MUHAMMAD IS WORSHIPPED BY BEASTS AND TREES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF AÏSHA’S TESTIMONY

 

MUHAMMAD IS WORSHIPPED BY BEASTS AND TREES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF AÏSHA’S TESTIMONY

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

---

Abstract

This paper examines a controversial Hadith narrated by Aisha, the wife of Prophet Muhammad, as recorded in Jamiʿ al-Tirmidhi Hadith 3270. The narration reports that animals and trees prostrated before Muhammad, implying an act of worship. The Companions, amazed by this act, suggested that they too should prostrate before him. This Hadith raises deep theological questions about the nature of worship, the distinction between servitude to God and reverence for a human, and the boundaries of Islamic monotheism (tawḥīd). The paper seeks to evaluate the theological, logical, and Qur’anic inconsistencies that emerge from this narration.

---

The Quoted Hadith

Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 3270 — Narrated by Aisha:
"Once when Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) was with a number of the Emigrants and Helpers, a camel came and prostrated itself before him. Thereupon his Companions said, ‘Messenger of Allah, beasts and trees prostrate themselves before you, but we have the greatest right to do so.’ He replied, ‘Worship your Lord and honor your brother. If I were to order anyone to prostrate himself before another, I should order a woman to prostrate herself before her husband. If he were to order her to convey stones from a yellow mountain to a black one, or from a black mountain to a white one, it would be incumbent on her to do so.’"
(Transmitted by Ahmad and al-Tirmidhi)

---

Theological and Logical Inquiry

Aisha’s narration introduces profound theological implications that challenge Islamic monotheism (Tawḥīd al-ʿUlūhiyyah). The fact that animals and trees allegedly prostrated before Muhammad implies an act of reverence reserved for divine beings. In Islam, sujūd (prostration) is a distinct form of worship that belongs exclusively to Allah (Surah 41:37; 22:18). Thus, if non-human creation performed this before Muhammad, several critical questions arise:

1. Did the animals and trees commit shirk (idolatry)?
   According to Surah al-Anbiyāʾ 21:98–99,

   “Indeed, you and what you worship besides Allah are the fuel of Hell. You will surely enter it. If those had truly been gods, they would not have entered it, but all will abide therein forever.”
   This verse condemns all beings that are worshipped besides Allah. If animals and trees prostrated before Muhammad, does this not make him the object of their worship?

2. Why did Allah allow this to occur?
   If Muhammad is truly a mere messenger (rasūl), how does divine permission extend to acts of prostration toward him by creation? Is this not in contradiction with Surah 41:37 which states,

   “Do not prostrate to the sun or to the moon, but prostrate to Allah who created them.”

3. Was Aisha mistaken or fabricating?
   As the Prophet’s wife, Aisha’s report holds significant authority in Islamic tradition. However, if the Hadith implies the Prophet accepted worship (even passively), it undermines the Qur’anic command in Surah 18:110:

   “Say, I am only a human being like you, to whom it has been revealed that your God is one God.”
   If Aisha’s account is authentic, then it portrays Muhammad in a position of divinity rather than prophethood.

---

Exegetical Tension: Worship vs. Honor

The Prophet’s response—“Worship your Lord and honor your brother”—appears to distance himself from direct worship. Yet, the narrative fails to address why the camel and trees were permitted to perform prostration. The Companions’ statement, “Beasts and trees prostrate before you, but we have the greatest right to do so,” reveals that even early Muslims perceived this as an act of veneration, if not worship.

This suggests an early tendency toward prophetic exaltation, later seen in Shama’il al-Muhammadiyyah and Sufi traditions where Muhammad is described as the “Light of Creation” (Nūr Muḥammadī). The narrative, therefore, exposes an evolving theology that blurs the line between devotion to Allah and reverence for His messenger.

---

Philosophical and Theological Implications

From a theological standpoint, the Hadith leads to a paradox:

• If the beasts and trees truly worshipped Muhammad, shirk was committed.

• If they did not, the Hadith contradicts its own narrative, rendering it mythological or metaphorical.

• Either outcome undermines the integrity of Hadith transmission or Islamic theology of pure monotheism.

Furthermore, this account echoes ancient pagan reverence where nature worshipped semi-divine heroes and kings—suggesting the possible syncretic incorporation of earlier cultural myths into Hadith literature.

---

Conclusion

The Hadith of Aisha (al-Tirmidhi 3270) remains a profound theological problem within Islamic orthodoxy. It implies that Muhammad received a form of worship from creation, contradicting the Qur’an’s uncompromising monotheism. Whether this account is allegorical or literal, it exposes a tension between prophetic humanity and divine exaltation in early Islamic narratives. The narration attributed to Aisha thus becomes a critical text for examining the evolution of Muhammad’s deification in post-Qur’anic traditions.

---

Bibliography

1. Al-Tirmidhi, Abu Isa Muhammad ibn Isa. Jamiʿ al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 3270.

2. Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Musnad Ahmad, Vol. 6, Hadith No. 25512.

3. The Qur’an, Surah 18:110; 21:98–99; 22:18; 41:37.

4. Ibn Kathir, Ismail. Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Azim. Dar al-Fikr, Beirut, 1998.

5. Al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Ismail. Sahih al-Bukhari.

6. Crone, Patricia. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Princeton University Press, 1987.

7. Wansbrough, John. Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation. Oxford University Press, 1977.

8. Shimba, Maxwell. Theological Paradoxes in Islamic Texts: A Comparative Inquiry. Shimba Theological Institute Press, 2025.