Νοσοκομείο στη Γάζα από την Εκκλησία
January 28, 2009 by Anna
Source: Enet
(English translation below)
Νοσοκομείο στη Γάζα προτίθεται να χτίσει η Εκκλησία της Ελλάδος, που θα συνεργαστεί γι’ αυτό το σκοπό με το υπουργείο Εξωτερικών. Ο Ιερώνυμος, πιστός στο όραμά του για βοήθεια στους αναξιοπαθούντες απανταχού της γης, δεν μπορούσε να μείνει ασυγκίνητος από το δράμα των Παλαιστινίων.
*Ετσι, στις συναντήσεις που είχε με την υπουργό Εξωτερικών συμφωνήθηκε να δώσει η Εκκλησία τα χρήματα στο υπουργείο Εξωτερικών με αποκλειστικό σκοπό την ανέγερση του νοσοκομείου και το υπουργείο να προβεί στις απαραίτητες διπλωματικές ενέργειες για να διευκολύνει την υλοποίηση αυτού του έργου. Τα χρήματα για το νοσοκομείο συγκεντρώθηκαν από δισκοφορίες στους ναούς. Ως παράδειγμα του ύψους του ποσού που συγκεντρώνεται, αναφέρεται ότι κάθε μία από τις εκατοντάδες εκκλησίες που βρίσκονται στη δικαιοδοσία της αρχιεπισκοπής στην περιοχή των Αθηνών, συγκέντρωσε ποσά άνω των 700 ευρώ.
*Συγχρόνως συμφωνήθηκε να τεθεί στη διάθεση του υπουργείου Εξωτερικών ο ξενώνας της Εκκλησίας που βρίσκεται στην περιοχή του Φιξ, για να φιλοξενηθούν οι συγγενείς που θα συνοδεύσουν παιδιά από την Παλαιστίνη τα οποία θα μεταφερθούν σε νοσοκομεία της Αθήνας. Το ίδιο θα γίνει και με τον ξενώνα της μητρόπολης Νεαπόλεως στη Θεσσαλονίκη. Ενεργοποιείται επίσης η «Χριστιανική Αλληλεγγύη», που συνδέεται με ιδρύματα όπως το «Κόκορη» και «Δάμαρις» για κορίτσια με νοητική στέρηση.
Η οργάνωση αυτή είχε ιδρυθεί από τον αρχιεπίσκοπο Δαμασκηνό το 1940 και τώρα πρόκειται να συντονίσει τα βήματά της με τη ΜΚΟ «Αλληλεγγύη».
Hospital in Gaza from the Church
The Church of Greece is planning to build a hospital in Gaza, who will work for this purpose by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Jerome, faithful to the vision of assistance to the disadvantaged across the land, could not remain unmoved by the plight of Palestinians.
* For example, in meetings with the Foreign Minister, [they] agreed to give the Church the money to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the sole purpose of building the hospital and the ministry to make the necessary diplomatic efforts to facilitate the implementation of this project. The money for the hospital is collected from diskofories in temples. As an example of the full amount collected, indicated that each of the hundreds of churches in the jurisdiction of the archdiocese in Athens, collected in excess of 700 euros.
* At the same time [they] agreed to put at the disposal of the foreign ministry of the church hostel located in the Fix, to accommodate relatives who will accompany children from Palestine which will be transferred to hospitals in Athens. The same will happen to the metropolis of Naples hostels in Thessaloniki. Also the “Christian Solidarity” activated related institutions such as the “Kokoris” and “Damaris” for girls with mental deprivation.
The organization was established by Archbishop Damaskinos in 1940 and is now to coordinate steps with the NGO Solidarity.
Αν δεν υπάρξει προσυλητισμός των μουσουλμάνων ασθενών προς τον Χριστιανισμό και αν επίσης μέσα σε αυτό το νοσοκομεία δεν υπάρχουν χριστιανικά σύμβολα και εικόνες, τότε θα πρέπει να δεχτούμε την προσφορά και να ευχαριστήσουμε την εκκλησία.
