Cross-Dressing or Triple-Crossing (2)!

Did Jesus and Muhammad Wear

Women’s Clothing?
By Jalal Abualrub (www.IslamLife.com)

Prophet Muhammad (), the founder of the Islamic state, was contemporary to
countless Muslim men, women and children who were companions to him, who strived
hard to emulate his practices and learn aspects of life and religion from him. Countless
thousands of pagans, Christians, Fire-Worshippers, Jews and hypocrites, many of
whom his sworn enemies, were also his contemporaries watching carefully what he did
and how and if what he practiced conformed to what he preached. Prophet
Muhammad () lived for 13 years in Makkah, after he was sent as Allah's Last and Final
Prophet and Messenger, then lived for ten years in Madinah until he died at the age of
sixty-three. There is no man in history whose biography and history are as widely
recorded as Prophet Muhammad's biography and history are recorded.

How is it then that even though countless Muslims and non-Muslims, including
the hypocrites who pretended to be Muslims, witnessed and visited Prophet
Muhammad (), they never claimed that he used to wear women’s clothing? The
answer is found twofold in this segment: (1) This never happened; (2) Even the worst
enemies of Muhammad () of old had more decency than modern-day hostile
evangelists who think that the only way to discredit the message of Islam is to discredit
its Prophet by lying about him.

Wholesale Insults

In their new rebuttal to my original article refuting their blatant lie that Prophet
Muhammad, peace be upon him, used to wear women’s clothing, the AnsweringIslam
team resorts to their typical un-Christian behavior by insulting their opponent instead
of bringing proof and evidence to support their outrageous claims
(http://www.answeringislam.net/Responses/Abualrub/mhd_cross_dressing2.htm).

While wicked demeanor is nothing new to such a wicked team, what they wrote in
the new article even surprised me. I will first mention some of their wholesale insults
without a detailed comment then proceed to respond to their latest false assertions with
proof and evidence. I invite the readers to compare my rebuttal to what these people
write and then reach their own conclusion afterwards based on evidence and proof.

The AnsweringIslam team wrote, ‚The Meaning of Mirt and Thawb. Since
Muslim dawagandist Jalal Abularub has taken issue with our claim that his prophet
wore women’s clothing, and since other dawagandists are under the mistaken
assumption that Jalal has actually refuted our points … We have decided to address
some of his blatant distortions and smokescreens in order to show that there is
absolutely no substance behind any of his assertions. We admit that this will be a
daunting task, not so much because Abualrub has raised any good arguments which
are hard to refute, but because of his inability to write in a coherent and concise manner.
As a quick perusal of his materials shows, Jalal writes long-winded articles that do not
follow any logical pattern whatsoever. He often repeats the same point over and over
again, seemingly to give the impression that he is actually addressing the point. His
‚response‛ to our article concerning Muhammad’s cross-dressing is no different, being
another example of his shoddy style of writing and inability to communicate his point
in a logically coherent manner. As a result, it was tedious work to sift through his
smokescreens in order to get to the meat of his argument… Teaching a Muslim Shaykh
a valuable lesson in translation and meaning of words.‛

I leave this segment without commenting on it, except to say, {“Produce your
proof if you are truthful”} (2:111). I guess it is hard for such dedicated evangelical
enthusiasts to practice what they preach, "But I say unto you which hear, Love your
enemies, do good to them which hate you" (Luke 6:27). They worship the man who said
these words, even though he never told them to worship him, but they try their best to
defy his teachings and treat his commandments with empty hearts and blatant defiance.

Does Thaub mean ‘A Woman’s Dress’?

The AnsweringIslam team knows well that their invented creed does not stand a
chance against Allah's Islamic Monotheism, so they resort to slander and defamation.
In their pursuit of anything they think defames Muhammad (), the AnsweringIslam
team can become very innovative even if it means to defame their own falsely claimed
lord and savior. The biggest problem that this team has, is that they do not speak the
Arabi language. This is how and why they come up with this most absurd notion that
Thaub means, ‘a woman’s dress.’ Before I answer their direct claim, I hereby present
this gift to the AnsweringIslam team, from their own Bible.
 These verses are taken from the famous Van Dyke Arabic translation of the Bible.
I should first note here that the Arabic version of the Bible is centuries older than the
English version (http://www.arabicbible.com/bible/codex_151.htm). The Bible was not
widely translated into English until well into the 14th century.

1.
. ِِٔ‫د ُٕدِبَ ثَوِت‬
ِ ‫َس‬
َّ ٍ‫ َوإِذَا اٍِ َسَأجٌ َّاشِفَ ُح َدًٍ ٍُِْرُ اثَْْرٌَِ عَشِ َس َج سََْحً قَدِ جَاءَخِ ٍِ ِِ َوزَائِ ِٔ َو‬.ُٓ‫الٍَِ ُر‬
َ َ‫ع وَذَِثعَُٔ ُٕ َو وَذ‬
ُ ‫َفقَا ًَ ٍَسُو‬

‚And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind
him, and touched the hem of his Thaub‛ (Matthew 9:20).

2.
.ِِٔ‫ وَ طَيَثُوا ِإىََِِٔ أَُْ ٍَيَِسُوا َوىَوِ ُٕدِبَ ثَوِت‬،ِ‫ضعُوا اىََْسِضَي فٌِ األَسِوَاق‬
َ َ‫ و‬،ٍ‫َوحََِثََُا َدخَوَ ِإىَي قُسىّ أَوِ ٍُدٍُُ أَ ِو ضََِاع‬

‚And whithersoever he entered, into villages, or cities, or country, they laid the sick in the
streets, and besought him that they might touch if it were but the border of his Thaub‛ (Mark
6:56).

