In his Friday sermon at the University of Cape Town on February 21, 2025, Shaikh Muhammad West provided counsel on lessons derived from the assassination of Muhsin Hendricks on February 15, 2025.
MAHMOOD SANGLAY discusses Shaikh West’s appeal for moral clarity and compassion.
The sermon dissected the ideological divide in the Muslim community, as the speaker positioned himself between two extreme views: the liberal reinterpretation of Islamic doctrine (Group A) and the hardline conservative stance that condones vigilantism (Group B).
While expressing compassion and understanding for Muslims struggling with their sexual orientation, he remained unwavering in his commitment to traditional Islamic teachings as derived from the Quran, Hadith and the Seerah of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW).
Shaikh West characterises Group A as those who advocate for a radical liberal approach to Islam, aligning themselves with Western progressive ideologies. The statement from the Centre for Contemporary Islam (CCI) at the University of Cape Town, titled ‘Statement on the Assassination of Imam Muhsin Hendricks’, encapsulates this perspective, framing Hendricks as a martyr and a champion of a ‘liberation theology’ within Islam. Some members of this group celebrate the views and activism of Hendricks and support the reinterpretation of the Quran to accommodate liberal understandings of human rights, gender identity and sexual orientation.
Conversely, Group B represents the extreme conservative faction that perceives the theological stance of Hendricks as an affront to Islam. Some members of this group celebrate his murder, deeming it a necessary act to safeguard Islamic morality. Their views align with those who categorically reject any notion of accommodating LGBTQ+ identities within Islam. They declare out of the fold of Islam anyone expressing same-sex attraction as an innate inclination. Furthermore, they even declare anyone who disagrees with them on this matter as kafir.
Shaikh West paints a stark contrast between the two—one eulogising Hendricks as a hero of reform, the other exalting his murder as a triumph of faith. Though they stand at opposite extremes, locked in ideological warfare, they never truly confront each other. Their battleground is not with one another but with the Muslim ummah—the traditional majority that neither distorts the faith to fit modern sensibilities, nor twists it into a justification for violence. And so, rather than engaging in reasoned debate, both sides routinely attack the broad consensus and the traditional majority in the middle ground.
The middle ground upholding tradition with compassion
Shaikh West systematically dismantles the positions of both extremes, emphasising that while homosexual acts are not permissible in Islam, it also condemns murder and vigilantism. His sermon aligns with an anonymous critique posted on social media entitled ‘A Cynical Distortion of Islamic Law and Morality’, which challenges the CCI statement for attempting to revise Islamic doctrine under the guise of inclusivity. The critique argues that proponents of this statement lack formal qualifications in Islamic jurisprudence and have no scholarly authority to redefine what is halaal and haraam.
Despite his clear alignment with traditional Islamic values, Shaikh West’s tone is markedly different from that of the anonymous social media critique. While he agrees that homosexual practices cannot be legitimised within Islamic law, he does not dismiss the struggles of Muslims with same-sex attraction. Instead, he encourages them to maintain their faith and connection to Islam, reinforcing the idea that innate desires, in themselves, are not sinful. However, succumbing to desires like same-sex attractions is prohibited. He equates this struggle with other moral transgressions, such as engaging in usury or premarital relationships, stressing that Islam calls for a return virtue as opposed to a public celebration of transgressions.
Shaikh West invokes a powerful metaphor, borrowed from Dr Bilal Hassam: the masjid is a hospital for those seeking help to maintain their spiritual health. He underscores that the masjid should be a place where all Muslims—regardless of their struggles—can seek guidance, healing and a connection to Allah. Just as a hospital does not turn away the infirm, a masjid should not exclude those grappling with their faith. Rather than ostracising individuals who falter, the Islamic tradition calls upon the community to support them in their journey toward spiritual well-being.
His categorical rejection of vigilante justice and extrajudicial killing is founded on the Quranic injunctions against murder (Surah Al-An’am, 6:151 and Surah Al-Ma’idah, 5:32) and the Prophet’s (SAW) teachings about due legal process. He chastises Group B for assuming the role of judge and executioner, reminding them that even when dealing with serious moral violations, Islamic jurisprudence demands stringent legal evidence and due process.
Shaikh West illustrates his point using the hadith of the Prophet (SAW) regarding accusations of adultery. The Prophet emphasised that even in cases of clear wrongdoing, justice must be administered through legal means, not through mob action. By comparing Group B’s actions to the Khawarij (the historical sect infamous for declaring fellow Muslims apostates and justifying their killing) he highlights the dangers of extreme conservatism.
Addressing the broader discourse, Shaikh West critiques Group A’s attempt to modernise Islam beyond its doctrinal limits. He warns against the tendency of contemporary scholars to overturn centuries of unanimous Islamic rulings. The sermon emphasises that while new ijtihad (independent reasoning) is valid in areas where interpretation is permissible, the prohibition of the practice of same-sex relationships is firmly established in the Quran, Hadith and ijma (scholarly consensus).
His approach is both pastoral and principled and he challenges Group A’s use of selective inclusivity. He notes that if Islam’s moral framework can be rewritten to accommodate contemporary views on sexuality, then logically, all ethical boundaries, including those on alcohol, usury and gender interactions, could be subject to the same revisionist approach.
By rejecting both the liberal revisionism of Group A and the violent extremism of Group B, Shaikh West offers a critical framework for young Muslims to approach complex social issues—rooted in tradition, guided by knowledge and tempered with compassion.
Click here to download the audio of Shaikh West’s sermon
Click here to download the transcript of Shaik West’s sermon
