Journal articles on the topic 'The Orthodox Caliphs'

Abstract This paper tries to single out the reasons of al-Ġazālī’s lack of interest in the “lesser ǧihād”, military action. In Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn he maintains – according to the Sunna of the Prophet – the superiority of the “greater ǧihād”, the effort upon oneself for moral and religious improvement. By asserting the “golden mean” even on this occasion, he does not consider military action to be condemned, not even after having embraced the mystic path, but he postulates a hierarchy of values based on an esoteric reading of Q 4:95. Al-Ġazālī’s Sufi option is put in context: he writes Iḥyāʾ during the sultanate of Barkyārūq. Though he has “left the world”, he does not cease to consider himself as a muǧaddid and a ‘ālim ḫāṣṣ who should safeguard and promote political and social orthodoxy first and theological orthodoxy later. However, his šafiʿi commitment to this regard allows some exceptions linked to his position as a “courtier” in Iranian area and to the idea of power developed in the Eastern regions. Against al-Māwardī, he claims the ǧihād to be the sultan’s task, not the caliph’s. By refraining from sanctioning the Seljuk military action, al-Ġazālī hopes to preserve, though merely in a symbolical way, the caliph institution, without questioning the fragmentation of the real power. The safety of the umma appears to be secured only until the Eastern regions do not collapse.

Abstract Using analyses of myths and fieldwork material, the article studies the way Yezidis, a small ethno-religious group of the Middle East, appropriated the Muslim figure of Yazīd ibn Muʿāwiya, the second Umayyad caliph. In his Yezidi myth, he appears as a divine being who was incarnated on earth in order to subvert sharia and replace it with a more spiritual form of Islam, equated with the Yezidi religion at the time the myth was composed. The myth is constructed around the historical reputation of Yazīd as an antinomian figure, but interprets it in a way that mocks orthodox Islam and echoes the ethos of Yezidi religion. In their turn, the Prophet Muhammad and Caliph Muʿāwiya appear as inferior figures, representing a religious tradition that is superseded by Yazīd’s arrival. The myth throws light on the historical development of Yezidi religion, as it reflects an earlier stage, when Yezidis considered orthodox Islam a related, albeit rival and inferior, form of religion. However, today, as Yezidis emphasize their distance from anything related with Islam and Arabic culture, the myth may come to be rejected despite its profoundly Yezidi nature.

The article examines the formation of religious-anthropological traditions formed within the framework of Byzantine Christianity and medieval Arab-Muslim philosophy. The views of the Greek-Byzantine theologian and thinker Maximus the Confessor (580–662) regarding man in the Church Fathers’ theo­logical development of the main Christian dogma of the Divine Incarnation of Jesus Christ are presented. In terms of philosophical comparativism, the an­thropological concepts of St. Maximus and the most outstanding representative of Islam, the founder of the Sufi philosophical-theological system of the Middle Ages, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058–1111) are compared. Both the common fea­tures of the theology and philosophy of these thinkers and the differences in their anthropological doctrines are demonstrated. One point of intersection is the philosophical idea of the perfect man, which was formed by the Greek-Byzantine Church Fathers and al-Ghazali and based on which they created a broader philosophical-theological understanding of man in his relationship to the Creator. The authors indicate how the idea of human perfection was real­ized in the relation God-man-world ontologically and epistemologically from the perspectives of Eastern Patristics and Sufism. The integrity of the spiritual-bodily man in the orthodox doctrine of Byzantine Christianity is shown. Al-Ghazali’s doctrine of man is substantiated as a conceptual comprehension of man’s place as a caliph – the deputy of God on earth – in the world’s system created by the deity.

In 1924 the Dutch journalist and poet Jacob Israel de Haan was assassinated in Jerusalem by members of the Zionist Haganah. His death has been described as the price he paid for his struggle on behalf of the Palestine Arabs. He was labeled therefore as the Jewish (or even Dutch) Lawrence of Arabia. Indeed, in his writings De Haan pointed out the incompatibility of Zionist demands with Arab expectations. Yet he was in the first place a champion of Jewish orthodoxy as represented by Rabbi Chaim Sonnenfeld, the leader of the Ashkenazi community in Jerusalem. His quarrel with the Zionist Organization crystallized around their claim also to represent Jewish orthodoxy. Because of De Haan’s efforts the British Colonial Office in London did not combine the Sonnenfeldgroup into the Zionist Chief rabbinate as had been planned by High Commissioner Herbert Samuel. The Zionist Organization became nervous about De Haan’s propaganda. Extracting from King-Caliph Husayn of the Hedjaz in February 1924 a statement that His Highness considered the ‘godless’ Zionism a danger for Islam was De Haan’s last diplomatic act. This was denounced at the instigation of Frederick Kisch, the political Zionists' chief in Jerusalem, and probably sealed De Haan’s fate, following a number of other threats in the previous years.

В статье рассматривается изменение архитектурного облика Храма Гроба Господня под влиянием законодательных актов, на протяжении длительного периода регулировавших правовой статус христианских общин в этом грандиозном сооружении. Несмотря на то что значительная часть документов публиковалась в научной литературе, впервые предпринимается попытка рассмотрения документов в длительной перспективе: начиная с грамоты халифа Умара Ахтинаме, 638 г., до доклада секретариата Согласительной комиссии ООН, 1949 г. Цель исследования - определить наиболее значимые аспекты жизни храма и наиболее яркие эпизоды интенсивной борьбы христианских конфессий за право владения святынями храма, оказавшие влияние на формирование его архитектурного облика, попытаться выявить максимально достоверные сведения о пребывании в храме христианских монашеских общин. В статье ограниченно поданы сведения о пребывании некоторых конфессий, и главное внимание уделено взаимоотношениям греков и латинян, внесших основной вклад в сложение структуры храма. В настоящее время Храм Воскресения в Иерусалиме разделен между шестью христианскими конфессиями: греческая православная, римская католическая, армянская апостольская, сирийская православная, коптская православная, эфиопская православная церквями. Основные права на владение святыней и, следовательно, на внутреннее пространство храма имеют греки (греко-иерусалимская патриархия), латиняне (католический орден францисканцев) и армяне (представители армяно-апостольской церкви), в то время как копты, сирийцы и абиссинцы пользуются малыми правами. Но и по сей день споры, связанные с владением отдельными престолами и приделами храма, не прекращаются. Актуальность исследования, посвященного детальному рассмотрению споров между христианскими общинами, в результате которых менялся облик храма, позволит определить степень сохранности памятника в его первоначальном виде (IV в.). The article discusses the change in architectural appearance of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher under the influence of legislative acts regulating the legal status of Christian communities at the Church itself. Despite the fact that a considerable part of the documents were published in the scientific literature, for the first time an attempt is made to consider older documents (beginning with the letter of the Caliph Umar Ahtiname, 638, to the Working Paper prepared be the Secretariat, UNCCP, 1949). The aim of the research is to identify the most significant aspects of the Holy Sepulchre history, the most striking episodes of the intensive struggle between religions for the right to own the shrine, and what influenced the formation of its architectural appearance. The report will also try to reveal the most reliable information about the adobe of Christian monastic communities in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The article provides limited information on the presence of certain confessions, and the main attention is paid to the relationship between the Greeks and the Latins, who made the main contribution to the structure of the Church. Currently, the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem is divided between six Christian denominations: Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Armenian Apostolic, Syriac Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox Churches. The main rights to the possession of the shrine and, therefore, to the inner space of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre belong to the Greeks (the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem), the Latins (the Catholic Order of Friars Minor) and Armenians (representatives of the Armenian Apostolic Church), while the Copts, Syrians and Abyssinians use lesser rights. To this day disputes related to the possession of altars and chapels at the Church of the Resurrection are ongoing. The relevance of the study, devoted to the detailed consideration of disputes between Christian communities, as a result of which the appearance of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre changed, will allow to determine the degree of preservation of the monument in its original form (4th century).

