not everyone who is silent about his argument is invalid in his belief nor is everyone who speaks about it without proof correct in his claim. the just judge is the one who does not rush to issue a judgment without examining the arguments of the opponents and without changing the opinion of those who are present from the opponents and listening to them and the argument reaches its full extent of explanation and the judge involves the opponents in understanding what they have disputed about so that he is not more knowledgeable about the appearance of what he judges with in his judgment than about its interior nor is he more knowledgeable about what the opponent is satisfied with than about its secret. for this reason the people of prudence and deliberation among the judges used long silence and perfect understanding and deliberation so that the choice comes after the choice and the judgment comes after the clarification.
أما بعد فإنه ليس كل صامت عن حجته مبطلا في اعتقاده، ولا كل ناطق بها لا برهان له محقا في انتحاله. والحاكم العادل من لم يعجل بفصل القضاء دون استقصاء حجج الخصماء، ودون أن يحول القول فيمن حضر من الخصماء والاستماع منه، وأن تبلغ الحجة مداها من البيان، ويشرك القاضي الخصمين في فهم ما اختصما فيه، حتى لا يكون بظاهر ما يقع عليه من حكمه أعلم منه بباطنه، ولا بعلانية ما يفلج الخصام منه أطب منه بسره. ولذلك ما استعمل أهل الحزم والروية من القضاة طول الصمت، وإنعام التفهم والتمهل، ليكون الاختيار بعد الاختيار، والحكم بعد التبين.