In Christian terminology, it is the Feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God, and “dormition” is the eastern term for death. In the language of worship, the dead are called those asleep, in order to indicate Christ’s victory over death. Their death is because they are embraced by God before the Resurrection on the last day. The origins of the feast are eastern. It was established in the sixth century in Jerusalem where her church stood in Gethsemane. The Emperor Maurice made the feast general throughout the empire. Pope Sergius I, who died at the beginning of the seventh century adopted the feast, and Pope Pius XII announced that the transport of the Virgin to heaven in body and soul is a dogma.

The Orthodox Church has not defined the transport of Mary into heaven as a dogma. Orthodox theologians are divided between those who believe in the assumption of her body and those who do not, since where there is not a synodally-defined dogma, the matter is left to freedom of interpretation. However, the services for the feast are clear in stating that she was transported (“You were transported to life, being the Mother of Life”, that is of Christ). Also in the prayer for the feast we say “You arose after your death to be with your Son eternally” and even more clearly “God… preserved your body in the tomb and your glory is with Him in your divine transport”.

The question that poses itself to eastern Christians is ‘are the texts of the feast binding as dogma?’ The general, basic answer is that worship services reveal a dogmatic position in general, but this does not mean that we are able to extrapolate a binding dogmatic position from the worship services, and so we remain with critical freedom as long as a clear definition is not issued at an ecumenical council made up of all the Orthodox churches.

Taking stock of both the Orthodox and the Catholic positions, we can say that Mary anticipated the Resurrection, that she will not be subject to trial or judgment, and that she abides in glory, that is the state in which we will be after the final resurrection. This is what Saint John of Damascus realized in the eighth century when he addressed her in one of the two sermons he wrote about the Dormition. He said, “I will not call your holy departure death, but rather a dormition or a journey but the best way to call it is an abiding. In leaving the realm of the body, you entered a more excellent realm”.

I said that she abides in the divine glory and that she is not like us, subject to divine judgment on the last day. This is why we greatly magnify her. She is our ambassador to heaven.

She is full of grace, as the angel Gabriel told her at the moment of the Annunciation. That is, that she was free from all sin, submitting to God alone and prepared to accept every word from Him. This is what the angel meant when he said, “The Lord is with you, blessed among women.” These words were the beginning of her path to glory. The beginning of the path is that from her and from the Holy Spirit the Word of God, who existed in the beginning, became incarnate. The angel’s greeting makes it clear to Mary: “The Holy Spirit will rest upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.” There is no doubt that the angel Gabriel’s use of the word “overshadow” points to the cloud that accompanied the People of God of old and which later became the temple in Jerusalem. The idea, then, is that Mary is the new temple of God or the first church for Christ and there is no church unless she dwells within it. In the first church, which gathered in the upper room in Jerusalem, where the disciples gathered “continuing with one accord in prayers and Mary the mother of Jesus was with them” (Acts 1: 14). So when the Holy Spirit rested upon them, it also rested upon Mary, just as it had rested upon her at the Annunciation in order for the Word to be made flesh. This Spirit accompanied her until the end of her life on earth. This is the life in glory before her being transported to the heavenly abodes.

There is no further talk about Mary after this in the Gospel, since it goes on to talk about the Holy Spirit’s formation of the Church. The Virgin is an inherent part of the Church since she said, “From this moment all generations shall call me blessed” (Luke 1:48). Thus the words of the Gospel show that the humanity that relies on the Gospel as its scripture turns to the Virgin, through whom the Mighty One worked wonders (Luke 1: 49). Those who know of the place of Mary in glory address her, seeking her intercession.

The author of the Book of Revelation looked at her as an image of the Church. He said, “There appeared a great sign in heaven: a woman robed in the sun and the moon is under her feet and upon her head is a crown of twelve stars” (Revelation 1: 12). Byzantine art has a pattern by which she is drawn with the Child. She relies on Him for all her splendor. She has no power on her own. She is given what we receive from the Lord. If you love the Lord and go for all His splendors, then He is great in His saints and among them she is the first. Knowledge of Mary is a part of knowledge of Christ.

Perhaps this feast is an occasion for me to say that what is called the intercession or the entreaties or the meditations of the saints are words that do not cancel the single mediation of Christ. Salvation was achieved a single time in the person of the Savior. No one can add anything to that, since there is no power outside this salvation.

