Why is sloth in exalting the name of Allah on earth not considered disbelief, while committing an act of disbelief out of fear is considered disbelief, taking into account that sloth stems from the self and fear may have an external cause?

Scholars have differed regarding the ruling on one who desecrates the Quran. Some restrict the ruling of apostasy to the intention of desecration, such as writing the Quran with impurity with the intention of desecration, or writing it in a way that leads to its desecration, or placing it on an impure substance. Others issue a general ruling of disbelief in such matters and do not restrict it to the intention of desecration, such as one who intentionally neglects to wash off saliva that has fallen on the Mushaf, or places the Mushaf on an impure limb or garment.

The first view aligns with the fatwa mentioned by the questioner, which states that an act does not constitute disbelief unless it is done with the intention of desecration and disrespect. As for the second view, there is no ambiguity in it.

Sheikh Al-Rajhi holds that disbelief occurs in five situations: seriousness, jest, fear (that does not reach the level of coercion), coercion with the heart being content with disbelief – all these situations constitute disbelief. However, coercion with the heart being content with faith does not lead to disbelief.

Caution should be exercised when ruling on disbelief, for one whose Islam is established with certainty does not lose it through doubt.