Yes, we are thankful for the Church’s contribution. There are Palestinian Orthodox Christians so I’m not sure where the hospital is being built but I doubt its for missionary work, given the war-torn situation, and Allah knows best. Br. Ali, Muslims can enter churches (where there are lots of idols etc.), so let’s not be strict where shariah gives easiness to people. In other words, there is a warning for people who try to make the halal, haram and the haram, halal. It’s best to seek out the proper rulings before, we, as unqualified laymen, make statements or rulings. And Allah knows best.
Ο σέϊχ Ιμπν Ταϊμίγγια είπε ότι όποιος μπαίνει σε εκκλήσία είναι κάφιρ και αποστάτης από το Ισλάμ. Δεν ξέρω γιατί το είπε αυτό αλλά σέβομααι τον Ιμάμη Ιμπν Ταϊμίγγια.
Αν στο νοσοκομείο βρίσκονται παπάδες, εικόνες, εκκλησιαστικά βιβλία και πράγματα, τότε δε θε΄λω τη βοήθεια τους. Να μας λείπει. Δεν τους έχουμε ανάγκη.
Αυτοί θε΄λουν να μας προσυλητήσουν στον Χριστιανισμό. Εμείς, σεβόμενοι πα΄ντα το δικαίωμα τους να πιστεύουν ό,τι θέλουν και θα τους δείχνουμε αγάπη, αλλα΄αν η βοήθεια τους αποσκοπεί στο να μας εκχριστιαν΄΄ισουν, τότε να μου λείπει
Ali, calm down on this. Muslims are not in danger to be mislead by others, simply because they have more than anyone. As for people in Gaza trust me they are not as others, they should not sell their souls for a building. The Greek church only builds and has humanitarian activities in many places. They have bishop there and they know well how these people are, mainly those i Gaza that are really more religious than others, so they do not count on incrasing the christina population in Palestine.
Its nice to see moderate people who are not fearful of the Greek Orthodox Church building a hospital in Gaza. As for you Ali, if you don’t want to enter a hospital because it has priests, icons or cross on it, no one is forcing you to check in. With your type of thinking perhaps all the Western Christian doctors who volunteer their services in Palestian hospitals should leave. And lastly even if the hosiptal had a chapel within it and did some missionary work, why take so much offence?
I think what they are doing is wonderful regardless the religion issue! In situations like this, the attitude of compassion , support, and help ( in any way) speak for its self!
no, there is no problem for the muslim population. All the muslim countries live in harmony with christians, only for political reasons some might try the opposite. Also here in Athens the Hellenic Church respects the muslim community and we are in open dialogue, aknowledge our problems, have their own programs for refuges (not baptizing) to support them, to relief them. We have to be fair as Muslims, and open hearted like Greek archibishop Ieronymos. I wish more people to care for Gaza right now.
and if br.Ali believes to the teachings of Ibn Taymiya, we believe the Amir el Mu’minin Omar Ibn Al Khattab where he met the priests of Jerusalem inside the church, they welcomed him, and when the time for his prayer came, he asked their permission to pray just outside the church. Why outside the church? the priests asked him to pray inside but he said that he was afraid that after that someone might say “this is where the Amir el Mu’minin prayed” and claim the church.
Anna, this is indeed a very beautiful example, both of the Islamic tolerance, and of the respect both (muslims and christians) had for eachother.
