Is the disagreement regarding the obligation of covering a woman's face a difference of diversity or a difference of contradiction?

Question:
Benefits from the explanation of the book *Iqtida' al-Sirat al-Mustaqim li-Mukhalafat Ahl al-Jahim* by Ibn Taymiyyah. A shaykh in between in the hadith regarding the contradiction and diversity. The disagreement on the hijab of the woman, the covering of the woman's face: is it a type of difference of diversity or contradiction?

Answer:
The hijab for women is based on evidence from both sides. These are either the evidence of those who advocate for unveiling and not covering the face, and their evidence is either abrogated by the hijab, because at the beginning women used to uncover their faces. They uncovered their faces, and it was permitted for them to uncover their faces, then they were commanded to observe the hijab which they base their argument on.
. And in the story of 'Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her), when what happened occurred regarding her being left behind by the group due to what was mentioned, that she went to relieve herself, then she came and found that the group had traveled on, thinking she was in the howdah, and she remained in the place and sleep overtook her until Safwan ibn al-Mu'attal stopped by her. She said, "He knew me before the hijab was prescribed." She said, "I woke up by his recitation of the istirja' (saying: Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un), (may Allah be pleased with him). By his recitation of the istirja', and he knew me before the hijab was prescribed." We knew 'Aishah. Why did we know 'Aishah? Because he knew her before the hijab was prescribed; he knew her face, so he knew that she was the Mother of the Believers. Therefore, he recited the istirja'. The point from this is that it indicates that the hijab was only prescribed later, and that those who took the position of uncovering the face took it based on abrogated evidences. They took it based on valid evidences, but they are abrogated. This is one category. The second category built their argument on invalid evidences, on invalid hadiths, or on hadiths that are valid but not explicit, meaning they are ambiguous. So this is their perspective: either they built their argument on valid abrogated evidences, or they built their argument on valid but not explicit evidences, meaning ambiguous ones, or they built their argument on weak evidences that are not suitable for argumentation. This is the point of disagreement between them regarding the hijab. As for those who see that covering the face is required, they took the valid, later, explicit evidences that have no ambiguity, such as . What is the meaning of "lower their garments"? She is originally required to wear the jilbab. What is the meaning of "lower"? It means she covers her face, as 'Ubayd al-Salmani explained when he was asked about the verse. He took the end of his garment and placed it over his face and said, "This is how it is." This is an interpretation he received from Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both). So he clarified that the verse is explicit in covering the face, and by the interpretation of 'Ubayd al-Salmani from his imam and teacher, 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both).
And His saying, the Exalted: . What is the meaning of "hijab"? Does it mean a hijab for some of them, or a hijab for all of them? A hijab for all of them. The one who says it is for some of them must bring evidence. The default is that it is for all of them. Behind me is a hijab, whether it is a garment, a wall, or a door. Behind me is a hijab. And the hadith of 'Aishah is explicit: "We were with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in a state of ihram, so when men passed by us, one of us would lower her khimar from her head, and when they had passed by, she would uncover." This is the indication of generality. Yes, this is explicit; it is not ambiguous. It is explicit in covering the face from men.