Correspondence with Maulana Abul Lais Islahi Nadwi

DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE phrase “of this nature” in quoting a passage from his text. Firstly, the absence of these words did not affect the main argument. Moreover, this oversight was more his responsibility than mine, since he had crossed out the phrase with two bold lines and then placed a small mark indicating “correct” (—) ص ص a symbol commonly used in Urdu—beside it in fine pen. I had missed noticing this mark during my reading, and thus, that was left in my quotation. After hearing such a minor critique, I thought to myself, “If only Maulana Sadruddin hadn’t brought this up, it would have been better for him to keep quiet.” Next, let’s consider Maulana Jalil Ahsan, who, according to you, was requested “to correspond with me to understand my thoughts and explain the Jamaat’s perspective.” However, he adopted a peculiar approach which, regardless of any other merit it may have, cannot be called “explaining the Jamaat-e-Islami’s perspective.” My issue has been before them for the past nine months, yet to this day they have not written a single word addressing the real issue. Instead, he focused on various unrelated issues, one of which was his “condition” that he would read my “lengthy article,” ask questions, seek clarification, and discuss the evidence presented. I agreed to this condition, but when I received his questionnaire, I found that it