Revealing the Holy Fire. Holy Fire - revelations

). In the Orthodox community, there is widespread belief in the miraculous appearance of fire and various amazing properties are attributed to it. However, even at the beginning of the last century, even among the Orthodox, doubts arose about the miraculous nature of the emergence of fire and the presence of some special properties in it. These doubts were so widespread in society that it allowed the leading orientalist of the last century, IY Krachkovsky in 1915 to conclude: “The best representatives of theological thought in the East also notice the interpretation of the miracle that Prof. A. Olesnitsky andA. Dmitrievsky talk about the “triumph of the consecration of fire at the Holy Sepulchre”" ( 1 ). Founder of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, bishopPorfiry Uspensky , summarizing the consequences of the Holy Fire scandal, which led to the Metropolitan’s confession of forgery, left in 1848 next entry: “But from this time on, the Holy Sepulcher clergy no longer believes in the miraculous appearance of fire” ( 2 ). A student of Professor Dmitrievsky mentioned by Krachkovsky, he is an Honored Professor of the Leningrad Theological AcademyNikolai Dmitrievich Uspensky in 1949, he gave an assembly speech at the annual report of the Council of the Leningrad Theological Academy, in which he described in detail the history of the Holy Fire, and based on the material presented, he made the following conclusion: “Obviously, once, without giving a timely energetic explanation to his flock about the true meaning of the rite St. fire in the future, they were unable to raise this voice in front of the ever-increasing fanaticism of the dark masses due to objective conditions. If this was not done in a timely manner, then later it became impossible to do without risking personal well-being and, perhaps, the integrity of the shrines themselves. All that remained for them was to perform the ritual and remain silent, consoling themselves with the fact that God “as He knows and is able, He will bring understanding and calm the nations” ( 3 ). There are quite a lot of people who doubt the wonderful nature Holy Fire and among modern Orthodox believers. Here we can mention Protodeacon A. Kuraev, who shared his impressions of the meeting of the Russian delegation with the Greek Patriarch Theophilus in the following words: “His answer about the Holy Fire was no less frank: “This is a ceremony that is a representation, like all other ceremonies of Holy Week. Just as the Easter message from the tomb once shone and illuminated the whole world, so now in this ceremony we perform a representation of how the news of the resurrection from the edicule spread throughout the world.” There was neither the word “miracle”, nor the word “convergence”, nor the words “Holy Fire” in his speech. He probably couldn’t have spoken more openly about the lighter in his pocket." ( 4 ), another example is an interview about the Holy Fire with Archimandrite Isidore, head of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem, where he in particular recalled the words of the locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne of the Church of Jerusalem, Metropolitan Cornelius of Petra: “... This is a natural light that is lit from the Unquenchable Lamp, kept in the sacristy of the temple Resurrection" ( 5 ). Now disgraced Russian Orthodox Church, deacon Alexander Musin (Doctor of Historical Sciences, Candidate of Theology) co-authored with a church historianSergei Bychkov (Doctor of Historical Sciences) published a book: "THE HOLY FIRE: MYTH OR REALITY ?”, where they write in particular: “In order to lift the veil over this centuries-old, but by no means pious myth, we decided to publish a small work by the famous St. Petersburg professor Nikolai Dmitrievich Uspensky (1900-1987), dedicated to the history of the rite of the holy fire of Great Saturday, as well as a forgotten article by the world famous orientalist academician Ignatius Yulianovich Krachkovsky (1883-1951) “The Holy Fire” based on the story of Al-Biruni and other Muslim writers of the 10th-13th centuries.”
A series of works by the protopresbyter of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, George Tsetsis, is devoted to exposing the myth of the miraculous appearance of the Holy Fire; he writes: “The prayer that the patriarch offers before lighting the Holy Fire in the Holy Edicule is completely clear and does not allow for any misinterpretations. The Patriarch does not pray for a miracle to happen. He only “remembers” the sacrifice and three-day resurrection of Christ and, turning to Him, says: “Having reverently accepted this kindled (*******) fire on Your luminous Tomb, we distribute the true light to those who believe, and we pray to You, You have shown him the gift of sanctification." The following happens: the patriarch lights his candle from the unquenchable lamp, which is located on the Holy Sepulchre. Just like every patriarch and every cleric on the day of Easter, when he receives the light of Christ from the unquenchable lamp, which is located on the holy throne, symbolizing the Holy Sepulcher" ( 6 ).
The younger generation of theologians is not lagging behind; in 2008 it was defended thesis on Liturgics on the topic “The rite of the descent of the Holy Fire in Jerusalem”, performed by a 5th year student at the Institute of Theology of the BSU, P. Zvezdin, in which he also dispels the myth of the miraculous appearance of fire ( 7 ).
However, one has only to accept the correctness of the Orthodox figures mentioned here, who have earned honor and respect for their service, and one will have to admit that many Greek patriarchs and no less noble Orthodox clergy hypocritically deceived believers by talking about the miraculous appearance of fire and its unusual properties. This is probably why in apological articles written by famous Russian theologians, seemingly honored Orthodox figures are so often slandered, attributing to them heretical views, a craving for collecting fables to please their preconceived opinions and the lack of a scientific approach in their critical works regarding the Holy Fire (8 a, b; 9 ).