This article investigates the intellectual production of the celebrated scholar Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) during the decade or so he spent in the service of the Ghūrid sultans, from ca. 591/1195 to 602/1206. Operating exclusively within religious disciplines—theology, law and Qurʾān exegesis—and displaying pronounced rhetorical and dialectical features, this production contrasts significantly with his earlier and later production, which most notably exhibits much closer engagement with philosophy. It is argued that this “Ghūrid interlude” in al-Rāzī’s production reflects his role in spearheading the sultans’ project of divesting from the socially and culturally peripheral Karrāmiyya and fashioning themselves as champions of a sophisticated and cosmopolitan orthodoxy, and is furthermore aligned with his patrons’ transregional policies, including their pro-Abbasid stance. Al-Rāzī was in return invested by the Caliph al-Nāṣir with the title “he who summons people to the True One” (al-dāʿī li-l-khalq ilā l-ḥaqq), more commonly attested as “he who summons to God” (al-dāʿī ilā llāh). The article also offers a new examination of al-Rāzī’s Ghūrid-period intellectual biography and oeuvre.

Abstract Ibn Kamāl Pāshā (d. 940/1534) played a key role in defending key doctrinal positions in his capacity as Ottoman Shaykh al-Islām, the most famous of which is undoubtedly his refutation of Mullā Qābiḍ (d. 933/1527). Qābiḍ (tr. Kabız), whose credentials are as unknown as Ibn Kamāl’s are known, is said to have propagated the superiority of Jesus over Muhammad, an obscure notion rarely found in the intellectual history of Islam. His ideas were eventually brought to the attention of scholarly circles, leading to him being tried before the Imperial Council by Caliph Suleymān I (d. 973/1566). Noting the inability of some scholars to defend the orthodox position regarding the superiority of Muhammad, Suleymān I called upon Ibn Kamāl to provide a robust defence on behalf of the Empire. Although unable to respond to Ibn Kamāl’s reasoning, Qābiḍ nevertheless maintained his position and thus sealed his fate for good. Only a handful of studies have been carried out on Qābiḍ. This article intends to contribute to the discussion he and his trial have sparked by translating a key epistle written by Ibn Kamāl after the trial and entitled: Risāla fī ʾAfḍaliyyat Muḥammad. Knowing that the details of the controversy between him and Mullā Qābiḍ escape us, this treatise by Ibn Kamāl gives an insight into his thinking on prophetology and his implementation of scriptural, canonical and exegetical sources. It also provides a convenient overview of the exchange he probably had with Qābiḍ.

<em>This research is a descriptive analysis of the epistemological basis of Yudian Wahyudi's attitude towards the Islamic caliphate discourse in Indonesia. The caliphate discourse, which according to its proponents is a form of fundamental principles in religion, is contrasted with the Pancasila ideology which is the state philosophy. This research is qualitative and uses a descriptive approach to Yudian Wahyudi's thoughts about the Islamic caliphate in Indonesia from the perspective of Islamic fundamentalism put forward by Hassan Hanafi. The results of the research suggest that the Islamic caliphate discourse that has emerged in several organizations today is a form of taking over political power from legitimate sovereignty. According to Yudian, discourse like this must be rejected because it does not follow maqashid sharia. The end of the Ottoman Caliphate and the Arab community's choice to form their state as the center of Islamic civilization is an argument for the irrelevance of the imperialist pattern of power in modern society. For this reason, the caliphate discourse must be directed at the movement to improve the quality of religious understanding and knowledge competence of the people as caliph fil ardh so that they can internalize Islamic values in all aspects of community life. This perspective is relevant to the thought of Islamic fundamentalism initiated by Hassan Hanafi. orthodoxy discourse, Romanticism of history, or an a priori attitude towards modernity is not a form of Islamic fundamentalism because it will only give rise to acts of anarchism which are prohibited in Islam. Islamic fundamentalism must be interpreted with rational thinking, broad insight, mastering the history of world nations, accepting the challenges of the times, and being open to modern civilizations. So that the face of Islam will remain friendly to all civilizations and shalihun li kulli masa wa makan.</em>

