Is there a criterion for prioritizing one rule over another when weighing evidence?

The questioner : We know that when there are conflicting hadiths, scholars use certain rules for preference. Is there a criterion for prioritizing one rule over another that is understood by scholars?

The Shaykh : I cannot answer this question because it is fluid, not fixed or solid, because the rules are numerous. How can I prioritize one rule over another? Al-Hafiz al-Iraqi mentions that the ways in which reconciliation can be achieved between two conflicting texts are more than a hundred. So if you could define the scope of the question, perhaps I could answer it.
The student : Perhaps it would be clarified by an example, Shaykh?

The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The student : For example, al-Bukhari’s statement in the hadith: "The thigh," the hadith of Anas.

The Shaykh : The hadith?
The student : The thigh!

The Shaykh : The thigh!?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes.
The student : He said: "The hadith of Anas is more sound in chain, and the hadith of Jarhad is more cautious." So it seems that al-Bukhari here prioritized the rule of chains, prioritizing one chain over another. And some scholars prioritize the rule: "The saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) takes precedence over his action." And so on. This is what I mean!

The Shaykh : Ah, if you mean this, the answer to it is easy, if Allah wills. When al-Bukhari said: "The hadith of Jarhad is more cautious," he is referring to a slight doubt regarding its authenticity, but this does not prevent taking it as a precaution because it is more cautious. However, if the hadith were authentic in his view, or even if it were merely good in my opinion, he would not have made that statement in his Sahih. Because in that case, the well-known rule applies: "When the saying and the action of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) conflict, and reconciliation between the saying and the action is not possible by any of the methods of reconciliation mentioned earlier, then the saying is prioritized over the action." Here, regarding the observation of his action (peace be upon him), it is easy for the researcher and the student of knowledge to prefer the saying after its authenticity is established, and it is undoubtedly established, especially after the researcher traces the routes of this hadith. It becomes easy for him then to prioritize the saying over the action, because the reality is that one who studies this story that al-Bukhari narrated in his Sahih realizes that it is not correct to attribute an action to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), because when is an action attributed? When it is voluntary. And here is a note to clarify the misguidance of the Jabriyyah sect, who say that man is compelled and not a chooser. Glory be to Allah, they mix things up to the extreme between a person who moves his hand voluntarily, and Allah (Mighty and Majestic) created him as a sound human being, so he moves his hand according to his need. So the misguidance and foolishness without end is equating this sound person, who moves his hand according to need, with a paralyzed person whose hand moves against his will. Are they equal, for example? The answer: No. Now, in the narration of the story of Khaybar, about which Imam al-Bukhari said it is the most sound, there are two narrations: "The Messenger of Allah uncovered his thigh from the garment." In one narration: , the other narration has no action by the Messenger here. In the first narration: "uncovered," it is clear that he did it intentionally and with will. But one who looks at the story and studies it: its context and preceding events, cannot but be certain that the stronger narration is: "it slipped down." This is because he was pursuing the Jews when he attacked Khaybar while wearing the garment, so the garment slipped down while he was riding. This is from one aspect. From another aspect, what does it mean for this horseman, who has no equal, to intentionally, in this situation which is a situation of jihad, fighting, and battling the disbelievers, to intentionally uncover his thigh from the garment? This is not what comes to mind. So if we know this detail, then there remains no conflict between the hadith of Khaybar and the hadith: . I think I have provided the answer, if Allah wills.