What is the meaning of some exegetes' saying in their interpretation of His — the Almighty's — words: "and not display of their adornment except only that which is apparent of it" [Quran 24:31]: "except what is customary and natural to appear, and the principle in it is appearance"; and how do they connect the permissibility of the face and hands appearing with that, and does this statement contradict the obligation of hijab?

The phrase "except for what is customary and naturally apparent, and its origin is appearance" appeared in the interpretation of the verse: {And not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof} [An-Nur: 31]. This applies only to the face, hands, and feet. Thus, visible adornments like kohl and rings are permissible to display, while hidden ones like bracelets and anklets are not permissible to display except to maharim (unmarriageable kin). The reason for permitting visible adornment is hardship, such as the need to uncover the face and hands for interaction and transactions, and the appearance of the feet for walking, especially for poor women. The dispute is well-known regarding the face and hands. As for the feet, they are not considered part of what must be covered according to Az-Zamakhshari. This is a view in the Hanafi school. Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah held the view that it is permissible to display the feet, based on a statement from Aisha, and that women used to show their feet. Despite this, the preponderant view among the majority of jurists is that a woman's foot is awrah (private part that must be covered).