that it has no advantage over other independent juristic reasoning by which to give preference to one of two conflicting reports, there is disagreement as to whether or not it takes precedence over a solitary report. Ibn al-Qassār related that Mālik gave analogy precedence over a solitary report, contrary to Abū Hanīfa, who gave the solitary report precedence over analogy. And Allah knows best.

Section on [Disagreement among the Scholars of Medina and Others after Them]

When the scholars of Medina and others after them disagree over the ruling on a particular case, one must refer the matter to what independent juristic reasoning and examination require, through analogy with established principles. One must not assume, without examination, that any one of them alone is correct, even if he is the most learned among them. Our adherence to the school of Mālik, may Allah have mercy on him, our affirmation of its soundness, and our preference for it over other schools do not constitute an objection against us here. We adopted his school in general only after its soundness had become clear to us and we had understood the principles upon which he founded it and to which he referred in his independent juristic reasoning. We also knew his mastery of the rulings of the Book of Allah, Mighty and Majestic: its abrogating and abrogated passages, its fully explained and unelaborated passages, its specific and general expressions, and all its other characteristics and meanings. We knew, too, his mastery of the Sunnahs of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, and his ability to distinguish their sound reports from their unsound ones. His undisputed standing as an imam in all these matters was attested by the scholars of his time, who acknowledged his preeminence in them.

Moreover, we believe that he was the one intended by the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, when he said:

“People will soon urge their camels onward in pursuit of knowledge, yet find no scholar more learned than the scholar of Medina.”

This is for two reasons.

First, he is the one known as “the scholar of Medina,” since this designation identifies him. When someone says, “This is the opinion of the scholar of Medina,” “the jurist of Medina,” or “the imam of the Abode of Emigration,” it is understood that he means Mālik. Likewise, when someone says, “This is the opinion of al-Shāfiʿī,” it is understood that he means Muhammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfiʿī, rather than anyone else of his lineage. The same applies to al-Thawrī and al-Awzāʿī.

Second, the imams interpreted this as referring to him, including Ibn Jurayj, Ibn ʿUyayna, and ʿAbd al-Rahmān ibn Mahdī, without anyone disputing their interpretation. The suggestion that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, might have meant al-ʿUmarī the worshipper is unsound, because the description given by the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him—namely, that the flanks of