The one who was forced to offer a fly and entered the Fire, and the ruling on coercion
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner:
We say: Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, regarding the one who was forced to offer a fly and entered the Fire.
The Shaykh:
This person adhered to the default ruling and did not take the dispensation. He adhered to the default ruling because of the strength of his faith, so he adhered to the default ruling. Some scholars say this occurred in the legislation of those before us, because they were not granted a dispensation; coercion was not excused for them, whereas we were granted a dispensation in cases of coercion. Some scholars say that in this case, no dispensation is granted for actions of shirk (associating partners with Allah), unlike speech, for which a dispensation is granted for the words but not for the actions. They have answers regarding this.
The questioner:
Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, regarding the one who was forced to offer a fly and entered the Fire, is it not the case that his action was excused because he was coerced?
The Shaykh:
We have established this: either he did not take the dispensation and adhered to the default ruling due to the strength of his faith, or this is specific to those before us, who were not excused for coercion, whereas we were excused for coercion as a relief for us and a mercy to us, or because there is a difference between coercion regarding speech, which is permissible, and coercion regarding actions, which is not permissible, such as prostrating to other than Allah or slaughtering for other than Allah.
We say: Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, regarding the one who was forced to offer a fly and entered the Fire.
The Shaykh:
This person adhered to the default ruling and did not take the dispensation. He adhered to the default ruling because of the strength of his faith, so he adhered to the default ruling. Some scholars say this occurred in the legislation of those before us, because they were not granted a dispensation; coercion was not excused for them, whereas we were granted a dispensation in cases of coercion. Some scholars say that in this case, no dispensation is granted for actions of shirk (associating partners with Allah), unlike speech, for which a dispensation is granted for the words but not for the actions. They have answers regarding this.
The questioner:
Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, regarding the one who was forced to offer a fly and entered the Fire, is it not the case that his action was excused because he was coerced?
The Shaykh:
We have established this: either he did not take the dispensation and adhered to the default ruling due to the strength of his faith, or this is specific to those before us, who were not excused for coercion, whereas we were excused for coercion as a relief for us and a mercy to us, or because there is a difference between coercion regarding speech, which is permissible, and coercion regarding actions, which is not permissible, such as prostrating to other than Allah or slaughtering for other than Allah.
Source
شرح قرة عيون الموحدين في تحقيق دعوة الأنبياء والمرسلين، باب قول الله - تعالى - : { وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَتَّخِذُ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ أَنْدَاداً يُحِبُّونَهُمْ كَحُبِّ اللَّهِ } — islamhouse.com (1:07:54)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.