<em>This research is a descriptive analysis of the epistemological basis of Yudian Wahyudi's attitude towards the Islamic caliphate discourse in Indonesia. The caliphate discourse, which according to its proponents is a form of fundamental principles in religion, is contrasted with the Pancasila ideology which is the state philosophy. This research is qualitative and uses a descriptive approach to Yudian Wahyudi's thoughts about the Islamic caliphate in Indonesia from the perspective of Islamic fundamentalism put forward by Hassan Hanafi. The results of the research suggest that the Islamic caliphate discourse that has emerged in several organizations today is a form of taking over political power from legitimate sovereignty. According to Yudian, discourse like this must be rejected because it does not follow maqashid sharia. The end of the Ottoman Caliphate and the Arab community's choice to form their state as the center of Islamic civilization is an argument for the irrelevance of the imperialist pattern of power in modern society. For this reason, the caliphate discourse must be directed at the movement to improve the quality of religious understanding and knowledge competence of the people as caliph fil ardh so that they can internalize Islamic values in all aspects of community life. This perspective is relevant to the thought of Islamic fundamentalism initiated by Hassan Hanafi. orthodoxy discourse, Romanticism of history, or an a priori attitude towards modernity is not a form of Islamic fundamentalism because it will only give rise to acts of anarchism which are prohibited in Islam. Islamic fundamentalism must be interpreted with rational thinking, broad insight, mastering the history of world nations, accepting the challenges of the times, and being open to modern civilizations. So that the face of Islam will remain friendly to all civilizations and shalihun li kulli masa wa makan.</em>

Abstract The fiscal tradition regarding the taxation of the “Christians of the Banū Taġlib” is related to a ṣulḥ established by caliph ʿUmar b. al-Ḫaṭṭāb. He is said to have ordered to double the social contribution of Muslims, called ṣadaqa, in return for their renunciation of baptizing their children. This contribution analyzes the chronology of the emergence of this case in Abbasid literature. By studying the isnād on which scholars, beginning with the Grand Qāḍī Abū Yūsuf (d. 182/798), relied, I suggest a new theme at the end of the eighth century CE. On the one hand, all the issues of the ṣadaqa levying, the social bonds with Christian Arabs, and finally, the category of the Banū Taġlib itself, are related to the ongoing construction, and then to the freezing, of two social categories: the ethnical “arabness” and the genealogical tribal organization. On the other hand, Miaphysite ecclesiology confirms a consistent timeline for the rise of the Taglibōyē bishopric. In order to explain this late inrush of information, two events of ca. 153/770 and 171/787, respectively from the Syrian-Orthodox and the Arab-Muslim literatures, refer first to the migration/invasion of pastoralists and farmers of Banū Taġlib towards the north, and second to their anti-ṣadaqa revolt in the steppe of the hinterland of Mosul. The second occurrence takes place amidst numerous local insurgencies whose motivation are in part tribal, khariji, and – perhaps foremost – anti-fiscal. Indeed, the dynamics of formation of this peculiar Mosulian tribe were partly generated by the irruption of the state in Northern Iraq and the Jazīra during the 170s/790s, between al-Mahdī’s founding of Rāfiqa in ca. 154/772 and Hārūn al-Rashīd’s strengthening of administrative pressure. The key factor for state building at this time was the development of a new set of taxation on agricultural incomes of (Muslim) Arabs, called ṣadaqat al-māl or zakāt, whose first traces are attested in Middle Egypt during the late Marwānid period. A generation later, the anonymous author of Zuqnīn, who lived at the beginning of this period, is not only the first Syriac writer to mention the Taglibōyē, but also bears witness of the first extension of the levy of ṣadaqa to Northern Mesopotamia. He even gives data about its ex officio settlement (taʿdīl) as a non-proportional (ʿalā misāḥa) and in-cash tax, exactly the same as for the properties of the (Christian) Syrians. Both kinds of rural landlords probably petitioned against this system during the following decades, aiming to switch to a proportional (muqāsama) and in-kind method of taxation. This resistance perhaps involved the anti-ṣadaqa revolt of the Taġlib in 171/787, as it was decisive to transform the kharāj on the Muslims into a tenth (ʿushr). Whereas Abū Yūsuf suggests an analogical doubling of the tax on a Muslim land to convert it into kharāj for a Christian purchaser, the very idea of a double ṣadaqa as kharāj for Christian Arabs had perhaps been invented a very short time before.

