The ruling on forbidding evil when a greater evil results from it

The questioner : Our question, Professor, is focused on whether this is merely a narrative that we consider as such, or is it the word of Allah the Exalted?

The Shaykh : Peace be upon you, and Allah’s mercy and blessings.

The questioner : It is a minute detail on the tongue of Bilqis.

The Shaykh : This is a narrative about. A narrative.

The questioner : But. A narrative that the Lord of the Worlds has established.

The Shaykh : What does that mean? But not always. No, not always. Papa.

The questioner : This does not prevent it from having a large share of truth.

The Shaykh : The intent of this is known to us. Em.

The questioner : But the issue is not that this. First, the question is whether the story is reported from Ibn Taymiyyah or not? Second, it returns to the issue of accepting or not raising the prohibition of evil if raising it necessitates a greater, greater, or more severe evil.

The Shaykh : Regarding the first matter, I have no knowledge of it, but as for the second matter, there is no doubt in its correctness. There is no doubt in the correctness of the second matter. If a greater evil results from enjoining good or forbidding evil, then the Lawgiver naturally balances between benefits and harms, and whichever is predominant determines the ruling. It is known that if harm and benefit are equal, the harm takes precedence over the benefit and is dealt with according to its basis, so it is said that repelling harm takes precedence over seeking benefit. This is in the case of equality, so what do you say if the harm is greater and greater? Then I see that instead of citing the incident of Ibn Taymiyyah, one should cite the hadith of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). When he entered Makkah as a conqueror and prayed two rak'ahs inside the Ka'bah, when the Lady Aisha saw him, she wanted to do as he did and enter the Ka'bah, so he (peace be upon him) said to her: Pray in the Hijr, for it is part of the House. And when your people built the Ka'bah or renovated it, their funds ran short, so they left the Hijr outside the Ka'bah. And if it were not that your people were recently converted from shirk (associating partners with Allah), I would have demolished the Ka'bah and rebuilt it with the ground. If these Muslims had realized the Prophetic hope in all times, how much would the Muslims have been relieved from this congestion and standing in the Hijr? They would have cleared the people from the Hijr on one hand, and the general public would have been like kings. How is it that today only kings can enter the Ka'bah? And if only they were kings who are pleased and righteous. When the Ka'bah was built on the foundation of Ibrahim (peace be upon him), and two doors were made for it with the ground, one door to enter from and one door to exit from, the general people became kings. This organization of traffic is amazing.
The basis, the original, the point is that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) left the rebuilding of the House of Allah the Sacred on the foundation of our father Ibrahim (peace and blessings be upon him) for fear that his people, who were entering Islam, some of them, as it is said, would put one foot forward and the other back. He feared for these people that doubt and suspicion would enter them, that I am an agent in the House. And as some of the Jews said. It was known about the Jews that a husband. It is not permissible for him to mix with his wife. Not that he has intercourse with her, but to mix with her, and although intercourse in the Arabic language that we learned means more than the meaning that you know, whoever associates with a mushrik (one who associates partners with Allah) is like him, what does that mean? He mixed with him and lived with him, it does not mean he took him as a wife, no. So the point, so the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), by revelation from Allah naturally, knew about the Jews and their strictness in their religion and their fanaticism in it that when a woman menstruated, she became like a viper, not to be mixed with or lived with, and she lived in a room alone absolutely, not that she sleeps next to her husband on one mat but he does not approach her because she is menstruating, no, the matter that necessitated. That a man came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and asked him. What is permissible for a man from his wife while she is menstruating? So he said, demolishing the Jewish practice This hadith reached the Jews, and they said this man will not leave anything of our religion, nothing of our religion will remain, even the matter of his congregation, what is it? He addresses the menstruating woman except for intercourse, so he feared that such words or something close to them would be said regarding those weak in faith. If he had demolished the Ka'bah today, try yourself, come and demolish the minbar, the first and second rows will be cut off, O zeal of Allah, this is demolishing the blessed, so what do you say if he demolished a mosque to establish a mosque in its place according to the Sunnah? Without a doubt, many people will fight you, meaning the fiercest fighting. So it is from the wisdom of the call and the good style in the call, if it were not that your people were recently converted from shirk, I would have demolished the Ka'bah, leveled it with the ground, and dug out the foundation of Ibrahim (peace be upon him), and established the wall on these foundations, then made two doors for the Ka'bah, one door to enter from and one door to exit from, as you enter any mosque, not high with a ladder of gold or wearing gold, Allah knows best, so that the princes and the open sinners and the wicked would ascend, while the general righteous Muslims, who in the past used to come from the Maghreb, from Marrakech, from those lands, would walk on foot to perform Hajj to the House of Allah the Sacred, the distance would take a year with them, the distance would take a year with them, either they would perform Hajj that year or they would be delayed to the second year, depending on the means of transport available to them. So the point is that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) left this reform for fear of the harm that might result.