Cross-Dressing or Triple-Crossing (2)!

Did Jesus and Muhammad Wear Women’s Clothing?
By Jalal Abualrub (
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 ( 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 ( The Bible was not widely translated into English until well into the 14th century. 1.

. ِِٔ‫فقَاً ٍَ ُوع وَذَِثعَ ُ ُو وَذَالٍَِر ُ. وإِذَا اٍِسَأٌ َّاشِفَح دًٍ ٍُِْ ُ اثَْْرٌَِ عَشِسج سََْحً قَدِ َاءَخِ ٍِِ وزَائِٔ وٍَسد ُدِبَ ثَوِت‬ ٕ ِ َّ َ ِ َ ِ ‫ج‬ ََ ‫َ َ س ُ ٔ ٕ َ َ ُٓ َ َ ج ُ َ ر‬
‚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.

.ِِٔ‫وحََََُِا دخَوَ ِإىَي ُسىّ أَوِ ُ ٍُُ أَو ضَِا ٍ، وَض ُوا اىََْسِضَي فٌِ األَسِوَا ِ، وَ طَيَُوا ِإىََِِٔ أَُْ ٍَيَِ ُوا وىَوِ ُدِبَ ثَوِت‬ ٕ َ ‫س‬ ‫ث‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ٍد ِ َ ع َع‬ ‫ق‬ َ ‫َ ث‬
‚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,

. ‫ٍَِ ضَسَتَلَ عَيَي خ ِّكَ َاعِسضِ ىَ ُ اُخَسَ أٍَِ ّا، وٍَِِ َأخَرَ زِدَاءَكَ فَالَ ذَََِْعِ ُ ثَوِتَلَ أٍَِ ّا‬ ‫ض‬ ٔ َ ‫ض‬ ٔ ِ ‫َد ف‬ ِ
‚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',

. َ‫وَالَ ٍَيْثَسِ ز ُ ٌ ثَوِب اٍِسَأجٍ، أل َّ م َّ ٍَِِ ٍَعََِ ُ ذىِلَ ٍَنْ ُو ْ ىَ َى اىس ِّ إِهلِل‬ ‫س ٓ د َّب‬ ‫و‬ ‫َجو َ َ َُ ُو‬

"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,

.ُ ِ‫ث َّ َاهَ: «َٕاذٌِ ِّدَاء َّ ًِ عَيََِل وَأٍِسِنَِِٔ». فأٍِسَنَر‬ ٔ ََ َِ ‫اىس َ اىر‬ ‫ٌُ ق‬
"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 unsewn 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." ( I wrote an article responding to this ridiculous justification for mass murder of non-combatants ( 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.

ٍَِِ‫وأ َّا دَا ُ ُ فصعِدَ فٌِ ٍصعَدِ جَثَوِ اى ٍَُِّوُِ . َاَُ ٍَصعَ ُ َامَِّا وزأْ ُ ُ ٍغ َّي وٍَََِشٌِ َافِّا، وجَََِ ُ اىشعة َّر‬ ‫ح َ َ ع َّ ِ ِ اى‬ ‫م ِ د ت َ َ سٔ ُ َط‬ ‫صر‬ ِ َ َ َ ‫ٍََ ود‬ .ُ َ‫ٍعَ ُ غَ َّوِا ُو وَاحِدٍ زأْس‬ ٔ َ ُّ ‫َ ٔ ط 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.'" ( 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 (, 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, unsewn 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, nonArabi 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).

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

" ‫َبدي زجم انُيب صهً اهلل عهيّ وسهى فقبل : أيصهي أحدَب يف ثىة واحد ؟ فقبل " أو كهكى جيد ثىثني ؟‬

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)

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

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

‫فع َّوٓ وَأىْثَ ُو ُ زِدَاءً قِسٍِصًّا‬ ٍِ ِ ٓ ‫َ َس ِ ُ َ س‬

"And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet

Ridaa (robe)" (Matthew 28:27). differently, ٍ ‫َ ِ َ أز ُ َا‬ ُ ‫ثوب ُ ِجو‬

The second verse claims that Jesus was dressed

ٓ‫َ س‬ ُ ‫" وَأىْثَ ُو‬And 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:

ٍ‫" وَاىََْسَأ ُ مَاَّدِ ٍُرَسَسِتِيَحً ِتأز ُواُ وَقِسٍِص‬And the woman was arrayed in purple and ِ ٍ ‫ُ ِج‬ ‫ِج‬
The second verse asserts that scarlet is a type of

scarlet color" (Revelations 17:4). women's clothing,

‫" َا تََاخِ إِسِسَائَِوَ، اتِنِني شَا ُه َّ ًِ َأىْثَسَن َّ قِسٍِصّا‬Ye daughters of Israel, weep ِ ُِ ‫َ و َ اىر‬ ْ ٍ ٍ‫" وَالَ ٍَيْثَسِ ز ُ ٌ ثَوِب اٍِسَأج‬Neither َ َ ‫َجو‬

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, 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

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful