Hāshim, this was an indication that they possessed no more knowledge of it than their peers. Whom, then, should people follow (1), and from whom should they learn? From one who knows (2) what their grandfather brought, or from one who does not know it? The scholars are the heirs of the prophets, for the prophets left behind neither dirhams nor dinars; they left behind only knowledge. Whoever takes hold of it has (3) taken an abundant share.
If he says, “By these I mean the Twelve Imams,” he is told:
“Whatever Alī ibn al-Husayn, Abū Ja'far, and others like them transmitted from their grandfather’s hadith is accepted from them, just as it is when transmitted by their peers. Had people not found with Mālik, al-Shāfi'ī, and Ahmad more than they found with Mūsā ibn Ja'far, Alī ibn Mūsā, and Muhammad ibn Alī, they would not have turned from the latter to the former. Otherwise, what motive would people of knowledge and religion have had to turn from Mūsā ibn Ja'far to Mālik ibn Anas when both lived in the same city and during the same era? Had they found with Mūsā [ibn Ja'far] (4) as much of the Messenger’s knowledge as they found with Mālik—despite the Muslims’ profound eagerness to learn the Messenger’s knowledge, and the fact that Banū Hāshim themselves acquired more of the Messenger’s knowledge from Mālik ibn Anas than from their own cousin Mūsā ibn Ja'far; then al-Shāfi'ī came after Mālik and disagreed with him on certain matters and rebutted his positions, until what transpired between him and Mālik’s followers transpired, although he was more closely related by lineage