BT Vol. 61, No. 2: 71-80

Challenges Facing Bible Translation in the Islamic Context of the Middle East* Issa Diab

The author is a UBS translation consultant and a professor of Semitic and Christian-Muslim Studies in Beirut, Lebanon.

Introduction The mission of Bible translation is closely tied to the question of relationships. Challenges facing Bible translation in the Islamic context of the Middle East are the result of a long history of relations between Christians and Muslims. This is an interdisciplinary paper, covering issues that belong to Christian theology, Islamic studies, sociology of religion, biblical studies, and translation studies. For a good exposition of this complicated subject, I will treat the topic under five headings: (1) the Islamic view of “inspiration,” (2) the attitude of Islam towards Jewish and Christian scriptures, (3) the development of Christian views on scripture and inspiration, (4)  challenges of Bible translation, and (5)  facing these challenges. The Islamic view of inspiration The scriptural sources of Islam are the Qur’ān, the Hadīth, and the Sunnah. The most important of these by far is the Qur’ān, meaning “recitation.” For Muslims it is the book of divine guidance and direction for humankind, and they believe it to be the final revelation of God (2:23-24; 33:40). It is held that the written text was compiled in 633 C.E., under the direction of the first caliph, Abu-Bakr, and that in 653 C.E., in the time of the third caliph Uthmān, it was standardized, distributed throughout the Islamic empire, and produced in large numbers, while the “incorrect” copies were burned. The Qur’ān is crucial for the person and role of Muhammad—it is considered to be his central miracle, and proof that he was truly a prophet of God. Muslims regard it as the last and most important of all revelations of God to humanity. For Islam, these revelations began with Adam, the first prophet, who received his own revelation. Revelations to Abraham and Moses are mentioned in the Qur’ān as suhufi Ibrahima wa-Musa (scrolls of Abraham and Moses, 87:18-19). The Qur’ān also singles out as authentic divine revelations the Tawrāt (Torah, 3:3; 5:44), the * This is a revised version of a paper presented at the UBS Triennial Translation Workshop, Bangkok, 2009. Chapter references are to the Qur’ān unless otherwise indicated. All the qur’ānic texts are taken from The Koran (tr. N. J. Dawood; 7th rev. edition; London: Penguin Classics, 2000).

71

BT-61-2-2010.indd 71

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM

72

the bible translator vol. 61, no. 2 (april 2010)

Zabur (Psalms, 4:163; 17:55), and the Injīl (Gospel, 5:46; 5:110; 57:27). But the Qur’ān is the climax and supersedes all that came before. Islam holds that the Qur’ān was written in Arabic on golden tablets and was with God in the seventh heaven. But God sent it to the angel Jibrīl (Gabriel) in the first heaven and commissioned him to take its āyāt (verses) down to Mohammad in portions as they were needed (17:106). This occurred from 610 C.E. to Mohammad’s death in 632 C.E. Although the prime method of transmission was oral, Muslims believe the Qur’ān was written down by Muhammad’s companions, as it was initially spoken, on tablets, bones, and date palm fronds. Most chapters were in use amongst early Muslims but the Qur’ān did not exist in book form at the time of Muhammad’s death in 632 (Tabataba’i 1988). Thus, Muslims consider the Qur’ān to be a tanzīl (a “sent down” text, 20:2; 25:32), the literal word of God. And since God is transcendent and eternal, his word is too. To Muslims, the Qur’ān is perfect only as revealed in the original Arabic; translations are necessarily deficient because of language differences, the fallibility of translators, and the impossibility of preserving the inspired Arabic words and style. Translations are therefore regarded only as commentaries on the Qur’ān, or “interpretations of its meaning,” not as the Qur’ān itself. The hadīths (literally “narrative”) are oral traditions relating to the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad that were not incorporated in the Qur’ān. Hadīth collections are regarded as important tools for determining the Muslim way of life, the sunnah. They consist of reports passed on about things Muhammad said or did, or things done in his presence of which he approved. The hadīths were eventually written down, evaluated, and gathered into large collections mostly during the reign of Umar II during the eighth and ninth centuries. Sunnah literally means “trodden path”—the sunnah of the Prophet means “the way and the manners of the Prophet.” Arabs used to record their “way of life” or sunnah before the time of Muhammad, and simply continued this tradition—only now it was focussed on the ways of the Prophet (Goldziher 1981, 231). The sunnah of the Prophet, accounts of his actions, practices, and what his sahaba (companions) reported about him, is wider than the hadīth, which contains just the words of the Prophet. However, the two doctrines were closely related in the beginnings of Islam. We can acquire the sunnah by exploring the books of hadīth and biographies of Muhammad. Muslims view Mohammad not as the creator of a new religion, but as the restorer of the original, uncorrupted monotheistic faith of Adam, Abraham, and others. This is the dīn al-fitra (natural or intuitive religion). Mohammad is the last and the greatest in a series of prophets—the man closest to perfection, the possessor of all virtues. Thus Mohammad could transmit the verses of the Qur’ān sent down to him by the angel Gabriel without the slightest change or corruption.

