What is the Shari'ah-prescribed hijab for women?

Question:
She says: Many women call covering the head and uncovering the face "hijab." I ask you, may Allah reward you, to clarify this confusion and explain the meaning of the word "hijab," and the benefit that returns to a woman if she covers her face from non-mahram men? May Allah reward you with the best reward.

Answer:
Hijab is of two types: an obligatory hijab according to all scholars, which is the covering of the head and the body, except for the face and the hands. As for covering the face and hands from men, this is a matter of scholarly disagreement, and the correct view is that it is obligatory for her to cover her face and hands from men; because the face is 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered) and adornment, and the hands are likewise. Allah (Exalted and Majestic is He) says: [Surat al-Nur: 31]. So the face is of the greatest adornment, and the hands are likewise. Therefore, she is prevented from displaying her adornment to non-mahram men in the markets, or with her husband's brothers, or her husband's uncles, or with servants, and the like, out of fear of fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) for her and through her.
And Allah (Exalted and Majestic is He) says in another verse: [Surat al-Ahzab: 53], a verse from Surat al-Ahzab. So He (Glorified and Exalted is He) made it clear that hijab is purer for the hearts of everyone, men and women. This includes the face and other parts in His saying: , which includes the face and other parts. And Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said regarding the Farewell Pilgrimage: "We were with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in the Farewell Pilgrimage, and when men came near us, one of us would draw her jilbab (the outer garment) over her face, and when they moved away, we would uncover it." And in the two Sahihs (al-Bukhari and Muslim), it is narrated from her (may Allah be pleased with her) that when she heard the voice of Safwan ibn al-Mu'attal lamenting when he saw that the army had left her behind, she said: "I heard his voice, and he had seen me before the hijab was revealed. When I heard his voice, I covered my face with my khimar (the head covering)." This indicates that women before the hijab did not cover their faces, so when the verse of hijab was revealed, they covered their faces from men.
And the verse of hijab is the saying of Allah the Exalted: [Surat al-Ahzab: 53]. So hijab is for the entire body. As for the head and the feet: the head must be covered, and the feet must be covered, and likewise the chest and the neck, and the like. The disagreement is regarding the face and the hands. Some scholars hold that they are not 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered) if there is no adornment on the face, such as kohl or beauty, and if there is no jewelry or beauty on the hands. The correct view is that they are adornment, and that they are 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered) that must be covered absolutely, even if there is no kohl or adornment on them, and no jewelry on the hands. The correct view is that they are 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered), because they are of the adornment mentioned in the saying of Allah the Exalted: [Surat al-Nur: 31]. Even the anklet on the foot is of the 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered). Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) said: [Surat al-Nur: 31]. So He prohibited striking with the foot; because that leads to the anklet being known. So how about displaying the face, displaying the neck, and displaying the hand?
Some of those who permit uncovering the face if there is no fitnah (trial, discord or temptation), and the hands, may rely on a hadith narrated by Abu Dawud from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her): that Asma bint Abi Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them both) entered upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in Aisha's house, and she was wearing thin clothes—and Asma was wearing thin clothes—so the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) turned away from her and said: and pointed to his face and his hands. They said: This indicates that the face and hands are not 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered), based on his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): .
And the answer is: Yes, this is explicit. If it were authentic, it would be explicit that they are not 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered), if this hadith were after the hijab, after the revelation of the hijab. But the hadith is not authentic, and the time is not known: is it after the hijab or before the hijab? And the hadith has defects:
First: It is munqati' (a report with a broken chain) between the narrator from Aisha and Aisha, as Abu Dawud (may Allah have mercy on him) said when he narrated it: It is mursal (a report missing the Companion link), meaning: munqati' (a report with a broken chain); because it is from the narration of Khalid ibn Daryak from Aisha, and he did not meet her and did not hear from her. And a munqati' (a report with a broken chain) hadith is weak and cannot be used as evidence.
The second defect: That among its narrators is a person named Sa'id ibn Bashir, who is weak and his narration cannot be used as evidence.
The third defect: That it is from the narration of Qatadah from Khalid with an 'an'anah (indirect narration), and he is a mudallis (one who conceals a defect in a chain). And a mudallis (one who conceals a defect in a chain), when he uses 'an'anah (indirect narration), his narration is not accepted until he explicitly states the chain.
And the fourth defect: That its text is munkar (a denounced narration); because it is not fitting for Asma to enter upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) while she is an old woman; the wife of al-Zubayr, from the best of the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and from the ten who were given the good tidings of Paradise. It is never fitting for her, and it is not thought that she would enter upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in thin clothes through which her 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered) is visible. This is not thought of her (may Allah be pleased with her) and is never fitting for her. She is older than Aisha and more senior than Aisha, so no one should think, and it is not befitting for anyone to think, that she would enter upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in thin clothes through which her 'awrah (a part of the body that must be covered) is visible, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) turns away from her, seeing her hair, her chest, and her body. This is never thought of her. So it is batil (invalid) in its text, munkar (a denounced narration) in its text.
The fifth defect: That it is not established that this was after the hijab, after the revelation of the verse of hijab. And before the hijab, a woman would uncover her face and hands and sit with people. Then Allah revealed the hijab and they were prevented from that. So if its chain were authentic and its text sound, it would be necessary to demand from the claimant proof that it was after the hijab, so that the argument would be established. As for before the hijab, women used to uncover their faces, hands, and feet before the hijab. Then Allah revealed the verse of hijab, and they were prevented from that and commanded to cover themselves and observe hijab, as in the saying of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He): [Surat al-Ahzab: 53]. His saying (peace and blessings be upon him) : [Surat al-Nur: 31] to the end of it. His saying (peace and blessings be upon him) : [Surat al-Ahzab: 59]. And the jilbab (the outer garment) is what she places over her head and body. May Allah guide them all. Yes.

The presenter: O Allah, amen. May Allah reward you with good.