We Orthodox do not accept the view of Mary as a partner is salvation. No human can save humans. However, we believe that those in heaven pray, just like the people on earth, because Christ’s Resurrection is active from this moment and by it Christ has trampled down the death of those who have tasted it. Those who have been transported to glory stand in prayer and are not mere bones and ashes. They are alive with their Lord, that is they speak to Him and we speak to them. We accompany them and they accompany us in the vale of tears in which we live. The Church in heaven and the Church on earth is one. Heaven is chanting after divine kindness in the saints. Is it right for you to say that those in heaven are silent and that Mary is absent from the glory of her Son and of her brothers and sisters in righteousness?! She is a word, after the Word dwelt within her and after He gave those invited to the wedding at Cana wine to enjoy. What does it mean when some say “Can God not respond to us directly?” If you entrust grace with Mary, supplicate her, and receive an outpouring from her, is the Savior not working within you directly? In the Kingdom of Love above, what is direct and what is indirect? Are we not, with those great ones who preceded us in arriving at God’s mercy, the single body of Christ, living together in

Translated from Arabic

Original Text: “عيد رقاد السيدة” –Nahar- 13.08.2011

The event which we celebrate today, the transfiguration of Christ, is essential in the Gospel. Before it, in it and after it the atmosphere is pain and resurrection. After Peter’s confession concerning Jesus’ sonship to God, “from that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things … and be killed, and on the third day be raised.” (Matt. 16: 21)

Peter’s confession was in the area of Caesarea Philippi, which is currently called Banias, and is located on the foot of Mount Hermon or Jabal al-Shaikh. After six days of this confession the Lord took Peter, Jacob and John, who were His close companions, to a high mountain [Matt. 17: 1-2]. The tradition tells that it is Tabor in Galilee; however Tabor is not a high mountain. Thus, some scholars are inclined to say that the Lord has not left the region of Banias and that transfiguration has occurred on Mount Hermon. This is of no importance for the teaching. There He has been transfigured and His form was changed as it says in Greek. What does it mean that His face shone like the sun and His garments became white as light? Here comes the teaching of the Orthodox Church, as it reads the text. The event took place in the day time, however this was not the light of the sun, since this would not be different [than the regular light] and there would not be any wondrous element to be mentioned. However, it was the light of Godhead, which Jesus was concealing in His body and it has radiated in order to foretell His resurrection. Thus, this is kind of anticipation of the salvation events.

Just after this we read that Moses and Elijah appear to Jesus and talk to Him. Only Luke says that they “appeared in glory and spoke of his departure, which he was to accomplish at Jerusalem.” [Luke 9: 31] And the departure refers to the sufferings.

As the two prophets were on the mountain with Jesus, a bright cloud overshadowed them. And if we read this word with the Old Testament background we come to understand that the cloud is referring to Shekinah [Hebrew word] and the Arabic is Sakinah which means serenity, designating the divine presence. From this cloud of glory a voice was heard: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.” [Matt. 17: 5] The part before “listen to him” has been mentioned in the baptism of the Lord, which conceptually anticipates the suffering and the resurrection of the Savior. Is transfiguration then an image of the baptism and the heard voice is the same one heard at the Jordan River? This, in terms of the narrative, is a critical question which I cannot answer. However, as critics we may say that the content of baptism and of transfiguration is one, and that the whole question from the beginning to the end is about the crucifixion of the Master and His rising from the dead. In the baptism we are transfigured, that is we acquire a new form, which the Creator has prepared it for us from eternity.

Coming back to Elijah and Moses, the traditional thought has perceived Elijah as a prototype for the prophets, who come to tell that all prophesies are realized in the death of the Lord, and perceives Moses as the one by whom the law of obligations will come to an end, whenever he meets Jesus the Nazarene. They were present in the cloud of glory which has been declared first through Jesus Christ, while they were not in the glory before that, as the Lord has said: “No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.” (John 1: 18) However, the statement “listen to him”, which is not mentioned in the narrative of the baptism, calls us to listen to the transfigured Christ, who is anterior to us, whenever we become from the adherents [of Christ], staring only at Him, through His grace and our humility. Elijah, Moses and all the prophets, who preceded the Master in time, would not bring us other than to Him. We accept them since they brought the old humanity to Him. And we accept the thought that harks to Jesus and the philosophy which serves Him, and the art which discloses Him in one way or another. He alone remains and He does not abolish [others], since all truth and sublimity comes from His transfiguration, namely, from the radiation of that Godhead, which He carries, to the whole scope of life.

