How do we reconcile the hadith that the Shaytan and the black dog interrupt the prayer with the hadith (nothing interrupts the prayer)?

The questioner : Some people reject the hadith of the black dog being a Shaytan and say that there is a hadith What is the response to these people?

The Shaykh : It is not correct to say that some people reject the hadith that the dog interrupts the prayer...
Abu Layla : interrupts the prayer

The Shaykh : No. The hadith that says the dog interrupts the prayer is not rejected. That was the question. The answer to this doubt, after you have heard his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) that it interrupts the prayer with the condition mentioned, is that these three things—the woman, the donkey, and the black dog—come here. The doubt is that there is a hadith that says: Our answer to this hadith and this doubt is that the hadith negating the interruption of the prayer is a munkar (denounced) hadith with a weak chain of narration. First, neither of the two authentic collections (al-Bukhari and Muslim) narrated it. Second, in its chain, it was narrated by Abu Dawud and others, and in its chain are narrators who do not constitute a proof. Third, and finally, or rather before the last point, this hadith, despite its weak chain, contradicts many authentic hadiths that explicitly state that the Shaytan interrupts the prayer, with the detail that this interruption may mean invalidation, as in the last hadith which mentions the woman, the donkey, and the black dog, or it may mean reducing the reward of the prayer and diminishing its merit. These hadiths that explicitly state that something interrupts the prayer, along with the fact that one should not place a sutrah (barrier), mean that it is not correct to oppose these hadiths, especially the last one which is in Sahih Muslim, the hadith of the three. It is not permissible to oppose it with a hadith like because it has a weak chain and a denounced text. This is the third point. Fourth and finally, if two authentic narrations come and one cannot be rejected, then it is obligatory to reconcile the two narrations in one of the ways of reconciliation. We say: Either it is said that this was based on the original presumption of permissibility before the new ruling came, which is the establishment of the interruption mentioned in those hadiths, or we say that the negated interruption is the complete interruption, meaning the negated interruption is interpreted as the invalidation of the prayer. This is explicit in the last hadith. As for the first hadith , this interruption, in the reality of the scholars as previously mentioned, is not in the meaning of invalidation, but rather in the meaning of the reduction of the reward and the merit, as came in the authentic hadith and so on until he (peace be upon him) said: So this reduction in the merit of the prayer is what is exposed to the one who prays without a sutrah. On this meaning, if the hadith were authentic, it would be interpreted accordingly. As for the hadith of Muslim and so on, this is a more dangerous interruption than the first one, and it means invalidation. This is the madhhab (school of jurisprudence) of Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him), except in a narration from him where he hesitated regarding the issue of the black dog. And it is not befitting for us to hesitate after it has been established that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) paired the black dog with the donkey and with the woman. The woman in this hadith is intended to mean, as came in a narration, the menstruating woman, i.e., the adult. If the woman is a child who has not reached the age of accountability, then she does not interrupt the prayer, due to his saying (peace be upon him) in Sunan Abu Dawud with the wording "the menstruating woman." And the intended meaning is not the woman who is in the state of her monthly period, because this is one of the hidden matters that it is not reasonable for the Shari'ah to burden the believers with, because if a woman passed in front of you, may Allah forbid, if she was displaying her adornment, how would you know that she is menstruating or pure? What about if she is covered with the Shari'ah jilbab (outer garment)? So the intended meaning of "menstruating" is the adult. Please.