The study examines the reflection of the phenomenon of preference in tafsir. This will be discussed within the framework of Ibn Juzay al-Kalbī’s (d. 741/1340) work al-Tashīl li ulūm al-tanzīl. This work is of great importance because it frequently includes different views in the interpretation of the verses and makes choices between these views. The work differs from other tafsīrs in terms of the theoretical information given about the phenomenon of preference in tafsīr in its introduction. The inability to include different interpretations of a verse in practice or the disagreement of some views with each other makes it necessary to choose between these views. For this reason, many commentators choose between different interpretations in their tafsīrs. One of the commentators who extensively use preference in his tafsīr is Ibn Juzay, who belongs to the Andalusian tafsīr tradition. Upon examining the preference criteria in this tafsīr, it can be concluded that its goal is to minimize controversy and establish a standard approach in the interpretation of the Qur’an. In this respect, the work will shed light on the ongoing discussions about the existence of a method in tafsīr. The main aim of this study is to concretely demonstrate the function of the phenomenon of preference in tafsīr, and it also aims to contribute to enriching the limited literature in Turkey on the phenomenon of preference in tafsīr and Ibn Juzay’s exegesis. This study employs document analysis and tries to find answers to the questions regarding the criteria under which Ibn Juzay made his choice. As a result of the research, it was found that the commentator increased the number of preference principles from twelve, as stated in the introduction of his tafsīr, to twenty five in practice. He applied his preferences in areas such as Qur’an history, tafsīr methodology, Qur’an interpretation, and recitation, and his preferences were clearly influenced by the Andalusian tafsīr tradition. It has been observed that he prefer-red interpretations in line with the Zahiri perspective, the integrity of the Qur’an, the views supported by narrations, and the views of the Maliki sect to which he adheres to. It has also been determined that he made choices that contradicted the criteria he stated in his commentary.