What arguments do critics give about the miraculous nature of the appearance of the Holy Fire?
Almost all skeptics are confused by the clear definiteness of the time of receiving fire and the ability to change this time by order of local authorities.
Due to constant strife between Christian denominations, in 1852, through the efforts of the authorities, a document appeared, the so-called STATUS-QUO, where the sequence of actions of all rituals for all denominations in the city was thoroughly recorded. The service of the Holy Fire is also scheduled minute by minute, in particular, to find the fire, the priests who entered the Edicule are given time from 12.55 to 13.10 ( 10 ). And now, for 8 years of live broadcasts, this time has been impeccably observed. Only in 2002, due to a fight between the patriarch and the archimandrite inside the Edicule, fire began to be distributed much later than a certain time ( 11 ). Those. the delay was due to the priests, and not due to lack of fire. This fight had serious consequences; for several years now, an Israeli policeman has been the first to enter the Edicule inside the Edicule, together with the Armenian archimandrite and the Greek patriarch, vigilantly ensuring that high-ranking clergy do not fight again in this holy and revered place ( 12 ). Skepticism is also betrayed by another fact related to the time of appearance of the fire, which is narrated by Prof. AA Dmitrievsky, referring to prof. AA Olesnitsky, in 1909 he writes: “Once upon a time the festival of fire at the Holy Sepulcher was connected directly with Easter Matins, but due to some disturbances that occurred during this celebration, at the request of the local authorities it was moved to the previous day” ( 13 ). It turns out that the time of the appearance of a divine miracle can also be determined by the orders of the Islamic administration.
In principle, God is able to carry out any order of any administration, since He is omnipotent and can do anything and plan His miracles in any way. However, such a clearly defined miracle in time is the only example. Let's say in the Gospel example of the bath, which is referred to by miracle apologists (John 5: 2-4), healings do not occur at a strictly defined time, but as the evangelist writes: “<…>for the angel of the Lord from time to time went into the pool and disturbed the water, and whoever entered it first after the water was disturbed was healed<…>" Also other annual Orthodox miracles, for example, the descent of the Blessed Cloud on Mount Tabor on the day of the Transfiguration of the Lord or the appearance poisonous snakes in the Church of the Assumption Holy Mother of God(on the Island of Kefalonia) on the day of the Dormition of the Blessed Virgin Mary, I also do not have a strictly defined time period. By the way, the descent of the cloud on Mount Tabor and the appearance of poisonous snakes occurs in full view of people, while the fire occurs in Edicule, which is closed from pilgrims. Such accessibility greatly contributes to clarifying the true nature of these phenomena; for example, it turns out that the clergy themselves bring snakes and they are not at all poisonous ( 14 ). Regarding Mount Tabor, everything is also relatively simple. At this time of year, fogs form on the mountain almost every day, and pilgrims only witness the birth of such fog ( 15 ). The spectacle is truly beautiful, and having increased religiosity, it is easy to attribute miraculous properties to what you see.

Skeptics' version of the appearance of fire
From the point of view of skeptics, the Greek patriarch and the Armenian archimandrite light their candles from an unquenchable lamp, which is brought in by the keeper of the coffin shortly before the patriarch's entrance. Perhaps the lamp is not placed on the coffin, but in a niche behind the icon from which the patriarch takes it out; perhaps some additional manipulations are taking place inside. Unfortunately, we are not allowed to see this.
Let us recall the sequence of actions during the ceremony ( 16 , link to video).

1. Examine the Edicule (two priests and a representative of the authorities).
2. Sealed entrance doors Edicule with a large wax seal.
3. The keeper of the coffin appears and brings a large, capped lamp inside the coffin. The seal is removed in front of him, he goes inside Kuklii, and after a few minutes he comes out.
4. A solemn procession appears, led by the Greek patriarch, and circles the Edicule three times. The patriarch is stripped of his robes of patriarchal dignity and he, together with the Armenian archimandrite (and the Israeli policeman) enters the Edicule.
5. After 5-10 minutes, the Greek patriarch and the Armenian archimandrite come out with fire (before this they managed to distribute fire through the windows of the Edicule).

Naturally, a man with a lamp covered with a cap will interest skeptics. By the way, there are holes for air in the lamp's cap, so that a fire can burn in it. Unfortunately, apologists for the miracle practically do not explain in any way the insertion of this lamp into the Edicule. They pay attention to the inspection of the Edicule by government officials and priests before sealing. Indeed, after inspection there should be no fire inside. Then the miracle apologists pay attention to the search of the Greek patriarch before his entry into the Edicule. True, the video clearly shows that only Greek priests remove his clothes and do not search their patriarch, but this is not important, due to the fact that earlier another representative of the Greek Orthodox Church entered there to put a lamp on the slab of the Tomb and no one does not examine.

Unburning Fire .

Pilgrims write in their testimonies that the fire does not burn for a period of time, which lasts from 5 minutes to several months. You can find evidence in which pilgrims tell how the Holy Fire brought to Moscow (their temple) still did not burn, or how they washed themselves with the Holy Fire when visiting Jerusalem in winter. Mostly they write about not burning the Holy Fire during the first 5 - 10 minutes. A huge number of videos watched of pilgrims washing themselves with fire show that they simply move their hands through the fire, scoop fire with their hands, or move fire in front of their face and beard. The following relation is indicative of this:video [ 06 ].

A priest with a beard waves his hand through the fire, then tries to bring the fire to his beard, but gets burned. Again he waves his hand through the fire, and then moves a bunch of fire in front of his beard. Experimenting on myself, I discovered that instinctively (unconsciously) when trying to hold fire under the chin, a person moves his hand forward to a safe distance, without realizing it. He thinks he is washing his beard or face, but in reality he is moving the fire in front of his face or beard. The problem is that when the face (beard), fire and video camera are on the same line, it is difficult to accurately determine the size of the gap between the fire and the face and it is easy to speculate on this. Therefore, it is important to have a side shot of washing your beard with fire.

Two more videos demonstrating this effect, atfirst the pilgrim waves the fire at a noticeable distance from the scalp [ 07 ], on second the pilgrim waves fire in front of his face.

Moving your hands through the fire, waving the fire in front of your face, is not difficult with regular fire. What I do successfully [ 08 , 09 , see selection of photos and videos ]. This is exactly how 95% of pilgrims who received the blessed fire wash themselves and at the same time talk about its non-burning properties.

By the way, the wicks of the candles, in the hands of pilgrims, are lit by the blessed fire quite easily, which would be strange if the fire were warm. The correspondent also speaks about the burning properties of fire RTVi. ( ). Another unlucky pilgrimburning Holy fire (at 21 seconds). Tricks with fire (balls of fire in hands ).

If you try to hold the Holy Fire over parts of the body, you can easily get burned, as can be seen in previous videos or as described in some testimonies of pilgrims:

Hieromonk Flavian (Matveev):
“Unfortunately, it sets fire. In 2004, an acquaintance of mine, literally five minutes after receiving the fire of the flame (we didn’t even leave the temple), tried to “wash ourselves with fire.” The beard seemed to be small, but it began to flare up noticeably. I had to shout at him to put it out. I had a video camera in my hands, so this sad incident remained documented. (...) He himself took an example from others, held his hand over the fire. Fire like fire. It burns!” (The post was deleted from the forum).

Solovyov Igor, Orthodox Christian(newbie):
“I don’t know how much time passed since the Holy Fire descended, but when the fire reached me and I tried whether it burned or not, I singed the hair on my arm and felt a burning sensation. (...) In my opinion, the burning sensation was normal. From our group, some people were quite close to the Holy Sepulcher, but none of them said that fire does not burn" (* ).

