who believe, do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you for a meal, without waiting for its preparation) to His saying: (from behind a partition). Then the partition was set up, and the people stood up. It was also narrated by Muslim (4/150-151) in an extended form, as well as by al-Tirmidhī (3217) - who authenticated it - and the first addition is from both of them, while the other addition is from al-Ṭabarī in "al-Tafsīr" (22/26), and its chain is authentic. I say: In these two additions, there is strong evidence that Zaynab (may Allāh be pleased with her) had her face uncovered, otherwise there would be no point in Anas mentioning that she turned her face to the wall, and his description of her as being beautiful would have no significance. As for the statement of the author of "The Emancipation of Women in the Era of the Message" (3/68): "If her face had been uncovered, the noble Messenger would have commanded her to cover it, and there would be no need to set up the partition and prevent Anas from entering"!! My response to that: Firstly, his statement: "He would have commanded her to cover it" is merely a claim without evidence; because covering the face for his wives (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) before the revelation of this verse of the partition was not obligatory, so he would not have commanded her to cover it, and this is clear and not hidden, if Allāh wills. Secondly, his statement: "there would be no need to set up the partition..." contains an obvious fallacy, based on his opinion which he defends with all effort and fervor, which is that the persons of his wives (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) should be hidden behind a curtain so that men do not see their persons, nor do they see them! when speaking with them. However, according to what al-Ḥāfiẓ favored, that the intention was to conceal the body, not the person; the need for the partition remains as well, because they, by virtue of being frequently visited by men, required it