Accusations of Shi‘ism in Early Hadith Studies -An Analysis from the Framework of History of Hadith-

This article argues that it has been clearly observed that some transmitters have been associated with Shī？īte thoughts in rijāl type works written by Ahl al-hadīth scholars prior to the formation of the Shī？a as a sect. Naturally, Shī？īte accusations during the first three centuries after the hijrah denotes a proximity to a thinking and a belief form, and not an affiliation to a certain sect. This proximity generally can be observed as believing in ？Alī b. Abī Tālib’s legitimacy and his opponents’ illegitimacy in his wars and the expressing of this openly in society, being close to Shī？īte circles, criticizing or insulting the other companions of the Prophet, compiling and narrating traditions about the virtues (fa？ā’il) of ？Alī b. Abī Tālib or Ahl al-bayt, or the defects and the faults (mathālib/ma？āyib) of the companions of the Prophet, believing in the preference and priority of ？Alī over ？Uthmān, Abū Bakr and ？Umar, participating in Shī？īte revolts or considering these as legitimate, and accepting distinctive theological or jurisprudential opinions. If one glances over classical history, ？abaqāt and rijāl books, it is clear that 207 of al-Kutub al-Sitta narrators are accused of having Shī？īte views, albeit with different wordings. In this article certain methods are followed in order to examine these transmitters and to ascertain whether they are Shī？īte or not. Ultimately, the present article claims that following four essential questions whereby this issue can be answered through certain transmitter categorization: 1- What was the time of Sunnī and Shī？īte hadīth circles’ separation, 2- What was the period of the traditions’ transition from Ahl al-sunna to the Shī？a, 3- What was the problem of narration from Ahl al-bid？a, and 4- what is the execution type of jarh-ta？dīl. The first question’s answer is provided by the framework of those transmitters’ historical periods, geographical context and the extent of their tendency towards the Shī ？a views. The historical periods of both the accused transmitters and the other transmitters show them having different extent of tendencies toward the Shī ？a and this reveals that dissociation of Sunnite-Shī？īte course circles can be dated to the beginnings of the 3rd/9th century. Before this historical period, transmitters with Shī？īte tendencies seem to have been following both schools’ circles. The response to the second inquiry is that it is understood that the narrative transitivity among Sunnite and Shī？īte was mostly elicited by transmitters with Shī？īte tendencies in the 2nd/8th century. The third