BT-61-2-2010.indd 72

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM



Bible Translation in the Middle East

73

Wahy (usually translated “inspiration”) in Islam includes both the divine message and the divine operation of its delivery to the prophet, combining both the ideas of “revelation” and “inspiration.” It refers to the way in which God speaks to an individual, giving him a message intended for a wider audience. Since God is transcendent and inaccessible to humans, he assigns a mediator, an angel. God sends down (tanzīl) the divine message through his angel, and the message comes down (nuzūl) to the individual: “With the truth we [God] have sent it down and with the truth it has come down.” (17:105) The Qur’ān is full of self-reference, speaking of its own nature and divine origin. It depicts itself as the child of a preexisting text that contained God’s speech before it was sent down (43:3-4)—this is the source of the legendary “Golden Tablets.” The attitude of Islam towards Jewish and Christian scriptures Islam regards itself as the original religion, the religion of Adam. Human beings corrupted this pure religion, and God began sending prophets to bring his revelations to the people. Thus Abraham, Moses, the Hebrew prophets, and Isa (Jesus) were all prophets of Islam, upon whom scriptures “descended” from God, in the same way the Qur’ān descended on Mohammad. So the Tawrāt (Torah) of Moses, the Zabur (Psalms) of David, and the Injīl (Gospel) of Isa were inspired in the same way as the Qur’ān. These sacred books should present to humanity the same message of God since all of them were revealed by the one God, Allah (2:285; 3:3). The Qur’ān contains stories of many more of the same people and events that are found in Jewish and Christian writings, besides those just mentioned. Thus, also among the prophets of God are named Adam, Enoch, Noah, Heber, Shelah, Lot, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Job, Jethro, David, Solomon, Elijah, Elisha, Jonah, Aaron, Zechariah, and John the Baptist. As mentioned, the original Jewish and Christian texts were considered authentic divine revelations that those prophets received prior to Muhammad. However, Muslims also believe that those texts were “neglected and corrupted by the Jews and Christians [a process called tahrīf] and have been replaced by God’s final and perfect revelation, which is the Qur’ān” (Lewis 1984, 69). In the Qur’ān, there are two contradictory attitudes towards the “People of the Book” and their scriptures, probably due to changes in Muhammad’s social and psychological situation. Muhammad’s life is traditionally divided into two parts: the Meccan period and the Medinan period. During the Meccan period, Muhammad showed sympathy towards Christians and Jews. He testified to the integrity of their scriptures and affirmed those scriptures as the word of God. There are about twelve verses in the Qur’ān that specifically mention the Gospel. Additionally, a large number of other qur’ānic verses testify to the truth of the Gospel. Muhammad supported those scriptures because he believed they were God’s word, just as he believed his Qur’ān was God’s word.

