). And we need to understand one thing: al-Tabari did not intend to write a summarized tafsir for the masses; rather, he wanted to write an encyclopedia for the scholars. He mentioned at the beginning of his famous book: "I will report absolutely everything I hear, authentic or not." So we need to realize that al-Tabari is not Bukhari who was a critical collector. And the following reports that mention a story that involves Iblis/shaytan are found in these tertiary books.
And because it involves Iblis, a Western researcher (orientalist) by the name of Sir William Muir (d. 1905 CE) coined the term 'satanic verses' to refer to this particular incident. (Side note: Sir William Muir was a Presbyterian minister who specialized in Islam and became a professor in Scotland. And he wrote a big book about the seerah in English.) The Islamic sources on the other hand call the incident Qissat al-Gharaniq (قصة الغرانيق - the Story of the Gharaniq). Gharaniq is the name of a beautiful bird with a long neck — modern Arab linguists differ whether it's a pelican, heron, or crane.
In essence, versions 2 and 3 are the same — but there is one critical difference:
Version 2
This version adds details not found in Bukhari or any well-known seerah books. The report is found in al-Tabari in his Tafsir, and the isnad goes back to Urwah ibn al-Zubayr. And it is important to note that Urwah was not a sahabi — so there is a missing link in the chain of narration; it does not go back to the Prophet PBUH. Thus, this is the main weakness of this particular narration.
Before delving into the narrative, it is pertinent to review verses 19-22 of Surah al-Najm. Allah says, "Have you not seen al-Lat and al-Uzza? [19]. And the third of them Manat? [20]. Are you going to get the males and you will give Him the females? [21]. What an unfair sharing [22]."
Now, the story goes as follows: Urwah said: After verse 20, shaytan cried out and added two verses that were not in the Quran, and these verses were heard by the nonbelievers (i.e., the Quraysh) but *not* the believers. After "Have you not seen al-Lat and al-Uzza and the third of them Manat?" he added, "These idols are the mighty cranes, and their requests (intercessions) will be granted." When the mushriks heard these verses, they rejoiced, "Finally! He (the Prophet PBUH) has come to the middle ground! He is willing to praise and accept our gods!" (Note: Recall the Quraysh's problem with the Message of the Prophet PBUH was that he PBUH rejected al-Lat and al-Uzza. And the Quraysh never had a problem with believing in Allah [see episode 4].) So when the Quraysh heard the shaytan's cry —which they mistook for Quranic verses— they said, "Muhammad has agreed to accept our gods!" And thus, when the Prophet PBUH finished reciting Surah al-Najm, they all prostrated with him.
Version 3
This version is found in al-Wahidi and other Islamic sources. (So to to be clear, the story of 'the satanic verses' was not concocted by non-Muslims. They are found in Muslim sources. This is why non-Muslims jump on this incident and say, "The Quran can be changed even by shaytan — so this story clearly proves that Muhammad invented the Quran — he changed his theology one day to the next, singing the tune of the people!")
Version 3 is even worse — in version 2, shaytan recited out and the mushrikun heard; but in version 3, it's said the Prophet PBUH hears shaytan's recitation and thinks it is Jibril AS reciting to him, so then with his own tongue, the Prophet PBUH recited those 'satanic verses.' This is of course even worse — because those who believe this story are now saying that the Prophet PBUH couldn't tell the difference between shaytan and Jibril AS. [Nevertheless, even if we were to consider this version authentic, there exists a proper framework for its understanding, as we shall discuss in due course.]
______________
Recap
So we have three versions.
1. Version 1 is the most authentic version, found in the most authentic sources, such as Sahih al-Bukhari, Musnad Imam Ahmad, etc.
Then it gets lower and lower in authenticity.
2. In version 2, the details say shaytan screamed out and the Muslims didn't hear but the non-Muslims did.
3. In the 3rd version, it's said shaytan pretends to be Jibril AS. When Jibril recites the Quran, shaytan throws in two verses — and thinking that these verses are legitimate parts of the Quran, the Prophet PBUH recites them. And when the Quraysh prostrated, according to this version, Jibril AS came back and asked the Prophet PBUH, "What did you recite?" So he PBUH recited Surah al-Najm with the two 'satanic verses' to Jibril AS, who then stated, "I never told you to say this." And this deeply saddened and distressed the Prophet PBUH, as it gave him the impression that he had invented these verses from his own imagination. And according to this version, Allah revealed verses 52 & 53 of Surah al-Hajj in relation to this incident:
"Whenever We sent a messenger or a prophet before you [O Prophet] and he recited [Our revelations], satan would influence [people’s understanding of] his recitation. But [eventually] Allah would eliminate satan's influence. Then Allah would [firmly] establish His revelations. And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. All that so He may make satan's influence a trial for those whose hearts are sick and those [disbelievers] whose hearts are hardened. Surely the wrongdoers are totally engrossed in opposition" [22:52-53] — Dr. Mustafa Khattab, the Clear Quran.
