What is the evidence for the preference of covering the face and its recommendation?

The questioner: Oh Professor, regarding the hijab of the Muslim woman ... ?

The Shaykh: The hijab of the Muslim woman?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: In the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), some women would cover their entire bodies, including the face and the two hands, and some would cover their entire bodies except for the face and the hands. The former is better, and the latter is permissible. So if a woman wants to cover her face and hands, that is more noble and better for her. However, there is no evidence that this is obligatory for the woman. In other words, there is no evidence indicating that the face and hands of a woman are part of the awrah (the part of the body that must be covered); there is no evidence for this. But the reality that many of the women of the Companions were in, as we mentioned, was that they would cover their faces and their hands as well. This indicates permissibility, indeed the better permissibility. But this reality is countered by another reality: some women would uncover their faces. This reality indicates pure permissibility, while the first reality indicates the better permissibility.
This is the most just opinion among what the scholars have differed on. Some say that the face and hands are not awrah, and then they do not address the fact that the better option is to cover them. Others say that the face and hands of a woman are awrah like the rest of her body; it is not permissible for her to show any part of them. This is something for which there is no evidence, as I detailed in my book "The Hijab of the Muslim Woman in the Book and the Sunnah."
This is the summary of our position in this issue.

The questioner: Is there evidence for the preference? Is the preference of covering, like covering the whole body, with evidence?

The Shaykh: The preference is what we mentioned earlier, in two realities in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him): covering and uncovering. There is no doubt that covering is more concealing.

The questioner: Is there evidence for it? He asks: Is there evidence?

The Shaykh : That is what I am saying.

The questioner: A woman does not wear the niqab (face veil) in ihram (the consecrated state of pilgrimage).

The Shaykh: No, this is not the evidence he is looking for. This means she wears the niqab while not in ihram.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: But this is evidence for permissibility.

The questioner: The preference, evidence for the preference?

The Shaykh: No, it is not evidence for the preference.

The questioner: ... You cited it in the book "The Hijab of the Muslim Woman" in the section on the permissibility of the ...

The Shaykh: I do not remember this.

The questioner: He is present.

The Shaykh: It exists that the woman used to wear the niqab.

Another questioner: In the reality, I mean.

The Shaykh: Yes, that is right, it is not evidence that this is recommended.

The questioner: The hadith exists; you cited it in the section on the permissibility of covering the face.

The Shaykh: The permissibility of removing the ...

The questioner: Yes, permissibility, the better permissibility, you say, and then you bring this hadith.

The Shaykh: I do not remember; in any case, the topic should be reviewed.

The questioner: He is present.

The Shaykh: The hadith exists and is authentic, and I used it as evidence that wearing the niqab was known in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). I refuted with it those who exaggerated in the issue and said that a woman covering her face is an innovation. I refuted these people with this hadith, but I did not address the fact that this hadith indicates recommendation.
And there is no explicit textual evidence for the recommendation; rather, it is derived through inference, from two angles:
The first angle: I began by mentioning it earlier, and I said: There is no doubt that it is more noble and more concealing for a woman to cover her face. Especially since some scholars who made covering the face obligatory said that it is a place of fitnah (trial, discord or temptation). And if it were not for the fact that we have some hadiths that explicitly state that the woman used to uncover her face while being beautiful, and the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) approved of that, we would have agreed with those who say it is obligatory for a woman to cover her face if she is fair and beautiful. At the very least, we would say that covering her face is better and more noble for her. This is the first angle.
The second angle: The noble women of the Companions, such as the Mothers of the Believers, used to cover their faces. So whoever among the women today covers her face follows the example of the women of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and the Mothers of the Believers. From this angle, we see that covering is better.

The questioner: Especially regarding adornment; the woman now in this era puts on adornment.

The Shaykh: No, if she does not want to put on adornment, it becomes haram (forbidden) for her to uncover her face.

Another questioner: Okay, a note.

Another questioner: The verse is explicit: ; so is it permissible for the Muslim woman to go out for other than necessary works?

The Shaykh: No, it is not permissible.

Another questioner: ... It is established in an authentic hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that after the revelation of the verse of hijab ... except for very necessary works? And the verse is also explicit that in the imposition of hijab on the face ... ?

The Shaykh: Therefore, it seems to me that you have entered one issue into another. Are you still in the first issue, or have you opened another door?

The questioner: No, with the completion of the question at the beginning .

