Other scholars mention that this narration is authentic, like Ibn Taymiyyah authenticated- inshaa'Allaah more on this later.
As for the narration of Ibn `Abbaas that you mentioned is authentic, then this comes in many different wordings and all of them are weak.
Even if one was to accept it, then there are ways to explain it:
1) Ibn Taymiyyah said in Majmoo` al-Fataawaa:
فإذا كن مأمورات بالجلباب لئلا يعرفن ، وهو ستر الوجه ، أو ستر الوجه بالنقاب ، كان الوجه واليدان من الزينة التي أمرت ألا تظهرها للأجانب ، فما بقي يحل للأجانب النظر إلا إلى الثياب الظاهرة .
فابن مسعود ذكر آخر الأمرين ، وابن عباس ذكر أول الأمرين " اهـ .
انظر مجموع الفتاوى [ 22 / 111 ]
So, he reconciles between the statement of Ibn Mas`ood and Ibn `Abbaas.
Ibn Mas`ood mentioned regarding the statement of Allaah: "ولا يبدين زينتهن إلا ما ظهر منها " (and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent)
He, radiyAllaahu `anhumaa said: "كالرداء والثياب" (Like the clothes and the outher garment)
As you see above, Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned that the statement of Ibn `Abbaas was the first command and the statement of Ibn Mas`ood is the last command.
2) Another way to look at this is that Ibn Katheer rahimahullaah actually uses the statement of Ibn `Abbaas to say that one should cover the face and hands. He used the statement of Ibn `Abbaas "وجهها وكفيها والخاتم" to say that this refers to the statement of Allaah "ولا يبدين زينتهن" (and not to show off their adornment)
3) The third way to look at this is the actual `amal of the women at the time of when this ayah was revealed. As I mentioned before we have the narration of `Aa'ishah when she explained about the part of the ayah which comes right after the part we are discussing:
"وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ"
“When these words were revealed – ‘and to draw their veils all over Juyūbihinna [Soorah Noor: 31]” – they took their izārs (a kind of garment) and tore them from the edges and covered their faces with them.”. Ibn Hajar in his Fathul Bāri explained clearly that they covered their faces.
From the third point it is clear that the view of Ibn Mas`ood is what is correct.
Note: Whenever a person cites something as evidence, then it must meet two conditions so that a person can do `amal upon it:
1) It is authentic.
2) It has to indicate to that particular ruling.
The narration that you use to support this view is that of Ibn `Abbās in Sahῑh Al Bukhāri. The root for the hadῑth is Shu`ayb who narrates from Az-Zuhrῑ who narrates from Sulayman ibn Yassār who narrates from Ibn `Abbās. They quote from this Hadῑth that Ibn `Abbās’s brother al-Fadl was with the Prophet sallAllāhu `alahi wa sallam during the farewell hajj (the Prophet sallAllāhu `alahi wa sallam would stand there and people would come and ask him questions regarding the Hajj). So a lady came to the Prophet sallAllāhu `alahi wa sallam and she came from Al-Khath`ām. Al-Fadl describes her as ‘a radiant lady’. The narration mentions that Al-Fadl started looking at her and she looked at him, and he was amazed by her and she was amazed by him. [They cite this as evidence that he looked at her face]
• Only Shu`ayb narrates this addition [that she was radiant and he was amazed by her beauty] from Az-Zuhrῑ, and he has opposed those who are more reliable than him in memory like Imām Mālik who narrates from Az-Zuhrῑ (and the narration is collected by Imām Bukhāri and Muslim), Ibn Jurayj (narrated by Bukhāri and Muslim), `Abdul `Azῑz ibn Salamah (narrated by Bukhāri) and also Shu`ayb himself narrated through another chain in Bukhāri. Thus, some of the scholars mention that this ziyaadah (addition) is shaadh (odd). This is because none of the other narrations (through Mālik, Ibn Jurayj and others) narrate this addition. All the narrations through different chains (all reported by Bukhāri and Muslim) narrate the same incident, except the narration of Shu`ayb through the first chain, which has this addition.
• However, other scholars who accept this ziyaadah (addition), explain this Hadῑth: The lady who came to the Prophet sallAllāhu `alahi wa sallam came to him during the time of Hajj and thus she was in a state of Ihrām, this is supported by an addition in the Musnad of Imaam Ahmad that suggests she was in her Ihraam. And it is known that a woman in the state of Ihrām should uncover her face and hands (unless there are non-mahaarim)
• The scholars also explain it as: This hadῑth does not show the approval of the Prophet sallAllāhu `alahi wa sallam, so thus cannot be taken as evidence to uncover the face.
