Is the narrator's understanding of what he narrated always given precedence over others?

The Shaykh: Oh Allah, seize this opportunity. Abu Ahmad, it is not here.

The questioner: Now, if the narrator's understanding of the hadith he is narrating comes up, is there a rule that it is given precedence over the understanding of others? Is this a consistent rule, or does it have conditions that restrict it?

The Shaykh: As we said earlier, there is nothing that is always consistent; it is very rare. Therefore, it must be restricted. For example, if his understanding contradicts an explicit text, or contradicts another narration reported by a trustworthy narrator, then this understanding is not considered. And if it is an opinion he held alone, and there are established legal opinions based on sound derivations from the Book and the Sunnah by a scholar, then he is not obligated in this case to adopt the narrator's opinion. But the benefit of adopting the narrator's opinion, and the fact that the narrator is more aware of what he narrated than others, lies in the situation where they say, "We are men and he is a man." This narrator understood the hadith this way, and I understand it that way. No, this specific understanding here has no relevance. However, if he brings evidence from the Shari'ah that supports his specific opinion, then he is not obligated to adopt the opinion of this narrator. Look, for example, at the example we mention in connection with the discussion on installment sales. There is a hadith in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, narrated by Sammak ibn Harb from Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade two sales in one sale." Now, there are many opinions in interpreting "two sales in one sale," including the opinion of Sammak, the narrator of this hadith. When he was asked, "What are two sales in one sale?" he said: "It is when you say, 'I will sell this to you for such-and-such in cash, and for such-and-such on credit.'" There is no justification or reason whatsoever to disregard this opinion, because it falls under the rule first, and because there is nothing to negate it second, and because there is something that supports it third, which is the hadith of Abu Hurayrah in the other wording . So this reversal does not reveal its meaning except in this surah that Sammak ibn Harb interpreted.