Recently, discussions concerning the Ameer of Hefazat and the Khatib of Baitul Mukarram have repeatedly caught my attention on social media.
Although I have tried to avoid getting involved in these discussions, my own sense of responsibility compels me to share, briefly, some personal observations concerning the respected Khatib.
I previously wrote something about the Ameer of Hefazat. At present, I feel neither the need nor the inclination to revisit that subject.
Following the demise of the former Ameer of Hefazat, the towering scholar Shaykh al-Hadith Junayed Babunagari (Rahimahullah), Mufti Abdul Malek (Hafizahullah), the Khatib of Baitul Mukarram, has remained one of the most respected figures among the prominent living scholars of the Qawmi madrasa tradition.
I have no personal acquaintance with him, and he probably does not know me either. Nevertheless, reading his various writings and books has gradually cultivated in me a profound sense of respect and affection for him. I love him for the sake of Allah.
I have always known the respected Khatib as a learned, sincere, and unassuming scholar. A natural simplicity is clearly reflected in his speech and conduct.
However, I must respectfully admit that some of his recent statements have left me somewhat concerned and disappointed.
It is undeniable that the respected Khatib is not, in essence, a political figure. Nor would it be reasonable to expect him to possess extensive knowledge, analytical expertise, or practical experience in politics. He is primarily a deeply learned scholar devoted to theological studies, intellectual pursuits, and spiritual development. My impression is that he neither has the preparation nor the inclination to navigate the complex and diplomatic world of politics. It is therefore understandable that some of his political remarks may, at times, appear incomplete or oversimplified when viewed against the realities on the ground.
In my personal assessment, politics is not his natural field of engagement. His real sphere of excellence lies in teaching, religious scholarship, research, and spiritual purification.
Recently, some of his remarks concerning the election and referendum have generated considerable discussion.
Given the honourable and influential position he occupies, people naturally expect clear, responsible, and guiding statements that serve the best interests of the Muslim community.
The reality is that the nation does not expect him to provide complex strategic or technical political analyses. Rather, in matters such as a referendum, people look for clear and straightforward guidance on which position would be more beneficial for the nation—voting ‘Yes’ or ‘No’.
In this instance, however, I felt that instead of adopting a clear position, he offered relatively cautious and strategically framed remarks.
He pointed out certain concerns regarding support for ‘Yes’, noting that one might not agree with every proposal. He also discussed arguments for and against ‘No’. However, his statements did not, in my view, adequately reflect the complex realities underlying these political arrangements. The issues seemed to be presented somewhat simplistically, leaving uncertainty as to whether ordinary worshippers would be able to arrive at a clear and informed conclusion.
Of course, he rightly drew attention to an important point: the mere presence of the word ‘Islam’ in a party's name does not automatically justify voting for it, just as one should not vote blindly merely on the basis of a symbol or a candidate's name. His emphasis on this principle is undoubtedly positive and commendable.
In reality, however, none of these considerations can be the sole determining factor. Similarly, merely claiming to represent the truth is not sufficient. Rather, important qualities such as honesty, commitment to justice, accountability, trustworthiness, competence, foresight, organizational ability, and moral integrity must be carefully evaluated. Decisions as consequential as voting or expressing political support should be made after assessing the available options against these criteria.
I would humbly suggest that these matters could have been presented in a manner that was clearer, more balanced, and more coherent, leaving less room for any party to accuse him of bias while making the discussion more beneficial and comprehensible to his audience.
I would also like to make another humble request.
Allah Ta‘ala has granted him an honourable and influential position. From such a position, greater caution is necessary when making statements on political matters.
In this regard, traditional Islamic knowledge and moral insight alone may not be sufficient. Political wisdom, an understanding of realities on the ground, foresight, and extensive study and experience of the diplomatic and strategic dimensions of politics are also essential.
Despite these observations, my sincere respect and affection for him remain unchanged. I hope to maintain the same respect and affection in the future as well.
The views expressed above are entirely based on my personal observations and understanding. I am fully aware that these remarks may displease him or some of his followers.
Nevertheless, I have expressed my feelings solely out of sincere affection and respect for him.