Elijah and Moses did not see God in the Old Testament. No one can “see [God] and live” [Ex. 33: 20]. No one penetrates the essence of God. Since then, he/[she] would become God, in his/[her] essence. Nevertheless, God is light that has to be attainable. “God became man so that man might become a god.” [St. Athanasius, De inc. 54, 3]  Since Irenaeus, in the second century, this has been said, and it was affirmed by Athanasius in the fourth century, Basil has confirmed it, Gregory Palamas in the fourteenth century has taught it, and the Christian East has verified it in a council.

In one way or another all of them have maintained that there are in God eternal powers, which are not God’s essence, however they are uncreated powers. Since whenever God offers you temporal powers, namely powers that are created in time, they would not be God or they would not arrive at God. God provides you with works which are God’s, and they were eternally with God, and whenever you receive them you rise to eternity and you become as having no beginning.

If grace was created, then it would be exterior to God, namely it would not deify you. What does it mean that grace sanctifies you? What does it mean that you become perfect through sanctification, if sanctification was something that God throws within you while it is not of Godself?

The incarnation of the Son of God implies that He has bridged the gap between the Creator and the creature, without God becoming a creature in essence, or the creature a Creator in essence. However, they become one through sanctification and they meet in eternity. In eternal life, which has been accomplished through resurrection, you are not merely behind God, but you are in God. You walk in God toward God’s unending reality and toward your unending reality through the consolidation of love.

However, you would not reach at this resurrection without you being crucified with Christ, so that you would be purified from the defilements of this world. “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me” [Matt. 16: 24], so that he/[she] might throw away every corruptive lust and choose Christ alone. That is why when Moses and Elijah have disappeared from the mountain the disciples could not see other than Jesus.

Every one of us may resemble Christ that is by crucifying one’s sins every day, so that one might rise every day. Through such resembling one might become a partner of Christ, namely one with Him in love, which is not mixed with hypocrisy, as though he/[she] is sitting with Him on the right side of God.

That person would coexist with all people, would perform any profession and would love the things of this world, without being subject to them. However, in each fold of his/[her] inner existence he/[she] would be with Christ or from Christ until he/[she] reigns with Christ at the resurrection when God becomes all in all.

Translated by Sylvie Avakian-Maamarbashi

Original Text: “تجلي يسوع” –An Nahar- 06.08.2011

Ramadan is a month for all of us, whether we refrain from food or refrain from sin. It is not right for a Muslim to be practicing his asceticism and for us to not support him with prayer. He believes that his fast was decreed for him. You should ask blessings, health, and purity for him so that he can reach the highest point of his struggle and benefit all people through his nighttime prayer.

It saddens me that some of us welcome the iftars to which our friends invite us without our hearts going to the fast itself, that is to turning away from this world and its pleasures insofar as we are happy for Muslims to draw near to God and His generosity.

We accept Muslims because God accepts them in the purity of their worship.

The month of faith and preservation / There is triumph in it for those who wish to accept

These are the qualities that a profound believer seeks and they transcend the outward price, which is restraint from what is ugly and at that point only God remains. You become like Mary, who said “I have vowed a fast unto the Merciful One, and may not speak this day to any mortal” (Surat Maryam 26). If you have achieved purification, you have achieved your ascent to God who gives you what to say to people or who gives you silence to save you from your emptiness.

For those especially dedicated to worship, Ramadan becomes withholding the senses from sins and a fast of the heart from everything but God. As for the purely outward image of fasting, it is nothing and serves no purpose. The special characteristic of spiritual sacrifice in this struggle is described by one who said, pleadingly, “My God, the beggars have stopped at your door and the poor have fled to your refuge. The ship of the wretched has stopped at the shore of your generosity, receiving passage to the field of your mercy and grace. My God, if in this noble month you only are generous to those who are sincere with you in their fasting, then who is there for the dedicated sinner who drowns in the sea his sins and transgressions?” “My God, if you only accept the diligent, who is there for the negligent? My God, those who fast have profited, and as for us your sinful servants, have mercy on us and bestow your grace upon us. Forgive us all, by your mercy, most merciful one.” This is the Muslim’s window on all-encompassing love.

