Re-Reading Mr. Kadivar's Opinion Regarding the "Punishment of the Apostate and Those Exerating the Prophet"

Mohsen Kadivar, in his treatise criticizing the punishment of the apostate and those exerating the Prophet, while criticizing the opinions of some jurists regarding the punishment of the ruling of the two, considers this issue as being the position of ifta and the enforcement of hudud to be solely the responsibility of the jurist and believes that the enforcement of hudud should be in the court. He is also of the opinion that the execution of the verdict of the apostate degrades the position of religion and is against the verses of the Qur'an and the custom of the wise. Among his other claims, we can mention the change of the subject of apostasy in relation to the beginning of Islam. The problem of this research is whether the punishment of the apostate and those exerating the Prophet would weaken the position of religion and be contrary to the mercy of Islam? The research method is analytical-critical, and findings of the research show that the wise manner of viewing cannot alone be a sufficient reason for the brutality of the punishment of the apostate, moreover such an attitude is in conflict with the rational and narrative evidence, and the change of the subject of apostasy does not have a defensible document either.