Abstract
Allāh has set the shar‘ī rules within the framework of specific purposes and wisdom, considering the interests of the servants. The dominance of the principle of facilitating and removing hardship in Islamic law is an indicator of this. The unavoidable circumstances that go beyond the will and intent of the servant are always considered in divine legislation. Therefore, most harāms are allowed in cases of necessity and complete coercion. However, it turns out that the principle of facilitation does not apply to some harāms. This study aims to analyze the harāms, which are not allowed in any case, and determine the reasons for not changing the rules of these acts. For this purpose, first, harām acts that are never allowed have been identified, and then the features of these acts that affect the fact that they are not permissible even in cases of necessity and complete coercion have been revealed. Finally, the legal and theoretical reasons why these acts are not allowed under any circumstances has been determined. The study reached some important results in terms of Islamic law, theory of Islamic law, Islamic belief, and penal and legal philosophy.