"And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet except that when he spoke [or recited], satan threw into it [some misunderstanding]. But Allah abolishes that which satan throws in; then Allah makes precise His verses. And Allah is Knowing and Wise. [That is] so He may make what satan throws in [i.e., asserts] a trial for those within whose hearts is disease and those hard of heart. And indeed, the wrongdoers are in extreme dissension" [22:52-53] — Saheeh International.
So according to version 3, shaytan succeeds in deceiving the Prophet PBUH, and the Prophet PBUH recites the so-called 'satanic verses'; however, Allah then corrects 'the satanic verses,' and the proper recitation is revealed; and this prompts the Quraysh, who initially entertained the notion of joining hands, to retract their willingness; and the exaggerated narrative of this incident reaches the Muslims in Abyssinia, and they decide to return.
______________
Scholars' Interpretations: Exploring Supporters of Each Version
The issue in coming to a conclusion about which story is correct is that not all scholars agree. There is no question that the first report is authentic — it is reported in Bukhari. But the problem is that the second and third versions do not contradict the outline provided by it. As such, there are major Islamic scholars supporting the second and even the third version.
The majority of scholars, however, discarded the second and third versions and stuck with version 1. And these were big names, such as:
- Ibn Kathir — the most famous scholar of tafsir.
- Al-Qadi Ayyad (القاضي عياض) (d. 544 AH) — a specialist in seerah.
- Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (فخر الدين الرازي) (d. 606 AH).
- Al-Albani (الألباني) (d. 1999 CE) — the greatest scholar of hadith of our times, who wrote an entire booklet on just this story, and he went over every single report wherever it is found, and shows in academic detail that every one is weak.
- Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Khuzaymah (محمد بن إسحاق بن خزيمة) (d. 311 AH) — one of the four people to have written a sahih book. (Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Hibban [ابن حبان] [d. 354 AH], and Ibn Khuzaymah.) And when he was asked about this story, he said, "This is a fabrication that the enemies of Islam concocted to try to destroy Islam." It is interesting to note that even during the earliest stage of Islamic history, some people were already saying this.
How we wish we could have restricted ourselves to these scholars.
But unfortunately, there are scholars who do follow the other versions of the story as well. (Interesting side note: In 1966, a worldwide conference was held in Cairo, Egypt, specifically dedicated to academically discussing this particular story. The conference witnessed the presence of numerous eminent scholars, and they delivered papers, presented references, and offered compelling evidence. The conference concluded that versions 2 and 3 of the story are fabrications. Thus, it is widely agreed among contemporary scholars to cross out versions 2 and 3 as unnecessary details. This consensus is reflected in modern seerah books, where these versions are either omitted or identified as fabrications. However, it is important to note that this is not the sole stance within Sunni Islam. Some scholars have embraced version 2, and a few have even accepted version 3.) And had they been small names, we could have ignored them — but they were all equally big names:
Version 2, which suggests that Iblis spoke out loud and the Prophet PBUH was unaware, is comparatively more plausible for us to accept, especially when compared to version 3. In this version, there is no direct interference with the process of wahy itself. So essentially, if the Prophet PBUH did not take part, how can we place blame on him? This version is accepted by a lot of scholars, most notably Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, a renowned expert on Sahih al-Bukhari. Ibn Hajar's argument is that while it is true that each individual story in versions 2 and 3 is not reported with an authentic chain, when you consider them collectively, the presence of multiple chains can provide supporting evidence to one another, thus lending credibility to the overall narrative. And this leads us to a brief tangent regarding the sciences of hadith: It is a recognized principle that when multiple weak chains exist for the same narration, the scholars of hadith may combine these chains to authenticate the hadith, despite the weaknesses in individual chains. Ibn Hajar applied this principle to the incident in question, contending that although the reports are individually weak, their cumulative presence suggests a basis for the story. However, Shaykh al-Albani disagrees and argues that while Ibn Hajar's point about weak reports becoming authentic when combined is generally valid, it cannot be applied universally without exceptions. And Shaykh al-Albani delves into scholarly analysis to demonstrate that this principle should not be extended to encompass this particular incident.
