Is a person considered a martyr, and among the best of martyrs, if, when given the choice between committing a minor sin that does not exit the fold of Islam (such as removing the hijab, displaying oneself, or listening to music) and being killed, they choose to be killed?

Scholars have differed regarding the validity of coercion concerning actions. Most of them have held that whoever is coerced into performing a forbidden act may perform it, and there is no sin upon him. Some of them have held that coercion only pertains to utterances.

According to the view that coercion regarding actions is not considered, patience is obligatory. However, according to the second view, which states that whoever is coerced into performing a forbidden act is not sinful by performing it, he is obligated to perform what he was coerced into doing in order to preserve his life. The preservation of life takes precedence over abstaining from these forbidden acts. Jurists have stipulated that if one is coerced into drinking alcohol or the like, he is obligated to perform what he was coerced into doing, out of consideration for the greater of two benefits and to avert the greater of two harms.

Coercion has levels: some instances necessitate the action, such as coercion to drink alcohol or eat pork and carrion; some instances merely render the action permissible, such as uttering a word of disbelief; and some instances remain forbidden and are not made permissible, such as coercion to kill.

Therefore, whoever is coerced into drinking alcohol or eating carrion or the like, must take the concession (rukhsah), and if he is killed without taking it, he is sinful.