Correspondence with Maulana Abul Lais Islahi Nadwi

In such situations, I believe your stance after reading my response was not appropriate. The commentary I sent you on August 19 regarding Maulana Sadruddin’s writing, I am confident, included points that deserved your careful consideration. You should have consulted Maulana Sadruddin about his response to those points. However, the tone of the letter you wrote to Sadruddin Sahib regarding my work is such that it appears as though nothing had happened at all. Even now, Sadruddin Sahib’s words seem to you to be just as conclusively established as they were before. I am most surprised by your letter dated August 28 (addressed to Maulana Sadruddin), which is the first letter you wrote after reading my response. Yet, it is astonishing that you made no mention of my significant criticisms, such as the misattribution to two commentators on the interpretation of the verse “aqeem-ud-deen.” A person genuinely seeking truth would immediately ask, “What is going on here?” when faced with such a situation. The verse on which Jamaat-e-Islami’s revolutionary ideology is based is being argued by one individual to have a different interpretation according to scholars. These scholars supposedly agree that the term “deen” in the verse does not imply the entire Shariah but rather the fundamental teachings of deen, and therefore, no revolutionary objective can be derived from this