Explaining the theory of social gap in the Iranian society of the Umayyad transition period, and the subsequent emergence of asociality as a phenomenon in this society from the center of the caliphate can be examined by functionalist analysis. After the Islamic conquest of Iran, the new Arab-Islamic society failed to absorb Iranians. Iranians’ expectations about the improvement in their general situation did not become materialized and their former social gaps not only did not disappear but with the expansion of the tribal system and their status as Mawalis in the lowest stratum, they became an underprivileged society. Using the historical method and an analytical interdisciplinary approach to the theories of social gap and asociality in sociology, the present research aims to explain the role of the social gap within Iranian society in the asociality of the first century A. H. . According to the findings of the research, the existing social gaps in the Umayyad society and asociality within Iranian social strata were caused by the Umayyad political structure. Furthermore, Umayyad discriminatory policies and the existence of social gaps within Iranian society initiated asociality and paved the way for the Abbasid reception in the hope of a better future.

The issue of exaggeration (ghuluw) and its typical examples has always been discussed during the history of the Imamiya, and there has been a discrepancy about the extent of its existence. Some of their beliefs were sometimes considered Ghuluw and sometimes were regarded as the standard Imamiyeh doctrines. In this paper, try to investigate the Historical evolution of the concept of Guluw in the three schools of Kufa, Qom and Baghdad, and find the origins of the differences existing in them. Besides that, we seek to know which important characters were in these schools, and why their views were accused of ghuluw. In this article, some characters such as, Jabir ibne-Yazid al-J’ ufi, Mufadla ibne-Omar, Ibne-Abiya’ four, and Hisham ibne-Hakam from the Kuffah and, Sheikh Saduq, from Um school and, Sheikh Mufid from Baghdad school were studied. The research was conducted in a descriptive and analytical as a library one. As a result, It seems that Some of these figures who quoted special Hadiths which Ahl al-Bayt would narrate them only to their very close companions (who shared secret facts with Imam), caused people to call them Ghali. Also, some beliefs, (such as Sahv Al-Nabi) were considered ghuluww in a school while in another one, it was not ghuluww.