The defect caused by the higher narrator is stronger than the defect caused by the lower narrator; what is the explanation for this?

Abu Ishaq: In some of the words of the people of critique, they say that the defect caused by the higher narrator is stronger than the defect caused by the lower narrator. I have not found this phrase in the books of terminology except from that man.

The Shaykh : It does not appear to me that it is stronger, but rather that it is more preferable.
Abu Ishaq: I mean, for example, al-Hasan from 'Umar, and in the chain there is a liar. Which is more preferable: to defect it due to the disconnection, or to defect it due to the lying of the narrator?The Shaykh : No, that is a normalization of your question.
The students laugh.

The Shaykh : No, they are not equal, for example.
Abu Ishaq: Is al-Hasan the higher narrator?

The Shaykh : This example does not represent your first question, because the two defects mentioned in the chain should be equal. Only then is it said that the defect by the higher one is stronger. As for when it is in the form you described just now, that speaker does not say that the defect here by the higher one is the stronger.
Abu Ishaq: I mean, equality is a condition.

The Shaykh : No, excuse me, we do not have a rule now that we can study, establish, and build upon. But I am saying that if someone says that the defect by the higher one is stronger, I did not digest this matter, but I said it is more preferable. When you brought up the example, the example departed completely from the previous question because it was absolute, so it became restricted. Do you not see with me that the matter is so?
Abu Ishaq: Yes, but what made the problem is that the phrase is absolute; it says the defect by the higher one is stronger, and it did not restrict it with the restriction you mentioned.

The Shaykh : Good, I am saying it is more preferable. So let me be and what I am saying now: we take the question "stronger." The one who says this does not imagine that he means the form you presented last, but rather two equal defects in the chain, one above and the other below. He says in this case that the defect by the higher one is stronger. But when you imagine the form you mentioned just now, where the lower defect is stronger terminologically and is not the higher one, I do not think he would remain with his previous statement that you reported about him specifically regarding this form.
Al-Halabi : My teacher, is there not something that comes to mind, namely that the one who said this phrase did not intend height in terms of rank, but intended another kind of height?

The Shaykh : No, that is the intended meaning of his statement.
Abu Ishaq: He explicitly stated: "Defect the hadith with the narration of the Tabi'i who did not hear from the Companion." He gave an example and said the defect by the higher one is stronger.

The Shaykh : Okay, what is the second defect present in that chain?
Abu Ishaq: I remember that the higher defect was concealment of a defect in a chain and disconnection.

The Shaykh : And the lower one?
Abu Ishaq: And the lower one was poor memorization.

The Shaykh : Ah, whereas in your example you brought a fabricated liar, so the matter differs. I think it is our duty to assume that al-Hasan, when the form you described just now is presented to him, his answer would not be that answer.
The student: Is it not possible that he intends by this that the lower defect usually repeats in the chain, such as the disconnection from 'Umar, so it remains disconnected in all chains? Whereas if the defect is high, it can be through another teacher.

The Shaykh : Correct, and that is what comes to mind.