BT-61-2-2010.indd 73

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM

the bible translator vol. 61, no. 2 (april 2010)

74

And of Jesus the son of Mary, who said to the Israelites: I am sent forth to you from God to confirm the Torah already revealed, . . . .  (61.6) If they observe the Torah and the Gospel and what is revealed to them from their Lord, they shall enjoy abundance from above and from beneath. (5.66) Therefore let those who follow the Gospel judge according to what God has revealed therein. (5.47). These and many other verses (3.3, 48-50; 5.46-48; 10.37; 12.111; 29.46; 35.31; 61:6) show that both the Torah and the Gospel, revered by the “People of the Book,” were truly God’s word in Muhammad’s viewpoint. But in the Medinan period, Muhammad gradually changed his attitude toward the People of the Book. Scholars suggest at least two reasons for this: (1) The Jews accepted neither his message nor his claim to be a prophet; (2) they showed him differences between their Torah and his sayings. There are two traditional answers to the dilemma posed by this change in opinion: (1) Islam annulled or superseded all the messages that came before it even if they were sent by God; (2)  the Torah and the Gospel had the same message as Muhammad’s but the Jews and the Christians corrupted them, and this was the reason God sent Muhammad. The development of Christian views of scripture and inspiration Literal interpretation is not new. Jewish literalism started with Ezra, who is considered the first of the Jewish interpreters. When the Jews returned from Babylon they spoke Aramaic, not Hebrew, and Ezra expounded the sense of the scriptures to the people (Neh 8). One of the directions that interpretation then took developed into letterism, an extreme form of literalism, whereby, in their intense devotion to the details of the text, interpreters missed the essentials and made mountains of the accidental. Intertestamental Judaism developed in several different directions and what follows is merely an overview of some of the influential ideas that developed with regard to scripture. Judaism saw itself as a revealed religion. God had spoken from heaven to the patriarchs and prophets and given his divine law. This happened through many channels including dreams, auditions, and theophanies. With the exception of the direct appearances of God, all these revelations were mediated by the spirit of Yahweh. The holy spirit was regarded as the spirit of prophecy. So, any to whom God revealed himself could be deemed to be a prophet. Thus the title prophet came to be applied not only to the major and minor prophets, but also to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, and even Mordecai. In all, Judaism recognized forty-eight prophets and seven prophetesses who bore God’s message to Israel (Moore 1930, 235-37). In defining a prophet as one to whom God spoke, the concept of an inspired scripture naturally grew. Everything in scripture was viewed as inspired. According to the rabbis, the holy spirit had inspired the prophets and the scriptural

BT-61-2-2010.indd 74

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM



Bible Translation in the Middle East

75

authors so that every syllable of scripture had the truth and the authority of the word of God. But the Jews did not see all scripture as having an equal level of inspiration. The Torah had come in its entirety from God, every verse and letter. (Much later rabbis extended this even to the vocalization that started taking place not before the sixth century C.E.) This revelation was complete and final. The Prophets and the Writings were seen to add nothing to the Torah but rather served to reinforce, repeat, amplify, and explain it. Contradictions and differences between the Torah and the later writings were denied. The rabbis gave proof-texts for theological points by quoting verses in triplets: one from the Torah, one from the Prophets, and one from the Writings. Islam and Judaism share the idea of a revealed scripture. Even though they differ over the precise text and its interpretations, the Hebrew Torah and the Muslim Qur’ān have a lot in common—including narratives, legal instructions, and many other fundamental religious concepts. Muslims probably owe their literalist and letterist view of scripture to the Jews and the Judeo-Christian sectarian communities that were scattered in the Arabian Peninsula at the time of the emergence of Islam. But another quite different path can be traced from Jewish reverence for scripture, as it developed in the early Christian church. The Christian community at Antioch was strongly influenced by the Jewish literal school but at the same time avoided its letterism as well as the allegorism of the Alexandrians. The Peshitta, a Syriac translation of the Bible which has many different readings from other traditions, is strong evidence of this shift from letterism in the Syrian school based in Antioch. Developing Christian views of scripture owe much to Jewish attitudes towards translation. Early on, the Jews regarded the Greek Septuagint (LXX) as divinely inspired and this idea took root in the Christian church. Augustine reproached Jerome for his use of the Hebrew text over the “inspired” and authoritative LXX. This shows us, also, that the church fathers were following a critical approach to scripture. As the Christian faith expanded in the Greek-speaking world, the use of LXX was affirmed. Seeing that Christians were using LXX in their liturgy, catechism, and evangelistic activities, the Jewish rabbis became reserved towards LXX, warned against its use, and retreated to a view which held only the original Hebrew manuscripts to be inspired. While the church fathers accepted the Jewish canon, the canonization of NT books was not straightforward. “Inspiration in the early church was too broad to be limited to the canon,” says Allert (1999, 108), noting Kalin’s findings on the breadth of the concept of inspiration in the writings of Irenaeus, Origen, Eusebius, and others. The church fathers were, in general, not fundamentalist and showed no consensus on the concept of inspiration. They did not reject Bible translations, even paraphrased ones, like the Peshitta. And the Syriac Church used the Diatessaron, a weaving of the four gospels into one. The early church was very far from a letterist view of inspiration.