I’ve been wanting to reply to this for a while. You guys beat me to it. Br. Ali, may Allah reward you for your enthusiasm to study the deen more and more in depth. Some points hopefully we can benefit from:
1. In order to make a legal ruling (fatwa), the person must be highly qualified, which none of us even come close.
2. There is a severe warning for those who are not qualified to make legal rulings.
3. There are legal rulings for the general case and then there are rulings for every specific case that comes up.
4. The ruling you mentioned is for the general case, and even for the general case, there is a difference of opinion and the most correct is that it is not haram, but makrooh (disliked) and Allah knows best, and this is for a church, not even a hospital. http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/111832/muslim%20church
5. In specific cases (ex. calamity), sharia already has a built in adaptation where rulings can extend or ease up.
6. And just as a side point, since you mention Ibn Taymiya, it’s interesting to note that it was him that persuaded the Mongols commander to release NOT ONLY the Muslim prisoners but he was very insistent to also free the Christian prisoners.
Insha Allah, we are all learning and benefiting from each other. But, let’s leave the legal rulings to those who spend their lives in specializing in that field. May Allah forgive me if I have made a mistake and reward those who are striving to learn the deen.
Σαλάμ.
Εγώ δεν είπα να μη σεβόμαστε τους Χριστιανούς. Ασφαλώς πρέπει να τους σεβόμαστε και να ζούμε μαζί τους με ειρήνη και αλληλοκατανόηση αλλά με παραξενεύει η απόφαση τους να χτίσουν νοσοκομείο στη Γάζα. Γιατί όχι κάπου αλλού? Από την άλλη, υπάρχουν τόσα ισλαμικά ιδρύματα που μπορούν να βοηθήσουν στο χτίσιμο ενός νοσοκομείου από μουσουλμάνους.
Σε κάθε περίπτωση πα΄ντως, με συγχωρείτε αν μίλησα ακραία.
Δείτε το
http://nabiallah.wordpress.com/2009/01/17/6-%ce%bf%ce%b9-%ce%bc%ce%bf%cf%85%cf%83%ce%bf%cf%85%ce%bb%ce%bc%ce%ac%ce%bd%ce%bf%ce%b9-%ce%bf%ce%b9-%cf%87%cf%81%ce%b9%cf%83%cf%84%ce%b9%ce%b1%ce%bd%ce%bf%ce%af-%ce%ba%ce%b1%ce%b9-%ce%bf-%ce%b4/
The following is an intersting quote from Ibn Taymiyyah:
“…And likewise, if there were ever to be a state established for the Jews in ‘Iraaq or other than it, the Raafidah would be from their greatest supporters, as they usually ally themselves with the disbelievers from the polytheists, the Jews, and the Christians, and they assist them upon fighting the Muslims and having enmity towards them.” ['Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah'; v.3, p.378]
In the original Arabic:
و كذلك إذا صار لليهود دولة بالعراق وغيره ، تكون الرافضة من أعظم أعوانهم ، فهم دائماً يوالون الكفار من المشركين واليهود والنصارى ، ويعاونونهم على قتال المسلمين ومعاداتهم”
[منهاج السنة النبوية : ج3/ ص378]
Ibn Taymiyyah wrote a lengthy response to a letter by Bishop Paul of Antioch (1140-1180) which had circulated widely in the Muslim world. He replied to an edited version of the original letter. He dismissed the much cited hadith that “he who harms a dhimmi (member of a protected community) harms me” as false, arguing that that this hadith amounted to “absolute protection to unbelievers; moreover, it would make it a travesty of justice, for, just as in the case of Muslims, there are times when they deserve punishment and physical harm” (Michel: 81). Christians should, in this view, “feel themselves subdued” when they pay the jizya tax (Q9: 29). Muslims should separate and distance themselves from other communities; dissimilitude should exist in every aspect of life, practice, dress, prayer, and worship. He cited an hadith that said, “whoever cultivates resemblance with a people is one of them” (82). Some Muslims, it seems, were actually joining in certain Christian festivals, at least to the extent of walking with them in their processions and “coloring Easter eggs, fixing a special meal, wearing new clothes, decorating houses, and lighting fires” on feast days (82). Not only must Muslims not participate in any way in Christian festivals, he said, but they must not even sell them “anything needed for the feast” or “give them presents” (82). He supported the dress regulations that prohibited Christians from wearing the same style of dress as Muslims. He also supported collecting the jizya from monks who were engaged in agriculture or business, whereas some jurists exempted all monks and priests (81).
