the questioning. Then, after this (1), he said: ‘O Kumayl ibn Ziyād, here indeed is abundant knowledge (2), if only I could find (3) bearers for it.’”
The response is that, even if this report is authentically transmitted from Tha'lab, Tha'lab provided no chain of transmission by which it could be cited as evidence. Nor was Tha'lab one of the hadith authorities who could distinguish sound reports from unsound ones, such that one might say, “He deemed it authentic,” as could be said if Ahmad, Yahyā ibn Ma'īn, al-Bukhārī, or their peers had done so. Indeed, even jurists more learned than Tha'lab cite many hadiths that have no basis—so what, then, of Tha'lab! He had heard this from people who did not identify (4) anyone as the source of what they reported.
Alī—may Allah be pleased with him—did not say this in Medina, whether during the caliphate of Abū Bakr, Umar, or Uthmān. He said it only during his own caliphate in Kufa, in order to teach those who did not know what they ought to know. This (5) was due to their shortcomings in seeking knowledge, and Alī—may Allah be pleased with him—would instruct them to seek knowledge and ask questions.
The report of Kumayl ibn Ziyād (6) bears this out, for Kumayl was one of the Successors and did not