As for coercion to commit forbidden acts, there are two views on whether coercion makes them permissible, both reported from Ahmad. According to the first, forbidden acts—such as eating carrion, blood or pork, and drinking wine—do not become permissible under coercion, unlike utterances. As Ibn ‘Abbās said, “Taqiyya is only by the tongue.” Moreover, acts carry legal consequences even without intent, including when performed by an insane person or others, whereas intent is taken into account in utterances.

The second, better-known view is that such acts become permissible under coercion, just as forbidden things become permissible through necessity. Someone under coercion may have greater reason to fear being killed than someone driven by necessity who neither seeks the forbidden nor exceeds the limits. Moreover, the person driven by necessity falls within the literal or implied meaning of being subjected to harm, for he is driven by necessity, neither seeking the forbidden nor exceeding the limits.

This is supported by the words of Allah Most High:

“Do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, seeking the fleeting gains of worldly life. But if anyone compels them, then Allah, after their compulsion, is Forgiving and Merciful.” Surah al-Nūr, 33.

This concerns acts forbidden on account of Allah’s right over them. As for killing a person whose life is inviolable, coercion does not make it permissible, without dispute. One has no right to preserve one’s own life at the cost of that person’s life, nor does this take precedence over the reverse. Rather, his seeking to preserve his own life