When the dress code was re-introduced in 1301, Christians complained to the Sultan. Some Christians lost their posts at the same time. Ibn Taymiyya ruled that they must “return to the prescribed code” (81). He was emphatic that Muslims must not enter alliances with Christians, and some Muslims had during the wars against the Mongols. Anything which might contaminate Islam’s strict monotheism must be repudiated. Christians also complained that the closure of Churches was a breach of the Pact of Umar, but Ibn Taymiyya ruled that if the Sultan “decided to destroy every Church” within the Muslim territory he would be entitled to do so (79). Much blame fell on the Shi’a Fatimids, who had been far too lenient in their treatment of Christians. They had “ruled outside the Shari’ah” (79). It was not a surprise, he said, that the Fatimids failed against the Crusaders (79). It was better, Taymiyya advised, to employ a less able Muslim than a more able Christian, although the opposite had been practiced by many Caliphs. Muslims did not need Christians and should “make themselves independent of them” (80). Practices such as visiting the tombs of saints, praying to them, preparing “banners,” forming processions for the leaders of Sufi orders, all represented innovation (bida) possibly in imitation of Christians. Trinity, the crucifixion and even the Eucharist were Christian inventions. He accepted that the Bible had been corrupted (known as tahrif). He denied that a verse such as Qur’an 2: 62 could give Christians any comfort, arguing that the Christians referred to in this verse were those who believed in Muhammad’s message. Only those who accept Muhammad as prophet could expect to be among the righteous.
Shaikh al-Islam Ibn-Taymiyya was the best when it comes to debating with Christians. If you read his debate with Christian scholars, you will find him supper. He showed very clearly their contradiction and man-made modification to their Bible. His book “Al-Jawab Al-Sahih Liman Baddala Qaula al-Maseeh (The right answer to those who changed the message of the Messiah)” is the best ever book that was written against the missionary Christians. May Allah bless his soul, he was a great man. I have to say that all Damascus attended his funeral including all these who he was in-dispute with them about some branches in Islamic practices like the Sufis and other schools. Muslims prayed at him even in far countries such as Yemen and China. Ibn-Taymiyah was one of the greatest men in Islamic teaching he is one of very few Imams who fought on the front-line side by side with Muslim soldiers. He was school in Fiqh and Jihad at the same time.
http://www.islamicweb.com/beliefs/creed/taymiyah.htm
There we go again, the topic starts off as salad and turns into apples. Is digressing from the topic a Greek thing or what? Because we are all so good at it.
Br. Ali, what you are quoting from Ibn Taymiyah is what we like to call a “prescription” fatwa/ruling, meaning that his ruling applies to THAT specific situation at that specific time for that specific people. It would be incorrect to take a “prescription” fatwa and then apply it to an “off the shelf” fatwa where it would apply to anyone.
Again, conclusion is leave it to those who are qualified (i.e. fuqaha/legal jurists).
Ruling on a Muslim entering a church.
Question
What is the ruling on a Muslim entering a church to listen to a lecture that is being given there?
Answer.
Praise be to Allaah.
Entering churches for meetings and to listen to lectures is not free of a number of haraam things, some of which have been discussed in the answer to question no. 82836.
The scholars differed concerning the ruling on a Muslim entering a church in the first place. There are a number of opinions:
1-That it is haraam. This is the view of the Hanafis and Shaafa’is, but the Shaafa’is limit the prohibition to churches in which there are images, as it says in Tuhfat al-Muhtaaj (2/424), Nihaayat al-Muhtaaj (2/63) and Haashiyata Qalyoobi wa ‘Umayrah ‘ala Sharh al-Muhalla (4/236).
The Hanafis regard it as haraam in all cases, and they gave as their reason the fact that they are abodes of the devils, as the Hanafi Ibn Nujaym said in al-Bahr al-Raa’iq (7/364) and in Haashiyat Ibn ‘Aabideen (2/43).
