We know from authentic transmitted reports that there was no dispute over Uthmān’s appointment to the caliphate, nor did any faction among the Companions say, “Appoint Alī or someone else,” as some of the Ansār had said, “Let there be a leader from among us and a leader from among you.” Had anything of the sort occurred, there would have been every incentive and motive to transmit it, just as the dispute of some of the Ansār concerning Abū Bakr’s caliphate was transmitted. Anyone who alleges otherwise is therefore a fabricator.

For this reason, Imam Ahmad said:

“Never did the people agree upon a pledge of allegiance as unanimously as they agreed upon the pledge to Uthmān.”

Uthmān (1) was appointed by the Muslims after they had consulted one another for three days. They were united and in full accord, loving one another, bound by mutual affection, and all holding fast to the rope of Allah. Allah granted them ascendancy and, through them (2), made manifest the guidance and religion of truth with which He had sent His Prophet. He granted them victory over the disbelievers and, through them, opened the lands of Greater Syria, Iraq, and part of Khurāsān.

They preferred no one to Uthmān, as Abd al-Rahmān ibn Awf reported. For this reason, Abd al-Rahmān pledged allegiance to him, as is established in authentic hadiths.

As for the claim made by some people that he stipulated to Uthmān (3) that he follow the practice of the two Shaykhs, but Uthmān did not assent—either because he was incapable of emulating their practice, or because following others as authorities is not obligatory or is impermissible—and that he then stipulated the practice of the two Shaykhs to Alī (4), who assented because it was possible to follow them or permissible to follow them as authorities: this report is [false] (5) and has no established chain of transmission,