Mohamed Khosht - محمد الخشت

Good evening,

His Excellency the Imam, I have a good relationship with him

and I am honored to be a member of the Board of Directors of interreligious dialogue at Alazhar
But today I am faced with an unexpected way in understanding what I said.
I do not want to fall in the same trap by making comparable accusations.
First, what I said was interpreted in a way that is associated with a different movement, one that is opposed to Alazhar.
This is not true. I mean what I say.

My first publications were taught in Saudi and other Arab universities in 1986:
* Keys to the Studies of the Traditions of Prophet Muhammad

* My study of and inquiry into Elsakhawy’s Good Intentions
* My study of and inquiry into Discerning the Virtuous from the Vicuous

Dr. Hatem Elwany, I have 67 books and studies,
so I know what I am talking about 

Your Excellency, the Imam,
I did not need an argument evidence, but a dialogue to find a common ground
When I refer to issues that we agree about, I get an objection.
My idea is when I say we take our doctrines from the recurrent Hadith and not from the individual, I also receive an objection.
That is if we agree, I receive a confirmation and if we disagree, you counter argue.
As for the definitive and the probable,
I only had ten minutes and had to only make quick statements.
Let me welcome you Dr. Hatem Alwany at Cairo University to show you the standards and criteria of establishing a new religious discourse and I will show you that I am talking about the common grounds between us,
the distinction between the absolute and relative; and between the recurrent and individual.

His Excellency, the Dean of the Faculty of Religious Teaching tells me:
Do not worry, we do this.
I am not worried,
why did you regard what I said as an attack?
Some think in terms of either/or;
either Elkhosht is with us or against us!
This is the Aristotelian way of thinking
which is based on epistemological knowledge that separates two alternatives .
Islam is not based on the either/or dichotomy.
No one can claim to have access to the absolute truth.
“And I or you are rightly guided or in error” (34:24) 
Who said this quote?
I would like to hear an answer.
And who said “Those who realize that they will meet their God” (1: 48)
Of course you will tell me: Dr Elkhosht, study the books on the heritage and you will find the interpreters saying: Doubt here is used to mean certainty.

And I ask: Why did God not use “those who are certain”
If Alimam Alshafe’ie were to come back during our era, he would produce different jurisprudence.

You agreed with me about this
so why speak about this point of view and oppose it?
Does this mean that when we agree, there is an objection and when we disagree there is an objection as well?
What does going beyond the heritage mean?
Those who understand going beyond the heritage in the language of the common man,
have misunderstood the term. 
Going beyond the heritage here does not mean negating it,
because going beyond means copying
and also development
It can also mean inclusion
Does copying mean deletion and cancellation or proof and reproduction?
I need an answer please.
Copying has two meanings
to go beyond which is similar to the German (aufheben)
Going beyond does not mean negation and deletion alone,
but going beyond means negative as well as preservation,
to have a group of conflicting oppositions.
I have to work on them in order to get them to interact and reach a synthesis.
This synthesis does not negate the heritage in an absolute sense
Did Prophet Muhammad PBUH come to confirm Judaism versus Christianity
or Christianity versus Judaism? 
Do not our scholars tell us that Islam is dominant and that it confirms the validity of the scriptures, whether the Old or the New Testament?

Islam is a synthesis:
“God revealed the scriptures that convey the truth to you (Muhammad), confirming what was sent before: He sent the Old and New Testaments) (3: 3).
The Qur’an is a confirmation and is dominant, but is not repetitive or a duplication.
I quote Ahmed Ibn Hanbal, so how can anyone claim that I disregard the heritage absolutely?
And how can I copy them?
I follow their methodology in innovatively.
My position towards the heritage is clear:
I do not underestimate it, nor do I exaggerate its importance, nor do I regard it as sacred.
Should I unconditionally conform to everything in the heritage?
If this were true, let’s put the universe to a halt.
His Excellency the Imam knows how much I admire him.

