Is it permissible to interpret, weaken, or explain the hadith: "The Imams are from Quraysh" in a way that differs from its apparent meaning, and if so, what is its interpretation?

The majority of scholars hold the view that the Caliph of the Muslims must be from the Quraysh, and a consensus on this has been reported. As for those who disagree, some have rejected the evidence because it consists of ahad (single-narrator) reports, while others have considered the ahadith to be informative rather than prescriptive. Some have gone to extremes, accusing the ahadith of being fabricated. Others have considered it a matter of changing Sharia (definition) politics, such that the rationale is the obedience of the Arabs to Quraysh; if circumstances change, the criterion for selection also changes. This condition is only required when the selection is made by the Ahl al-Hall wal-Aqd (people of authority and influence). However, for one who seizes power by force, or one who was appointed by a previous Imam and whose removal would risk sedition, being from the Quraysh is not a condition. In cases where a competent Qurayshi is unavailable, the Caliphate is given to someone else to safeguard the public interest.