3. Jesus, peace be upon him, is reported to have said,

. ‫ َوٍَِِ َأخَرَ زِدَاءَكَ فَالَ ذَََِْعُِٔ ثَوِتَلَ أٍَِضّا‬،‫ٍَ ِِ ضَسَتَلَ عَيَي خَدِّكَ فَاعِ ِسضِ ىَُٔ اُخَسَ أٍَِضّا‬

‚And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away
thy Ridaa forbid not to take thy Thaub also‛ (Luke 6:29).

The AnsweringIslam team claims that, ‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s

clothing.‛ Therefore, using their sick logic, Jesus, peace be upon him, not only used to
wear women’s clothing, Thaub, but also encouraged men who also wore women’s
clothing, Thaubs, to give up their Thaubs, or 'women’s clothing', to those who take
away their Ridaa. Luke 6:29 mentioned two types of clothing, Thuab and Ridaa. In this
context, Ridaa is the outer garment, a coat or a robe, while Thaub is a shirt, while in
Mark 6:56 and Matthew 9:20, Thaub is in reference to a cloak.

Here is a biblical verse that mentions the two words together, 'woman' and
'Thaub',

. َ‫ ألََُّ مُوَّ ٍَِِ ٍَعََِوُ ذىِلَ ٍَنْسُوْٓ ىَدَى اىسَّبِّ إِهلِل‬،ٍ‫ب اٍِ َسَأج‬
َ ِ‫وَالَ ٍَيْثَسِ َزجُوٌ ثَو‬
"Neither shall a man put on a woman’s Thaub: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord
thy God" (Deuteronomy 22:5).

Here is a clear biblical quote wherein Ridaa is mentioned as women's clothing,

.ُِٔ‫ َفَأٍِسَنَر‬.»َِِٔ‫ل َوَأٍِسِن‬

ِ ََِ‫ «َٕاذٌِ اىسِّدَا َء اىَّرًِ عَي‬:َ‫ثٌَُّ قَاه‬

"Also he said, Bring the Ridaa that thou hast upon thee, and hold it. And when she held it…"
(Ruth 3:15)

I remind the reader -again- that most probably, the author of the
AnsweringIslam new rebuttal is a devious man who sometimes assumes the feminine
personality of Esther. Thus, it is natural for such a character to accuse Jesus and
Muhammad, peace be upon them, of wearing women’s clothing, by saying that ‚thawb
… indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛

The AnsweringIslam team wrote, ‚What makes his ‚rebuttal‛ rather amusing is
that, despite his rants and raves against our assertions concerning Muhammad wearing
women’s garments, Abularub had to admit that the words used in the hadith do refer to
clothing. Note, for instance, what he writes concerning the terms thawb and kisaa: g.
Words like ‘Thaub’ and ‘Kisaa’, used to describe both REGULAR CLOTHES and un-
sewn garments such as those used as blankets, are defined by the Context. (Emphasis
ours) It is interesting that Abualrub admits that these specific words can mean clothes
as well as un-sewn garments, since an un-sewn garment doesn’t have to necessarily
mean a blanket but can in fact refer to a woman’s garment much like a dress.‛

I am glad that AnsweringIslam finds my words amusing. I am also glad to have

quoted their own Bible to prove that whatever these people may use against Prophet
Muhammad, peace be upon him, with regards to Thaub will also be used against their
falsely claimed god, Jesus, peace be upon him, who never told them he is a god to begin
with. If, as the AnsweringIslam team so wickedly insists, ‚thawb … indeed refer to
women’s clothing‛, then both Jesus and Muhammad used to wear women's clothing.

However, I stand confused at their words. Here, their author agrees with me
that Thaub and Kisaa are used for various contexts including clothing, bed covering,
garments, etc., as I proved with ample evidence in my original rebuttal. Why then did
he decide and still insists that Prophet Muhammad () used to wear women’s clothing
rather than being covered under the blanket of his ‘Child Bride’ as he calls Aishah, the
Prophet's wife? Before the AnsweringIslam author wrote what he wrote, whom among
those who saw Prophet Muhammad () used the Hadeeths AnsweringIslam quoted to
reach the conclusion AnsweringIslam reached?

If the AnsweringIslam author agrees with Jalal Abualrub that Thaub and Mirt
also mean un-sewn garments sometimes used as bed-covering, then why does he insist
that the Mirt that the Prophet () used to cover with, in Aishah’s bed, only refers to
Aishah’s clothing rather than her bed covering? This team comes to a word that means
a host of things and so wickedly invents a meaning unheard of before regarding
Hadeeths widely recorded in Islamic books. It is the meaning they invented in Hadeeths
widely reported that earns them the title wicked.

AnsweringIslam corrupted the context of Hadeeths that were recited and

analyzed by countless scholars who never heard of nor came up with the notion that
Prophet Muhammad () used to wear women's clothing. This is because Prophet
Muhammad () used to lay next to his wife in bed under one blanket, he never did
wear women's clothing as the shameless claim. AnsweringIslam agrees with Jalal
Abualrub that Thaub means a host of things, including bed-covering. Yet, they still
insist on the opposite of what they agree about with Jalal Abualrub, by claiming that
‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s clothing ... a woman’s garment much like a dress.‛

Well, Which One Is It: a, b or c?

a. Thaub ‚indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛

b. Thaub, "can mean clothes."
c. Thaub "can mean … un-sewn garments" such as "a blanket."

