صحيح البخاري
Bukhari
كتاب الأحكامThe Book of Al-Ahkam (Judgements)
بَابُ تَرْجَمَةِ الْحُكَّامِ، وَهَلْ يَجُوزُ تُرْجُمَانٌ وَاحِدٌ:Chapter. The translators of a ruler; and is it permissible to keep one translator?
Hadith 7196
اُردوEn
حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْيَمَانِ ، أَخْبَرَنَا شُعَيْبٌ ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ ، أَخْبَرَنِي عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، أَنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عَبَّاسٍ أَخْبَرَهُ ، أَنَّ أَبَا سُفْيَانَ بْنَ حَرْبٍ أَخْبَرَهُ ، " أَنَّ هِرَقْلَ أَرْسَلَ إِلَيْهِ فِي رَكْبٍ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ ، ثُمّ قَالَ لِتَرْجُمَانِهِ : قُلْ لَهُمْ إِنِّي سَائِلٌ هَذَا فَإِنْ كَذَبَنِي فَكَذِّبُوهُ ، فَذَكَرَ الْحَدِيثَ ، فَقَالَ لِلتُّرْجُمَانِ : قُلْ لَهُ : إِنْ كَانَ مَا تَقُولُ حَقًّا فَسَيَمْلِكُ مَوْضِعَ قَدَمَيَّ هَاتَيْنِ " .
Narrated `Abdullah bin `Abbas: That Abu Sufyan bin Harb told him that Heraclius had called him along with the members of a Quraish caravan and then said to his interpreter, "Tell them that I want to ask this (Abu Sufyan) a question, and if he tries to tell me a lie, they should contradict him." Then Abu Sufyan mentioned the whole narration and said that Heraclius said to the inter Peter, "Say to him (Abu Sufyan), 'If what you say is true, then he (the Prophet) will take over the place underneath my two feet.' "
Explanation & Benefits
Maulana Dawood Raz
Hadith Commentary:
Here, the objection has been raised: how can the action of Heraclius be considered a proof, since he was a disbeliever?
The Christians have answered this by saying that although Heraclius was a disbeliever, he was well-versed in the books of the previous prophets and their circumstances. Thus, it is as if, even in the previous laws, the translation by a single translator was considered sufficient.
Some have said that the action of Heraclius is not the point; rather, Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhu, who was a scholar of this Ummah, narrated this incident and did not object that the translation by one person was insufficient. From this, it is understood that he considered the translation by a single person to be sufficient.
Here, the objection has been raised: how can the action of Heraclius be considered a proof, since he was a disbeliever?
The Christians have answered this by saying that although Heraclius was a disbeliever, he was well-versed in the books of the previous prophets and their circumstances. Thus, it is as if, even in the previous laws, the translation by a single translator was considered sufficient.
Some have said that the action of Heraclius is not the point; rather, Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhu, who was a scholar of this Ummah, narrated this incident and did not object that the translation by one person was insufficient. From this, it is understood that he considered the translation by a single person to be sufficient.
Source: Sahih Bukhari: Commentary by Maulana Dawood Raz, Page: 7196
Shaykh Abdul Sattar al-Hammad
Hadith Commentary:
➊ Although Heraclius was a disbeliever, he was well acquainted with the books of the previous prophets (alayhim as-salam) and their circumstances. From this, it is also understood that in previous legislations as well, there was a practice of having an interpreter in the royal court who would translate for foreign people and inform the king.
➋ In any case, Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah has established from this hadith that a single interpreter is sufficient for translation; making it a condition to have multiple interpreters is merely an unnecessary formality. This hadith is narrated by Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhu. If this position were incorrect, he would have at least corrected it. His remaining silent is evidence that a single interpreter is sufficient for translation.
➊ Although Heraclius was a disbeliever, he was well acquainted with the books of the previous prophets (alayhim as-salam) and their circumstances. From this, it is also understood that in previous legislations as well, there was a practice of having an interpreter in the royal court who would translate for foreign people and inform the king.
➋ In any case, Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah has established from this hadith that a single interpreter is sufficient for translation; making it a condition to have multiple interpreters is merely an unnecessary formality. This hadith is narrated by Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhu. If this position were incorrect, he would have at least corrected it. His remaining silent is evidence that a single interpreter is sufficient for translation.
Source: Hidayat al-Qari: Commentary on Sahih Bukhari, Urdu, Page: 7196