Alexander Gagin, Orthodox Christian:
“When the fire went down and it was handed over to us (a few minutes later), it burned as usual, I didn’t notice anything special, I didn’t see any men putting their beards into the fire for a long time” (* ).

In the magazine of the Patriarchate "Zion" N-3 from 1874, priest Ghevond found an article that tells how, during the ceremony of the Holy Fire, the Greek Patriarch burned his beard, which they were able to quickly extinguish. This case, as noted in the magazine, is the consequence of superstitious interpretations about fire that the Greeks spread among their flock, and if the Greeks had explained to their own, as the Armenian Patriarch does, then there would not have been such cases and temptations with which the Christian faith is humiliated before believers of other religions (30).

However, it's not that simple. In a state of religious inspiration, with faith in the special properties of fire, a person may not really feel its burning properties. In this state, people can pierce parts of their body, cut themselves, or burn themselves with fire without feeling pain. In our age of doubt, not very many people are able to enter such a state, only 5%, or about 5 videos out of hundreds of fire washings I watched. But even in this case, no one holds parts of the body over the fire for more than 4 seconds, does not hold the fire under the beard, although there are videos in which the fire is actually carried out under the beard, but it is carried out quickly enough so that the beard, although burned, does not flared up. From what I saw in only one video, the pilgrim held his hand over the Holy Fire for as much as 2.2 seconds, which is difficult to repeat without negative feelings. My record is 1.6 seconds.

Proof of availability warm fire there will be either a 5 second holding of the hand over the flame or a 3 second holding fire under the beard. It is holding, and not moving like a bunch of fire under the beard.

LiveJournal user Andronic (andronic) wrote about an interesting experiment @ 2007-04-08 07:40:00:
“Yesterday in the afternoon news on NTV, a few minutes after the descent of the Holy Fire, Evgeniy Sandro in live slowly moved his hand in the candle flame and confirmed that it practically did not burn. I became interested, and at midnight, when my wife, at the start of the procession of the Cross (where I went with her “for company”), lit a Jerusalem thirty-three candle bundle in front of the church, I also put my hand into the fire, and slowly stirred it there too. Although this flame was not lit from the Holy Fire, the hand did not immediately become hot. I repeated Sandro’s trick a couple more times, and got so carried away that I didn’t notice how my actions attracted the attention of those around me who came to the Easter party. religious procession. The believers ran up, began to light their candles from our thirty-three candlestick, joyfully thrust their hands into its flame and shouted “It doesn’t burn!” It doesn’t burn!” Some tried to “catch” the fire like water with their hands folded into a “ladle” and wash themselves with it. The influx of people wishing to take part in the miracle was so great that we could not move and the procession left without us. Thus, I unwittingly became the culprit of an outbreak of religious enthusiasm. It is curious that the “affection” of fire towards those who partake of it depended in a rather amusing way on the degree of faith. Those who doubted it cautiously brought their palms to the upper tip of the flame and fearfully pulled it back. The enthusiastic ones (like me before) boldly put their hands directly into the center of the flame, where the temperature of the fire is significantly lower, and did not get burned. As a result, everyone received it according to faith"(* ).

In the article “In Defense of the Holy Fire,” Y. Maksimov writes:
“If we look at least at the video footage posted online, we will see, for example, that in one case a pilgrim holds his hand in the flame from a whole bunch of candles for three seconds, in the second case another pilgrim holds his hand over the flame for five seconds, but the third shot of another elderly pilgrim holding his hand in the flame for five seconds" (* ).

However, in the video offered in the text of the article, people just pass their hands through the fire, but do not hold parts of their body over the fire for 2 or 3 or 5 seconds. At the Orthodox forum of A. Kuraev, this point was raised in a topic with the same article title, and an Orthodox Christian was the first to draw attention to this discrepancy when he bothered to check Maksimov’s words (* ). It’s amazing how an Orthodox apologist can present video fragments that do not correspond to the caption in the article, and this can be easily found out by just watching the video. Why do people so easily accept words without checking?

Wonderful flashes.
Dozens of journalists from special equipment for taking photographs in darkened rooms and hundreds of amateur photographers. That's why there are a lot of flashbulbs there. Typically, on a high-quality video, the flash trail is 1 - 2 frames long and has a white or slightly bluish color. On 5 well-made live broadcasts, and in a secular film, all the flashes of light are exactly like that. On video of poorer quality, color may vary depending on defects in video setup, development quality and video processing features. As a result, photo flashes on different videos will look different colors. The worse the quality of the video, the more varied in time and color the flash can be displayed on it. It is interesting that the criteria put forward by apologists for distinguishing a flash from a photographic flash fit into the possibilities of the “trace” of a regular photographic flash on videos of different quality. Hence the impossibility, using the criteria of apologists, to distinguish a miraculous flash from a photographic flash by color and duration, especially after video processing. Thus, it is difficult to refute or prove the presence of flashes based on video (see selection of photos ).

However, while the descent of the Holy Fire is the main thing Orthodox church- the main trump card of Orthodoxy. The show is truly exciting! Jews and Catholics are drooling with envy. The Pope is especially jealous in his Vatican.

In a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople Kirill Lukaris, written in 1627, one of the most educated sons of Russia in the 17th century, Archbishop Meletiy Smotritsky of Polotsk writes: “You answered this question to me... that if this miracle really happened in our time, then all the Turks They would have believed in Christ long ago.”

Miracle apologists often cite the testimony of Sylvia, a 4th century pilgrim, as an argument for the miracle, for example:

http://www.pobeda.ru/spravka/blag_ogon.html Synodal Department Moscow Patriarchate on interaction with the Armed Forces and law enforcement agencies.

And on the website of the leading apologist of the Holy Fire - http://www.holyfire.org/velich.htm

There are two fragments of what Sylvia wrote:

1. A pilgrim of the 4th century, mentioning the evening service, writes: “At the ninth hour (what we call vespers), - writes this pilgrim, - everyone gathers at the Church of the Resurrection, all the lamps and candles are lit and there is a great light. But no fire is brought from the outside, but supplied from the inside of the cave, where an unquenchable lamp burns day and night, that is, inside the barrier" / http://www.orthlib.ru/other/skaballanovich/1_05.html/.

but, as a pre-revolutionary researcher noted:

"(...) the earlier evidence could be considered the story (227) of a pilgrim of the 4th century (Sylvia of Aquitaine?), but she does not yet speak of a miracle, but only of the custom of maintaining an unquenchable fire" /Krachkovsky/..

