The mujahideen could not draw their attention to themselves nor gain their favor. Necessity dictates that they adopt the Islamic or religious belief, either openly or secretly, to advance their political discourse. Secondly, the Islamic unity requires striving for the reform of Islam in an Islamic manner, or in other words, striving in the twentieth century to revive principles laid down a thousand years ago as social guidance in a state of nature and simplicity. Some of these principles distinguish slavery, others include customs and laws regarding male-female relations that contradict the views of people of this era, and others still contradict something even more significant: the casting of civil, criminal, and financial laws into a single, unchangeable mold. This has hindered the progress of countries whose people adhere to Islam. For these reasons, and setting aside all political considerations, those who advocate for the reform of Egypt do not fail to begin by recalling the call for Islamic unity. The utmost care must also be taken to guard against any natural inclination towards national unity, lest it be drawn in without the awareness of its proponent. This movement – the movement of Islamic unity – is one of the greatest progressive movements, and no one deserves to be drawn to it. For it may be difficult for a person to distinguish the Sheikh of Islamic unity if he is drawn to national unity.

However, I am aware that alongside the movement of Islamic unity, there is another movement that can be called the national movement, to the extent that the two movements merge in such a way that it is not easy for a person to say where one begins and the other ends. But I am convinced that the movement of Islamic unity is the stronger of the two. Regardless, I will search for the national movement, disregarding its real or imaginary relationship with the movement of Islamic unity, and I will say: I would not mind if the idea of Egyptian national unity had blossomed and flourished, as this is what nature dictates. As for those who call themselves patriots, there is little doubt that they do not represent the vast majority of the nation in their desires and aspirations. I have heard from some prominent Egyptians that they object to the leaders of this party calling themselves by the title they claim for themselves. They have told me that this party consists of only a few individuals who make a lot of noise and clamor, and that their motives are not commendable. They do not have any desire for their homeland or any true aspirations. I believe what I have been told is true. In any case, I am confident that this party has a very limited understanding of the positions that result from its discourse, or the places where its discourse is translated from words to actions.