A critique of the famous jurisprudent's view on the rejection of martyrdom with its adaptation in Islamic jurisprudence

Testimony testifying to voluntary and unpardoned martyrdom, if it is sought to prove the right to claim, acceptance of that position is contrary to jurisprudents. Famous jurists have absolutely rejected this testimony. Considering that testimony is one of the most practical proofs of proof, and considering that there is actually a lot of evidence that it is evidence of the process of ignorance, and in this way it is testifying in a way that the testimony is to be ignored, Many cases are related to judicial justice and a factor for justifying the right of the claimant. Therefore, the present study is descriptive-analytic to criticize and review the well-known evidence of rejection of martyrdom. The findings show that the well-known reason is not qualified to prove their claims. On the other hand, the rejection of martyrdom is completely absurd, and on the other hand, accepting martyrdom.