2. “We do not have earlier liturgical evidence about the rite of the Holy Fire, but we find some hints about its occurrence in the description of the Jerusalem divine service of the 4th century pilgrim Sylvia of Aquitaine. She writes the following about the service of Great Saturday: “The next day on Saturday it is corrected according to according to custom, at the third hour; also at the sixth; at the ninth, on Saturday, the Easter vigil is prepared in a large church, that is, in the martyrium, the Easter vigil is celebrated in the same way as with us, only here the following is added: children who have been baptized, dressed as they came out of the font, are led along with the bishop, first of all, on the Resurrection. The Bishop goes beyond the barrier of the Resurrection, one song is sung, then the bishop says a prayer for them and then goes with them to the large church, where... according to custom, all the people are awake. There, what usually happens with us, and after the celebration of the liturgy, there is dismissal" / Prof. N. D. Uspensky. On the history of the ritual of holy fire performed on Holy Saturday in Jerusalem. Activity speech delivered on October 9, 1949, http://www.golubinski.ru/ecclesia/ogon.htm/.

Actually speaking about the service.

But both do not talk about a miracle, the first about the lighting of a fire from a lamp, the second about the fact that at the usual hour of the evening service is not held, but they are preparing for the all-night vigil, and there is also no mention of a miracle during earlier services.

Up until the 9th century, we lose traces of BO; it can be assumed that during this period it began to be perceived as a miracle, and almost with the first evidence of a miraculous nature, we encounter the first evidence of criticism. During this period, criticism came from Muslims who, although they exposed this “miracle,” for the most part did not seek to prevent its occurrence.

First period.

Here you need to pay attention to two points. Firstly, only after the 12-13th century did priests begin to enter the Edicule. In other words, the fire did not descend into the presence of man. Secondly, subsequent critics took information from previous ones, although the BO ritual itself had already changed significantly. Based on these features of the ritual before the 12th -13th centuries, the evidence of whistleblowers points primarily to a system of devices for delivering fire without human participation.

Let's look at the evidence:

A system of delays that allows the fire to pass from the outside of the temple to the Edicule.

Ibn al-Qalanisi (d. 1162) “When they are there on Easter... they hang lamps in the altar and arrange a trick so that the fire reaches them through the oil of balsam wood and devices made from it, and its property is that fire arises when combined with jasmine oil, it has a bright light and brilliant radiance. They manage to place a stretched iron wire like a thread between neighboring lamps, running continuously from one to another, and rub it with balsam oil, hiding it from view until the thread passes to all the lamps. they pray and the time of descent comes, the doors of the altar open; and they believe that there is the cradle of Jesus, may he have peace, and that from there he ascended to heaven. They enter and light many candles, and the house becomes hot from the breath of many people. One of those standing tries to bring the fire closer to the thread, it catches on to it and moves along all the lamps from one to another until it lights everything. Anyone who looks at this thinks that fire has come down from the sky and the lamps have been lit" /Krachkovsky/.

al-Jaubari (d. 1242) “And the fact is that this lamp is the greatest of the tricks arranged by the first generations; I will explain it to you and reveal the secret. The fact is that at the top of the dome there is an iron box connected to a chain, on which is suspended. It is fixed in the very vault of the dome, and no one except this monk sees it. On this chain there is a box, inside of which there is emptiness. And when the evening of the Saturday of light comes, the monk goes up to the box and puts sulfur in it like a “sanbusek”. ", and under it a fire, calculated until the hour when he needs the descent of light. He lubricates the chain with balsam oil and, when the time comes, the fire ignites the composition at the junction of the chain with this attached box. Balsam oil collects at this point and begins flow along the chain, going down to the lamp. The fire touches the wick of the lamp, and it is previously saturated with balsam oil, and lights it up." /Krachkovsky/.

Mujir ad-din, writing around 1496 “They play tricks with it, so that the fools among their ignoramuses think that fire comes from the sky. In fact, it comes from oiling balsam on high stretched silk threads, rubbed with sulfur and other things.” .

If we omit some dubious details of the description of Ibn al-Qalanisi, then from these three descriptions we can make the following simple diagram receiving fire, which Muslim critics suspected. A lit candle (or something more complex, representing an iron chest) was hidden in the Edicule, most likely in its dome. A silk thread (more precisely, copper wire and silk thread) or an iron chain, lubricated with a burning substance, was connected to the candle. At the moment when the candle burned out to the point of contact with the thread, the fire transferred to the thread and followed the thread to the required lamps. The burning time of a candle is easy to calculate. It is not difficult to disguise a burning candle inside the Edicule. Since there is also a large space in the dome, there are niches in which the candle can stand and burn quietly without the risk of being detected. In addition, dozens of lamps are suspended on chains above the coffin itself, and it is not difficult to disguise another chain.

During a search, such a system can only be exposed either by completely disassembling the Edicule, or by knowing in advance where the hidden niche is located. This method of working miracles can be modified by adding a movable platform for a candle, controlled outside the Edicule using a rope attached to the back of the Edicule. Again, disguising this rope is not a problem. I will try to analyze this method in more detail in the “repetition” section.

Second period

After the patriarch began to enter the Edicule, the possibilities of receiving fire increased significantly. Hiding a burning lamp, candle or just matches in the Edicule is not particularly difficult.

I will turn to the whistleblowers.

Lighting with a hidden burning lamp

Testimony of Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 1256) “When the sun sets and it becomes dark, one of the priests takes advantage of his inattention, Opens a niche in the corner of the chapel, where no one can see him, lights his candle from one of the lamps and exclaims: “He came down.” light and Christ had mercy" /Krachkovsky/.