Version 3 — Had this version been supported by anyone else, we could have ignored it — but it is supported by one of the greatest scholars of Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah. And he writes about this in a number of his books and tafsirs, and he says: Not only do all the reports add up and make it authentic, but the verses of Surah al-Hajj [52 & 53] make it crystal clear. An interesting linguistic consideration arises when examining the term 'tamanna' (تمنى) in Arabic, which some may argue primarily means 'to wish.' However, a deeper analysis reveals that the word originally meant 'to recite,' as evidenced by its usage in pre-Islamic poetry. Even Ibn Abbas and other sahaba understood 'tamanna' in verse 52 to mean 'to recite.' As such, verses 52 & 53 can be interpreted in two ways:
Interpretation 1: "...except that when he recites, shaytan produces something and throws it into his recitation. Allah will abrogate what shaytan said, then Allah will make His ayat firm and clear, so that Allah will cause this satanic recitation to be a test for those whose hearts have a disease and those whose hearts are hardened."
Thus, Ibn Taymiyyah asserts that these verses provide a clear depiction of the events surrounding the incident of Surah al-Najm.
However, an alternative interpretation posits that verse 52 does not specifically relate to Surah al-Najm or the so-called 'satanic verses,' but rather, it holds a general meaning:
Interpretation 2: "No prophet or messenger has wishes except that shaytan tries to tamper with his intentions (make him insincere, make him think of something else, etc.). And Allah will get rid of what shaytan says, and Allah will affirm His ayat."
But Ibn Taymiyyah counters this interpretation by questioning its consistency with the subsequent verse: "Whatever the shaytan has said will become a fitna for those in whose hearts is a disease and whose hearts are hardened." So according to Ibn Taymiyyah, this indicates that the prophets and messengers have indeed heard something external, rather than it being an internal matter confined to their thoughts.
______________
Scholars' Arguments: Theological Dimension
Now, we must consider an additional dimension in this discussion, as it pertains to theological implications.
The majority of those who reject versions 2 and 3, particularly version 3, argue that it is inconceivable for the Prophet PBUH to have been unable to distinguish between Jibril AS and shaytan. As it would imply that the revelation itself has the possibility to be corrupted and tampered with — the integrity of the wahy becomes compromised. A famous scholar of our times said, "I hold no regard if the isnads are كالشمس (like the sun); I will [still] not accept this story." And many previous scholars shared similar sentiments. Al-Qadi Ayyad, a distinguished writer of the seerah book "al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa (الشفا بتعريف حقوق المصطفى - the Remedy by the Recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One)," questioned how any Muslim, especially those who hold a deep love for the Prophet PBUH, could accept the notion that he would inadvertently recite the words of shaytan. The argument of these scholars mainly revolves around the concept of ismah, affirming that prophets are ma'sum and incapable of committing mistakes.
While Ibn Hajar agrees on upholding the Prophet's PBUH ismah, he argues that version 2 does not compromise it since shaytan recites without the Prophet's PBUH hearing. Therefore, he suggests disregarding version 3 and accepting version 2.
However, Ibn Taymiyyah, who also believes in the Prophet's PBUH ismah, presents a distinct interpretation of "ismah" compared to other Sunni Muslims. And this is now a theological controversy. According to Ibn Taymiyyah, no doubt, prophets cannot commit (i) major mistakes, (ii) engage in fawahish (فواحش - obscenity/immorality), or (iii) lie; but they can make judgmental errors. And he provides examples, such as the incident of the prisoners of the Battle of Badr when Allah revealed in the Quran, "It is not for a prophet to have captives [of war] until..." [8:67] [see episode 40]. Then Ibn Taymiyyah states that prophets can commit minor sins, but (i) they do not persist, and (ii) they repent immediately. And the primary example he cites is that of Adam AS. He also refers to Surah al-Fath verse 2, "So that Allah may forgive you for your past and future shortcomings, perfect His favor upon you, guide you along the Straight Path" [48:2]. Ibn Taymiyyah's conception of our Prophet Muhammad PBUH is that he is the best human, but he is a human. So he can commit minor mistakes and errors like other prophets — but he does not persist in them and will repent immediately. And in this repentance is the perfection — Allah has made the prophets true role models for us. Indeed, if He had made them like angels, how would they be role models?
