and this explicitly states the implication of his statement, “acting voluntarily”: thus, an acknowledgement made under compulsion is not valid, based on the previously cited words of Allah, Most High:

“unless it be a trade conducted by mutual consent among you.” [al-Nisaʾ 4:29]

And because Allah has lifted the ruling of disbelief from one who is compelled, as He says:

“except for one who is forced while his heart is secure in faith.” [al-Nahl 16:106]

Likewise, the legal effect of his act of disposition is waived, because he acted under compulsion.

However, if he is compelled to acknowledge something but acknowledges something different from it, whether in the specific item or its description, he is held to his acknowledgement—unless we know that he intended exaggeration. Thus, if he is compelled to acknowledge one hundred but acknowledges eighty, the acknowledgement is upheld, because he was not compelled to acknowledge eighty; rather, he was compelled to acknowledge one hundred. If he is compelled to acknowledge one hundred but acknowledges two hundred, he is held to that, because it differs from what he was compelled to acknowledge. If he is compelled to acknowledge that this car belongs to so-and-so, but acknowledges that the other car belongs to him, he is held to it. Likewise, if he is compelled to acknowledge one hundred measures of inferior wheat but acknowledges one hundred measures of pure wheat, he is held to it.

The point is that if he is compelled to acknowledge something but acknowledges something different in its specific item or description, he is held to his acknowledgement—unless we know that he intended exaggeration. An example is where they compel him to acknowledge one hundred and beat him; then, when they beat him and cause him pain, he says, “If you wish, I will acknowledge that I owe him one thousand.” This differs from what he was compelled to acknowledge, but it is said as an exaggeration in order to escape and be delivered from those who compelled him and were causing him pain by beating him; so he acknowledged more than they demanded.

Similarly, if they say, “This is a 1977 Datsun car,” and compel him to acknowledge that it belongs to so-and-so, but he says, “I acknowledge that this Buick car belongs to so-and-so,” then, if we know from the circumstances that he intended exaggeration, he is not held to it, due to the saying of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him: “Deeds are only by intentions, and every person shall have only what