The 8 volumes of “The Book of My Being” by Bishop Porfiry (Uspensky) are not memoirs, but a diary, where he recorded his impressions of events of historical scale, reflections on abstract topics, descriptions of monuments and various little things. They were published by the Imperial Academy of Sciences at the expense of the Imperial Orthodox Church Palestine Society edited by P.A. Syrku after the death of the bishop. The third volume was published in 1896. Here's the literal quote:

“In that year, when the famous lord of Syria and Palestine Ibrahim, Pasha of Egypt, was in Jerusalem, it turned out that the fire received from the Holy Sepulcher on Holy Saturday is an ungracious fire, and that which is kindled, like any fire is kindled. This Pasha decided to make sure, indeed Does the fire suddenly and miraculously appear on the lid of the Tomb of Christ or is it lit by a sulfur match? What did he do? He announced to the patriarch’s governors that he wanted to sit in the edicule itself while receiving the fire and vigilantly watch how it appeared, and added that in case of truth? they will be given 5,000 pungs (2,500,000 piastres), and in case of lies, let them give him all the money collected from the deceived fans, and that he will publish in all the newspapers of Europe about the vile forgery. Dionysius (the current one of Bethlehem) came together to discuss what to do. During the minutes of the meeting, Misail admitted that he was lighting a fire in the edicule from the lamp hidden behind the moving marble icon of the Resurrection of Christ, which is near the Holy Sepulcher. After this confession, it was decided to humbly ask Ibrahim not to interfere in religious affairs and a dragoman of the Holy Sepulcher monastery was sent to him, who pointed out to him that there was no benefit for his lordship to reveal the secrets of Christian worship and that the Russian Emperor Nicholas would be very dissatisfied with the discovery of these secrets. Ibrahim Pasha, having heard this, waved his hand and fell silent. But from that time on, the Holy Sepulcher clergy no longer believed in the miraculous appearance of fire. Having told all this, the Metropolitan said that God alone is expected to stop (our) pious lies. As he knows and can, he will calm the peoples who now believe in the fiery miracle of the Great Saturday. But we cannot even begin this revolution in minds; we will be torn to pieces right at the chapel of the Holy Sepulchre. “We,” he continued, notified Patriarch Athanasius, who then lived in Constantinople, about Ibrahim Pasha’s harassment, but in our message to him we wrote “holy light” instead of “holy light.” Surprised by this change, the most blessed elder asked us: “why Have you started calling the holy fire differently?" We revealed to him the real truth, but added that the fire lit on the Holy Sepulcher from a hidden lamp is still sacred fire, received from a sacred place.”

pp. 299-301 of volume 3

Local Christians - a tiny minority in a Holy Land racked by violence - certainly need something to cheer them up. But one Armenian torch-bearer, Soukias Tchilingirian, felt the truth had to be told. He said: "It"s not a miracle. The Greek priests bring in a lamp - one that has been kept burning for 1,500 years - to produce the Holy Fire. For pilgrims full of faith who come from abroad, it is a fire from Heaven, a true miracle. But not for us. Of course the source of the fire is ancient and symbolic. I heard this from my father and I think he knew the truth." /http://www.holyfire.org/eng/doc_Guardian2001.htm/.

Of all the sources, the entries in the diary of Bishop Porfiry seem to be the most valuable. Firstly, they were not intended for wide publicity, secondly, the bishop had very great authority, both among the clergy and among the scientific community, and thirdly, the situation of recognition is well described here:

“In moments of deliberation, Misail admitted that he was lighting a fire in a cuvuklia from a lamp hidden behind a moving marble icon of the Resurrection of Christ, which is near the Holy Sepulcher.”

Those. confessed to a meeting of metropolitans, and not trying to prevent a non-Christian from passing off what was happening as a deception.

“But from that time on, the Holy Sepulcher clergy no longer believed in the miraculous appearance of fire. Having told all this, the Metropolitan said that God alone is expected to stop (our) pious lies.”

Priest speaks to priest about the loss of faith of the Holy Sepulchre clergy, not the Gentiles.

This needs to be described because there are attempts to change the meaning of this testimony, as if the stories of deception were necessary to prevent the appearance of a non-believer in the Edicule at the moment the fire appeared.

You can find a lot of interesting things about the lamp. Indeed, some pilgrims from different centuries mention that a lamp covered with a cap is brought into the temple.

Evidence. “Before, however, (57) it begins, the doors of the chapel are opened for a moment to the abbot of the temple and he places an unlit lamp on the Holy Sepulchre, along with two bunches of candles, each from 33, in memory of the years of Christ, and puts cotton paper in order to collect with it the Holy Fire, appearing, as they say, in small sparks on a marble slab" / Andrei Nikol. Muravyov, 1832, A)/. “But even before that they carried there a great lamp, filled to the very top with oil, and a great lamp was launched into it, and they placed the lamp in the middle of Christ’s tomb” / Monk Parthenius 1841-71, A/.

Now it looks like this. The gates of the Edicule are sealed with wax and left there to await the patriarch. When the time for the appearance of the Greek patriarch approaches, the seal is removed, but before the patriarch enters the Edicule, a priest enters carrying a lamp covered with a cap. Perhaps he places it on the coffin slab. Then the patriarch and representative enter the cave Armenian Church. The doors are closing. After some time, the patriarch comes out with lighted bunches of candles. And while the fire is spreading throughout the temple, the same lamp is taken out of the Edicule in the same form, covered with a cap. The question is, what is the point of this lamp? What's in it? See photo

The existence of the possibility of chemically reproducing a fire can be evidenced by a fragment given in Krachkovsky’s article:

Ibn-al-Qalanisi (before 1162 about 1007) - “...so that fire can reach them through the oil of the balsam tree and the devices made from it, and its property is the emergence of fire when combined with jasmium oil, it has a bright light and a brilliant radiance...” . And

“Ya.I. Smirnov drew my attention to one characteristic example: according to the story of Deacon Zechariah (1639-1699), Catholicos Philip once took two candles from under his cloak, which lit up in the hands of the Erzerum Pasha by themselves (M. Brosset, Collection d" historiens armeniens. Tome II, St.-Petersbourg 1876, p. 76)"

Several other versions about the appearance of fire.

Mysterious book and candle. Yakut (d. 1229) “And then I saw a magic book in which it was written that he brings a candle closer to the lamp, and fire suddenly appears in it. People see, but do not suspect this; for them it seems great (miracle) and they obey."

It is interesting that this evidence is unexpectedly echoed by an eyewitness who claims to be illegally present during the descent of the fire. He is not a whistleblower; rather, on the contrary, he conveys something amazing during his stay in Edicule. “Be careful,” Elder Anatoly told me, “prepare in advance and place the Holy Lamp in a gold stand on the marble slab of the Holy Sepulcher.” “Lamp?” - flashed through my head like lightning. “What kind of lamp can be on the Holy Sepulcher if the Holy Fire descends from above?” Elder Anatoly, noticing my confusion, did not attach any significance to it, and continued: “In addition, the Holy Book, which is kept in the Sacristy, should be placed on the Life-Giving Tomb. You will have to cover with a thick candle the page on which the prayers of the Holy Fire begin. Hearing this second order of the elder about the “thick candle,” I lost the last remnant of faith, which was barely glowing in me. A black cloud of doubts covered my entire soul - the Candle. “- I asked with surprise, expressing decisive bewilderment with all my appearance. “Why is the candle needed?” ? ..." / Archimandrite Savva Achilleos. I saw the Holy Fire. Athens, 2002, http://www.holyfire.org/Achelious_ISawHolyLight.htm/.