Thus, Ibn Taymiyyah argues that version 3 does not at all show that the wahy has been corrupted; rather, it shows the wahy has been protected, and that the Prophet PBUH is the most truthful of all those who speak the truth. Why? Because of the very fact that he came clean with the story. He said to everybody this story that would actually impugn him and make him look bad — but he still said the truth.
Note two stories in the seerah are highly sensitive, emotional, and controversial. The first of these is this 'incident of the satanic verses,' and the second is the story of Zaynab [see episode 69]. Aisha RA, regarding the Prophet's PBUH marriage to Zaynab bint Jahsh RA, remarked: "If the Prophet PBUH were to have hidden any verse from the Quran, he would have hidden this verse (verse [33:37])"—*but* he PBUH did not hide it, which shows his truthfulness PBUH. Hence, in light of 'the incident of the satanic verses,' Ibn Taymiyyah poses the question: Why can we not apply the same to this story? That Allah SWT allowed the shaytan to throw in two verses, but He SWT then abrogated what the shaytan had said and perfected His verses, and the Prophet PBUH came clean and said everything.
Hence, when carefully analyzed, we come to realize that all three versions of the event hold potential validity. And indeed, there are major scholars on all three sides of the equation. Nonetheless:
______________
Sh. Yasir Qadhi's Opinion
Allah AWJ knows the truth; but as a minor student of knowledge, Sh. Yasir Qadhi's opinion is as follows: Version 1 is all that we need, and we can cross out versions 2 and 3 for the following seven reasons:
1. Claiming that Iblis can inspire the Prophet PBUH seems to indicate that the process of wahy can be interfered with. And this seems to go against Allah's guarantee about the purity of revelation, e.g., Quran [41:42], [15:9], [26:192-193]. (And of course, if Ibn Taymiyyah were to engage in our discussion, he would argue that even according to his interpretation, the revelation was not falsified, as Allah abrogated what the shaytan said. — But still, Sh. Yasir's heart inclines toward the fact that the purity of revelation should not be compromised.)
2. There is no authentic isnad for the account of 'the satanic incident.' Every single one is weak and none of them has an unbroken chain back to the Prophet PBUH.
3. Even if we forget the isnad analysis, look at the story itself: There are so many versions of it. In yet another version, it's said the Prophet PBUH was sleepy and made a mistake as a result. In one version, it's said he PBUH was reciting in his salah at the Ka'bah, but according to another, he was sitting in the gathering, reciting.
4. No authentic book of hadith mentions 'the satanic incident' — forget books of hadith, it's not found even in Ibn Hisham and Ibn Ishaq. It is only found in tertiary sources.
5. [This point is the biggest for Sh. YQ] Contextual analysis of the verses. Verses 19-20 show that what will follow will be criticisms because of the istifham inkari (إستفهام إنكاري - derogatory questioning). Inserting 'the satanic verses' —which praise the idols— between verse 20 and verse 21 —which both critique the beliefs of the pagans— disrupts the linguistic and contextual coherence. Such a structure would present an incongruity of transitioning — from criticism to praise to criticism. Even in English, one does not speak in this manner when honoring something.
6. As noted by Muhammad Abduh (محمد عبده) (d. 1905 CE), the esteemed mufti of Egypt, even from a linguistic standpoint, the story lacks credibility. The word "gharaniq" was never employed in pre-Islamic poetry to refer to idols. Its sole appearance occurs within this particular story. If the intention of shaytan was to deceive the pagans, he would have chosen a word familiar to them.
7. We have the authentic narration from Bukhari with a good enough explanation as to why the mushrikun prostrated — it was simply the power of the Quran — and everything makes sense. So why would we resort to 'the incident of the satanic verses'?
______________
Modern researchers as to where this story came from: even legends have a basis. There is a modern historian who theorizes that when the Quraysh prostrated, they felt embarrassed that they had become so emotional, and as a result, they said the reason that they did this was because the Prophet PBUH had agreed to praise their idols. Sadly, we cannot find classic reasoning. It is a reality that the next generation narrated it, but none of the Companions mentioned it.
In the end, all verses have been accounted for — those two verses are not in the Quran anyway. So as Allah says, He has made His verses crystal clear [see Quran, 22:52].
[Transcribed by Br. Safwan Khan & Faizan]
safwan-khan@hotmail.com
[Re-revised by Br. Syed Haq & MAR, June 2023]
safwan-khan@hotmail.com
[Re-revised by Br. Syed Haq & MAR, June 2023]
