that Imām Mālik and his book (al-Muwaṭṭaʾ) would be made a judicial code for the Abbasid state, but Mālik forbade them from doing so and said: "The Companions of the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) differed in the branches and dispersed in the lands, and each was correct." I say: This story is well-known and famous about Imām Mālik (may Allāh have mercy on him), but his statement at the end: "and each was correct" is something for which I know no basis in any of the narrations and sources I have reviewed. Except for one narration reported by Abū Nuʿaym in (al-Ḥilyah) (6/332) with an isnād that includes al-Miqdām ibn Dāwūd, who was mentioned by al-Dhahabī in (al-Ḍuʿafāʾ). Nevertheless, its wording is: "and each considers himself correct," so his phrase "considers himself" indicates that the narration in (al-Madkhal) is flawed. How could it not be, when it contradicts what has been reliably narrated from Imām Mālik that the truth is one and does not multiply, as previously explained. This is the stance of all the imāms from the Companions, the Followers, the four mujtahid imāms, and others. Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr said (2/88): "If correctness were in two opposing views, the predecessors would not have criticized each other in their ijtihād, judgments, and fatwás. Reason rejects that something and its opposite could both be entirely correct, and indeed, the one who said: 'Affirming two opposites at the same time is the most reprehensible form of impossibility' spoke well."