The crime of moharebeh has been one of the most debated concepts in Islamic criminal jurisprudence, reflecting its central role in safeguarding social and political security in the Islamic community. Jurists, exegetes, and legislators have offered diverse interpretations of this crime, making its study across historical jurisprudential periods essential. In the aqdamīn period (from the companions of the Imams to Shaykh al-Ṭūsī), moharebeh was treated primarily as a security-related crime, grounded in Qur’anic verses and Shiʿi traditions with a devotional approach. During the qudamāʾ period (from Shaykh al-Ṭūsī to al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī), jurisprudence became more systematic, combining hadith-based reasoning with principles of uṣūl al-fiqh. The mutaʾakhkhirīn period (from al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī to al-Shahīd al-Thānī) marked a shift, as the refinement of jurisprudential methods enabled more precise analysis of moharebeh, its boundaries with baghy (rebellion) and ifsād fi’l-ard (corruption on earth), and the significance of judicial discretion in punishment. In the mutaʾakhkhir al-mutaʾakhkhirīn period (from al-Shahīd al-Thānī to Shaykh al-Anṣārī), reliance on principles such as darʾ (averting punishment in doubt) and iḥtiyāṭ (precaution) gave rise to more restrictive interpretations, limiting its application. Finally, in the contemporary period, with changes in Islamic governance and the codification of laws, moharebeh has been incorporated into the Islamic Penal Code as a crime against public—and at times political—security. This article, adopting a descriptive-analytical approach, examines the views of jurists across these five periods to trace the evolution of moharebeh. The findings reveal that while certain principles remain constant, major differences persist concerning its scope, evidentiary requirements, intent, and judicial discretion, reflecting the socio-political conditions of each era.