Why is the principle "that which is forgivable in the subordinate is not forgivable in the superordinate" not applied to educational CDs that contain music which is not intended for its own sake, and why is the knowledge acquired through these materials considered flawed, and what is the ruling on future courses that contain similar educational materials?

The ruling on educational discs that include music is prohibition, due to the absence of necessity or urgent need for them. Music is forbidden whether it is in a song, a news broadcast, or a documentary program. If it is impossible to gain the educational benefit except through them, then it may be permitted to the extent of the need, because the music here is not intended. This falls under the rule: "That which is permissible as a subsidiary may not be permissible otherwise."

If a person has a genuine need for a permissible educational field and cannot find a means free of music, then it is permitted for him according to his situation. As for the knowledge itself, it does not become questionable due to the presence of music in the means of acquiring it. The reprehensible element is the religiously forbidden act associated with the means, not the knowledge itself.