Second Point: Due to its gross misrepresentations, attaching unimaginable meanings to one or two matters out of thousands, the prosecution accuses us of certain offences. However, those matters are in the large collections of the Risale-i Nur. The ‘ulama of al-Azhar University in Cairo, the leading scholars of Damascus, the exacting scholars of Mecca and Medina, and of Aleppo and so on, and especially the investigative scholars of the Directorate of Religious Affairs, have all seen them and have praised them appreciatively and put their signatures to them. So it was with astonishment and bewilderment that I saw the pseudo-scholarly objections in the indictment. Even if I had made some errors and the indictment was correct in what it imputed, although thousands of scholars had not spotted them or objected to them, they still would not constitute a crime; they would only be scholarly errors. Moreover, three courts have acquitted the entire Risale-i Nur and ourselves. Only Eskişehir Court gave light sentences to myself and fifteen out of a hundred of my companions because of fifteen words in the Twenty-Fourth Flash, which is about the veiling of women. I wrote in the addendum to my objections that if there is justice on the face of the earth, it would not accept my being convicted for expounding that verse and complying with what was laid down in three hundred and fifty thousand Qur’anic commentaries. As though collecting water from a thousand streams and in its cleverness, the prosecution tried to use against us a number of points in books and letters written over twenty years. That makes the, not three, but five or six courts which acquitted us on this point our accomplices in this imaginary crime. I am reminding the prosecution not to insult the honour of those just courts.
The Third: Even if explicitly, to criticize and object to a leader who is dead and gone, whose relations with the Government have ceased, and who was the cause of certain faults in the reforms, cannot be a legal offence. But there was not anything explicit; the prosecution applied my general statements to him through its misrepresentations. It publicized those confidential meanings, which we do not tell to everyone, and drew everyone’s attention to them. If there is any crime involved, the prosecution is guilty. Because it is inciting the people, and attracting their attention to those meanings.
The Fourth: Due to baseless suspicions, repeating the same old story, collecting water from a thousand streams, the prosecution investigated hints of a secret society, despite our unequivocal acquittal on this point by three courts. However, while there are numerous political societies which are harmful for this nation and country, which they permit and look on tolerantly, to call a secret society the solidarity of the Risale-i Nur