What is the wording used by a jurist to indicate that he considers the ruling on an issue to be "contrary to what is preferable" (khilāf al-awlā)? And does his statement that what is preferable or better in an issue is to do such-and-such, mean that not doing it is contrary to what is preferable, or not?

"Khilaf al-awla" (contrary to what is better) is a status between makrooh (disliked) and mubah (permissible). Some jurists consider it a category of makrooh, believing that the degrees of makrooh vary. That which has an explicit prohibition is called makrooh, while that which does not have an explicit prohibition is "khilaf al-awla." Abandoning mandubat (recommended acts) that have no specific guidelines is not makrooh. Khilaf al-awla is a category of makrooh, and the degrees of makrooh vary. When a jurist intends to express a ruling as "khilaf al-awla," he states it explicitly, or he may use other phrases such as: "it is not appropriate."