as for his statement: "And with us regarding it..." etc., he means the following ḥadīth. From what you will see in its extraction, it will become clear to you that his statement: "It was uniquely narrated by al-Yashkurī" is only according to his knowledge, otherwise, a group has followed him as will be mentioned. 3 - As for the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUmar, it was extracted by al-ʿUqaylī in "al-Ḍuʿafāʾ" (257) and al-Dāraqutnī in "Gharāʾib Mālik" through the path of ʿAbd al-Wahhāb ibn Nāfiʿ al-ʿĀmirī who said: Mālik narrated to us from Nāfiʿ from Ibn ʿUmar in a marfūʿ manner, and al-ʿUqaylī said: "ʿAbd al-Wahhāb is munkar al-ḥadīth, he does not uphold it." Al-Dāraqutnī said: "ʿAbd al-Wahhāb is very weak." Then al-ʿUqaylī said: "It has no origin from the ḥadīth of Mālik, nor was it narrated by a trustworthy person from him, and it has a narration from another angle that is also weak." Al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Lisān" following the ḥadīth: "Then al-Dāraqutnī extracted it from five paths from Mālik, and said: all who narrated it from Mālik are weak." I say: Perhaps among these paths is the narration of al-Yashkurī which al-Ḥākim referred to in his previous statement, and it was extracted by al-Khaṭīb in "al-Fawāʾid al-Ṣiḥāḥ al-Gharāʾib" (vol. 1, no. 17 - from my copy) through the path of Muḥammad ibn Ghālib ibn Ḥarb who said: Muḥammad ibn al-Walīd al-Yashkurī narrated to us, he said: Mālik ibn Anas narrated to us with it, and he said: "This is a strange ḥadīth from the ḥadīth of Mālik ibn Anas from Nāfiʿ from Ibn ʿUmar. It was uniquely narrated by Muḥammad ibn al-Walīd al-Yashkurī, and he was followed by ʿAlī ibn Qutaybah al-Rifāʿī from Mālik, and it is not established from his ḥadīth."