I say: The shaykh—and those who imitate or side with him—have floundered in several ways while trying to wriggle free from the clear import of this ḥadith:

At one point he says (p. 208):
“There is nothing in it to show that the woman had her face uncovered. It may be that Ibn ʿAbbās was impressed by the elegance of her bearing, the grace of her figure, and the brightness of whatever extremities were visible.”

This statement collapses under its own weight: its beginning contradicts its ending, and its ending undoes its beginning. For the Arabic term atʾrāf (“extremities”) refers to the two hands, the two feet, and the head—as every Arabic speaker knows. Thus, what he denies at the outset he affirms at the conclusion, though only after a bout of verbal circumvention—regrettably so. In fact, atʾrāf does include the face, as the dictionary al-Qāmūs states: “The extremities of the body are the two hands, the two feet, and the head.”

Did the shaykh truly not know this linguistic fact—just as he erred when explaining the terms jilbāb, khimār, and iʿtijār—or did he overlook it on purpose to confuse and mislead? If ignorance is the reason, was he also unaware of the Prophet’s authentic saying: “When a servant prostrates, seven extremities prostrate with him: his face, his two hands…,” the ḥadith (1)? Or did he deliberately ignore that as well? Either way, the outcome is lamentable.

Presently (p. 44) we shall see proof that he is indeed employing obfuscation, for there he says: “the extremities of her hands.”