This article examines several versions of a report in which ʿUmar b. al-Ḫaṭṭāb makes a public statement asserting the lawfulness of stoning as punishment for a category of offenders convicted of unlawful intercourse. The article also analyzes certain versions of a report in which ʿUmar makes a public declaration that the acclamation of Abū Bakr as caliph was legitimate despite the process being unexpected and in haste. The author argues that the motif of ʿUmar as having made a public statement about the validity of stoning drew upon a motif about his public declaration regarding Abū Bakr’s caliphate. The association between these two motifs may have been part of a strategy to link, under the purview of ʿUmar’s authority and reputation for insulating the community against internal crisis, the settling of one contentious matter (the legitimacy of stoning) with another (the legitimacy of Abū Bakr’s caliphate).

本文研究了一份报告的几个版本，其中 ʿUmar b. al-Ḫaṭṭāb 发表公开声明，声称将石刑作为对一类被判非法性交的罪犯的惩罚是合法的。文章还分析了报告的某些版本，在该报告中，ʿ奥马尔公开声明称阿布伯克尔为哈里发是合法的，尽管这一过程出乎意料且仓促。作者争辩说，ʿ奥马尔就石刑的有效性发表了公开声明，这一主题借鉴了他关于阿布·伯克尔哈里发的公开声明的主题。这两个主题之间的关联可能是一种策略的一部分，在 ʿUmar 的权威和使社区免受内部危机影响的声誉的范围内，