he invited him, and he ate, and his finger touched my finger. He said, "Ouch, ouch! If he had obeyed you, no eye would have seen you." Then the verse of the veil was revealed. It was recorded by al-Bukhārī in "al-Adab al-Mufrad" (1053), al-Nasāʾī in "al-Kubrā/al-Tafsīr" (6/435), and al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Muʿjam al-Ṣaghīr" (p. 45 - Hindiyyah, no. 801 - al-Rawḍ al-Naḍīr) and also in "al-Awsaṭ" (1/166/2/3100 according to my numbering), and from him by Abū Nuʿaym in "Akhbār Aṣbahān" (1/188) through the route of Mūsá ibn Abī Kathīr from Mujāhid from her. I say: Its isnād is good, and al-Suyūṭī said in "al-Durr al-Manthūr" (5/213) - attributing it to Ibn Abī Ḥātim as well as al-Ṭabarānī and Ibn Mardawayh - "Its chain is authentic." And al-Haythamī said in "al-Majmaʿ" (7/93): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in 'al-Awsaṭ', and its men are the men of 'al-Ṣaḥīḥ', except for Mūsá ibn Abī Kathīr, who is trustworthy." Similarly, al-Dhahabī deemed him trustworthy in "al-Kāshif", and al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Taqrīb": "Truthful, accused of Irjāʾ, those who weakened him were mistaken." I say: Al-Haythamī overlooked that it is also in "al-Muʿjam al-Ṣaghīr", and al-Ḥāfiẓ remained silent about its isnād in "al-Fatḥ" (8/531), indicating its strengthening after attributing it only to al-Nasāʾī, and mentioned it after the ḥadīth of the chapter and the story of Zaynab, saying: "It is possible to reconcile by saying that it occurred before the story of Zaynab, and due to its proximity to it, ʿĀʾishah attributed the revelation of the veil to this reason, and there is no objection to multiple causes." The point is that these ḥadīths invalidate the previous claim of the author of "al-Taḥrīr" that Zaynab, if..