Muhammad's Child Bride?

It was said before that if one is shameless, one will do anything. Or, one will say
anything, because one is shameless. AnsweringIslam cannot get themselves to respect
the Prophet of Islam (), even if just to be polite. Here is what they say in their new
article: "Muhammad and his child bride." This is the same AnsweringIslam that
believes that God ordered Moses and the Children of Israel to kill tens of thousands of
men, women and children who were captured in war, but to only keep the virgins for
themselves. This does not seem to touch the conscience of these soft-hearted
evangelists. They only have a problem with Muhammad () marrying Aishah.

Read this amazing AnsweringIslam justification for the terribly violent

commandments the Jews falsely attributed to God, "Let me say upfront. I don't
understand everything in the Bible … Some of the early war history of Israel is also
difficult to me … I want to present you with a few thoughts of which I don't claim that
they will answer everything, but they might be worth thinking about … [Num. 31:1]
And the Lord said unto Moses, ‘Avenge the children of the Mid'-an'ites’ ... They warred
against the Mid'-i-an'ites, as the Lord commanded Moses, and they slay all the males.
And they took all women as captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their
cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. And they burnt all their cities wherein
they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire. Moses said, ‘HAVE YOU SAVED ALL
THE WOMEN ALIVE? NOW KILL EVERY MALE AMONG THE LITTLE ONES, AND
KILL EVERY WOMAN (Jalal wrote: I did not capitalize anything here) that has known
a man by lying with him, but all the young girls who have not known a man by lying
with him keep alive for yourselves … Numbers 22-25 and 31 … The Israelites have not
dreamed this up themselves. It was not their "idea" to go to war … In the end among
the spoils are 32,000 girls/women who have never slept with a man … What does that
say about the number of men they fought against? 32,000 virgin women usually have
brothers and fathers in military age. 50,000 might not be unrealistic … though I am
speculating here … I don't know to say much more here. Main point is: It is a definite
command of God, it is a punishment of the LORD to the evil of the Midianites … it is
"the Lord's battle" … It was not a "normal, human battle" … And this is GOD's
judgement. … You might compare this with Muhammad and see the differences."
(http://www.answering-islam.org/Q-A-panel/war.html)

I wrote an article responding to this ridiculous justification for mass murder of

non-combatants (http://islamlife.com/religion2/news/news/539-prince-of-peace-or-lord-
of-war). However, here are a few more comments in response to those who say,
"Muhammad and his child bride."

1. Never mind "Muhammad and his child bride", she was his wife. But, what about
those 32,000 virgins, how did the Children of Israel determine their virginity and
what test did they conduct to decide who is a virgin and who is not?
2. Hopefully no one will say that the test is their being unmarried, because this is not
what the Bible says. What the Bible says is this, "… all the young girls who have not
known a man by lying with him." It is about having sex, not about being unmarried.
3. Would it be reasonable to say that the test was scientific, i.e., any girl even one day
older than three years of age was considered a non-virgin?
4. Why did the Children of Israel keep all these girls to themselves, to teach them the Torah?
5. Indeed, why not "compare this with Muhammad and see the differences"? Do that,
please; do compare Muhammad's Child bride to the 32,000 virgins the Children of
Israel allegedly took for themselves.
 As for the ‘Child Bride’ of Muhammad (), she so loved the Prophet of Allah ()
and remained perfectly faithful to him, until she died decades after he () died. She did
not complain to AnsweringIslam about her marriage to the Prophet (), nor did she
ever say that she did not like being married to him, peace be upon him. To the
contrary, she once said to him (), when he indicated to her one night that he wished to
spend that night worshipping his Lord, "By Allah! I love your nearness to me, but I also
love what makes you pleased." She said that he () then stood up, washed up for
prayer and kept praying and crying, until he made his lap, beard and then the floor wet
with his tears, until it was time for the [dawn] prayer (Sahih at-Targheeb [1468]).

After his death (), Aishah said to a woman who asked her about a type of hair
dye, "It is alright to use it. But, I dislike it [because] Habibi (the my-beloved), peace be
upon him, used to dislike its smell" (Hidayat at-Ruwah, by al-Asqalani [245/4]).
Aishah described him () as 'Habibi', and said, 'peace be upon him', and disliked
something just because he disliked it. Who can bring more eloquent proof to their love
for their spouse than what Aishah said in such a brief statement? Does this look like an
oppressed woman who was forced to marry an older man, or a wife devoutly in love
with her husband, whom she so often called, 'O, Messenger of Allah"?

Why wouldn't any normal human being be offended at Shamoun and his cohorts
at AnsweringIslam for 'sticking their nose' between a man and his wife? Their hatred
for Prophet Muhammad () seems to blind their sight and mind as it blinded their
hearts. Why is it strange that Prophet Muhammad () would marry a young girl by
agreement from her parents and from her, her tribe and his tribe? I was told that Sam
Shamoun’s own grandmother married at a young age yet he does not feel ashamed to
use such abusive words that could easily be used against his own grandfather. He uses
anything that he thinks defames Muhammad () even if, by using his sick logic, he
defames his own false deity and his own grandparents.