I consider Savva’s story itself to be fictitious, but I cite it because it surprisingly resonates with the ancient testimony of the whistleblower.

Here we can assume that something is happening chemical reaction, depending on the composition of the candle (or what was put into it) and the contents of the lamp.

In addition, I heard that the fire is ignited by a ray of the sun that penetrates through the dome of the Edicule, from a ray falling from a hole in the dome of the temple.

There are quite a lot of different statements about what tricks the priests use to get fire, but most likely it is the hidden candle for the first period and the hidden lamp for the second period that look most convincing. In addition, if you want to confuse the investigation, then you need to throw in more “fictitious” revelations and then the real will be lost behind the fictitious.

Arguments challenging revelations.

1. Why hasn’t it been banned yet?

Christina claims that, despite all attempts, no one succeeded in exposing the miracle, as evidenced by the miracle itself, which continues to this day. The Orthodox cite stories in which whistleblowers are put to shame despite all their attempts. But we must understand that these legends are composed by Christians themselves, and the fact that the miracle still exists is most likely explained by the large incomes that both Muslims and Israelis receive for it. Although, over the last 200 years, international prestige has also played a significant role. As soon as you mention the tricks of the monks, you will immediately be accused of inciting hatred, oppression, etc.. Evidence: We resume Curzon's report on Easter Sunday. The day following the occurrences which have been related, I had a long interview with Ibrahim Pasha, and the conversation turned naturally to the blasphemous imputations of the Greek and Armenian patriarchs, who for the purposes of worldly gain, had deluded their ignorant followers with the performance of a trick in relighting the candles which had been extinguished on Good Friday with fire which they affirmed had been sent down from heaven in answer to their prayers. The pasha was quite aware of the evident absurdity which I brought to his notice.... It was debated what punishment was to be awarded to the Greek patriarch for the misfortunes which had been the consequence of his jugglery, and a number of the purses which he had received from the unlucky pilgrims passed into the coffers of the pasha's treasury. I was sorry that the falsity of this imposture was not publicly exposed, as it was a good opportunity of so doing. It seems wonderful that so barefaced a trick should continue to be practiced every year in these enlightened times.... If Ibrahim Pasha had been a Christian, probably this would have been the last Easter of the lighting of the Holy Fire; but from the fact of his religion being opposed to that of the monks, he could not follow the example of Louis XIV, who having put a stop to some clumsy imposition which was at that time bringing scandal on the Church, a paper was found nailed upon the door of the sacred edifice the days afterwards, on which the words were read: Du part du roi, defense a Dieu De faire miracle en ce lieu. The interference of a Muhammadan in such a case as this would only have been held as another persecution of the Christians; and the miracle of the Holy Fire has continued to be exhibited every year with great applause, and luckily without the unfortunate results which accompanied it on this occasion. (32) /http://www.cloudsstore.com/14/Bishop_Auxentius_The_Rite_of_the_Holy_Fire.html/.

or from the testimony of Porfiry already quoted here.

“After this confession, it was decided to humbly ask Ibrahim not to interfere in religious affairs and a dragoman of the Holy Sepulcher monastery was sent to him, who pointed out to him that there was no benefit for his lordship to reveal the secrets of Christian worship and that the Russian Emperor Nicholas would "Ibrahim Pasha, having heard this, waved his hand and fell silent. But from that time on, the Holy Sepulcher clergy no longer believed in the miraculous appearance of fire."

2. A constant search does not give any results, no matter how the patriarch is searched.

During a miracle, security is present. Now it is a group of Israeli police, but previously it was a detachment of Turkish troops. Seeing the presence of armed infidels during the miracle, many imagine that they came specifically to expose the miracle, and this gives rise to a lot of speculation, which is supported by the priests. But in reality, these soldiers maintain order. Very often, clashes on inter-confessional grounds occurred and are even happening now in the church. And if it weren’t for the soldiers, the Christians would have killed each other long ago. Christians indicate in their testimonies that the Metropolitan is being searched. But firstly, until the 13th century, no one entered the Edicule until the fire appeared in the coffin, and secondly, the video clearly shows that the Metropolitan is being undressed by priests and this procedure is similar to a cleansing ritual. But even if the metropolitan is searched, besides him, a priest enters the Edicule, bringing a special lamp, an Armenian representative enters, and at the same time we do not see any evidence of their search.

3. Is it beneficial for the authorities to expose a miracle?

al-Jaubari (before 1242) Under the heading "The trick of the monks in lighting the fire in the Church of the Resurrection" he says: "Al-Melik al-Mauzzam, the son of al-Melik al-Adil entered the Church of the Resurrection on the day of the Sabbath of Light and said to the monk, ( assigned) to her: “I will not leave until I see this light descending.” The monk said to him: “What is more pleasant to the king: this wealth that flows to you in this way, or familiarity with this (business)?” If I reveal this secret to you, then the government will lose this money; leave it hidden and get this great wealth“When the ruler heard this, he understood the hidden essence of the matter and left him in the same position. (...)” /Krachkovsky, 1915, 236-237 pp./.

The income is so huge that in fact the entire population of Jerusalem was fed from it, so prof. Dmitrievsky quotes the following observation from Prof. Olesnitsky “But in Jerusalem and Palestine this holiday belongs not only to the Orthodox population: all local residents take part in it, not excluding Muslims. A family hearth is unthinkable without a warming and illuminating element, and this latter exudes for all of Palestine from the holy tomb. This is felt the entire population, and cannot help but feel, because Palestine feeds almost exclusively on the gifts that are brought to it by the fans of the Holy Sepulcher from Europe. Thus, the Feast of the Holy Sepulcher is a celebration of the happiness and well-being of the country. legends about holy fire and its miraculous properties, and that in the circumstances surrounding the consecration of fire (in its color, brightness, etc.) people see signs of a happy or unhappy summer, fertility or famine, war or peace" /Dmitrievsky, 1909/.

4. Do Muslims bother to be caught red-handed or are rumors enough?

As already said, legends are composed by Christians, but here is what is known from historical sources regarding exposure and consequences (disgrace of priests). Here is an explanation of the destruction of the temple in 1009, written by the historian Ibn al-Qalanisi in 1162. ". . . And al-Hakim asked the missionary Khutekyn2) adudit, who was with him, why Christians go to this church and what their beliefs about it. He asked for a description of it and (to tell) what is attributed to it, and Khutekyn knew this on frequent trips to Syria and trips with embassies from al-Hakim to its rulers. Easter there... then they hang lamps in the altar and arrange a trick so that the fire reaches them through the oil of balsam tree and devices made from it, and its property is the appearance of fire when combined with jasmium oil, it has a bright light and brilliant radiance. They manage to pass a stretched iron wire like a thread between neighboring lamps, running continuously from one to another, and rub it with balsam oil, hiding it from view until the thread passes to all the lamps. When they pray and the time of descent comes, the doors of the altar are opened; and they believe that there is the cradle of Jesus, peace be upon him, and that from there he ascended to heaven. They enter and light a lot of candles, and the house becomes hot from the breath of so many people. Someone standing tries to bring the fire closer to the thread, he catches on it and moves through all the lamps from one to another until he lights everything. Whoever looks at this thinks that fire came down from heaven and these lamps were lit" /Krachkovsky, 1915, 235 pp./

As you can see, if there is a desire, then catching Christians with anger is not necessary for Muslims. Suspicion is enough.

By the end of the 19th and early 20th centuries, a rather skeptical attitude towards the miracle developed among advanced orientalists, including those with theological titles.

I will turn to the text from Krachkovsky.

The attitude of modern Christians, even those of the clergy, is often not the same as that of Abbot Daniel or cleric Nikita: it is enough to point out detailed description rite (1876) by the Jerusalem priest Ilias Shakhavat, who took direct part in the ceremony five times, or on the articles of the Orthodox bishop Raphael Hawawini. Among the best representatives of theological thought in the East, one can see the interpretation of the miracle that Prof. allows. A. Olesnitsky and A. Dmitrievsky talk about “the triumph of the consecration of fire at the Holy Sepulcher.” " /Krachkovsky/

For example, in Dmitrievsky we read: “It is not surprising that local residents have a whole range of instructive tales about the holy fire and its miraculous properties, and that in the circumstances surrounding the consecration of the fire (in its color, brightness, etc.) people see signs of a happy or unhappy summer, fertility or famine, war or peace. Therefore, on the day of the consecration of the fire, countless crowds flock to Jerusalem from surrounding villages and cities, eager to personally read their fate, inscribed on the tablet of the holy tomb."

Professor A. A. Olesnitsky calls the litany of Great Saturday, the day of receiving the grace of the holy fire, “the triumph of the consecration of fire at the Holy Sepulcher,” and the beginning of the appearance of this celebration dates back to the times of the Old Testament, to the construction of Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem, when it fell from heaven on the prepared sacrifices fire, which was then constantly maintained by the priests"/Dmitrievsky A. A. 1909, http://www.holyfire.org/doc_CerkovnieTorgestva_1909.htm/.

From Soviet literature we have received the testimony of the former famous theologian A. A. Osipov. He recalls a prominent theologian, professor at the Leningrad Theological Academy, who became interested in the problem of the “holy fire” that miraculously lights the lamps on the Holy Sepulcher at Easter midnight. “Having studied ancient manuscripts and texts, books and testimonies of pilgrims, he,” writes about this professor A. A. Osipov, “proved with exhaustive accuracy that there was never any “miracle”, but there was and is an ancient symbolic ritual of kindling by the clergy themselves over the tomb of the Lampada. I...| If only readers could imagine what a howl the churchmen raised after the speech of a believing professor of theology who dared to tell the truth he had obtained! (...] And as a result of this whole matter, the now deceased Metropolitan Leningradsky Grigory, also a man with a theological academic degree, gathered a number of theologians in Leningrad and told them (many of my former colleagues, they probably remember): .,I also know that this is just a legend! What... (here he is named after the first and patronymic name of the author of the speech and research) is absolutely right! But don’t touch the pious legends, otherwise faith itself will fall!” / Osipov A. A. Frank conversation with believers and non-believers. Reflections of a former theologian. L., 1983, pp. 114-1151/.

Most likely, the report was read by the Honored Professor of the Leningrad Theological Academy Nikolai Dmitrievich Uspensky, born on January 3, 1900. In the fall of 1923, Nikolai Dmitrievich met Alexei Afanasyevich Dmitrievsky, who had a huge influence on the young student. The same A. A. Dmitrievsky whom I love to quote.

It is interesting that some modern Orthodox theologians have maintained a similar attitude, as evidenced by an article published in May 2005 in the Izvestia newspaper. -

DIVINE PYROTECHNICS FROM THE MINISTER OF CULTURE, Alexander Musin, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Candidate of Theology, Sorbonne, Paris

Disappointment in the miracle of the Holy Fire One of the most educated sons of Russia in the 17th century was Polotsk Archbishop Melety Smotritsky. One of the important episodes of his biography is the attempt to reconcile Catholics and Orthodox Christians, which led him to union. This decision was not easy for him, which was preceded by a trip to the East for consolation and strengthening in Orthodoxy, but the meeting with the Orthodox East only brought him even more disappointment. In a letter to his former teacher, written to the Patriarch of Constantinople Kirill Lukaris in 1627, on the eve of his final transition to Uniate positions (VSL, pp. 106-114), he writes in particular: “Your Eminence probably remember that I once asked you why the deputy your Meletius, writing against the new Roman calendar and trying to prove the superiority of the old over the new... does not mention this famous miracle in Jerusalem. To this question you answered me... that if this miracle had really happened in our time, then all the Turks would have believed in Christ long ago? The Patriarch of Jerusalem spoke even more sharply about this: the same one who takes this fire, takes it out and distributes it to the people. Thus, it is sad to say, our Orthodox fellow believers, regarding this wonderful fire, which once really appeared, but now, for our sins, has ceased. appear, they prefer to be at one with heretics, such as the Eutychians, Dioscorites and Jacobites, rather than with Catholics, who do not allow this miracle for very good reasons, especially when you see what the Abyssinian heretics are doing at the tomb at that time.”

A series of works by the protopresbyter of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, George Tsetsis, is devoted to exposing the myth of the miraculous appearance of the Holy Fire; he writes: “The prayer that the patriarch offers before lighting the Holy Fire in the Holy Edicule is completely clear and does not allow for any misinterpretations. The Patriarch does not pray for a miracle to happen.He only “remembers” the sacrifice and three-day resurrection of Christ and, turning to Him, says: “Having reverently accepted this kindled (*******) fire on Your luminous Tomb, we distribute the true light to those who believe, and we pray to You, You have shown him the gift of sanctification." The following happens: the patriarch lights his candle from the unquenchable lamp, which is located on the Holy Sepulchre. Just like every patriarch and every cleric on the day of Easter, when he receives the light of Christ from the unquenchable lamp, which is located on the holy throne, symbolizing the Holy Sepulcher” (6).
Original taken from alanol09 in Orthodox priest about the Holy Fire

When the Greek Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophilus, in a conversation with pilgrims from Russia, among whom was Deacon Andrei Kuraev, refuted the version of the miraculous self-ignition of the lamp in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, stating that the Holy Fire “... is not an annual miracle, but only a reminder of the light, who appeared at the Resurrection of Christ." Deacon Andrei Kuraev commented on the words of Patriarch Theophilus: “He probably couldn’t have spoken more openly about the lighter in his pocket.”
And the so-called Holy Fire is the work of human hands, not God.

There is quite a bit of evidence confirming the words of Fr. Andrey. Well, okay, atheists, all sorts of scientists or testimonies of Muslims - they can at least be accused of bias and hostility towards Orthodoxy. But there is a lot of evidence from Orthodox circles - and from not the least people in Orthodox Church that the so-called “Miracle of the Descent of the Holy Fire” is a forgery and deception. What should we do with this evidence - hush it up and ignore it?
You need to understand that refuting the miraculous nature of the Holy Fire is not an attack on Orthodoxy itself, but only a desire to cleanse the church of deceitful “miracle workers” who want to profit from this so-called miracle.
It is also necessary to understand that in Orthodoxy the miraculous nature of the fire of Holy Saturday is by no means a dogma, and many prominent figures of Orthodoxy wrote about the far from miraculous nature of this “miracle.”
Understand that Deacon Kuraev was far from the first who doubted the miraculous nature of the Holy Fire and spoke honestly about it. Moreover, among those who doubted this miracle were not only atheists who, in principle, do not believe in any miracles, but also completely religious people, including Christians and even authoritative theologians of the Russian Church.
Representatives of other Christian movements, also present in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, interpret what happens on Holy Saturday in a completely different way than was customary in Rus'.
Thus, according to the testimony of the Armenians, the fire is kindled by the Greek Patriarch from a previously brought in burning lamp.
For example, the abbot of the Armenian monastery of St. Archangelov, who attended the ceremony for 9 years, describes it as follows: “At two o’clock the doors are opened, and the Greeks bring in a closed (lit) Lamp and place it on the Tomb. After which the procession of the Greeks around the Tomb begins, on the 3rd circle The Armenian archimandrite joins them and together they move towards the doors. The Greek Patriarch enters first, followed by the Armenian. And both enter the Tomb, where they both kneel and pray together. Both go and serve candles to the people through the holes, the Greek comes out of the coffin first, followed by the Armenian."
It is difficult not to recall the famous Russian professor Nikolai Uspensky, who back in 1949, at an assembly evening of the Leningrad Theological Academy, gave a lecture in which he argued natural nature Holy Fire.
Moreover, according to Uspensky, the Palestinian hierarchs themselves are deeply worried that they do not have the strength to “push against the bullshit” and finally stop this “pious deception”: “We may be asked the question: what are the Palestinian hierarchs and the Patriarch of Jerusalem himself looking at? We answer this question We find the answer in the above-mentioned diaries of Bishop Porfiry. Having cited his conversation with the patriarchal vicar, Bishop Dionysius of Philadelphia (later Metropolitan of Bethlehem), where the latter spoke about the method of lighting the Holy Fire, Rev. Porfiry writes: “Having told all this, the Metropolitan said: that God alone is expected to put an end to pious lies. As He knows and is able, He will enlighten and calm the peoples who now believe in the fiery miracle of Great Saturday. But we cannot even begin this revolution in minds; we will be torn to pieces right at the Chapel of the Holy Sepulchre.”
Obviously, once upon a time, without giving a timely and energetic explanation to his flock about the true meaning of the rite of St. fire, in the future they were unable to raise this voice in the face of the ever-increasing fanaticism of the dark masses due to objective conditions. If this was not done in a timely manner, then later it became impossible to do without risking personal well-being and, perhaps, the integrity of the shrines themselves. All that remained for them was to perform the ritual and remain silent, consoling themselves with the fact that God “as He knows and is able, He will bring understanding and calm the nations.”
And here is what the Right Reverend Bishop Porfiry (Uspensky Konstantin Alexandrovich, 1804 - 1885), Bishop of Chigirinsky, abbot of several Orthodox monasteries and founder of the first Russian mission in Jerusalem, candidate of theology, doctor of Greek philosophy and author of historical books, wrote:
“In that year, when the famous lord of Syria and Palestine Ibrahim, Pasha of Egypt, was in Jerusalem, it turned out that the fire received from the Holy Sepulcher on Holy Saturday was not a blessed fire, but a kindled one, just as any fire is kindled. This Pasha decided to make sure whether the fire really suddenly and miraculously appears on the lid of the Tomb of Christ or is lit by a sulfur match.
What did he do? He announced to the patriarch’s governors that he wanted to sit in the edicule itself while receiving the fire and vigilantly watch how he appears, and added that in the case of the truth they would be given 5,000 pungs (2,500,000 piastres), and in the case of a lie, let them give him everything money collected from deceived fans, and that he will publish in all the newspapers of Europe about the vile forgery.
The governors of Petro-Arabia, Misail, and Metropolitan Daniel of Nazareth, and Bishop Dionysius of Philadelphia (currently of Bethlehem) came together to consult what to do. During the minutes of deliberation, Misail admitted that he was lighting a fire in a cuvuklia from a lamp hidden behind a moving marble icon of the Resurrection of Christ, which is near the Holy Sepulcher. After this confession, it was decided to humbly ask Ibrahim not to interfere in religious affairs, and the dragoman of the Holy Sepulchre was sent to him, who pointed out to him that there was no benefit for his lordship to reveal the secrets of Christian worship, and that the Russian Emperor Nicholas will be very dissatisfied with the discovery of these secrets.
Ibrahim Pasha, having heard this, waved his hand and fell silent. But from that time on, the Holy Sepulcher clergy no longer believed in the miraculous appearance of fire.