Continuation of the explanation of the author's statement: "It is disliked to enter the toilet with anything containing the name of Allah the Exalted, except out of necessity"

The Shaykh : ... Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. This is not the known form of dhikr, even though "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah" is one of the two testimonies, or one of the two testimonies. However, "Subhan Allah," "La ilaha illa Allah," and "Allahu Akbar" are different. This implies that it is disliked to enter the toilet with anything containing the name of Allah. This is based on the authenticity of the hadith of Anas. Whoever authenticates or grades it as good says that it is disliked. As for those who say the hadith is not authentic, they say that entering with something containing the name of Allah is not disliked. However, it is better not to enter with it. There is a difference between saying "this is recommended" and saying "this is disliked," because leaving off a recommended act does not necessarily lead to committing a disliked act, as is well known. Some scholars made an exception in this issue, saying: "Except the mushaf." It is forbidden to enter the toilet with the mushaf, because the mushaf is the most noble of speech, and entering the toilet with it is a form of disrespecting it. Therefore, it is not permissible to enter the toilet with a mushaf, whether it is visible or hidden in one's pocket, because of the disrespect involved. The author's statement "except out of necessity" is an exception to the dislike, meaning except if one needs to do so. For example, coins may contain the name of Allah at their beginning, and also wallets, passports, and papers. These are in your pockets, and this is a necessity, because if we said "do not enter with them" and you took them out and left them at the door of the toilet, they would be exposed to being forgotten. This is a risk in everything that is exposed to being forgotten. If they are in a place where one has left, they are exposed to being blown away by the wind, for example. If they are in a gathering of people, they are exposed to being stolen. If that is the case, then it is a necessity to enter with them. Often, a person places something, especially if it contains verses, intending to take it when he comes out, but then he goes out and forgets. So this is a necessity. If a person needs to enter with something containing the name of Allah, it is permissible for him to enter. Now, we said regarding the mushaf that some said it is forbidden. Does necessity permit entering with it, or do we say that only dire necessity is required? It is known that what is forbidden is not permitted except by dire necessity, not by pressing need. However, they said that if one fears it will be stolen, there is no harm in entering with it if he fears it will be stolen. The apparent meaning of their words is that even if a person is wealthy and his mushaf were stolen, he would find a replacement. In any case, a person should try not to enter with the mushaf, especially if he is in a public place; he should give it to someone he trusts and say, "Hold it until I come out."