The AnsweringIslam team wrote, ‚Moreover, the plural form of thawb appears
in the following Quranic texts‛, then, they mentioned the following Quranic Ayat. It
seems that these people think that by quoting Ayat in English that contain variations of
the word ‘clothes’ they can prove that Thaub "refer to a woman’s garment much like a
dress." Let us examine the quoted Ayat to examine their proof. I left the text used by
the AnsweringIslam team without change. The reader should first remember that what
AnsweringIslam seeks to prove in their article and by bringing the quoted Ayat is that
"thawb … indeed refer to women’s clothing ... a woman’s garment much like a dress."

The AnsweringIslam team quoted this Ayah, ‚Lo! now they fold up their breasts
that they may hide (their thoughts) from Him. At the very moment when they cover
themselves with their clothing (thiyabahum), Allah knoweth that which they keep
hidden and that which they proclaim. Lo! He is Aware of what is in the breasts (of
men). S. 11:5 Pickthall‛

This Ayah proves that Prophet Muhammad () used to do what normal men do,
he used to lay besides his wife in bed under her bed covering. A hint: the
AnsweringIslam team used these very words from the English translation of Ayah 11:5,
"cover themselves." They just quoted any sentence that has the word Thuab or any of
its variations, even if what they quote actually proves them wrong. How amusing!

Somehow, the AnsweringIslam team thinks that Ayah 11:5 supports their
assertion that "thawb … indeed refer to women’s clothing ... a woman’s garment much
like a dress." Here is the comprehensive meaning of Ayah 11:5 as found in these books
of Tafsir (explaining the Quran): Tafsir at-Tabari; Tafsir al-Qurtubi; Tafsir Ibn Kathir.

1. Before, people used to dislike facing heaven with their uncovered private parts
while answering the call of nature and during sexual intercourse. So, they used to
cover their private parts with their clothes while answering the call of nature and
cover under their bed covering while having sexual intercourse.
2. Ayah 11:5 is also in reference to the hypocrites covering their heads so they were not
recognized, trying to avoid listening to the Prophet () by covering their heads and
turning away from him.
3. Ayah 11:5 is also in reference to doubting Allah and committing sins thinking that,
by bending the chest or covering the head, they can hide from Allah what they say
or do.

Allah informed such people that when they cover with their Thiyab, i.e. bed
covering, in the darkness of the night, {[Allah] knows what they conceal}.‛ Therefore,
bending the chest and covering the head is even less as a way of concealing what one
does than being under bed covering in the darkness of the night.

This Ayah says nothing about Thiyab, plural for Thaub, being only sewn clothes.
This Ayah says nothing about ‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛ If
anything, Ayah 11:5 describes disbelieving MEN and has a host of contexts for Thaub, as
follows.

First, having sexual intercourse under the cover of a Thuab, i.e., a blanket. They
used to dislike getting naked without a cover between them and heaven so they used to
use bed covering, Thiyab, to cover their nakedness. It would be rather silly for someone
to get naked by taking off their clothes then feel shy to have sexual intercourse without
a cover between them and the sky, so they would wear their clothes again. Thus, they
would "cover themselves with their … (thiyabahum)" i.e., cover themselves under their
bed-covering while having sexual intercourse. Normal men, whether believers or
disbelievers, may cover themselves in bed under their bed covering while having sexual
intercourse. Likewise, Prophet Muhammad () used to go under the bed covering of
his wives, including Aishah, when he was in bed with one of them.

Second, disbelieving men and hypocrites used to cover their heads trying to
avoid listening to the Quran or to the Prophet () who was sent with it. Obviously, this
is in reference to pulling the top of their garments over their heads, not wearing a
woman’s dress over their heads. The Arabic Bible concurs to this context.

ٍَِِ‫ة اىَّر‬
ِ ‫اىش ِع‬
َّ ُ‫ َوجَََِع‬،‫صعَدُ تَامَِّا َو َزأْسُُٔ ٍُغَطَّي وٍَََِشٌِ حَافَِّا‬
ِ ٍَ َُ‫ مَا‬. ُِ‫صعَدِ جَثَوِ اىصٍَِّرُو‬
ِ ٍَ ٌِ‫صعِدَ ف‬ َ ‫َوأٍََّا دَاوُدُ َف‬
.َُٔ‫ُو وَاحِدٍ َزأْس‬
ُّ ‫ٍَعَُٔ غَطَّوِا م‬

‚And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head
covered, and he went barefoot: and all the people that was with him covered every man his head‛
(II Samuel 30:15).

Third, Ayah 11:5 is also in reference to having ill thoughts about Allah thinking
that He does not see what they do and what they say. So they try to conceal what they
do or say by covering their heads and bending their chests.

Nowhere does this Ayah speak of the fantasy that AnsweringIslam seeks to prove
that ‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛ Rather, the Ayah uses Thaub in the
context of bed covering. The readers are welcome to read the Ayah as many times as
they wish then should wonder as I wonder why AnsweringIslam quoted this Ayah.

This Ayah proves my statement that Aishah’s Mirt was not a woman’s dress, but
her bed covering. The Prophet () used to spend the night with his wife in her bed
covered under her blanket. This is what normal men do. A normal man would not
refrain from sleeping under his wife’s blanket at night for fear that a man who calls
himself Esther may accuse him of wearing a women’s dress.

The same can be said about this Ayah which the AnsweringIslam team also
quoted, ‚And verily! Every time I called unto them that You might forgive them, they
thrust their fingers into their ears, covered themselves up with their garments
(thiyabahum), and persisted (in their refusal), and magnified themselves in pride. S.
71:7 Hilali-Khan‛
 Ibn Kathir stated in his Tafsir that Abdullah Ibn Abbas said that this Ayah means
that [the disbelieving men] used to veil their faces so that they did not have to hear
Prophet Nu`h (Noah), peace be upon him. This is in obvious reference to covering the
lower part of the face with part of the Imamah (turban), to veil the face, because they did
not want to be recognized. How can this prove that ‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s
clothing‛?