&Ouml;ZET İsl&acirc;m Tarihinde Hulef&acirc;-i R&acirc;şid&icirc;n&rsquo;den sonra iş başına gelen ve yaklaşık bir asır devam eden Emev&icirc;ler d&ouml;neminde, idar&icirc;, siyas&icirc; ve asker&icirc; sahalarda birtakım olaylar meydana gelmiştir. Bu d&ouml;nemde dikkat &ccedil;eken isimlerden bir tanesi, sadece meydana geldiği zaman değil, aynı zamanda yankıları g&uuml;n&uuml;m&uuml;ze kadar devam eden Kerbel&acirc; Olayı&rsquo;nda vali ve komutan olarak g&ouml;revde bulunan Ubeydullah b. Ziy&acirc;d&rsquo;dır. Bu incelemede onun hayatı, siyas&icirc; ve asker&icirc; faaliyetleri ele alınmıştır. ABSTRACT BOOK REVIEW From Ambition to Power... Karbal&acirc; -The Anatomy of the Reign of Ubaydullah b. Ziy&acirc;d, the Umayyad Governor- Various political, administrative and military events of note were observed during the time of the Umayyad dynasty, who succeeded Khulafā-i Rāshid&icirc;n (the Orthodox Caliphs) and was able to hold its power for about a hundred years. One of the most remarkable rulers of the time was Ubaydullah b. Ziy&acirc;d who was in power as a governor and military leader during&nbsp;the tragic Karbal&acirc; event which was not only a marked occurance of the time but became afterwards a historical legacy. This study is concerned with the lifestory of Ubaydullah b. Ziy&acirc;d and his political and military activities. .

Hazrat Abdul Rehman (may Allah be pleased with him) belonged to Arab tribe of Quraish and was a close relative of Mohammad (peace be upon him). At the time of conquest of Makkah He (may Allah be pleased with him) entered the circle of Islam. He (may Allah be pleased with him) is counted among the companions of Muhammad (may Allah be pleased with him) who came to sub-continent specially Balochistan in order to preach for Islam and Jihad during the Khilafat of orthodox caliphs. He (may Allah be pleased with him) came to Balochistan twice for Jihad and conquests first during the Khilafat of Hazrat Usman (may Allah be pleased with him) and second time in the early era of Hazrat Muawia (may Allah be pleased with him). He (may Allah be pleased with him) played a vital role in the wars of Balochistan. He (may Allah be pleased with him) established Zehri his abode and capital after conquering Kalat, Khuazdar (Sajistan), Kachi, Gandhava, and Chaghi, and from here he expanded the series of his conquests till Kabul and Qandar. Besides this, he included many areas of sub-continent in the Islamic empire of conquered areas. His (may Allah be pleased with him) life is consists of great chapters of sincerity in deeds. Wisdom and valor, determination fearlessness, strife, hospitality, simplicity and patience. He (may Allah be pleased with him) is counted among the great generals of Islam had the honour to have carried the message of Holy faith in every corner of Balochistan in tough and unfavorable conditions and planted the flag of Islam in Balochistan forever.&#x0D;

The accepted variant readings (qirāʾāt) of the Qurʾān have often been characterized as those that may be recited in the course of the ritual prayer. However, it appears on examination that premodern juridical handbooks laying out the rules governing the ritual prayer rarely discuss textual variants. When they do, it is almost always to rule out variants reportedly recited by Companions before the caliph ʿUthmān promulgated a single orthodox text. Also, contrary to what some scholars continue to allege, it is doubtful whether the acceptance of seven, ten, or any other number of accepted variant readings has been affected by judicial rulings or fatwas from jurisprudents backed by state power. What constrained specialists to restrict themselves to widely accepted variants was evidently fear not of the state but of disapproval from fellow specialists.

