Prioritizing Religious Duties and Determining the "Most Important" Among Conflicting Rules Requires a Precise Understanding of the Criteria for Judgments

Simply adhering to the initial appearance of texts, without considering the true criteria, can lead to errors in determining importance and challenges in interpreting texts. Especially in cases where texts use the comparative adjective to compare the importance of duties and conflict with the fatwas of jurists and jurisprudential intuitions, the need to re-identify the evaluation criteria for discovering the most important criterion becomes apparent.



This research aims to identify the evaluation criteria for discovering the most important criterion, with an emphasis on the ontology of the criterion in this discovery. The main research question is: How can the discovery of the most important criterion be evaluated and validated to prevent errors arising from the superficial interpretation of texts?



The research method is based on tracking and induction in hadiths and their rational analysis using library sources. By examining examples of comparative hadiths, this research has justified and explained their correct meaning by considering the evaluation criteria.



This research shows that a correct understanding of the criteria is necessary to determine the "most important" and the correct interpretation of religious texts, and a definitive conclusion cannot be reached by relying solely on the appearance of the texts.