BT-61-2-2010.indd 75

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM

the bible translator vol. 61, no. 2 (april 2010)

76

This situation of openness would not continue forever in the Arab world. The concepts of scripture and inspiration would see a move towards fundamentalism and letterism. Christians in the Arab Empire (especially Damascus, Baghdad, and Alexandria), in the period following the rise of Islam, gradually began defending the inspiration of the Bible and its non-corruption against Islamic attack, with concepts very near to the Islamic literalist and letterist views. Later still, Protestant reformers adopted a very strict attitude regarding biblical literalism and inspiration, sticking to the simple and explicit meaning and refusing to acknowledge the deuterocanonical books. Post-reform Protestant theologians remained tied to biblical literalism and word-by-word Bible translations emerged during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The situation would not change until the emergence of historicalcritical studies of the Bible. Further, in reaction to this critical awakening, the Protestant fundamentalist movement in the U.S.A. adopted biblical literalism as one of its essentials. Missionaries who founded the different Protestant churches in the Middle East from the beginning of the nineteenth century had a biblical literalist view. The indigenous Protestant churches in the Middle East found in this literalism, and even in letterism, something convenient in their theological struggle with Islam. Thus, the doctrine of inspiration in Islam influenced Middle Eastern Christian views of inspiration. The view of the “verbal inspiration and infallibility” of the Bible taught by conservative and fundamentalist evangelicals became rooted in the Christian Middle Eastern mind as an apologetic tool against the Islamic charge of corruption. This, of course, has negatively affected the Middle Eastern Christian attitude toward any Bible translation project. Challenges facing Bible translation in the Islamic context of the Middle East Bibles in national and vernacular languages are used by Christians in the Middle East for spiritual nourishment, liturgical worship, evangelism, and witness. But many intellectual Muslims also like to read or at least skim through the Christian Bible. So our target audience is very wide: Christians with their different traditions and, to a lesser extent, Muslims. The Bible is viewed by the majority of Christians of the Middle East as: •

the same word of God, dictated by God directly or indirectly, coming to us exactly as first written by the authors;

•

infallible, even in historical and scientific matters;

•

composed of sacred words which should be carefully preserved.

This letterist view of the Bible presents the task of Bible translation with the following challenges: 1. Many Christians think that having many translations is not a good witness to the truth of the Bible in an Islamic context because it suggests many

BT-61-2-2010.indd 76

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM



Bible Translation in the Middle East

77

Bibles. Christians should have only one Bible, just as Muslims have only one Qur’ān. 2. This “one Bible” in the local language, always the oldest translation, gains the status of “inspired,” much as KJV in the West. It becomes the “vulgate” of the church. 3. Even when the necessity for another translation is accepted, the “inspired” translation is considered as a textus receptus and the basis of comparison in the evaluation of any new translation. 4. Literal translations are the most venerated by Middle Eastern audiences. The Islamic view of the Qur’ān has influenced the tendency of Middle Eastern Christians to “sanctify” the very words of the Bible. These “original” and “sacred” words should be respected and literally transmitted in other languages. Dynamic translations are not taken seriously and cannot be “official scriptures” or used in liturgy. These challenges are caused mainly by different concepts of inspiration and the theology of the word of God. But other kinds of challenges further complicate the picture. Since Christian denominations are, to a certain extent, ethnic tribes, the decision of the head of the church is weighty and strongly influences the attitudes of members, including scholars. In most cases, the heads of churches are neither scholars nor specialists. They fight to conserve the tradition of their churches, as influenced by their conflicting histories. To a great extent, the historical churches of the Middle East are still psychologically, emotionally, and even theologically in the climate of the Middle Ages; the wounds of the christological conflicts of the fourth and fifth centuries, of the extension of Islam in the seventh century, of the iconoclastic conflict of the eighth century, and of the Great Schism in the eleventh century have not totally healed. The Old Testament is a scandalous book in the context of the Arab and Islamic world, not only for Muslims, but for Christians too. Marcion’s controversy is always present: This is the book of the Jews. The anti-Israel nationalistic parties (which include many Christians) consider the Old Testament as a political text, forged and interpreted to support the Zionist movement and the “Christian” West in the usurpation of Palestinian rights, identifying Islam with terrorism, and waging a harsh war against Muslims in their territories. In addition to this, humanists see this as a book that supports racism, injustice, human rights usurpation, and genocide. On the other hand, and because of its ambiguity, the Old Testament is sometimes considered a book of magic, or the book of esoteric secret groups. This “mysterious” aspect of the Old Testament makes it desirable to some intellectuals, politicians, parapsychologists, and curious people in general. Facing the challenges of Bible translation Robert Hodgson, writing about the “target orientation” in translation studies, shows how Skopos theorists (Reiss, Vermeer, and now Christiane Nord)

