نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجو دکتری، گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی. دانشگاه مازندران. بابلسر. ایران.
2 استاد، گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی. دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی. دانشگاه مازندران. بابلسر. ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The significant transformation of warfare in the modern era has raised new jurisprudential challenges for the concepts of jihad and martyrdom. One such concept is ma‘rakah (battlefield), and by extension martyr of ma‘rakah, which in classical jurisprudence is generally understood as the place of direct confrontation between two armies. However, with the emergence of aerial, missile, drone, and long-range warfare, the scope of military conflict has expanded beyond the traditional battlefield, and areas deep within a territory may now be directly targeted.
This article adopts an analytical–ijtihādī approach to examine whether the concept of ma‘rakah can be extended to modern warfare. Drawing on textual evidence, munāsabat al-ḥukm wa al-mawḍū‘ (the suitability of ruling to subject), alghā’ al-khuṣūṣiyya (elimination of the specific feature), the generality of proofs, and the rational practice of bāna al-‘uqalā’ (established rational custom), the study argues that limiting ma‘rakah to a fixed geographical battlefield does not possess an independent legal subject-matter basis, but rather reflects the conventional form of war in earlier periods.
Accordingly, any location that is directly subjected to military attack or combat in the context of a war operation may, from an and rational perspective, be considered part of the battlefield. On this basis, if the other legal conditions are satisfied, those killed in such places may be regarded as martyrs of ma‘rakah. The study concludes that jurisprudential analysis must take into account the qualitative changes in the nature of warfare and avoid confining legal concepts to their historical forms when the underlying rationale remains applicable.
کلیدواژهها [English]