Why do you hold that a questioner is not permitted to adopt the less weighty opinions (such as not making up missed prayers, or the permissibility of benefiting from unlawfully inherited money, or the non-obligation of Zakat on gold jewelry, or that a conditional divorce intended as a threat entails expiation) except out of necessity, while other reliable scholars are of the view that adopting them is a facilitation, is not considered a sin, and is not always deemed a contravention of the majority?

The answer becomes clear by drawing attention to three points:

1. The strength of an evidence is relative, as understandings differ and knowledge varies. Allah Almighty says: {And if it were from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction.} 2. The common person, who lacks the ability to examine evidences, it suffices for him to seek a fatwa from someone he trusts among the people of knowledge and piety. If the muftis differ for him, he should follow the one he finds most trustworthy. 3. There is no correlation between preponderance (rajahan) and the opinion of the majority. The opinion of the majority may sometimes be weak (marjooh).

As for the questioner's statement that fatwa no. 135194 mentioned "it is not permissible to go against the majority," this is a fallacy. The fatwa stated that the questioner's judgment that the saying about the necessity of acting upon what is preponderant is contrary to the leniency of the Sharia is a clear fallacy. Acting upon what is preponderant means acting upon what is most likely to be the intent of Allah and His Messenger based on the preponderance of evidences, not based on whims. There is no harm in taking the easier opinion when there is a need.