One of the debated issues in Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) is the status of interpretive hadiths in the applicability of Ayāt al-aḥkām (a list of Quranic verses from which practical rulings of the Shari'a (or jurisprudential rulings) can be gleaned) to Shar’i rulings. Traditional jurists have only considered their own interpretations of Quranic verses as authoritative and have used them as evidence. However, suppose a hadith interprets a Quranic verse to convey a specific ruling, and the verse itself does not explicitly state this ruling. In that case, the hadith is used as an independent piece of evidence derived from the Sunnah (Prophet's traditions), rather than the Quran. This study employs a library-based research method to analyze the views of jurists and exegetes (Quranic commentators) on Surah An-Nisa, verse 101. This verse, with its debated legal ruling, serves as a case study for the concept of Ta’abbudi interpretation. The collected data is then comparatively analyzed through the lens of Ayatollah Khamenei's perspective. The article introduces and defends the Leader's novel theory of "correlation between interpretive hadiths," which aligns with the concept of Ta’abbudi interpretation of Quranic verses. This approach emphasizes the importance of interpretations by religious authorities when the meaning and legal implications of a verse are not immediately clear.