Abstract The sigillion as a caliphal diploma for patriarchs, particularly in the Miaphysite/ Syrian-Orthodox Church, remains an under-researched aspect of early Islamicate Eastern Christianity. Drawing on the writings of Patriarch Dionysius of Tell-Maḥrē (r. 818–845), this article examines how this type of document was used both to formalize ecclesiastical authority, and to confirm ancient political and fiscal privileges. First appearing in Egyptian papyri, as well as in Syriac and Muslim historiography in the early Islamic period, both sijill and sigillion likely derived from a local adaptation of the Latin sigillum, and/or reflect a pre-existing Semitic usage. Its origin can be traced to the Diocese Orientis (Bilād al-Shām) and/or Northern Arabia before its introduction to Egypt after the Arab conquest. Its function extended beyond a simple ‘safe-conduct’ or ‘fiscal grant’: it might primarily be conceptualized as a formal ‘mission order,’ with a folded – and sealed – bottom, reserved for authorized administrators to verify the holder’s claim. The sigillion could grant exceptional rights or appointments, such as exemption from corvée labor, internal passports for movement, state revenue allocations, or the authority to request law enforcement support. In the mid-8th century, emirs, particularly in Northern Mesopotamia, began issuing sigillia to prelates, metropolitans, and patriarchs. Over time, this practice gained acknowledgment from the Caliphate, establishing the sigillion as a legitimate and official document for patriarchal claims during the Great Schism of the Syrian-Orthodox Church (ca. 754–785). The Church eventually embraced this caliphal recognition as part of its ecclesiastical authority, marking a significant shift in its integration into the structures of the Islamic state and Christian clerical leadership.

Abstract This paper offers a cross-analysis of Syriac and Arabic sources related to the Jazīra, the northern province of the caliphate, during the second/eighth century. Specifically, it delves into what the author refers to as the “Ḥarrān moment”. It pertains to the period when this regional town was turned to the last capital of the Umayyads, and immediately to the centre of the provincial government of the future caliph al-Manṣūr, prior to his ascent to power in 754-755 CE. The study views the Abbasid revolution as part of a single decade of civil war (fitna) (744-755) and emphasises the continuity between two dynasties, challenging the traditional historiographical divide of the “Abbasid revolution.” The “Ḥarrān moment” marked a significant shift in central political (and ecclesiastical) power from Umayyad Damascus to Abbasid Baghdad. Syriac sources underscore the centrality of the Jazīra and its capital, as well as the similarities in the political and military history before and after 132/750. Moreover, local ecclesiastical chronicles highlight how Ḥarrān became the centre of the Church at that time, partly by chance and partly due to geopolitical and geo-ecclesiological co-construction. It is argued that this results from a period when prelates and patriarchs became more courtiers, and both Marwān II and al-Manṣūr initiated a policy of affiliation of the Syrian Orthodox Church to the Caliphate, particularly through the issuance of diplomas (sigillions). This article demonstrates that the physical encounter of these two central powers, civil and ecclesiastical, in this strategic location during this critical time of interconnected political-military and ecclesiological turmoil and changes of the 740s-750s, is the key to understanding this process. The study specifically examines the similarities between monastic and tribal provincial and infra-provincial networks, which arise from the same political constraints, to explore the formation and crystallisation of parallel regional ecclesiastical and political blocks during the mid-eighth century CE.

