who believe: do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless you are given permission for a meal, without waiting for it to be ready,” up to His words, “from behind a screen.” Thus, the hijab was ordained, and the people rose to leave.

Muslim also narrated it at length (4/150–151), as did al-Tirmidhi (3217), who declared it authentic. The first addition is found in both of their versions, while the other is from al-Tabari’s exegesis (22/26), and its chain is authentic.

I say: These two additions constitute strong evidence that Zaynab—may Allah be pleased with her—had her face uncovered. Otherwise, there would have been no point in Anas’s mentioning that she had turned her face toward the wall, or in describing her as beautiful.

As for the statement of the author of Women’s Liberation in the Age of the Message (3/68):

“If her face had been uncovered, the noble Messenger would have instructed her to cover it; there would have been no need to draw the curtain and prevent Anas from entering!”

My response is as follows:

First: His statement, “He would have instructed her to cover it,” is a mere claim unsupported by evidence. Covering the face was not obligatory for the Prophet’s, peace and blessings be upon him, wives before the revelation of this verse of hijab, such that he would instruct her to cover it. This is clear and unmistakable, Allah willing.

Second: His statement, “There would have been no need to draw the curtain …,” contains an obvious fallacy, according to the view which he defends with such strained effort and fervor: namely, that the persons of the Prophet’s, peace and blessings be upon him, wives were concealed behind a screen, so that men could not see them, nor could they see the men when speaking to them.

But according to what al-Hafiz considered more likely—that what was intended was to conceal the body, not the person—the need for the hijab still remains, because men frequently came to them