STATE VISIT: President Khatami's Florence University Address

[Mansour Bighamian]

Full text of president khatami's speech at florence university

Rome, March 10, IRNA -- The following is the full text of the
President's speech at the European University of Florence where he
addressed a group of academics:

In the Name of God, The Beneficent, The Merciful

Ladies and Gentlemen,
Distinguished audience,
Meeting a group of academics is always a pleasing experience for
me. for it is in their presence when matters revolve around
+ACI-speaking+ACI-, +ACI-listening+ACI- and +ACI-understanding+ACI-.
understanding is the result of speaking and listening, and these
two -- speaking and listening -- in addition to seeing, constitute the
most important of all physical, mental and spiritual functions of man.
what arises from +ACI-seeing+ACI- is the expansion of the frontiers of wisdom
as well as the stability and firmness of the +ACI-self+ACI- while we speak to
+ACI-others+ACI- and listen to +ACI-others+ACI-.
seeing is done through the +ACI-i+ACI-, and the +ACI-universe and mankind+ACI-
arise from seeing and the subject of seeing. however, +ACI-speaking+ACI- and
+ACI-listening+ACI- are a two-dimensional -- or multidimensional -- effort
aimed at coming closer to the truth and arriving at understanding.
it is for this reason that +ACI-dialogue+ACI- pertains neither to
skeptics, nor does it belong to those who believe the truth to lie
solely within their own claws and under their own domination. rather,
understanding reveals its beautiful, albeit veiled countenance, only
to the wayfarers of the path whose followers travel hand in hand, and
in step with each other.
the phrase +ACI-dialogue among civilizations and cultures+ACI-, which
should in fact be interpreted as the process of +ACI-speaking and
listening among civilizations and cultures+ACI-, is based upon such an
account of truth. this definition is not necessarily in contradiction
with the well-known explications of truth that have appeared in
philosophical discourses.
+ACI-dialogue among civilizations+ACI- necessitates +ACI-listening+ACI- to other
civizations and cultures, and listening to others, if not more
important, is certainly not less important than speaking to others.
talking and listening creats conversation, one side addresses the
other side, and speech is exchanged. udner what circumstances is man
addressed? in other words, in what kind of world is he or she
addressed?
the world of science is not a world of speeches and addresses.
science is a conscious effort to discover the relationship between
objects , and for this reason scientific discourse does not transcend
the man's self-consciousness.
however, the world of art and the world of religion are worlds in
which the man is addressed. we are addressed by works of art, and in
religion, by words from the divinity. it is for this reason that
gnostic and religious languages share a genuine and deep bond, and it
is for this reason that the earliest works of human art are considered
to be an example of +ACI-sacred art+ACI-.
the phrase +ACI-o mankind+ACI- has been repeated many a time in the holy
bible and the magnificent quran. it is by being addressed as such
that +ACI-individual man+ACI- rises to the level of an exalted +ACI-person+ACI-.
although the etymology of the word +ACI-persona+ACI- shares the same root
the word +ACI-mask+ACI-, as worn by actors in a play, it is important to note
that in the theory of religious address -- when mankind is addressed
as a universal and all-encompassing divine word, and not when he is
being taught a religious precept or social law -- the +ACI-person+ACI-
addressed is not his psychological, social or historical persona. what
is addressed is the true, historical and unified essence of man. it is
for this reason hat in their essence and substance, divine religions
are not different from each other. their differences arise from
religious edicts and laws which pertain to man's social and legal
life.
here, one must ask, +ACI-who is this +AGA-person' who is being addressed?+ACI-
a great deal of efforts of the philosophers since time immemorial has
been devoted to finding an answer to this question. they have
attempted to explain how and in what manner can one come to know the
persona+ACI- of man -- an absolute understanding of the +ACI-self+ACI-. the
concepts of self-knowledge and self-discovery constitute the two main
parts of this philosophical inquiry.
the interesting story of philosophical anthropology and the
adventures of self-knowledge require a few long nights in the +ACI-one
thousand and nights of the history of philosophy+ACI-. some of these
stories have been posed in the east, and some in the west. the
important point, however, that eastern stories explain the eastern
aspect of man's existence and ssence, while western stories narrate
man's western aspect. man is the fluence of the soul of the east and
the reason of the west. the denial of any aspect of man's existence
renders out understanding of the meaning of his existence flawed and
inadequate.
in gaining an understanding of the meaning of the term +ACI-person+ACI-,
we should not be ensnared by either the notion of individualism or
the notion of collectivism. although the ground for the development of
the modern concept of the +ACI-individual+ACI- has been laid down by christian
thinkers, this not be interpreted as a natural connection between
these two theories.
in my opinion, deep attention paid to the meaning of +ACI-person+ACI-, as
the essence of the sacred word, bears no relation to the notion of
+ACI-egoism+ACI-. of course, everyone has said that in modern society, it is
individual who is the measure of all institutions, laws and social
relations, and that civil laws and human rights are in fact the rights
of the same individual+ACI-. on the other hand, collectivism, as against
individualism, in fact has been the result of the development of this
very concept of the individual. consequently, both concepts are
