Compelling Coercion
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Is compelling coercion, for example, being like a tool: If someone falls on a person and kills him, is this compelling coercion?
This is not compelling coercion. This is a case where a person was coerced, where someone fell on another person and killed him under coercion, or rather, something happened from him unintentionally.
The coerced person is like a tool,For example: such as when a large man takes a small man and uses him like a stick to strike a third person. This action—the action of the striker—is not the action of the coerced person. This coerced person did nothing at all and made no movement. This large man took him and struck the third person with him, so the ruling here pertains to the striker, not to the man who was used as a weapon.
The questioner: So is the striker liable?The Shaykh: There is no doubt, the striker is liable.
The questioner: For example, if a person is given a choice: to kill so-and-so or to be killed?The Shaykh: If an oppressor says to him: "Kill so-and-so, or I will kill you," it is not permissible for him to kill so-and-so; because it is not permissible to destroy the life of another to preserve one's own life. Otherwise, it would be permissible for a person who is hungry and fears death to slaughter one of the people he can overpower and eat him. Is this permissible? It is not permissible.
This is not compelling coercion. This is a case where a person was coerced, where someone fell on another person and killed him under coercion, or rather, something happened from him unintentionally.
The coerced person is like a tool,For example: such as when a large man takes a small man and uses him like a stick to strike a third person. This action—the action of the striker—is not the action of the coerced person. This coerced person did nothing at all and made no movement. This large man took him and struck the third person with him, so the ruling here pertains to the striker, not to the man who was used as a weapon.
The questioner: So is the striker liable?The Shaykh: There is no doubt, the striker is liable.
The questioner: For example, if a person is given a choice: to kill so-and-so or to be killed?The Shaykh: If an oppressor says to him: "Kill so-and-so, or I will kill you," it is not permissible for him to kill so-and-so; because it is not permissible to destroy the life of another to preserve one's own life. Otherwise, it would be permissible for a person who is hungry and fears death to slaughter one of the people he can overpower and eat him. Is this permissible? It is not permissible.