BT-61-2-2010.indd 77

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM

78

the bible translator vol. 61, no. 2 (april 2010)

“helped steer our attention toward an important goal for translation: recreating in a target language the skopos or purpose of an original. In focusing attention on the purpose of a document, these theorists (who were also at the same time translation educators and trainers) helped us understand that translation includes not only a linguistic and cultural task but also a teleological one” (2009, 4). For Middle Easterners (Christian and Muslim), the purpose of any sacred text is to create reverence, fear, and mystery in the mind of its readers. Ambiguity and lack of understandability are expected. Modern translation studies encourage respect for the power of audiences and markets. Hodgson reminds us of Toury’s assumption that “it is an audience that determines whether or not a translation functions as a translation” (Hodgson 2008, 5; discussed in Toury 1995, 23-39, 147-66). If Skopos theory was conceived as merely “giving the audience what it wants” it would lead us to produce, in the Middle East, a Bible translation with a qur’ānic flavor, in compressed, ambiguous, and highly eloquent language, for an audience largely affected by the Islamic tanzīl and the idolization of the written sacred words. However, this is not what Skopos theory requires. It is possible to describe an aim, or skopos, for a translation project which, in full awareness of such audience expectations, seeks to challenge and modify the prevailing view, and so contribute positively to inter-communal relationships (Nord, personal communication, 2009). In what follows I offer some suggestions and recommendations to help the people of the Middle East become liberated from the qur’ānic view which venerates the words of the text as the very words of God. I suggest: 1. Teaching about the nature of the Bible, with a focus not only on the divine role but also on the human contributions in the writing, reviewing, and editing of the sacred texts. 2. Urging people to distinguish between the real “Words of God” (God’s acts in history) and the testimony to God’s Word conveyed in human words in the Bible. Such a theology of the word of God should help people (Christians and Muslims) to grasp plausible explanations of sacred texts that appear to support acts of physical or moral terror. They should explain the unpleasant images of God in the Old Testament in their historical and cultural contexts, in order to reveal the real image of God in Jesus Christ. This will help also to counter certain existential political readings of the Bible that seem to allow racism, war, favoritism, and terrorism. To counter negative reactions toward the Old Testament, translations should always be published with exegetical footnotes explaining issues that lead to misunderstanding of the image of God and unpleasant scenes in the Old Testament. The reader of the Old Testament should always be pointed to NT explanations of the OT text. Christ’s ethos should be the standard of any ethical treatment in the text of the Bible. Bible Society translations have largely avoided theological engagement and interpretation. Now, the results of this avoidance should be studied and evaluated in order to assess if it has helped or harmed the mission of Bible translation.