This church, located in the Christian quarter of the old city of Jerusalem (Israel), serves as the architectural monument commemorating the salvific events associated with the final days of Jesus' life. Consecrated in 335, and renovated repeatedly over the centuries, the church encompasses the traditional locations of Christ's crucifixion as well as his burial and subsequent resurrection. Its building was part of a broader building programme, instituted by Emperor Constantine (d.377) which saw the construction of a number of Christian churches in key sacred locations in Palestine. In its earliest form, it comprised two separate structures: the Rotunda, a circular building enclosing a smaller monument known as the Aedicule, and the Basilica of Constantine which stood to the East. The church however suffered numerous destructions which altered its fabric. Chief amongst these was its destruction in 1009 on orders of Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim (985-1021) which led to its reconstruction initially during the 11th century, but in the main during the period of the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem (1099-1291). The building's current form is mainly the result of this reconstruction, completed in the Gothic style between the 1140s and the 1160s, though it has been subject to numerous, significant repairs since that date. The Rotunda remains the main part of the church and encloses the most sacred element of the structure. The Aedicule, a smaller monument contained with the Rotunda and rebuilt in 1555, was constructed over a 1st century CE rock-cut tomb, dug away from original quarry which it seems to have been a part. The empty tomb is believed to be that of Christ and is venerated by many Christian denominations as the location of Christ's resurrection from the dead. The south of the Church contains a chapel, reached by a series of steps, commemorating the place of Calvary or Golgotha, and thus the site of Christ's crucifixion. This chapel in turn sits atop further chapel in which the rock of Golgotha can be see (sometimes recognised as the burial place of Adam). To the east of the Church, surrounding the choir, are a series of other chapels, including the Prison of Christ, the Chapel of Flagellation, the Chapel of Crowning with Thorns, and the subterranean chapel of St Helena which commemorates the site where the Empress Helena (d.330) miraculously discovered the resting place of the True Cross. All these locations play a significant role in historical and contemporary commemorations of Christ's passion and resurrection. In recent times, the Church has undergone major renovation works, particularly during the period of the British Mandate (1918-1948) and since the 1960s, though this latest phase was completed in 2017. Today it is held in reverence by many of Christianity's denominations. It is controlled jointly by groups representing the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, Coptic, Syrian, and Ethiopian churches whose ownership is managed through an agreement known as the Status Quo which gives each groups certain rights over different parts of the building. It is widely considered Christianity's most sacred place.

The Monastery dedicated to Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, is situated 30 km to the north of the city of Damascus in Syria, in the mountains that overlook the city of Saydnaya. It belongs to the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch and it operates as a female monastery. It possessed the famous icon of the Virgin of Saydnaya, also known as the Shaghoura (meaning "the renowned" or "the illustrious" in Syriac), attributed to the hand of Saint Luke the Evangelist. It is believed that the convent was founded by the Byzantine emperor Justinian in 547, following two visions he has had of the Mother of God. The first indicated her request to have a church built for her as well as the intended site, while the second provided details for the convent's architectural design. The church was dedicated on September 8, the day of the Virgin's Nativity, which is still the day on which the Monastery of Saydnaya celebrates. However, there is no factual evidence supporting that Justinian founded it. Moreover, its walls bear no traces of a 6th-century construction, whereas Procopius of Caesarea († 561), the official historian of Justinian, does not mention the foundation of the convent. Instead, historical records mention that the convent was founded by a widow of Damascus during the Byzantine period, who withdrew in the desert to lead an ascetic life in Qalamoun. In either case, the origin of the convent is quite uncertain. Information about the Monastery's history is sparse. It is assumed that unlike many churches destroyed in Syria and Egypt in 1014 by the Fatimid caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr-Allah, Saydnaya was most probably spared. The Monastery is first mentioned in a report addressed in 1175 to the emperor Frederick I Barbarossa by the Burchard of Strasbourg. The document describes Saydnaya and recounts its history. At the beginning of the 13th century it began to draw Western pilgrims in large numbers. Saydnaya was also spared by the Mamluk rulers (1250-1517), who destroyed many other churches and monasteries in the region. Saydnaya received financial support by the Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible (1560), while the Tsars continued to support it by authorising alms by Russian pilgrims. During its long history, the convent has undergone constant alterations, but the current structure belongs to the end of the Ottoman period and the early 20th century. Three sections of the complex, however, are older since they belong to the Medieval period: i. The Church of the Virgin, a small vaulted chapel at the south side of the apse of the 19th-century church that houses the miraculous icon of the Mother of God; ii. the lower floor, that includes the kitchen and the cellars, all of them barrel-vaulted at differing levels and connected by steps; and, iii. the long barrel-vaulted room below the cells of the nuns, built of alternating stones and brick, currently the visitors' reception room. All three parts were built directly upon the bed-rock, which is visible in the passage leading to the Shaghoura. More recent renovation works have revealed that the present building was not constructed exactly on the foundations of the old one. Its central axis has been moved a few metres to the north. If there are any foundations left, the north side must be hidden underneath the church floor, while the south side might be buried below the garden between the 19th-century church and the south wall of the fortification.