What is the ruling on one who is coerced into doing a disliked act?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : The wrong does not cease except by enjoining it and forbidding it.
The Shaykh : Yes, that is right.
The questioner : Like Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) in his time.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : Had he not been patient, he would have brought a calamity upon the community.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : But he sacrificed himself...
The Shaykh : I mean, this leads to the issue of coercion. If a person is coerced into doing something, if a person is coerced into doing something. As for the issue where someone else does it, he will say in the gatherings, "This is a forbidden, wrong act," and he will not be harmed, because if he speaks in the gatherings that it is wrong, he will not be harmed. But if he says to the person himself, "Do such and such" or "Do not do such and such," then he is the one who will be harmed.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No. As for the issue of doing the act himself, by being coerced into doing a forbidden act, do we say that this coercion permits him to do the forbidden act, just as Allah the Exalted permitted disbelief for the coerced person, which is the greatest of forbidden acts? Or is it said that the scholars have detailed this, with some saying: "That this is a permission due to the generality of His saying:[An-Nahl 16:106] And it is permissible for you when coerced to say the forbidden statement or to do the forbidden act when coerced."
But the correct view is to detail this by saying: If doing this coerced act leads to harm in the religion, not in his own self, but in the religion, then this is not permissible. And for this reason, Allah made jihad obligatory, even though it involves the risk of losing one's life and destroying wealth. So if there is a risk of disruption in the religion, it is obligatory for the person to be patient, as I mentioned in the example of Imam Ahmad. If he had said during that coercion that the Qur'an is created, the entire community would have said so, yes.
The questioner : Shaykh, ordinary people.
The Shaykh : No, ordinary people. There is no harm if they are coerced into something, then its ruling is lifted from them, its ruling is lifted from them. Yes.
The questioner : As for the Prophets (peace be upon them).
The Shaykh : Yes, the Prophets are commanded to convey the call.
The questioner : Even if they are exposed to being killed.
The Shaykh : Even if they are exposed to this, they are killed, because this is considered a personal obligation that is necessary. Yes.
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : The wrong does not cease except by enjoining it and forbidding it.
The Shaykh : Yes, that is right.
The questioner : Like Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) in his time.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : Had he not been patient, he would have brought a calamity upon the community.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : But he sacrificed himself...
The Shaykh : I mean, this leads to the issue of coercion. If a person is coerced into doing something, if a person is coerced into doing something. As for the issue where someone else does it, he will say in the gatherings, "This is a forbidden, wrong act," and he will not be harmed, because if he speaks in the gatherings that it is wrong, he will not be harmed. But if he says to the person himself, "Do such and such" or "Do not do such and such," then he is the one who will be harmed.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No. As for the issue of doing the act himself, by being coerced into doing a forbidden act, do we say that this coercion permits him to do the forbidden act, just as Allah the Exalted permitted disbelief for the coerced person, which is the greatest of forbidden acts? Or is it said that the scholars have detailed this, with some saying: "That this is a permission due to the generality of His saying:
except for one who is forced [to renounce his religion] while his heart is secure in faith
إلا من أكره وقلبه مطمئن بالإيمانBut the correct view is to detail this by saying: If doing this coerced act leads to harm in the religion, not in his own self, but in the religion, then this is not permissible. And for this reason, Allah made jihad obligatory, even though it involves the risk of losing one's life and destroying wealth. So if there is a risk of disruption in the religion, it is obligatory for the person to be patient, as I mentioned in the example of Imam Ahmad. If he had said during that coercion that the Qur'an is created, the entire community would have said so, yes.
The questioner : Shaykh, ordinary people.
The Shaykh : No, ordinary people. There is no harm if they are coerced into something, then its ruling is lifted from them, its ruling is lifted from them. Yes.
The questioner : As for the Prophets (peace be upon them).
The Shaykh : Yes, the Prophets are commanded to convey the call.
The questioner : Even if they are exposed to being killed.
The Shaykh : Even if they are exposed to this, they are killed, because this is considered a personal obligation that is necessary. Yes.