Accountability for uttering or committing disbelief under coercion

Question:
The questioner says: One of the scholars stated in his explanation of the Book of Tawhid (the oneness of Allah) that a person is not held accountable for an act or statement of kufr (disbelief) if he is coerced, based on the generality of the statement of Allah the Exalted: I hope for clarification?

Answer:
Yes, the coerced person is not held accountable for the statement, but not for the act. One does not prostrate to an idol, nor slaughter for other than Allah, and then say, "I was coerced." No, that is not permissible. However, if he is coerced to say a word of disbelief to escape torture or being killed, there is no harm in that: .
If he says it in order to escape, saying the word of disbelief in order to escape from torture or from coercion, there is no harm in that. This is a dispensation. This is a form of dissimulation; there is no harm in it when there is a need. As for the action, it is not permissible. He must not submit to them and commit shirk (associating partners with Allah), slaughter for other than Allah, or bow and prostrate to other than Allah. It is not permissible for him, even if he is killed; he must be patient. In the hadith, no one permits it. That means no one passes by them unless on the condition that he slaughters for them. So two Muslims passed by them, and they said to one of them, "Slaughter." He said, "I would never slaughter for anyone other than Allah the Exalted and Majestic." He refused to slaughter, so they killed him, and he entered Paradise. They said to the other, "Slaughter." He said, "I have nothing to slaughter." He did not say that slaughtering for other than Allah is not permissible; rather, he said, "I have nothing." This indicated that if he had something, he would have slaughtered it. He said, "I have nothing to slaughter." They said, "Slaughter, even a fly." So he took a fly and slaughtered it, and they let him go, and he entered the Fire. So the action is not permissible, but as for the utterance, there is no harm; it is permitted in cases of dire necessity. Yes.