Azamgarh–April 30, 1963

Respected Maulana Syed Abul Ala Maududi,

Greetings of peace,

I received your letter dated March 21. I am surprised that, despite your promise, you declined to respond to my questions. If you were unable to provide a detailed reply, you could have offered a general comment on my concerns. If even that was not feasible, you could have selected a single point from the entire discussion, analysed it, and demonstrated to me how my reasoning is weak and lacks scholarly depth.

In my previous letters, I presented all these options to you. Yet rather than choosing any of these approaches, you directed sarcastic remarks toward me. If you had words for sarcasm, you certainly could have had words for a response, but you chose the former and left the latter.

I must say that by doing so, you have chosen a very precarious path for yourself. First, when a person approaches you with his thoughts, and you are aware of the flaws in his reasoning, yet you do not offer a single word in response and return the writing without comment, then, to the extent that you recognize his error, you bear some responsibility for his mistake. Think about how serious this is.

Secondly, you know that the conclusions I have reached through my studies have led me to believe that “religion has been compromised.” If this sentiment persists in me, I will be obligated to express and declare it to the best of my ability. If your knowledge and understanding deem my perception incorrect, it was incumbent upon you to attempt to change this sentiment, thereby preventing me from taking such an action. Then, if I persisted in my actions, the responsibility would have rested on me. However, by not responding to stop me, the responsibility for my actions now shifts directly onto you.

For the past eleven months, I have remained in contact with you to obtain your response to this issue, and this correspondence will undoubtedly testify that today I stand as a victim. Perhaps you know that casting oneself as an oppressor while placing another in the position of the oppressed deprives one of divine support and entitles the other to it. Divine support is always granted to the oppressed, not the oppressor.

Sincerely,

Wahiduddin