What is the response of the majority of jurists, and your preferred ruling, concerning those who cite the hadiths "No, so long as they establish prayer among you" as proof of the clear disbelief of the one who abandons prayer, which necessitates fighting him and opposing him with the sword?

The majority of scholars hold that the hadiths concerning the abandonment of prayer and the one who abandons it are interpreted in terms of the ruling on killing and fighting, not on disbelief and apostasy from the faith. Not everyone who deserves to be killed is a disbeliever. Scholars have unanimously agreed that the one who abandons prayer out of arrogance or denial is a disbeliever. As for the one who abandons it out of laziness, he is not a disbeliever, but he is killed for a sin, not for disbelief. The narrations indicate that whoever abandons prayer is fought but not declared a disbeliever. The two mentioned hadiths indicate the legitimacy of revolting against a ruler if he abandons prayer, just as the hadith of Ubadah indicates this in the case of a ruler falling into disbelief.