نویسنده
استادیار دانشکده فقه و فلسفه، پردیس قم، دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
The enforcement of Hodood (Divine prescribed punishment) in the Major Occultation era of Imam Mahdi is one of the remarkable subjects of Twelver Shia (Imami) jurisprudence.
Referring to a juridical principle called Adam-al-Vilaayah (Lack of Guardianship); some Shia jurists consider the task as the prerogative of infallible Imam or his Special Representatives and maintain that the enforcement of hodood must be ceased in the era of occultation.
In contrast, many jurist hold that the enforcement of Hodood is obligatory, while referring to the absoluteness of traditional proofs (Dalil), as well as those traditions which indicate that the jurist take charge of deputyship of infallible Imam in the period of occultation.
Regardless of the juridical challenges about the subject, the opponents put forward some theoretical and practical challenges.
This article supports the idea that a fully qualified jurist can enforce the divine punishment in the era of occultation, while investigating some theological problems of the subject, concludes the challenges cannot stand as a primary real rule against the traditional proofs for enforcement of Hodood in occultation era.
کلیدواژهها [English]