Again, the AnsweringIslam authors quote an Ayah that proves that Thuab does
not ‚indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛ How can this Ayah prove their assertion when
it uses Thaub in the context of covering by men? Also, the covering mentioned in Ayah
71:7 is about veiling the face with the Imamah, the head-turban, not about men covering
themselves with women's clothing. This Ayah proves that Thiyab is used to veil the
face, thus proving that Thiyab comes in various types and are used for various reasons.

Here is another Ayah quoted by the AnsweringIslam team, ‚For them will be
Gardens of Eternity; beneath them rivers will flow; they will be adorned therein with
bracelets of gold, and they will wear green garments (thiyabin) of fine silk and heavy
brocade: They will recline therein on raised thrones. How good the recompense! How
beautiful a couch to recline on! 18:31 Y. `Ali‛

Ayah 18:31 is indeed about Thiyab in the context of clothing. There are two types
of clothing mentioned in Ayah 18:31, Sundus, fine shirts as Ibn Kathir stated in his
Tafsir, and Istabraq, thick [outer] garments of Dibaj also as Ibn Kathir stated in his
Tafsir. However, by examining the Ayah in its original context, one 'discovers' a few
facts that escaped those who brought this Ayah to try and prove that ‚thawb … indeed
refer to women’s clothing.‛

First, Ayah 18:31 says nothing about Thiyab, plural for Thaub, being only sewn
clothes. In fact, it mentions two types of clothing, Thaub (shirt) and Kisaa (cloak).
Second, Ayah 18:31 says nothing about ‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛
Ayah 18:31 speaks of the clothing of the people of Paradise, who are both men and
women, and does not say that this is only in reference to women’s clothing.

It is funny that AnsweringIslam would use Ayah 18:31 to prove that ‚thawb …
indeed refer to women’s clothing‛ when before, they had written articles that question
what, if any, will Allah give believing women in Paradise. Here is part of what a
character called Dallas M. Roark wrote for AnsweringIslam, "There is another strain of
thought running through the Qur’an and it involves paradise through the eyes of the
male, rather than the female being there on her own right and because of her own faith.
Paradise is described as a man’s world where he shall eat and drink with easy
digestion. … In Sura 44:51 a little different emphasis is made. The Qur’an says, 'Surely
the god-fearing shall be in a station secure among gardens and fountains, robed in silk
and brocade, set face to face. Even so, and We shall espouse them to wide-eyed houris,
therein calling for every fruit, secure.'" (http://www.answering-
islam.org/Authors/Roark/women.htm)

Therefore, Dallas Roark sees Paradise as a man's world and brings Ayah 44:51 to
prove that Paradise is a man's world, an Ayah that speaks of the clothing of the residents
of Paradise, i.e., men according to Roark. Meanwhile, in the new cross-dressing article,
AnsweringIslam uses an Ayah that discusses the clothing of the people of Paradise to
prove that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, used to wear women's clothing.

These people have got to make up their mind on this issue. Muslims are
anxiously awaiting their decision whether or not Muslim women will enter and enjoy
Paradise as men do (http://islamlife.com/down/dr-deceiver.pdf), and if so, whether or
not the residents of Paradise, both men and woman, all wear women's dresses.

How can the AnsweringIslam authors think that Ayah 18:31 proves that Thaub
refers to women’s clothing when it outwardly talks about men’s clothing as is apparent
from its words? They again prove my point that Thiyab do not ‚indeed refer to
women’s clothing.‛ To the contrary, what this proves is that the wicked authors
dismiss every possible meaning for Arabi words and insist on only one meaning with
regards to Prophet Muhammad () so as to lie about him.

The amusing thing is that they prove their assertion by bringing evidence
asserting that, Thaub does not ‚indeed refer to women’s clothing‛ but indeed refers to
multiple meanings defined by the context, such as bed covering, sewn clothing, un-
sewn clothing, outer garments, robes, cloaks, coats, what wraps or covers the body, a
head turban, etc. Similar words can be said about this next Ayah quoted in the
AnsweringIslam article, ‚Their garments (thiyabu) will be of fine green silk, and gold
embroidery. They will be adorned with bracelets of silver, and their Lord will give them
a pure drink. S. 76:21 Hilali-Khan‛

Amusingly, the AnsweringIslam article quotes this Ayah, ‚These two opponents
(believers and disbelievers) dispute with each other about their Lord; then as for those
who disbelieve, garments (thiyabun) of fire will be cut out for them, boiling water will
be poured down over their heads. S. 22:19 Hilali-Khan‛
 The AnsweringIslam team seems to insist on proving my point that Mirt and
Thaub do not ‚indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛ I hereby thank them for this effort
and ask them to keep it up. My point is that these two words carry a host of meanings;
both I and the AnsweringIslam team have proved this point. Yet, the wicked team
insists that ‚mirt and thawb do indeed refer to women’s clothing‛ even though they
bring proof that these two words do not only ‚refer to women’s clothing‛, but are
gender-neutral words that mean a host of things.