What is the purpose of the fast? Asceticism, abstinence, and austerity are exercises by which God makes possible for man what the Christians call grace, which is the divine power in the human heart or, as al-Ghazali says, what God causes to leap up within one’s breast. Secondly, the fast is a focus on the Lord himself and thus internal conditions make Ramadan a gateway to heaven. This means that its true purpose is for the one fasting to take on one of God’s attributes, which is steadfastness insofar as the divine steadfastness is reflected in a human being.

The Imam Ghazali said, “Fasting has three levels: the fasting of ordinary people, the fasting of the select, and the fasting of the select of the select.” Ordinary people’s fasting is following known obligations and it is summarized by refraining from desire for food and sexual restraint. The fasting of the select is refraining from all sins such as averting one’s gaze from what is blameworthy, controlling the tongue, refraining from listening to unpraiseworthy things “because that which it is forbidden to say is also forbidden to listen to.” A beautiful saying of al-Ghazali’s is “one should not eat permissible food in excess, to the point of filling one’s belly, when breaking the fast because there is no vessel more detestable to God than a belly full of permissible food.” His advice is that one fasting should eat what he would eat every night if he were not fasting.

As for the select of the select, their fast is “the heart’s fasting from cares… and worldly thoughts and abstaining from everything other than God.”

If Muslims were to write new Ramadan literature, they would have to think in this Middle East that the Christians who love them, even if they do not fast with them bodily they are still close to them, since if each group of us is elevated spiritually, the other is elevated together with them, or at least this is what one imagines. At the deepest level, one does not look at dogma, but rather at human beings. The goal is human beings coming together to the point of love and not just the rapprochement of two sets of dogmas. What was called Muslim-Christian dialogue targeted dogmas. For that reason, it had little success and some scholars rejected it because of the difficulty of undertaking it and began to talk about the ethical aspect in dialogue. The truth is that there is another aspect, which is the coming together of people who seek God in love and who want the other to be elevated along with them. In their intense focus on God during the fast, is there anything to prevent Muslims from carrying Christians along with them and not becoming prisoners of politics?

Political communication may be extremely difficult because it is focused on competition, denying the other his right, and a lack of vision for national unity. This is expressed by saying “I am more important than you and greater than you.” Politics is always focused on the ego, and the ego always denies the other’s ego. All that is based on humans is human, which is to say that within it are people’s desires. But if we lay aside politics and its struggles within a religion or within multiple religions, and we focus the heart and mind on God in a continuous Ramadan or in Lenten fasting, we will feel that we are human beings capable of unity and coming together and that we are in principle a single society.

The outward, organizing form of this society is that it is a civil society. The search for this is ongoing, without a limit to the expression. In sum, it is for us to be a religious society that, in so being, does not have a political aspect. Or, if it must be so organized, it must submit to civil laws without sectarian reference.

What is important is for us to be free of all vainglory and that we should not strive for what pertains to this world. When will we turn in this Ramadan direction?

If, during Ramadan, you are among the select or the select of the select, to the point of reaching God, look at His servants in the way that He does, that is that they are His children, according to the Christian terminology. No matter what your language, God is the one who shelters you and He calls all those under his shelter unto Himself. I do not only mean on the last day. We are drawn to Him at all times through His mercy and loving-kindness.

Through bodily abstinence, through spiritual abstinence, or through both of them, we shall enter Ramadan together in perfect brotherhood.

Translated from Arabic

Original Text: “أقبل رمضان” –Nahar-  30.07.2011

It appears that we are witnessing a competition taking root between Muslim scholars or preachers and the state over the question of domestic violence. These brothers see the proposed legislation to be mutually exclusive with Islamic law and appeal to the latter for a woman’s obedience to her husband. This is what little I read in the press. In the absence of the complete text you cannot take a position, even if you are a non-Muslim. However, I anticipate a major division in the country, not only dividing between the sects but also dividing between segments within a single religion.

No doubt, only the powerful practice violence. They assert themselves with the means at their disposal, with their muscles for example. Modern society emphatically speaks of dialogue, but dialogue is not always a meeting of equals except superficially, because the strong often show kindness in order to assert themselves. Violence of different levels is rooted in nature, but it must be overturned by the justice and equality that God wants to be universal among us.

