in Medina when ‘Umar and ‘Uthmān were there, while Ibn Mas‘ūd served as their deputy. It is well known that ‘Alī, together with these men, surpassed all his Iraqi companions in knowledge and merit. Thus, when al-Shāfi‘ī debated certain Iraqi scholars on jurisprudence, he cited the opinions of ‘Alī and Ibn Mas‘ūd against his opponent. Al-Shāfi‘ī accordingly wrote The Book of the Disagreements of ‘Alī and ‘Abd Allāh, explaining which of their opinions his opponent and other scholars had set aside.
After him, Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazī wrote more extensively on this subject than al-Shāfi‘ī had. He said:
“You and the rest of the Muslims set aside their opinions in favor of what carries greater weight than those opinions. Likewise, others set them aside in favor of what carries greater weight.”
What further clarifies this matter is that the people of all Muslim cities other than Kufa deferred to the knowledge of the scholars of Medina and did not regard themselves as their equals in learning. This was true of the scholars of Syria and Egypt, such as al-Awzā‘ī and the Syrian scholars before and after him, and al-Layth ibn Sa‘d and the Egyptian scholars before and after him. Their great regard for the practice of the people of Medina and their adherence to the earlier Medinan positions are clear and evident. The same applies to the scholars of Basra, such as Ayyūb, Hammād ibn Zayd, ‘Abd al-Rahmān ibn Mahdī, and others like them.
This is why the school of the people of Medina gained prominence in these cities. The Egyptians became supporters of the Medinan position, including Mālik’s eminent Egyptian disciples, such as Ibn Wahb, Ibn al-Qāsim, Ashhab, and ‘Abd Allāh ibn al-Hakam. And the Syrians