Benefits of the Hadith: (There is no sin on its people if they benefit from its hide).

The Shaykh : It is derived from this hadith that if the prohibition of something is qualified by a specific description, then that prohibition does not extend to all forms of benefit. How is this clear? Only eating it was forbidden, and the prohibition of eating does not necessitate the prohibition of everything else. From this, we arrive at a matter in which there is disagreement, which has passed before us: Is it permissible or not to use gold and silver vessels for purposes other than eating and drinking? Some scholars say it is permissible, such as using them to place medicine in, or to store documents, or the like, because only eating and drinking with them was forbidden, and the prohibition of eating and drinking does not necessitate a general prohibition; it does not necessitate generality. And some scholars said, rather, it is forbidden to use them for eating and drinking and for other things, and to possess them as well, even without use. This is the well-known position in the madhhab of Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) regarding the prohibition of possessing them and using them for other than eating and drinking, and using them for other than eating and drinking. But it has preceded us that the stronger position is that the prohibition is restricted to eating and drinking, and we provided two pieces of evidence for this. The first: When the Lawgiver restricts a ruling to a specific description, it is not permissible for us to expand this ruling to what does not possess that description, is it not? Because this is restricting what the Lawgiver expanded. The second: Umm Salimah, who narrated the hadith regarding the prohibition of gold and silver, had a silver box in which she kept some of the hair of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). And this can be taken from this hadith: the understanding of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) of the Book of Allah is that Allah only forbade eating carrion, and He did not forbid anything other than that. Good.
And in it is also evidence that it is incumbent upon a person, if he sees someone doing an action that he thinks is correct, and the doer thinks it is correct, but it is not correct, to point it out to him, even if it is not a major sin, because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) pointed out to them that they should tan the skins and benefit from them, even though if they had said, "We do not tan them, and our benefit from them does not compensate for tanning them," there would be no blame on them. Yes, correct.