2-That it is makrooh. This is the view of the Hanbalis, but some of them limited this to churches in which there are images. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Fataawa al-Kubra (5/327): The view which most of our companions hold is that it is makrooh to enter churches in which there are images, and this is the correct view concerning which there can be no doubt. End quote.
See: al-Furoo’ (5/308), al-Adaab al-Shar’iyyah (3/415) and al-Insaaf (1/496).
They quoted the following as evidence:
(i)
It was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) saw images in the Ka’bah and he did not enter until he had ordered that they be erased. Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3352).
(ii)
It was narrated that Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: Jibreel promised to come to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) but he was late and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) grew concerned. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) went out and saw him, and he told him of his concern and he said to him: “We [angels] do not enter a house in which there is an image or a dog.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (5960).
(iii)
It was narrated that Aslam the freed slave of ‘Umar said: When ‘Umar went to Syria, one of the leaders of the Christians made food for him and called him. ‘Umar said: We will not enter your churches because of the images that are in them – meaning the statues. Narrated by ‘Abd al-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf (1/411 and 10/398).
3 – The third view is that it is permissible to enter churches in general. This is the view of the Hanbalis, as it says in al-Mughni (8/113) and al-Insaaf (1/496).
It is also the view of Ibn Hazm al-Zaahiri as it says in al-Muhalla (1/400).
They quoted the following as evidence:
(i)
What was narrated about the conditions stipulated by ‘Umar to the people of the Book to expand their churches and monasteries so that the Muslims could enter them to spend the night or pass through them.
Al-Mughni (8/113).
(ii)
Ibn ‘Aa’idh narrated in Futooh al-Shaam that when ‘Umar came to Syria, the Christians made food for him and called him, and he said: Where is it? They said: In the church, and he refused to go. He said to ‘Ali: Take the people to eat lunch. So ‘Ali took the people and entered the church, and he and the people ate lunch, and ‘Ali looked at the images and said: What would be wrong if the Ameer al-Mu’mineen entered this place?
Al-Mughni (8/113).
By studying the evidence quoted above, it does not seem that there is any clear evidence that it is haraam to enter churches. The fact that there are images and statues in them or any other place does not mean that it is haraam to enter it. The sin is on the makers of the images and those who make the statues; the one who enters a place where those statues are should advise and explain, but he does not have to leave that place.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
“With regard to entering a house in which there is an image, it is not haraam. Rather it is permissible to refuse an invitation because of it as a rebuke to the host and to show that he has lost respect because of his introducing something evil into his house. The one who sees it in the host’s house does not have to leave, according to the apparent meaning of Ahmad’s words. He said, according to the report of al-Fadl: If he sees an image on the curtain that he did not see when he entered, that is less serious than if it was on the wall. It was said: If he did not see it until the food was placed before them, should he leave? He said: Do not make things too difficult for us; but if he sees it he should rebuke them and tell them not to do that”. End quote.
Al-Mughni (8/113)
But at least it is makrooh to enter churches unnecessarily, because the fact that the angels and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not enter the house in which there were images indicates that it is makrooh.
Moreover this being makrooh may reach the level of being haraam if entering the church will lead to any bad consequences such as if it means approving of the Christians’ shirk and their claim that Allaah has a wife and son, exalted be Allaah far above that. Or if entering the church is a sign of taking the Christians as friends and loving them, and so on.
It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (2/115):
If your going to the church is just to show tolerance and lenience, then it is not permissible, but if it is done to call them to Islam and create opportunities for you to do so, and you will not be taking part in their worship and you are not afraid that you may be influenced by their beliefs or customs, then it is permissible. End quote.
See also the answer to question no. 11232.
And Allaah knows best.
Islam Q&A
Σαλάμ αλέϊκουμ.
Θα ήθελα τη γνώμη σας σχετικά με την παραπάνω φάτουα (γνωμοδότηση).