derived from an identical sophical source. for this reason, from the
standpoint of our spiritual wisdom, we consider the conflict between
individualistic liberalism and collective socialism to be merely
superficial and accidental.
the theory of the +ACI-person+ACI- is readily elucidated and explained by
gnosticism. muslim gnostics view man as a universe. his originality
neither due to his individuality nor to his plurality. man's
originality rises from the fact that it is he, and only he, who is
addressed by the sacred voice. by thus being addressed, man's soul
gains ascent, and with the ascent of his soul, his world becomes a
just and humane world.
whoever reflects, even briefly, upon the history of philosophy,
will clearly witness the constant movement from one extreme to
another. the most recent link in this chain is the concept of
+ACI-modernity+ACI-. the word +ACI-modernity', which is apparently the most modern
derivative of the group of words is derived from the latin +ACI-modernus+ACI-,
which apparently came into fashion for the first time during the 19th
century. but the root of this word has fifteen centuries of usage
behind it.
it is only in the 19th and 20th centuries that this word was
applied to a wide range of concept in various philosophical, artistic,
scientific, historical and ethics. the common denominator of all these
terms consists of a tremor that rocked the foundations of human
existence and thought toward the end of the middle ages, a tremor
that altered the axis round which humanity and the world rotated. to
the extent that man's world is influenced by his thought,
contemporary man and his world are the result of this +ACI-modern+ACI- axis
which appeared after the middle ages. this new axis, which was termed
+ACI-modern+ACI- in those days, is now known to us as the renaissance.
despite numerous books and articles published to explain the advent of
the renaissance, this momentous event is still in need of greater
deliberation by philosophers, historians and men of knowledge.
as pointed out by many thinkers, the renaissance did not only seek
a renewal of greek culture+ADs- rather, its main objective was to discuss
religion in a fresh language and from a fresh mental perspective.
the renaissance described religious man in such a manner that, instead
of seclusion from the world, in order to belittle and suppress it, he
would come to face the world.
as seen by the renaissance, the religious man's being is open to
the world, and the world receives him with open arms. the reciprocal
opening of the world and man to each other is the most fundamental
characteristic of the renaissance -- an essentially religious event,
aimed at the preservation, reformation and propagation of religion,
rather than its contravention and contradiction.
yet, this momentous event met with a fate quite at variance with
what the renaissance had originally intended. the concept of opening
the world to man turned into oppression, domination and subjugation of
the world, a process not only confined to nature, but one whose flame
engulfed human community as well. what later came to be known as
+ACI-colonialism+ACI- in social and political history of europe was the result
of the extension man's domination of nature and the use of the
natural sciences to man and human sciences. it is here that one cannot
reflect and study the story of +ACI-modernity+ACI- without first adopting a
humanistic and moral stance.
the critique of modernity which i am presenting arises from an
angle and stance that are radically different from what its famous
critics, especially in the realm of philosophy, have adopted. one who
wishes to saw off a branch of a tree must not saw off the branch on
which he stands. the manner in which some contemporary philosophers
have criticized modernity is very much like this proverb.
by stripping modernity of all rationality or its source of origin,
they either turn it into a weapon capable of destroying everything,
including itself, or they portray it as a dull, rusty, old, worn-out
weapon, which can be valued as a museum piece. without the force of
reason and, of course, without recognizing its limits, it is
impossible to use reason as a tool for criticism.
the critique of pure reason -- which opened a new chapter in
western philosophy and can be interpreted as a critique of objects
and concepts, including pure reason itself -- can be realized only
when intellect is based on reason. without reason, it would be
impossible to arrive at a correct conception and a true picture of
some of the most vital issues, such as human rights, peace, justice
and freedom, and attempt to establish them.
this should not be taken to mean a call for reversion to european
rationalism and logocentrism as they existed before the advent of
post-modernism. as the origin and fountainhead of modern rationality,
europe bears a greater responsibility in offering a critique of that
kind of rationality and finding a way to avoid its destructive
implications. europe which has been the prime victim of unbounded
reliance on rationality, is now in the process of depriving its own
rationality of all credibility and authority in the hands of its
thinkers and philosophers.
the orient, which even in an etymological sense signifies the
process of imparting direction and order to things, can beckon europe
and america to equilbrium, serenity and reflection in the context of
an historical dialogue and understanding, and thus contribute to the
establishment of peace, security and justice. if deeply understood
in their eastern connotations, equilibrium and enity lie beyond both
the dionysian and apollonian extremes of western culture. the age of
reason is an apollonian age while romanticism is the opposite pull on
the swing of this pendulum.
the coming century ought to be a century of turning to a kind of
spirituality, searching for which eastern man is endowed with
thousands of years of experience. european culture owes its vitality