BT-61-2-2010.indd 78

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM



Bible Translation in the Middle East

79

In sum, as Bible Societies, our task in the Middle East is to translate the Christian Bible, with its Greek and Hebrew cultures, into the vernacular Middle Eastern languages that are immersed in Islamic culture. The solution is neither to “Islamize” the Bible, nor to force Greek and Hebrew concepts on Islamic culture, but to create a “cultural mediation.” Hodgson says, “Translation is often thought of as a linguistic and literary activity which of course it is. But translation is also an act of cultural mediation” (2008, 7). Anthony Pym’s examination of Bible translation practices in medieval Spain, where Christian, Jewish, and Islamic scholars influenced each other, led him to the idea of a “translational interculture,” a meeting ground for source and target cultures which is not identical to either (Pym 2000). Translators must span the gap between two (often unrelated) languages and cultures and by doing so create a single new world of ideas where the two meet. Hodgson adds that “One effect of an inter-culture is to transform, through translation, both a source and target culture, or at the very least our understanding of those cultures” (2008, 8). The Bible Societies in Arab and Islamic countries should aim to produce such a “cultural mediation” or “inter-culture.” The effort would pay off as an investment in the future of Bible translation in the Middle East. The fact that both Hebrew and Arabic belong to the Semitic language family makes the mission promising. This cultural mediation is usually called “the Christian-Muslim dialogue,” which exists neither for evangelism nor for apologetics, but in order to know the other person and his religion and culture better and to let him know me, my Bible, and my Christianity better. The Christian-Muslim dialogue is an opportunity for witnessing to the real love of God in Jesus Christ for all the peoples of the earth. Christian-Muslim dialogue is essential for supporting moderate Muslims in their fight against Islamic fundamentalism. It can also help moderate Muslims to understand the inescapable human dimension to the writing of the Qur’ān and uncover the possibility of a human Islamic hermeneutic. It is also essential to help Christians from Muslim backgrounds remain in their cultures and societies, and build their own contextualized Christian theology. Conclusion There are significant challenges to the task of Bible translation in the Middle East, posed by the influence of Islamic letterism, Islamic attitudes towards the Christian Bible, the political reading of the Old Testament, and the continuing struggle between the “Christian” West and much of the Islamic world. Solutions from the field of translation studies which emphasize deference to audience expectation are found to be not totally helpful in confronting these challenges. But the field also offers alternative ways of thinking about audience focus and defining a translation’s purpose. I believe that the United Bible Societies should become more involved in the fields of biblical studies, hermeneutics, and theology in order to promote credible views of the human role in writing, revising, and canonizing the books

BT-61-2-2010.indd 79

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM

the bible translator vol. 61, no. 2 (april 2010)

80

of the Bible. Once this human role is obvious, the text can be criticized and contextualized. I also recommend creating, with Islam, an inter-culture, a space for ChristianMuslim dialogue that will provide opportunities for mutual presenting and understanding. As a translation consultant with UBS, I see my mission to Muslims as including helping them to be liberated from the blind use of the sacred text, witnessing to all peoples that Jesus Christ is the savior of the world, and that we can know about him in the Bible, and helping the followers of Jesus to stay in their culture and society and build up their own theology. This is a mission of building bridges, and of translating a Bible for peace. References Allert, Craig D. 1999. Is a Translation Inspired? The Problems of Verbal Inspiration for Translation and a Proposed Solution. Pages 85-113 in Translating the Bible: Problems and Prospects. Edited by Stanley E. Porter and Richard S. Hess. JSNTSup 173. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. Goldziher, Ignác. 1981. Introduction to Islamic Theology and Law. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Hodgson, Robert. 2008. Translation Studies: An Introduction. Paper presented at the Nida Institute for Biblical Scholarship. September 8-21. http://img.forministry.com/E/E2/ E20E8F77-F498-4BA5-BF6BE722491C5963/DOC/Translation_Studies_Introduction​ .pdf. Retrieved August 10, 2009. Lewis, Bernard. 1984. The Jews of Islam. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Moore, G. F. 1930. Judaism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Pym, Anthony. 2000. Negotiating the Frontier: Translators and Inter-cultures in Hispanic History. Manchester, U.K.: St. Jerome. Tabataba’i, Muhammad Husayn. 1988. The Qur’an in Islam: Its Impact and Influence on the Life of Muslims. Translated by Assadullah ad-Dhaakir Yate. Blanco, Tex.: Zahra Publications. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Benjamins Translation Library 4. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Wikipedia articles: Qur’an; Sunnah; Hadith; Islam. http://en.wikipedia.org/.

BT-61-2-2010.indd 80

3/22/2010 10:58:20 AM