Ayah 22:19 is about the residents of the Hell-Fire, who are both men and women,
wearing garments made of fire. This Ayah says nothing about Thiyab, plural for Thaub,
being only sewn clothes. In fact, this Ayah is about Thaub being in the context of Mirt
and Kisaa, a gender-neutral robe or un-sewn garment used as an outer garment by both
men and women. This Ayah says nothing about ‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s
clothing.‛ Also, this Ayah does not only refer to Thaub in the context of clothing, but
also to having a designated lot or area in Hell.

In his Tafsir, Imam al-Qurtubi explained the meaning of Ayah 22:19 by saying
that, ‚The fire will surround them like cut out Thiyab surround them when they wear
them‛ (Tafsir al-Qurtubi). This means that just as outer garments or robes used to
surround the body of the disbelievers in this life when they wore them, Hell will
surround them likewise in the Hereafter as if they are wearing it or wrapping
themselves with it. Thus, the AnsweringIslam team keeps adding new contexts to the
word Thiyab, but keeps insisting that ‚thawb … indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛

Ayah 22:19 outwardly talks about Thiyab with regards to men, but also includes
women in its general indication. The residents of Hell are both men and women. The
Ayah mentions Thiyab in the context of un-sewn garments and lots of land, or lots in the
Fire in this case. Thus, Thiyab is a gender- neutral word that describes what is shared
between men and women.

Next, the AnsweringIslam team insists on proving my point, by quoting this

Ayah, ‚O ye who believe! let those whom your right hands possess, and the (children)
among you who have not come of age ask your permission (before they come to your
presence), on three occasions: before morning prayer; the while ye doff your clothes
(thiyabakum) for the noonday heat; and after the late-night prayer: these are your three
times of undress: outside those times it is not wrong for you or for them to move about
attending to each other: Thus does God make clear the Signs to you: for God is full of
knowledge and wisdom… Such elderly women as are past the prospect of marriage, -
there is no blame on them if they lay aside their (outer) garments (thiyabahunna),
provided they make not a wanton display of their beauty: but it is best for them to be
modest: and God is One Who sees and knows all things. S. 24:58, 60 Y. `Ali‛

The AnsweringIslam team insists on proving my point, again, that Thaub and
Mirt mean a host of things, such as outer garments as these Ayat state with regards to
both genders.

The first Ayah, 24:58, is about Muslims, men and women, taking off their outer
garments before the dawn prayer, in the noon heat and at night, or having sexual
intercourse with their spouses during these times by taking off their clothes. Thus,
Thiyab in the Ayah is also about men’s clothing, not only about women’s clothing.
Clothes here refer to outer un-sewn garments, which people take off in the heat of the
day, and inner sewn clothes, which they may take off during sexual intercourse or
while resting during the times mentioned in the Ayah. Thus, this Ayah proves not that
‚mirt and thawb do indeed refer to women’s clothing‛ as the AnsweringIslam team
insists yet still bring Ayat that clearly disprove their claim.

Ayah 24:60 is about older women past the prospect of marriage removing part of
their outer garments, meaning the Jilbab or Ridaa as Ibn Kathir reported from Abdullah
Ibn Mas'ud and Abdullah Ibn Abbas. This Ayah is not about women taking off their
shirts or getting naked in front of men if they grow past the prospect of marriage. The
Jilbab is the outer garment that women wear on top of their clothes to cover themselves
in front of men who are not their husbands, fathers, uncles, brothers, or children. The
Ridaa is a robe, and both men and women wear Ridaa. Older women must still wear
decent clothes that cover the entire body even past the prospect of marriage.

Thus, Thaub and its variations mean a host of things and the Ayat
AnsweringIslam brings prove this point. Add that to the fact that even Jesus, peace be
upon him, used these words in the context of men's clothing, and then one will come to
know why Jalal Abualrub rightfully insists on calling the AnsweringIslam team wicked.
It is because they insist that of all the possible meanings, the only meaning for the
Prophet () covering under Aishah’s Mirt is that he used to wear women’s clothing.
Their lies, are just unbelievable.

To prove that ‚mirt and thawb do indeed refer to women’s clothing‛, the
AnsweringIslam team brings this Ayah, next, ‚And your garments (thiyabaka) purify!
S. 74:4 Hilali-Khan‛

This is rather amusing that one would use what is proof against one as if it is
proof for one. Thiyab in this Ayah has a host of meanings as Imam Ibn Kathir stated in
his Tafsir, from being in reference to actual clothes to purification from sin, buying
clothes from lawful resources, performing righteous good deeds and cleansing the heart
from the filth of polytheism, such as idol-worship and Trinity. The latter meaning, it
being in reference to purifying the heart but using clothes figuratively, was mentioned
in a poem by the famous Arab poet Imru-u-l-Qais, who died a long time before Islam
came (Tafsir Ibn Kathir).

Poor Arabs! It seems that not only the Prophet () and his generation, but even
Arab poets of ancient times did not know their own language. Only modern day, non-
Arabi speaking, hostile evangelists know Arabi.

How can Ayah 74:4 prove that ‚mirt and thawb do indeed refer to women’s
clothing‛ when Thiyab here is used in the context of a man’s clothing and also in
reference to cleansing the heart? Ayah 74:4 is addressed to Prophet Muhammad (), the
best man ever!

The enemies of Muhammad () seek to prove that Thaub means a woman’s
dress by bringing proof from the Quran that Thaub means a host of things, not only
clothes, and certainly not only ‘a woman’s dress’. Let the reader now find out which is
more amusing, my scientific rebuttal that proves that Thaub is a gender-neutral word
that means a host of things or the assertion of the AnsweringIslam team that Thaub
refers to women’s clothing. The enemies of Muhammad () lie.