He ended his talk by saying that we have all failed and that other nations have surpassed us.
Your Excellency, have you not said this?
(The Imam replied, “But this is not because of the heritage.”) 
I have not focused on the heritage alone.
There are many other issues.
It is inappropriate to judge all the heritage at once:
I mean I cannot say that all the heritage is good or not good.
This is not right.
“Say: Walk on earth and look” (29: 20).
In reading the heritage, we have to discriminate.
The heritage was created by someone like your Excellency,
or like me.
You can be right or wrong, can’t you?
And I can be right or wrong.
We are human beings.
I am not talking about Alazhar as an institution,
Alazhar can be right or wrong as well, 
Cairo University can be right or wrong,
and the UN can be right or wrong
Is skepticism the opposite of absolutism?
No your Excellency.
You taught us in philosophy that the absolute is the opposite of the relative,
not the opposite of doubt doubtful.
Is my book absolute? Of course not.
Is it questionable? Of course not.
It involves human effort
. God Almighty wanted us to be different and to disagree until the day of judgment

The finger print of his Excellency the Imam is different from mine, which is different from that of his Excellency Almufti, and from that of Mr. Amr Moussa.
If God wanted us to be identical, He would not have had a different finger print for each of us.
The problem is that some have classified me as belonging to a certain trend: either/or, but I am not either/or.
I only belong to my faith.
I am a Muslim.
I am not an Asharite.
I am a Muslim but not a Mutazilite.
Why would I limit my understanding of my Islamic faith to the Asharite method of thinking?
Ashari was great in his own time your Excellency the Imam
and I respect him because he did his duty in defending the Islamic doctrine as opposed to deviant doctrines at the time when there was strife and doubt.
If I wanted to be like Asharite,
would I follow his ideas verbatim?
Or do I respond in a way that suits the age?
I respond in a way that suits the age.
Your Excellency, if we have failed as you said,
this means that we are going in the wrong path,
for sure, with a wrong methodology and a wrong way of thinking.
Therefore, we must reconsider.
The religious mind does not refer to the Holy Qur’an.
The religious mind means our own way of thinking,
and this is the human way.
As for Alazhar, I stand here to honor Sheikh Shaltout.
I said this in my initial address. I learnt from Sheikh Abdullah Deraz.
By God, your Excellency,
I suggest the book Deraz wrote entitled The Constitution of Morals in the Qur’an,
be taught because he incorporats other fields of knowledge.
I respect Alazhar
and agree with some issues said at Alazhar and disagree with others
This is normal. Am I against Alazhar?
Of course not
We belong to one country, and a patriotic country means one that is made up of institutions.
We have to unite
We have to reach a common ground
Regarding the issue of divorce and its documentation,

you ask for a rational proof and I propose the theory of the modern parallel legal forms. I do not forward an absolute truth.
I present my view among other views,
and in the end the issue is subject to unanimous agreement on legalization at the parliament.
Your Excellency, the Imam
The companions of the Prophet Mohamed, May Allah Accept them, are great men. Unparalleled?
Yes
But are they infallible?
No
Is this an insult?
Never
Neither I, nor anyone else can be Omar Ibn El-Khattab or Abu-Bakr, May Allah Accept them.
They have left a great heritage and created a great civilization.
The Islamic nation was prominent when they had a methodology and a path to follow.
If we want to be like them we should know the conditions of a renaissance and the prerequisites of moving ahead from one era to another.
We should not imitate them.


Your Excellency, the Imam
I invite you and the young members of my family at Alazhar to come to Cairo University
has done away with the either/or way of thinking, that is you are either with me or against me. 
I do not agree with you on everything and I am not against you in everything.
Your Excellency the Imam, I honour you and respect you and appreciate your point of view.
I do not have the absolute truth,
but my arguments are not questionable
they are relative and can be right or wrong, like yours.
I hope my children and friends, scholars of Alazhar, understand what I said
because we need to move to a new intellectual era. We should not  resort to argumentation and making accusations against one another.
We need to listen to what is said in the light of the context in which it is said, not to classify what is said as belonging to a specific movement.
I invited his Excellency the Imam to come to Cairo University
to talk to my young people because I am sure they will be in good hands.
I am happy to be with you today
I am happy to be with the Imam and Alazhar scholars to clarify different points of view and to find a common ground.
May God grant us all success.