نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
The “enforcement of ḥudūd and taʿzīrāt in the era of occultation” is a long-standing problem in Imāmī jurisprudence. Textual sources explicitly restrict the authority to legislate and apply such punishments to the Maʿṣūm Imams, while direct access to them is absent in this period. Using a descriptive–analytical method and a close reading of the Qur’an, ḥadīths of the Ahl al-Bayt, and rational theories of the “delegation of religion” to the Imams, this article examines major arguments for and against allowing fully qualified jurists (fuqahāʾ) to enforce ḥudūd during occultation. The findings indicate that most Imāmī jurists, based on “legislative delegation” and selected traditions, accept both the permissibility of enforcement and the need for systematic mitigation in light of the possible pardon of the Hidden Imam. A minority position limits implementation strictly to the Imam or his specific deputy, focusing on political conditions and the requirement that juristic authority be demonstrably justice-oriented. The study further compares the grounds for penal mitigation in Ḥanbalī, Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfiʿī and Imāmī fiqh and highlights their doctrinal implications. It concludes by proposing a fiqh-legal framework for the limited and conditional application of criminal penalties in the era of occultation that preserves both the continuity of Islamic justice and the potential for the Imam’s intended leniency.
کلیدواژهها English