• The last way to look at this is that this hadeeth does not suggest in anyway that al-Fadl saw the face of the woman in the first place. It can be the case that he described her based on him seeing her eyes, like even in our times we have men who propose to sisters (who wear niqaab) for marriage, based on just looking at their eyes.
As mentioned before, this hadῑth at the least does not indicate to the specific ruling and is a general narration.
This hadeeth was narrated by ‘Ā-ishah, Umm al-Mu’minīn that: Asmā’, daughter of Abū Bakr, entered upon the Messenger of Allāh wearing thin clothes. The Messenger of Allāh turned his attention from her. He said: “O Asmā’, when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this”, and he pointed to her face and hands.
This hadīth meets one of the conditions (i.e. it indicates to the ruling that a woman is allowed to uncover her face). With regards to its authenticity, then it has a number of problems with its chain:
• There is Walīd b. al-Muslim who is mudallis.
• He narrates from Sa’īd b. Bashīr who is classified as weak by many scholars including Imām Ahmad, `Alee ibn al-Madīnī (teacher of Bukhaari), Yahya b. Ma’īn, an-Nasā’ī, Al Haakim, Abu Dawood and others. Furthermore, he was known for narrating munkar reports on Qatādah (remember the chain of this hadeeth has Qataadah in it) as mentioned by Muhammad ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Numayr, Zakariya ibn Yahya As-Saajee. He also mentioned: "His hadeeth is to be rejected and he does not amount to anything" and Ibn Hajar also said something similar.
• He narrates from Qatādah, who was known for a great memory, but would also sometimes do tadlīs.
• Sa’īd b. Bashīr is the only person to narrate from Qatādah, who had many students narrating thousands from him, such as Shu’bah b. al-Hajjāj, Sa’īd b. Abī ‘Arūba, Hammām b. Yahya.
• He narrates from Khālid b. Durayk, who is the only person to narrate on the authority of ‘Ā-ishah, who herself had many students, the likes of ‘Urwah b. Zubayr, Muhammad b. Qāsim.
• Khālid b. Durayk did not hear from ‘Ā-ishah, as mentioned by Abū Dāwūd and Abū Hātim.
• Khālid b. Durayk is not known for reporting narrations – they amount to roughly five.
Some scholars mention that these are the seven problems which break the narration from its foundations/routes, and it (this hadeeth) was weakened by a number of scholars including Imām Ahmad and Abū Dāwūd (who narrated this very hadeeth).
We have some of the greatest of Huffaadh weakening this narration. And also Shaykh al-Albaanee, as mentioned by scholars, was sometimes mutasaahil (lenient in terms of authenticating narrations).
Now, the narration is not only weak and munkar from its chain but it is also munkar from its matn. How can it ever be the case that Asmaa', one of the greatest from the Sahaabiyyaat, wear thin clothes after the ayah of Hijaab was revealed. We all know the narration of when she refused to mount on the camel that was offered by the Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu `alayhi wa sallam and she refused to do so because of her husband's ghayrah (Zubayr ibn al-`Awwaam). This was the level of hayaa' Asmaa’ bint Abee Bakr had, so how can one attribute this narration to her.
I agree that Shaykh Al-Albaane was a great scholar and was indeed a very pursuasive writer- may Allaah raise his ranks in this dunya and in the aakhirah. But we do need to look at what the Huffaadh from the salaf (the likes of Imaam Ahmad and others) of the past had to say about such narrations. Scholars like Imaam Ahmad, Abu Dawood, al-Daraqutni etc. were scholars who were masters on another level- and they were from those few scholars who had mastered `Ilm al-`Ilal in terms of hadeeth. This is why Ibn Rajab rahimahullaah mentioned that in his time, there are very 'few' who are knowledge in `Ilm al-`Ilal.
Barak Allah feek.
Since I am actually translating as I type, as I cant find what I need readily in English, I will reply to only selected points that I think are more important... (so granted this doesnt cover this very long topic)..
As for the narration of Ibn Abbas about showing one eye...It is narrated by Ibn Sa'd in Al Tabaqaat 8-176-177, from Muhammad Ibn Ka'b Al Qurdhi..
Imam Al Albani said that its fabricated, and its flaw is having Ibn Seirah (in it).
Imam Ahmad said in Al Ilal 1-241 : "He was a liar and would fabricate hadeeths".
And who narrates from him is Muhammad Ibn Umar Al Waqidi, who similarly, Al Haafidh said in Al Taqreeb "Matrook" (his words are not accepted).
And Ahmad said "A liar"
Moreover its Mursal.