Their assertion next is astonishing, to say the least, ‚In all of the foregoing
examples thawb clearly refers to clothing oneself with something, whether actual
garments one wears or wearing something in a metaphorical sense such as being
clothed in fire.‛

Therefore, the author of the AnsweringIslam rebuttal knows that Thaub does not
only mean a woman’s dress since he brings proof that it has a host of meanings,
including being given a piece of Hell as their space in it, not as their actual garments.
Yet, the author of the rebuttal claims that ‚mirt and thawb do indeed refer to women’s
clothing.‛ However, none of the Ayat they brought proves that Thaub only refers to
women’s clothing. They even bring proof that Thaub refers to bed covering, such as
Ayah 24:58, and Ayah 11:5. Thanks, AnsweringIslam, for using evidence that proves
you are lying.

The only thing AnsweringIslam could prove through these Ayat is that they
indeed come to a word that refers to a host of meanings, choose only one of them then
 ‘stick’ the meaning they chose to Prophet Muhammad () to claim he used to wear
women’s clothing, a claim never heard of before in history.

1. No one before the wicked team ever came to the conclusion that Prophet
Muhammad () used to wear women's clothing.
2. No non-Muslim who saw Prophet Muhammad () ever said that he used to wear
women’s clothing.
3. None of the Prophet's companions ever said that their beloved Prophet () used to
wear women's clothing.
4. None among the Prophet's companions who reported the Hadeeths quoted by the
AnsweringIslam team in their cross-dressing articles explained these Hadeeths by
saying that the Prophet () used to or was wearing women's clothes. Had they
made that conclusion, they would have asked him () if that is only for him or if
Muslim men are also permitted to wear women's clothing. But, none of that ever
happened.
5. Why is it that no Muslim scholar ever said that Prophet Muhammad () used to
wear women’s clothing? If that were true, the scholars would have mentioned it
and then went on to say that, just as Prophet Muhammad () is the only Muslim
allowed to keep more than four wives at the same time, he alone can wear women's
clothing, for example.

It must have been a vast conspiracy where both Muslims and non Muslims, both
the friends and the enemies of Muhammad, peace be upon him, conspired to hide this
issue regarding Prophet Muhammad (). They all had access to the same Hadeeths
quoted by the AnsweringIslam team. Why is it that only the wicked team could use
these Hadeeths to prove what no one before them ever claimed? The truth is that the
AnsweringIslam team shamelessly lies about Prophet Muhammad ().

What is most amusing is that in their newest rebuttal, the AnsweringIslam team
seems to have forgotten that they needed Ayat that prove that ‚mirt and thawb do
indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛ Instead, they brought Ayat that prove that Thiyab
mean a host of things, not only clothing, and most certainly not women’s clothing. The
AnsweringIslam team also proves that they indeed are wicked. Only a wicked heart
would turn a husband’s normal behavior of being with his wife under one cover in bed
to the accusation that the husband is wearing women’s clothing.

In the next segment Inshaallah, we will explain in more detail the issues of Thaub
and Mirt to prove that the AnsweringIslam team adds ignorance to insolence as
displayed in their false statement that, ‚mirt and thawb do indeed refer to women’s
clothing.‛ But as an advance payment, we will list here six different proofs that use
Thaub in the context of men’s clothing.

First, this Hadeeth mentions Thaub in the context of a man covering his face:

‫وذكس انفنت فقسهبب فًس زجم يقُع يف ثىة فقبل ْرا يىيئر عهً اهلدي‬

Murrah Ibn Ka`b reported that once, the Prophet of Allah () mentioned future
turmoil and when a man passed by while covering his face in a Thuab, he said, "This
man will be on the right guidance then." When Murrah Ibn Ka'b stood up to find out
who the man was, he found that it was Uthman Ibn Affan. (Sunan at-Tirmidhi)

Second, this Hadeeth states that the Prophet () used a Thaub to sleep in:

‫أتيت انُيب صهً اهلل عهيّ و سهى وْى َبئى عهيّ ثىة أثيض‬

Abu Dharr al-Ghifari said that he once went to see the Prophet () and found
him asleep with a white Thaub on him (Sahih Muslim).

Third, the Prophet of Allah () used one Thaub, of the Namirah type, as a shroud for
Hamzah Ibn Abdul Muttalib (Sahih at-Tirmidhi).

‫ يف ثىة واحد‬، ‫أٌ زسىل اهلل صهً اهلل عهيّ وسهى كفٍ محزح ثٍ عجد املطهت يف منسح‬

Fourth, Abdullah Ibn Abbas said that once the Prophet of Allah () gave a speech to
women and advised them to give charity, and one of them would throw her earring and
ring in Bilal's Thaub (Sahih Abi Dawud).

