it increases the narration about him, and it was authenticated by al-Ḥākim and al-Dhahabī and deemed good by al-Ḥāfiẓ, as you have seen. ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-Ishbīlī indicated this by including the ḥadīth from the narration of al-Nasāʾī and remaining silent about it in his book "al-Aḥkām al-Ṣughrā" (2/760), in which he stipulated authenticity, as is known from its introduction. And what no thorough researcher doubts is that the convergence of these paths on this text and their gathering upon it instills confidence in its authenticity, especially since it is accompanied by the certainty of the narration of Yazīd ibn Naʿīm ibn Huzāl that it is true. Then I saw Shaykh Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī quoting in "al-Mirqāt" (4/82) from the author of "al-Tanqīḥ" — who is Ibn ʿAbd al-Hādī — that he said: "And its isnād is sound." Then I found the ḥadīth with al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr" (22/201-202) through the path of Muḥammad ibn al-Munkadir and ʿIkrimah ibn ʿAmmār from Yazīd ibn Naʿīm ibn Huzāl from his grandfather Huzāl, both in a shortened and extended form. I said: And there remains something related to the fiqh of the ḥadīth, and what is meant by his saying to Huzāl: "If you had concealed it..." since its apparent meaning is not intended in its entirety?! Therefore, al-Bājī interpreted it in "al-Muntaqā" (7/135) by saying: "He means from what you revealed of his matter, informing the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam), Abū Bakr, and ʿUmar about it. Concealing it would have been by ordering him to repent and hiding his sin. The mention of the cloak is only for emphasis, meaning: if you found no way to conceal it except by covering him with your cloak from those who witness against him; it would have been..