We say: If you maintain that view, then base translation upon testimony and say: if the translation concerns a matter that requires four men, such as adultery, then only four are accepted.

Our companions—the scholars of the madhhab—said: Yes, we are committed to that. We say that where four are required, translation likewise requires four, because it is based on testimony. Thus, for example, if someone confesses to adultery but the judge does not understand his language, four translators must translate his confession for it to be established before the judge, just as adultery is established only by the testimony of four witnesses. This is the well-known position of the madhhab.

The view followed by the author, may Allah have mercy on him, differs from the madhhab, for he held that the testimony of two upright men suffices for translation in all cases, even in matters where only the testimony of four is accepted. This is because translation is testimony not concerning the act for which four are required, but concerning the establishment of this statement; and the establishment of the statement is achieved through the testimony of two.

What the author adopted is closer to the correct view than the position of the madhhab. There is also a third view, held by the ocean of knowledge, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him: that a single translator suffices, provided that he meets the three conditions we mentioned. This is because the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, employed a single translator in momentous and important matters. He appointed Zayd ibn Thabit, may Allah be pleased with him, to translate the letters received from the Jews and those sent to them. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, instructed Zayd ibn Thabit, may Allah be pleased with him, to learn the language of the Jews, and he learned it in