Another narration stating this, is that of Ibn Sereen asking Ubaidah Al Salmani, narrated by Al Souyoti in "Al Durr", which is not only Mutdharib as Al Albani mentioned, but is disconnected (Mawqoof). This is because Al Salmani is a Taabi'i and not even a Sahabi (in which case it would be at least Mursal).
As for Ibn Abbas saying "the face and hands", Al Albani mentions 7 routes I think, one of them being "Sahih Jiddan" (very sound). In another narration theres an additional explanation, that Al Albani rejects as an irregularity that contradicts the original text ( shudhoodh شذوذ ).
He adds to the opinion of Ibn Abbas raa, the similar opinions of Ibn Umar, Aisha, ,Saeed Ibn Al Jubair, Atta' and others.
As for the hadeeth of Aisha raa, Al Albani rahimahu Allah didnt miss to mention the fact that the hadeeth. He said what is similar to what you said.. which is that it is Mursal, and that Khalid Bin Duraik didnt hear from Aisha raa, quoting Abu Dawood.
He adds "and Saeed Ibn Basheer, is weak, as in Al Taqreeb by Al Haafidh Ibn Hajar. He said it is Saheeh as a Mursal (meaning the route that exists is authentic, but the Sahabi is missing so its disconnected at the level of the companions).
But he says it is strengthened by other narrations, that do not have neither Saeed Ibn Basheer or Khaled Bin Duraik. He also discusses Qutadah, but the problem is I cant translate his whole text because its in many pages, and written as a reply to Al Maudoodi, who made some claims that Al Albani addressed in his reply discussing them in detail, all revolving around the narration of Qutadah.
As for the hadeeth of Al fadl looking at the woman.. as a part of your reply "And it is known that a woman in the state of Ihrām should uncover her face and hands (unless there are non-mahaarim)".
The thing is, Al Fadl himself, was a non mahram. This was Hajj, so its expected to have men around. And she looked at him too, and the prophet was present, and it is only narrated that he turned Al Fadls face away. And here Al Albani also mentions the distinction between niqab, and covering the face, and why it doesnt matter if shes in the state of Ihraam, or immedietly after it during the Hajj period.
Al Albanis approach is both a comprehensive one, and a wholistic one.
Starting from linguistic approach, to interpretations of the sahabah, to explicit hadeeths (as the hadeeth of the woman whos cheeks were showing) to hadeeths that are pretty direct, but less explicit, as in the hadeeth of Al Fadl during Hajj, and Aisha about women praying with the prophet peace be upon him Fajr prayer, unknown because of darkeness, not because their faces were covered. And the hadeeth of the Khath'ami woman, the hadeeth in Saheeh Muslim in which the cheeks of a woman shows and is changed in color, and narrations from the salaf, actions of women, and so on.
Theres probably near a hundred hadeeths and even more narrations so its not possible to mention them all. (
Im sure those who hold the other opinion, similarly have many things to mention as well)
He proceeds to give examples on how women interacted with men, as in some of the ones mentioned above in the previous post, making it obvious that its really not concievable that they all wore gloves and covered their faces.
Even if one or two or three have certain possible explanations, resorting to these possible explanations in all cases (if even possible), makes the probability of it being correct much less, and unlikely.
So he focuses on tafseer/explaining Sunnah, with Sunnah, and narrations, with other narrations. I love this approach. To me personally - and im no scholar for sure, rather far from it- from what I read about the other opinion, is usually based on inaccurate analogy (not referring to the Sha'ri Qiyas here), and sometimes includes texts on being protective etc, so many writings on this, arent exactly objective.
As for those who are closer to laymen (and some students of knowledge even), would resort to the "Would you accept this for your sister?" arguement. Of course, whether one accepts or not, its not a source of Islamic Shariah.
One of the arguements of the person who Al Albani was mainly replying to in his book, would ask why Al Albani had his daughters cover their faces if he doesnt believe in it!? Of course, its not scholarly to do so, and Al Albani anyway strongly encourages covering the faces, and only argues that its not obligatory. The point is lots of emotions are involved sometimes.
Some even speak as if this opinion (whether correct or not), is something factual and undisputed. But its far from being so. Some even went on to claim consensus (also, very inaccurate).
What I love about Al Albanis approach in his book, is that he explains Qur'aan and Sunnah with Qur'aan and Sunnah, and narrations with narrations, and while having a wholistic approach, he is very, very precise in his words and gives great attention to detail. On top of this hes a mountain of knowledge in hadeeth, masha'Allah. I wish I had the chance to visit him before he passed away may Allah have mercy on his soul, but alhamdulillah.
Finally, so my words arent misused, I reitierate that despite the disagreement, covering the face is better, theres no doubt about that among scholars, neither with Al Albani or anyone else.