The Shaykh: has no relation to the previous topic.
This means that even if a woman goes out in her complete clothing, it is not permissible for her to make it her habit to leave her house. This is the meaning of . If she is covered in every way, it is obligatory for her to stay in her house. This is another issue, and it has no relation to the first issue. Therefore, I do not think you have finished with the first issue. Have you finished with the first issue?
In the other verse you mentioned earlier, which is His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): , this verse does not indicate the obligation of a woman covering her face, because the command in this verse is only to draw close; . What is the meaning of drawing close? Drawing close is from nearness, which is closeness. That is: they should bring close. This is an image that might occur; the woman in the pre-Islamic age of ignorance was most like what we see today in some Iraqi women who still keep the abaya, but what is the use of this abaya? She throws this abaya over the top of her head, then lets it hang over her shoulders, and then everything from her chest and neck is visible.

Eid Abbasi: And some of the hair.

The Shaykh: And perhaps some of her hair as well; this is what they did in the pre-Islamic age of ignorance. So this verse was revealed: , . This is the meaning of drawing close. Now we must define the obligatory drawing close commanded in this verse. What is the obligatory drawing close?
What I believe is that no one holds that the commanded drawing close in the previous verse is complete drawing close; such that she covers her face including the eyes. No one says this. So now, with this agreement, we have excluded something from the face. What is the excluded thing with its definition? Some people say: she shows one eye, approximately like this. Some people say: she shows both eyes like this. Some people say: she shows the face, the nose, and the mouth as well; because it is the place of breathing.
When we saw this disagreement, it became necessary to return to the remover of disagreement and the judge of it; which is the Sunnah, as He said (Glorified and Exalted is He): . The explanation of the obligatory drawing close in the verse cannot be taken from it; because, as we mentioned, it is absolute. If it is taken in its absoluteness, it means the woman cannot walk in her path.
And I want to draw attention, on the occasion of my saying: she cannot walk in her path; because the jilbab (the outer garment) is thick fabric, not transparent, not like a handkerchief with fine holes; so she sees and is not seen, but it is something thick. If she were commanded to throw this jilbab over her whole face, she would not be able to leave her house at all. Therefore, those who went to the exception of one eye or both eyes together.
So it should be defined by the Sunnah what is the obligatory command of drawing close. The Sunnah is both verbal and practical. As for the verbal, it is his saying (peace be upon him): . This is a text from his saying (peace be upon him) that a woman who has reached the age of legal responsibility is not permissible, in this state, for more than the face and hands to be seen from her. So it is an explicit text for the permissibility of uncovering the face and hands of a woman, absolutely, as we mentioned earlier.
This hadith is further supported by the practical Sunnah, as we mentioned earlier, that there are many hadiths in which the women used to uncover their faces. Some of the Companions would see a woman’s cheek and describe the color of that cheek because it was uncovered, and another would see a woman and describe her as beautiful and lovely. All of this confirms that the aforementioned verbal exception is supported by the actions of the women during the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him). There is no doubt that what the Messenger approved and did not reject is, in itself, evidence of permissibility. How much more so when it is supported by the previous statement: ?
Once this is established, we return to the verse: meaning: they cover their entire bodies except the face and the hands, with the exception being the hadith supported by the Sunnah that occurred during the period of Prophethood and Messengership. In this way, the aforementioned verse can be understood. As for taking the drawing near (idna) in its absolute sense, that is what a person would say absolutely; there must be a specification, and specification by explicit text is preferable to specification by independent legal reasoning. The one who said that one eye is to be exposed, that is his independent legal reasoning, taking into account the dire necessity, which is that she needs to see her way. And the one who excepted both eyes, likewise, made that exception by independent legal reasoning and not by explicit text.

Another questioner: What is narrated from Ibn 'Abbas regarding covering the ?

The Shaykh: It is narrated, but with a chain that is not authentic from him. Yes, Ibn Jarir al-Tabari narrated it with a chain that has a break.

Another questioner: His saying (Exalted is He): does not mean that the face is to be covered or veiled?

The Shaykh: No, this is in the houses. The woman in the house is to be in a state of undress in her clothing, with her head and neck uncovered = -- and upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings -- = ; so in this case, she must not be seen at all. Yes, this veil is not the same as the veil mentioned previously in the verse: , which is the veil the woman throws over her body. The second veil is the veil that is in her home when she speaks to a stranger about her behind this veil; so they are two veils and not one veil.

Another questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And to you.

Eid Abbasi: In any case, the questions and answers have ... .