‫فًشً إنيهٍ وثالل يعّ فىعظهٍ وأيسٍْ ثبنصدقخ فكبَت املسأح تهقي انقسط واخلبمت يف ثىة ثالل‬

Fifth, a man asked Allah's Prophet () if 'A`haduna (a man among us) can pray wearing
only one Thaub,' and the Prophet () said, "Do all of you have two Thaubs?" (Muslim)

" ‫ أيصهي أحدَب يف ثىة واحد ؟ فقبل " أو كهكى جيد ثىثني ؟‬: ‫َبدي زجم انُيب صهً اهلل عهيّ وسهى فقبل‬
Sixth, when al-Abbas Ibn Abdul Muttalib was captured during the battle of Badr, he
was brought not wearing a Thaub. The Prophet () was given a Thuab that belonged to
Abdullah Ibn Ubai, and he () gave the Thaub to al-Abbas (Sahih al-Bukhari)

، ‫ فُظس انُيب صهً اهلل عهيّ وسهى نّ قًيصب‬، ‫ملب كبٌ يى و ثدز أيت ثبألسبزي وأيت ثبنعجبس ومل يكٍ عهيّ ثىة‬
. ِ‫ فكسبِ انُيب صهً اهلل عهيّ وسهى إيب‬، ّ‫فىجدوا قًيص عجد اهلل ثٍ أيب يقدز عهي‬

These select Hadeeths all use Thaub in the context of men's clothing, covering,
even in the context of a shroud. It seems that the Arabs not only did not know their
own language, but also their men used to wear women's clothing and they used
women's clothing to shroud their male dead. This is the mighty discovery that only
AnsweringIslam could reach. Better yet, and the truth indeed, AnsweringIslam is a
lying deceitful team and their statement that "thawb do indeed refer to women’s
clothing‛, is a blatant lie.

We end this segment with a few gifts intended for the AnsweringIslam team and
all those who follow their wicked lies.

The first gift is a Hadeeth that uses Thaub in the context of bed covering.
Maimunah Bint al-`Harith, the Prophet's wife, said, "The Messenger of Allah () used to
lay next to me when I had my menses, between me and him a Thaub" (Sahih Muslim).

. ‫ وثيين وثيُّ ثىة‬، ‫كبٌ زسىل اهلل صهً اهلل عهيّ وسهى يضطجع يعي وأَب حبئض‬

The second gift is another proof why the Bible is not the word of God, but the
word of corrupt men who spoiled the Word of God by way of addition and deletion.
As typical of the Bible in hundreds of instance, the New Testament contains this obvious
contradiction. This is a scene taken from the false Biblical claim made against God that
He became a man who was subjected to utter humiliation, spitting and smacking by
Jews and Romans. This is how they show their respect to God.

Did Jesus Wear a Purple Dress?

As the anonymous authors of the Bible would like us to believe, Jesus was either
dressed in a purple robe or a scarlet. Or, we can solve the problem as some Christians
did, who claim that Jesus was wearing both, a scarlet with purple lining. Or was it a
purple robe with a scarlet-ish look. Whatever the case, here are two verses that
contradict each other yet contain a startling discovery.
 The first verse describes what happened to Jesus just before he was allegedly but
falsely crucified, ‫َفعَسَّ ِو ُٓ َوَأىْثَسُوُٓ زِدَاءً قِ ِسٍِصًٍِّا‬ "And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet
Ridaa (robe)" (Matthew 28:27). The second verse claims that Jesus was dressed
differently, ٍُ‫ثَوِبَ ُأ ِزجُوَا‬ ُٓ‫" َوَأىْثَسُو‬And they put on him a purple Thaub (robe)" (John 19:2).

These Biblical verses prove that purple robes and scarlet are women's clothing.
The first verse: ٍ‫" وَاىََْ ِسَأجُ مَاَّدِ ٍُرَسَسِتِيَحً ِتُأ ِزجُوا ٍُ وَقِ ِسٍِص‬And the woman was arrayed in purple and
scarlet color" (Revelations 17:4). The second verse asserts that scarlet is a type of
women's clothing, ‫ني شَاوُ َه اىَّرًِ َأىْثَسَنَُِّ قِ ِسٍِصّا‬
َ ِ‫ اتِن‬،َ‫" ٍَا تََْاخِ إِسِسَائَِو‬Ye daughters of Israel, weep
over Saul, who clothed you in scarlet" (II Samuel 1:24). We also quoted the Bible before
where Thaub is used in the context of women's clothing, ٍ‫ب اٍِ َسَأج‬
َ ِ‫" وَالَ ٍَيْثَسِ َزجُوٌ ثَو‬Neither
shall a man put on a woman’s Thaub" (Deuteronomy 22:5). Any way one looks at it, it
looks bad for Jesus, peace be upon him, if we were to accept the sick logic of
AnsweringIslam.

Mirt and Thaub have various contexts including gender-neutral garments used
by both men and women, as well as, gender-neutral bed covering. AnsweringIslam
insists that "mirt and thawb do indeed refer to women’s clothing.‛ Well, if
AnsweringIslam thinks this is how they prove that Prophet Muhammad, peace be
upon him, used to wear women's clothing, then they also prove that Jesus, peace be
upon him, used to wear women's clothing. Or, they lie in both accounts, and indeed,
this is the truth.

We will now witness how the AnsweringIslam team scrambles to cover the hole
they dug for themselves. They brought shame to the man whom they worship without
his permission. And whether Jesus, as is falsely claimed, was dressed in women's
clothing by his choice or forced to do so, which makes it even worse for God to be
forced to dress like a woman after being forced to be stripped naked, this makes Jesus
and God look very bad. We completely reject what AnsweringIslam is falsely
claiming about Muhammad and Jesus, peace be upon them, and about Allah, the
Exalted. We hereby testify that Jesus, peace be upon him, is not divine, but a human
messenger from Allah, and that he was not crucified as the Christians and Jews falsely
claim. We hereby testify that AnsweringIslam lies about Jesus, Muhammad and,
above all, about Allah the Creator of all things.

Jalal Abualrub
www.islamlife.com