عنوان مقاله [English]
For centuries, there had been a disagreement amongst the Muslim scholars over the problem that whether the Khabar (Account), as a source of knowledge in various fields of studies of religion such as jurisprudence, theology and interpretation of Quran, could be considered argumentable or not. In this article the problem is surveyed during one of the initial eras of Imami theology namely the School of Baghdad along with the positions of the outstanding figures then such as Sheikh Mufeed, Seyyed Morteza and Sheikh Toosi. They almost agree on Khabar, s being argumentable whether it is Motavāter (Frequently Narrated) or Vāhed (Narrated Once), according to their division of it. This article is an effort to prove that they had not a comprehensive perception of entire various aspects of the problem as they claim that there is not any rational barrier to consider a Vāhed Khabar argumentable.