Criticism and controversy against Moududi(wikipedia)

A general complaint of one critic is that Maududi's theo-democracy is an

ideological state in which legislators do not legislate, citizens only vote to reaffirm the permanent applicability of God's laws, women rarely venture outside their homes lest social discipline be disrupted, and non-Muslims are tolerated as foreign elements required to express their loyalty by means of paying a financial levy.[23]

On a more conceptual level, journalist and author Abelwahab Meddeb questions the basis of Maududi's reasoning that the sovereignty of the truly Islamic state must be divine and not popular, saying "Mawdudi constructed a coherent political system, which follows wholly from a manipulation." The manipulation is of the Arabic word hukm, usually defined as to "exercise power as governing, to pronounce a sentence, to judge between two parties, to be knowledgeable (in medicine, in philosophy), to be wise, prudent, of a considered judgment." The Quran contains the phrase `Hukm is God's alone,` thus, according to Maududi, God - in the form of Sharia law - must govern. But Meddeb argues that a full reading of the ayah reveals that it refers to God's superiority over pagan idols, not His role in government.

Those who you adore outside of Him are nothing but names that you and your fathers have given them. God has granted them no authority. Hukm is God's alone. He has commanded that you adore none but Him. Such is the right religion, but most people do not know. [12:40]

Quranic "commentators never forget to remind us that this verse is devoted to the powerlessness of the companion deities (pardras) that idolaters raise up next to God…"[24]

Maududi is said to have received "sustained hostility" from the [ulama].[25] Muhammad Yusuf Banuri(d. 1397/1977) is quoted as saying

"Great Muslim scholars of India of every madhhab congregated at Jamiyyat al-'Ulama' in Delhi on the 27th of Shawwal, 1370 (August 1, 1951) and reached the conclusion that Mawdudi and his Al-Jamaat al-Islamiyya caused the destruction and deviation of Muslims and published this fatwa (decision) in a book and in papers." [26] And the scholars of Pakistan passed a resolution that Mawdudi was a heretic who tried to make others heretics; this resolution was edited once again in the Akhbar al-Jamiyya in Rawalpindi on the 22nd of February, 1396 (1976)." [27]

He has been criticised by some Deobandi scholars, such as Allamh Yusuf Ludhyanwi[28], for what was seen as disrespect towards the Prophets of Islam, Sahabah (Companions of the prophet Muhammad) and the Mahdi.

Maududi has been criticised by salafist author Jamaal Ibn Fareehaan al-Haarithee for "rejection of The Dajjal" allegedly claiming in his book Rasaa‘il wa Masaa‘il (p. 57), that the prophet Muhammad "used to think that the Dajjaal (Anti-Christ) would come out in his time, or close to his time. However, 1350 years passed away and many long generations came and went, yet the Dajjaal did not come out. So it is confirmed that what the Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) thought did not prove true!!” [29] Maududi allegedly believed this erroneous belief was explained by its being an "opinion and analogical deduction" of Muhammad while al-Haarithee considers this shirk as the Quran says “And he does not speak from his own desire. It is revelation inspired to him.” [Sooratun-Najm 53:3-4]

Others criticizing Maududi were Shaykh Safi ur Rahman Mubarakpuri - [30], Hammaad al-Ansaaree[31] and Al-Albaanee, Sanaullaah Amritsari [32]

In an article entitled Fatwa about the Deviation of Mawdudi, one critic complains that "Mawdudi was a CIA agent"; that he strove to solve "the main principles of Islam" using "his own reason," departing from "Islamic knowledge"; that while he preached revolution, "Islam would spread not through revolution but through knowledge, justice and morals."[27]