حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ سَعِيدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا عَوْفٌ، حَدَّثَنَا يَزِيدُ يَعْنِي الْفَارِسِيَّ، قَالَ أَبِي أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ و حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا عَوْفٌ، عَنْ يَزِيدَ، قَالَ قَالَ لَنَا ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قُلْتُ لِعُثْمَانَ بْنِ عَفَّانَ مَا حَمَلَكُمْ عَلَى أَنْ عَمَدْتُمْ، إِلَى الْأَنْفَالِ وَهِيَ مِنْ الْمَثَانِي وَإِلَى بَرَاءَةٌ وَهِيَ مِنْ الْمِئِينَ فَقَرَنْتُمْ بَيْنَهُمَا وَلَمْ تَكْتُبُوا قَالَ ابْنُ جَعْفَرٍ بَيْنَهُمَا سَطْرًا بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ وَوَضَعْتُمُوهَا فِي السَّبْعِ الطِّوَالِ مَا حَمَلَكُمْ عَلَى ذَلِكَ قَالَ عُثْمَانُ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ مِمَّا يَأْتِي عَلَيْهِ الزَّمَانُ يُنْزَلُ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ السُّوَرِ ذَوَاتِ الْعَدَدِ وَكَانَ إِذَا أُنْزِلَ عَلَيْهِ الشَّيْءُ يَدْعُو بَعْضَ مَنْ يَكْتُبُ عِنْدَهُ يَقُولُ ضَعُوا هَذَا فِي السُّورَةِ الَّتِي يُذْكَرُ فِيهَا كَذَا وَكَذَا وَيُنْزَلُ عَلَيْهِ الْآيَاتُ فَيَقُولُ ضَعُوا هَذِهِ الْآيَاتِ فِي السُّورَةِ الَّتِي يُذْكَرُ فِيهَا كَذَا وَكَذَا وَيُنْزَلُ عَلَيْهِ الْآيَةُ فَيَقُولُ ضَعُوا هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ فِي السُّورَةِ الَّتِي يُذْكَرُ فِيهَا كَذَا وَكَذَا وَكَانَتْ الْأَنْفَالُ مِنْ أَوَائِلِ مَا أُنْزِلَ بِالْمَدِينَةِ وَبَرَاءَةٌ مِنْ آخِرِ الْقُرْآنِ فَكَانَتْ قِصَّتُهَا شَبِيهًا بِقِصَّتِهَا فَقُبِضَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَلَمْ يُبَيِّنْ لَنَا أَنَّهَا مِنْهَا وَظَنَنْتُ أَنَّهَا مِنْهَا فَمِنْ ثَمَّ قَرَنْتُ بَيْنَهُمَا وَلَمْ أَكْتُبْ بَيْنَهُمَا سَطْرًا بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ قَالَ ابْنُ جَعْفَرٍ وَوَضَعْتُهَا فِ السَّبْعِ الطِّوَالِ‏.‏
Translation
It was narrated that Abu Umamah bin Sahl said

I was with ‘Uthman (رضي الله عنه) in the house when he was under siege. We would go into an entryway where, when we entered it, we could hear what the people were saying in al-Balat. `Uthman (رضي الله عنه) entered it one day for some reason, then he came out with his face flushed and said: They were threatening to kill me just now. We said: Allah will suffice you against them, O Ameer al-Mu`mineen. He said: Why would they kill me? I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim man except in one of three cases; a man who disbelieved after having become Muslim, or a man who committed zina after being married, or a man who killed a person not in retaliation of murder But by Allah, I never committed zina either during the Jahiliyyah or in Islam... I never wanted to change my religion since Allah, may He be glorified and exalted guided me, and I never killed anyone So why do they want to kill me?

Comment

Historical Context

This narration from Musnad Ahmad (468) in Musnad Uthman ibn Affan describes the critical period when the third Caliph was besieged in his home by rebels. The location mentioned - al-Balat - refers to the public square in Medina where gatherings occurred.

Legal Analysis of the Three Capital Cases

The Prophet's (ﷺ) hadith establishes three scenarios where Muslim blood becomes permissible: apostasy (riddah), adultery by a married person (zina al-muhsan), and unjust murder (qatl al-nafs bi-ghayri nafs).

Uthman's rhetorical questioning demonstrates his innocence according to these strict legal criteria, making his potential killing unlawful (haram).

Uthman's Self-Defense

His emphatic denial - "I never committed zina either during Jahiliyyah or Islam" - holds profound significance, as pre-Islamic sins were forgiven upon embracing Islam, yet he emphasizes his lifelong chastity.

"I never wanted to change my religion" affirms his steadfastness in faith, while "I never killed anyone" establishes his innocence regarding the third capital offense.

Scholarly Commentary

Classical scholars note this narration's importance in understanding the sanctity of Muslim life and the strict conditions for capital punishment. Uthman's invocation of this hadith demonstrates proper Islamic legal reasoning.

The incident serves as a timeless lesson against mob justice and emphasizes that accusations must be substantiated through proper Islamic judicial processes, not public sentiment.