Violence is intensified by the law or by the social order which the strong benefit from and hide behind. Spousal violence is wrapped in divine words in this or that religion until man discovers the depth of equality in grace and gain the experience that mercy is more powerful than physical strength or legal power. Here again we return to the ego. Am I, for example, the arbiter of what appears from God or is it possible to commit brutality in defense of the authority of law and to apply it in practice against a citizen who has transgressed the interpretation of this arbiter of the laws expressions? It is the temptation of the possessor of the law that it is his and its reality is that it is delegated to him to carry out God’s authority, or, you might say, the authority of truth.

If we return to the topic of the family, Christianity calls for a wife to submit to her husband, but it softens this by saying that the husband must love his wife just as Christ loved the Church: to the point of death. But I have rarely found a man who has read this part of the divine text and who is not just content to demand obedience from his wife. Naturally, texts are read by humans and if they do not love very much, they use them for their own benefit.

What about Islam? The clearest thing about the matter is aya 34 of Surat al-Nisa’: “If you fear their recalcitrance, admonish them then avoid them in bed, then beat them.” I posed the question of beating to Sheikh Sobhi el-Saleh, may God have mercy on him. The problem is that after his passing, I do not have a witness. He said that the beating does not have to be intense, and this is supported by the Tafsir of al-Jalalayn, which means that this is a form of admonition and not true violence. Sayyed Muhammad Hussein Tabataba’i deals with it graciously and considers it to be a means of rebuking, which means that in Surat al-Nisa’ we do not have something that must be understood as being violence. I understand it to soften the beating when the Qur’an says, “It is made lawful for you to go in unto your wives on the night of the fast. They are raiment for you and ye are raiment for them (Surat al-Baqara 187)”. In philosophical language, this symmetry, this meeting in love, absolutely precludes violent beating.

I do not at all see anything in the Qur’anic revelation that would permit domestic violence. How should we treat each other when there are verses of mercy, of which there are dozens, to the point that it’s possible to say that Islam is a religion of mercy? It is required in every place, not only in the home. The great question is what is the place of contemporary sensibility with regard to what God has said. How should we approach contemporary civilization insofar as it is against violence? Is it committing disbelief to insist on peace in every place? Can there be interpretation within time and within every period of time? Does the contemporary sentiment for domestic peace not please God?

Will the country really be divided? This time, people will not fight according to sect. To my mind, there will appear a group that sees statutory law as against Islamic law and another Lebanese group that includes both Christian and Muslim liberals who hold to their faith but pay no attention to think that they have gone against religious dogma if they say that they are against domestic violence and who are closer to believing in equality between husband and wife in ordering the affairs of the family. There is tradition, and there is modernity or reform of Islamic thought that is close to contemporary civilization. This reformist thought has roots in Islam in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, and elsewhere.

Woman’s march toward equality with men is a significant phenomenon in modern Islam. It will not stop while it raises the banner of an Islam that is true to itself but is also developing according to the development of civilization that is enveloping the world today. Within this civilization, no one understands a man’s violence or a woman’s violence. Domestic violence is against them both. I have witnessed before a woman’s cruelty to her husband and her ruthless behavior. The idea is that the law protects well-being and is aimed against either party persecuting the other. The obedience to the husband that religious teaching calls for does not include the right to punish her and he cannot be a party to the dispute and the judge at the same time. This is naturally contrary to mercy. Neither of the two can in any way subjugate the other. Union is not subjugation. It is a dual motion and a mutually exchanged love. The woman does not just receive affection from her spouse, she also gives it and expects a response from her companion in existence, until they both become one being.

My dream is for those with strong muscles and those with wealth will understand that the other might be greater spiritually and culturally and that they will receive as they give.

This leads me to say that we do not have a common life if we remain divided between traditionalists and reformists. Yes, I know that all societies are divided along these lines. However, if we remain divided between people of text and people of spirit, the country will have a long wait before it sees its revival. However, I am happy that the dispute is not between Christians and Muslims, but between rigorists and people who believe in development, growth, and progress. The two groups exist in both religions. However slowly, a true civil society will take shape along with an old, outmoded society, until the society that progresses toward truth is victorious, tomorrow or the next day. There is no doubt that within human reality there are spiritualities, but there are also lived realities that keep man from rigidity or delusion. We must look at the issue of violence, in the home and outside the home, in light of a profound reform of humanity. If there does not come a unity based on understanding, we will continue to proceed in a state of false calm based on platitudes. Without a profundity based on heritage and a general revival based on truth, love, fearlessness, and confidence in others’ ability to advance, we have

Translated from Arabic

Original Text: “العنف المنزلي” – Nahar- 02.07.2011