Jarh Based on Creedal Difference

In his PhD dissertation, later published as ʿAdālat al-Ruwāt wa al-Shuhūd, Dr. al-Murtada al-Mahatwary (d. 1436 AH) distinguishes between grounds that are agreed upon—such as established sins—and those that are disputed, which arise from doctrinal and sectarian disagreement. He emphasises that many instances of jarḥ in the tradition stem not from proven dishonesty or immorality, but from theological polemics that led to accusations of disbelief or immorality.

Among Zaydī scholars, the dominant principle is that difference in creed does not, in itself, constitute a valid cause for jarḥ, whether with respect to a narrator or a legal witness. A person is not discredited merely due to doctrinal disagreement so long as lying or clear moral corruption has not been established.

Source

Dr. al-Murtada al-Mahatwary, ʿAdālat al-Ruwāt wa al-Shuhūd, p. 544