and vigor to its critical view of everything, including the european
culture itself.
but now it is time for europe to move one more step ahead and
take a look at itself through the eyes of another. this does not
imply turning a blind eye to the remarkable heritage of the european
culture and civilization, nor does it signify a call for some kind of
obscurantism. rather, it is meant to encourage this culture to
acquire new experiences and gain a more precise knowledge of the
cultural topography of the world.
in orientalism, it is the orient which is the subject of study,
not a party to dialogue. in order to attain a real dialogue among
civilizations, the east should be transformed from an object of
understanding to a genuine party to dialogue. this, however, is not a
one-sided invitation. as iranians, muslims, and asians, we, too, are
obliged to take long strides in the direction of understanding the
realities of the west.
such an understanding will help us improve and bring order to our
economic and social way of life. taking such strides, whether on our
part on the part of europe, requires certain moral and mental traits,
which were first recognized and promoted in europe by italians.
historians of the renaissance have been explicit in the continuous
contact between italians and byzantium. the muslim world was the
driving force behind the emergence of tolerance among italians. since
the time of the crusades, italians came to know and admire islamic
culture and civilization. this knowledge of and admiration for an
unfamiliar culture and civilization became the driving force behind
the spread of the spirit of tolerance among italians.
one of the ironies of history is that this concept of tolerance,
which was adopted by europeans from muslims, a consequence of their
acquintance with muslims, has in our time come to be a moral and
political value recommended by europeans to muslims. traces of
islamic +ACI-civility+ACI- in producing the spirit of tolerance among
europeans are clearly discernible in european literature. +ACI-nathan the
sage+ACI-, a well-known play by the german playwright, lessing, itself an
adaptation of the ancient italian cento novelle anticho, clearly
states this.
the impression which islamic thinking and culture left on the
italian and european cultures is not limited to the concept of
tolerance. no civilization has the right to expropriate the share of
other civilizations in its own favor, nor should it deny the part
played by others in advancement of human civilization. apart from the
impression which islamic philosophy, theology and art have left on
europe, what brought about spiritual refinement and moral edification
of europeans has been the rich and vast islamic culture. perhaps one
example worth mentioning here is the influence which works of the
great muslim gnostic, ibn arabi, left on dante, a point which has
been deliberated at length by great european researchers.
however, to delve into past history without looking at the future
can only be an academic diversion. to help human societies and improve
the condition of the world, it is necessary to consider the present
state of relations between asian, in particular muslim, countries and
europe.
why do we say, in particular, muslim? because islam is europe's
next-door neighbor+ADs- unlike individuals, nations are not free to
choose or change neighbors. therefore, apart from moral, cultural and
human reasons, out of historical and geographical necessity, islam and
europe have no choice but to gain a better and more accurate
understanding of each other, and thus proceed to improve their
political, economic and cultural relations. our future cannot be
separated from each other, because it is impossible to separate our
past.
today, the philosophies of plato, aristotle, plotinus... and
among modern philosophers, descartes, kant, hegel and wittgenstein
are taught at our schools of philosophy alongside kandi, farabi, ibn
sina (avicenna), sohrevardi and molla sadra. if today, great asian
civilizations see themselves the mirror of the west, and are
acquainted with each other through the west in a not-too-distant
past, islam held a mirror to the west -- a mirror in which the west
could see a clear image of its own past history and cultural and
intellectual heritage.
if dialogue is not a choice but a necessity for our culture and
the culture of the west, then the west should attempt to enter a
dialogue with representatives of original islamic thinking and
culture. otherwise, a dialogue between the west and westernized
individuals, who represent only a flawed and sterile image of the
west, is not only not a dialogue, but cannot ven be considered a
monologue. a deep, precise and thoughtful dialogue between the west
and islamic civilizations can result in just, humane and practical
solutions to some of the most pressing problems of the present-day
world: crisis within the family, crisis in the relationship between
man and nature, the moral crisis in certain scientific research
projects, and numerous problems of this kind can and must be among
issues to be addressed in any dialogue between islam and europe.
a dialogue is desirable only if it is based on freedom and
choice. in a true dialogue, one party cannot impose his ideas on the
other. in a true dialogue, one must respect the independent existence,
the ideological, intellectual and cultural attributes of the other
party. only under such stances can dialogue become a prologue to
peace, security and justice. in the midst of this, a dialogue with
iran is particularly propitious. iran is a neighbor to europe on one
side, and to asia on the other. for this reason, iran is the
confluence of the cultures of the east and of the west, just as man
is the confluence of the reason of the west and the soul of the
east. hearts and minds of iranians epitomize harmony, love and
tolerance. it is because of this that iranians are proponents of
dialogue among civilizations.