Arguments from Jurisprudence

Muhammad did not take such action; instead, he forgave them all. Had Shariah obligated him to impose the death penalty on blasphemers, he could not have granted them forgiveness. It is stated that the Prophet’s role was that of a bearer of Divine Religion. His purpose was not to punish the wrongdoers but to convey God’s guidance to humanity. The Quran refers to him as “Rahmat ul lil Alamin,” which means “Mercy to all mankind” (21:107), a title bestowed upon him by Almighty God. However, some Muslims desire for the Prophet of Islam to be remembered in history as a “killer of people.” It is widely known that punishment for blasphemy was never administered during the time of the Prophet of Islam, even after his passing. While some individuals were killed during the Prophet’s era for reasons such as treason, rebellion, or in the context of warfare, no scholar of that time ever issued a fatwa calling for an execution solely based on verbal abuse. Furthermore, there is no historical record of any ruler carrying out such an execution. The truth is that criticizing God, angels, or the prophets does not constitute blasphemy. It signifies raising objections, which is not a crime in its simplest form. Common social or moral offences can be deterred through corporal punishment, but objections and criticisms cannot be curbed similarly. The only viable action in such cases is to refute them with compelling arguments. Such objections or