16
—or to conceal the face with a niqab—then the face and the hands counted as part of the adornment she was commanded not to display to unrelated men (non-mahrams). Nothing therefore remained lawful for such men to look at except the outer garments. Ibn Masʿūd referred to the second of these two rulings, while Ibn ʿAbbās cited the first.¹
Accordingly, His words—
“or to their womenfolk, or to those whom their right hands possess” ²
indicate that a woman may unveil her hidden adornment before her male slave. On this point there are two opinions:
(1) This is what the author says, may Allah have mercy on him. He means that when Ibn Masud explained “the apparent adornment” as clothing, as mentioned above, he was referring to the ruling that had ultimately been established. Ibn Abbas, however, when he explained it as the face and hands, was referring to the state of affairs that had prevailed earlier. This interpretation is unlikely, for each of these two distinguished Companions stated his own interpretation of the verse in question: “And let them not display their adornment except what is apparent thereof.” This verse certainly refers to the matter upon which the legal ruling ultimately settled. At most, they differed in how they interpreted that very matter; so how can it be said that Ibn Masud referred to the later of the two positions, while Ibn Abbas referred to the earlier one? For this reason, some of the early scholars sought to reconcile their two statements. In his Tafsir (18:94), Ibn Jarir, after citing the two positions with their chains of transmission back to them, said: “Others held that it refers to the face and clothing,” and he mentioned those who held this view. He then transmitted, through two sound chains, from al-Hasan al-Basri that he said regarding “except what is apparent thereof”: “The face and clothing.” Ibn Jarir himself then preferred the view that it refers to the face and hands. This is open to discussion from the perspective of Quranic style, as I have explained in al-Hijab. I agreed with him in this preference from a legal perspective; see that work, pp. 17–24.
(2) Surah al-Nur, verse 31.
أو ستر الوجه بالنقاب:
كان حينئذ الوجه واليدان من الزينة التي أمرت ألا تظهرها للأجانب.
فما بقي يحل للأجانب النظر إلا الثياب الظاهرة فابن مسعود ذكر آخر الأمرين وابن عباس ذكر أول الأمرين١.
وعلى هذا فقوله:
{أَوْ نِسَائِهِنَّ أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُنَّ}
٢ يدل على أن لها أن تبدي الزينة الباطنة لمملوكها.
وفيه قولان:
١ كذا قال المؤلف رحمه الله تعالى وهو يعني أن ابن مسعود لما ذكر في تفسير الزينة الظاهرة أنها الثياب كما تقدم قريبا إنما ذكر ما استقر عليه الأمر وابن عباس لما ذكر في تفسيرها أنها الوجه واليدين ذكر ما كان عليه الأمر قبل ذلك وهذا بعيد فإن كلا من الصحابيين الجليلين قال ما قال في تفسير الآية المشار إليها {وَلا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا} . وهي تعني قطعا الأمر الذي استقر أخيرا حكم الشرع عليه غاية ما في الأمر أنهما اختلفا في تفسير هذا الأمر ذاته فكيف يصح أن يقال: فابن مسعود ذكر آخر الأمرين وابن عباس أوله. ولذلك ذهب بعض السلف إلى الجمع بين قوليهما فقال ابن جرير في تفسيره "١٨ / ٩٤ " بعد أخرجه ساق القولين بأسانيده إليهما: وقال آخرون عني به الوجه والثياب ذكر من ذكر ذلك. ثم روى بإسنادين صحيحين له عن الحسن البصري أنه قال: {إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا} قال: "الوجه والثياب" ثم اختار هو أن المراد به الوجه والكفان وفيه نظر من حيث الأسلوب القرآني بينته في "الحجاب" وقد وافقته على اختياره من الناحية الفقهية فراجعه "ص ١٧ – ٢٤"
٢ سورة النور الآية: ٣١.