@article{article_596414, title={Textual Criticism In Shīʿa (PhD. Dissertation)}, journal={ULUM}, volume={2}, pages={203–208}, year={2019}, DOI={10.5281/zenodo.3357007}, author={Ünügür, Peyman}, keywords={Hadis,Şīʿa/Şīʿīlik,Metin Tenkidi,Ġulāt,Uydurma Hadis (Mevḍūʿ),Ḳarīne}, abstract={<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;margin:6pt 0cm;"> <span lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">Beginning with ʿusūls, that is, the ḥadith booklets which were originally formed to record the Imam’s words back in the late second hijrī century, Shīʿī (Ithnā ʿAsharī/Twelver) ḥadith scholarship has developed a comprehensive and unique literature over the last twelve centuries. One of the unique features of Twelver Shīʿīte ḥadith approach is the fact that the systematic application of isnad-centered criticism in the study and evaluation of ḥadiths with regard to accuracy was begun to be practiced after the 7th hijrī century and gained wide acceptance only after that time. To put it differently, the text (matn) and the textual criteria, instead of the chain of transmitters (sanad) were central in the evaluation of ḥadith reports for a long time in the history of Shīʿī ḥadith scholarship. This centrality of textual criteria employed in the evaluation of ḥadith reports continued throughout the Shīʿī ḥadith history and it reached its most effective position in the last century. Despite the decisive role the text and textual criteria have played in the study of ḥadiths in Shīʿa, textual criticism has received little scholarly attention so far, which makes this topic a significant research question. Furthermore, in order to examine the exact meaning of textual criticism present in Islamic tradition as comprehensively as possible, it is a necessity to approach it not only from Sunnī perspective but also with an approach that includes all the other madhhabs. Correspondingly, this study, Şīʿa’da Metin Tenkidi [Textual Criticism In Shīʿa] (PhD. Dissertation, Ankara University, Institute of Social Science, Department of Main Islamic Sciences, Ankara, Turkey, 2017) has explored the different approaches and practices of textual criticism as employed over the course of Shīʿīte ḥadith tradition.  </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;margin:6pt 0cm;"> <span lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">The social and political unrest, especially during the 2nd and 3rd hijrī centuries before the Shīʿa (Ithnā ʿAsharīyah) completed its development as a systematic Islamic madhhab, led to the emergence of ġhulāt, the extremist groups ascribing divine characteristics to ʿAlī and his family members. As an effective way of propagation and attracting more supporters, such groups used some reports fabricated in accordance with their views, and attributed them to the Imams of Shīʿa. The widespread practice of fabricating ḥadiths led way to the formation of a group reacting against such extremist ideas as well. The first chapter of the thesis provides a brief overview of the 3rd century Shīʿī theologians’ critiques of the ġhulāt-induced ḥadiths, and explores the initial attempts of early-period Akhbārīs, the scholars of so-called Qom School, to eliminate the fabricated reports as the first practices of textual criticism made by Twelver Shīʿītes.  </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;margin:6pt 0cm;"> <span lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">Having lived in the 3rd hijrī century, al-Faḍl b. Shāẕān (d. 260/873-4) and Ibn Qiba (d. 319/931) were among the early Shīʿī theologians, and they developed significant approaches with regard to textual criticism in ḥadith scholarship. They claimed that some factoids attributed to Shīʿa were actually originated from the reports of ġhulāt, and thus criticized them. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;margin:6pt 0cm;"> <span lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">The uncompromising attitude of Qom School towards the ġhulātis presented by Imāmiyya as an argument for the elimination of fabricated ḥadiths and not including these kind of reports in al-Kutub al-Arbaʿa. Indeed, it is obvious that the scholars of early Qom School employed a text-based criteria in eliminating the reports containing extremist ideas, such as ascribing divinity to other beings except Allah. As a matter of fact, such extremist ideas of ġhulātdo not appear as ḥadith reports in Shīʿī compilations. While the absence of such reports can be seen as an argument for the existence of a critical approach based on the content (matn), it is rather impossible to determine the exact criteria used and the status of textual criticism due to lack of data concerning its methodology. Besides, it cannot be claimed that these efforts were successful in eliminating the fabricated reports of ġhulātcompletely and in preventing their circulation among the Shīʿī ḥadith sources. Additionally, when it comes to the problem of imāmah -the identity and the features of the leaders after Prophet Mohammad-, the critique of the fabricated reports was not practiced in the same meticulous manner, which is because of the fact that its imāmahparadigm is the core concept shaping Imā}, number={1}, publisher={Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesi}