HPB-SB-3-81

T i

vol. 3, p. 81

H. P. Blavatsky Scrapbooks

from Adyar archives of the International Theosophical Society

vol. 3 (1875-1878)

Legend

SBT, DT

• HPB note
• HPB highlighted
• HPB underlined
• HPB crossed out
• <Editors note>
• <Archivist note>
• Lost or unclear
• Restored

<<   ☰   >>

eng • рус

Phenomena in Anglo-Jewish History

A Baal Shem–A Candle Burns Three Weeks–Curiosity and Death

The following extract is from an article—“Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History”—which appeared in the supplement of the Jewish Chronicle, an English periodical, June 5, 1874. They may be new to those not familiar with Jewish traditions: we do not remember to have seen them in print before:—

“The possession of supernatural powers has been usually attributed to those Jewish doctors who have mastered the secrets of the kabbala. and the character of a Thaumaturgos is by no means new in Jewish history. A gentleman. popularly invested with those miraculous gifts, made his appearance in London during the latter part of the eighteenth century. This Baal Shem,'' this master of the mode of uttering the Ineffable Name, this holder of an extraordinary faculty, which was said to have proved highly valuable to him, was known in every-day life as Dr. or Rabbi de Falk. He came from Furth, where his mother had died in straitened circumstances, and had been buried at the expense of the congregation; De Falk himself was without means when he reached this country. Whether he owned among his other secrets the grand one of the transmutation of metals, or whether he followed privately some lucrative occupation, like a common mortal, weare unable to state. But by all accounts, soon after his arrival in London, De Falk was seen to be in possession of considerable funds, and one of his first cares was to remit to the congregation at Furth the amount of the expenses incurred for his mother's funeral. Usually, De Falk was well provided with cash; but occasionally he found himself in absolute need, when he did not disdain to seek advances on his plate from a pawnbroker in Houndsditch. The bolts and liars of the pawnbroker's strong room were insufficient to confine there De Falk’s valuables, when he summoned them back to his own closet, but he always honorably acquitted his debt. One day, shortly after having deposited some gold and silver vessels with the pawnbroker, the Kabbalist went to the shop in question, and laying down the duplicate with the sum advanced and exact interest, he told the shopman not to trouble himself for the plate, as it was already in his possession. The incredulity with which this statement was received changed into absolute dismay when it was ascertained that De Falk’s property had really disappeared, without displacing any of the that had articles surrounded it.

“Rabbi de Falk lived in Wellclose Square, where he kept a comfortable establishment. He had there his private synagogue, and he exercised great benevolence towards the deserving. He is described as a man of universal knowledge, of singular manners, and of wonderful talent, which seemed to command the supernatural agencies of spiritual life. Instances are given of his extraordinary faculties by respectable witnesses of his day, who evidently placed implicit faith in the stories they related. Dr. de Falk was a frequent guest at Aaron Goldsmid’s table. One day, it is said, the Baal Shem was invited to call on one of Mr. Goldsmid’s visitors, a gentleman dwelling in the chapter-house in St. Paul's Churchyard, to hold some conversation with him in a friendly manner on philosophical subjects. ‘When will you come r asked the gentleman. De Falk took from his pocket a small piece of wax candle, and, handing it to his new acquaintance, replied, ‘Light this, sir, when you get home, and I shall be with you as soon as it goes out.’ Next morning, the gentleman in question lighted the piece of candle. He watched it closely, expecting it to be consumed soon, and then to see De Falk. In vain. The taper, like the sepulchral lamps of old, burned all day and all night without the least diminution in its flame. He removed the magic candle into a closet, when he inspected it several times daily, for the space of three weeks. One evening, at last. Dr. de Falk arrived in a hackney coach. The host had almost given up all expectation of seeing De Falk, as the taper, shortly before his advent, was still burning as brightly as ever. As soon as mutual civilities were over, the master of the house hastened to look at the candle in the closet. It had disappeared. When he returned, he asked De Falk whether the agent that had removed the candle would bring back the candlestick. ‘Oh, yes,’ was the reply; ‘it is now in your kitchen below,' which actually proved to be the fact. Once a tire was raging in Duke’s Place, and the synagogue was considered in imminent danger of being destroyed. The advice and assistance of De Falk were solicited: he wrote only four Hebrew letters on the pillars of the door, when the wind immediately changed its quarter, and the lire subsided without committing further damage.

“When Dr. de Falk made his will, for not all his knowledge could save him from the fate of ordinary mortality, he appointed, as his executors, Mr. Aaron Goldsmid, Mr. George Goldsmid, and Mr. de Symons. He bequeathed to the Great Synogogue a small legacy of £68 16s. 4d., and an annual sum of £4 12s. to whomever filled the functions of Chief Rabbi. To Aaron Goldsmid, De Falk, in token of his friendship, left a sealed packet or box with strict injunctions that it should be carefully preserved, but not opened. Prosperity to the Goldsmid family would attend obedience to De Falk’s behests; while fatal consequences would follow their disregard. Some time after the Kabbalist's death. Aaron Goldsmid, unable to overcome his curiosity, broke the seal of the mysterious packet. On the same day, he was found dead. Near him was the destructive paper, which was covered with hieroglyphics and kabbalistic figures.

“We need not multiply instances of De Falk’s alleged supernatural powers. We must, however, express a regret that his miracles did not assume a higher form. It seems hardly worth while to summon the assistance of the world of spirits merely to conjure away from a pawnbroker's office some coffee-pots and silver dishes. To make a candle burn for weeks is a very purposeless prodigy, unless applicable to the objects of domestic economy. But whether there is more in heaven or earth than we dream of in our philosophy; whether, as is more likely, De Falk’s miracles partook of the nature of the feats performed by Robert Houdin, Prof. Anderson, and Dr. Lynn; or whether, as is most probable of all, they were ordinary occurrences magnified into wonders by the love of the marvellous and of the supernatural obtaining in the mind of the vulgar, we will not undertake to decide. All we have to add with reference to De Falk is that the poor considered him as a benefactor; and consulted him on every emergency during his life, while they blessed his memory after death for the liberal donations he left, which were dispensed by Mr. de Symons, the surviving executor.”

Why Rome Puts a Ban on the Masons

“Why Rome Puts a Ban on the Masons,” says the Christian Union, “comes up as an interesting point in connection with the conversion of Lord Ripon who, in going over to Catholicism, is obliged to cut his connection with that secret order. Popery is not opposed to secret societies simply on general grounds. Her trouble with the Masons dates back a hundred years, when the opponents of the Jesuits formed secret organizations to carry out their plans to revolutionize society and reform the church. The Jesuits in self-defense denounced them all, the Masons included, as dangerous to their own order.” The English Independent says, “lire modern Church of Rome, having sold itself to the Jesuits, will not tolerate any secret society that pretends to be, or possibly may become, a rival to the Jesuits. She makes this a test of obedience, and those who are willing to take her for their spiritual guide, and to put their consciences in her keeping, have no right to complain if she exacts this as a test of the sincerity of their conversion. Forsaking all others, will they keep only to her? to use the words of the English marriage service. A good Romanist is to have no other allegiance than hers; and as the husband is entitled to prescribe what society his wife shall keep, and what friends she shall surround herself with, so the Church of Rome lays down the same terms to those who wish to enter her communion.”

The Sacrifice of Life in Hasty Burials

The record of all who have been buried alive, says Henry Belinaye, would form a fearful volume, and strongly guard us against a too hasty presumption of death. Even in the time of Pliny, alarm had begun to be felt on this subject, and he dedicated a whole chapter to it. Bodies have been found in burial vaults, which had turned upon their laces or sides—which had bled—which had marks of self-inflicted violence upon them, &c. From Bruhier alone, we learn that on the Continent, “Out of one hundred and eighty examples of persons erroneously supposed to be dead, fifty, two had been buried alive; four had been opened after supposed death, fifty-two had spontaneously revived after being put in their coffins; seventy-two were discovered to be alive, after having been deemed dead.” Surgeons have, through inadvertence, opened bodies which only parted with life on the application of the scalpel: this occured to Vesalius. Again, in 1763, a clergyman, supposed to have died from apoplexy, emitted a groan at the first incision of the knife by a surgeon deputed to investigate the cause of his death. La Place being informed of the circumstance and asked what was to be done, replied, “Gemir et se taire,”—Lament and conceal it.

Everybody is acquainted with the singular instance of an extraordinary resurrection recorded on a monument in a church of this city (London), and whoever is disposed to peruse many most marvelous and well-authenticated instances, will find them in Fodere and other authors, who have written expressly on the subject. The following will illustrate, and suffice for the present. In the Journal des Scavants, 1749, we find it recorded that a. woman in 1745 <... continues on page 3-82 >

Editor's notes

Sources

• 

  Spiritual Scientist, v. 1, No. 10, November 12, 1874, p. 117

• 

  Spiritual Scientist, v. 1, No. 10, November 12, 1874, p. 111

• 

  Spiritual Scientist, v. 1, No. 11, November 19, 1874, p. 125