You would be amazed how often I am asked this question.  Which technique is the most powerful?  Which angel is more powerful?  Can we create Talismans more powerful than those in the Key of Solomon?  Which material for talismans is the most powerful? Even, which Psalm is the most powerful?  And, every single time, my answer begins with the same words:

It’s not about “power.”

Now, to be clear, I’m not suggesting the concept of power has no relevance in magick!  Or, to be honest, I think a better word would be “effectiveness” instead of “power.”  For example, one can create perfectly workable talismans by observing only the Planetary day and hour.  But a more effective technique is to observe a full astrological election.  The latter could be called “more powerful”. 

Another example might be the Angelical (often mis-termed “Enochian”) language, which I have found exceedingly effective in my angelic workings.  So much so, I have in some cases(!) chosen to use it over Hebrew (following what I believe was Dee’s intention for the language).  One could say I find the Angelical language (and many of the associated Enochian tools) to be “very powerful.”

Yet… would a Baal Shem agree with me about Dee’s Angelical?  Would it be “more powerful” than Hebrew in the practice of Merkavah mysticism?  Hardly.  In fact, I would dare suggest the Angelical might be less effective than Hebrew in such cases.  Because it’s not about which one is “more powerful” – but which one is most effective within its own context.

The same is true of materials – such as choosing metal, parchment, beeswax, or another material for your talismans. On one hand, using a proper material (like gold for Solar talismans) will be “more powerful” than using something unrelated (like a Solar Talisman inscribed on silver). But, choosing between something like metal, parchment, or beeswax is not about “power” – it’s about practicality and context. You don’t want to bury a parchment Talisman! You can bury a metal one – but it could rust. So beeswax is best for burial. But if you want to wear or carry the talisman around, metal is more durable and won’t break like wax or get creased or worn like parchment. (Unless you roll the parchment into something to protect it.) I could go on with examples, but I hope this makes my point: it’s about using what is needed in the context of your work. Not about “more power.”

(And, yes, parchment is MUCH “more powerful” than notebook paper! LOL)

Magick is not like a movie or video game, where you and another worker are going to “face off” and whoever has the most powerful magical weapons wins! Well… ok so maybe it CAN be that way, but the winner of that kind of battle will come down to who has the better-established relationships with their spirits, who has trained them better and for longer, and who has the most ashe‘ built up in both themselves and their tools.

A few weeks ago, I began an unusual process for a client:  the consecration of a LARGE number of Planetary (and other) Talismans.  These aren’t Talismans that either Carrie or Eli Cohen created, but I was hired to perform their consecrations.

It’s not unusual for me to consecrate objects for people – it’s a standard service we offer at Doc Sol’s.  But it is very unusual for someone to invest in such a large number of consecrations!  Thankfully, it was possible to do most of them in groups – so that all Jupiter Talismans were consecrated together, then all Venus Talismans were done together the next day, etc.  Thus, in the end, the client was only paying for seven consecration rituals – rather than the nearly 20 for each individual Talisman!

So here I am, going back to work for the same client day after day for an entire week.  (It’s nearly done as I type this, just before the Moon begins to wane again, but I still have a few to consecrate the next time the Moon waxes.)  Each time, I have to read the rather lengthy list of Psalms over the Talismans – essentially performing a “service” over them, if you will.  And this has led me to a brand new AHA! moment:

I decided to alter the Psalms I was praying to include the name of my client.  More specifically, any time a Psalm spoke in the first person, I would change the pronouns to make it third-person (except, of course, where it’s God speaking!), and where appropriate I would change “I” to the name of the client.

Now, those of you who are my students, or members of my Solomonic Group on Facebook, have likely seen me talk about this very thing before.  Altering the wording of a Psalm to make it more specific to your needs is a practice found in the grimoires – often done when adopting portions of Psalms into longer invocations.  But, for some reason, I just never thought of doing it for the longer “service-like” lists of Psalms required for many Solomonic consecrations – and specifically when doing these for clients! (When doing them for yourself, all the first-person makes more sense.)

So, let’s just say Something “urged” me to make that very change this time.  And it wasn’t easy!  A big part of “ritual magick” is repetition – you establish “astral grooves” and settle into them, and that’s where the real magick happens.  But, sometimes, your Familiars and/or Guardians will teach you, give you suggestions, tell you how to make things better.  So, even though I struggled and stumbled over my words a few times, after a couple of days I was able to establish and settle into a whole new groove.

And, let me tell you, it was like flipping a switch!  It instantly changed the entire ritual I was performing from a generalized church service to a very intimate ceremony dedicated to that one single person.  The Psalms address every aspect of what the Talismans should do, the spiritual state of the person you’re praying for, and a whole lot more.  It took everything those Psalms have ever meant to me and shot it out like a laser beam directly to the client!  It has been a pretty mind-blowing experience.

And, now, I will be doing this every time I consecrate objects for others.  🙂

I was just watching an episode of Angela’s Symposium:

In this, she discusses the Book of Enoch (specifically 1Enoch, or the “Ethiopic Book of Enoch) and its influence on John Dee.  This is something I explore in depth in my books (I think especially in The Angelical Language, Vol I).  In case you are not familiar, I discuss in that work how the mythos of 1Enoch became the basis for Dee’s Enochian system.  However, as that text was considered long-lost in Dee’s time (it wouldn’t be re-discovered until the 17th century), I had always assumed the story had simply survived orally until it reached Dee. 

But I was wrong!  At the time I published, I was not aware of a man named Guillaume Postel (d. 1581 – the year before Dee began his angelic workings).  Dee knew Guillaume, and Guillaume actually had a copy of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch!

Neither Dee nor Postel could read the book, as it was written in Ge’ez, but Postel had been told what was in it by the Ethiopian from whom he had purchased the book.  Postel, then, related this information to Dee – and THAT is how the mythos contained in the “long-lost” Book of Enoch made it, fairly intact I might add!, into the journals of Dr. John Dee.

Here is a link to the Ethiopic Book of Enoch’s Wiki page, in case you want to study more about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch#Ethiopic

I was recently asked if I know how astrology works.  That is, they wanted to know if I believed the Planets emit “beams” (aka Rays) that project to the Earth, or something of the sort.  (An idea borrowed heavily from Theosophy and poor books like the Kybalion, but not entirely absent from older astrology texts.)

To be certain, the history of astrology is no small study.  It was an ancient art even by the time Egyptians and Sumerians began to keep the first written records.  And, you’ll find countless theories (both modern and ancient) about how it all works.  I am in not here to settle the matter – just to share what I know (in general and briefly) about its history, and my idea of how astrology “works.”

To vastly oversimplify a complex subject: the earliest astrologies (like in Egypt) focused on the seasons.  It’s rather intuitive, frankly.  The ancient shamans knew the motions of the stars were cyclic (even if they were unaware it was because the Earth is a spinning globe), and quickly figured out you could reliably predict the changing seasons by keeping an eye on the heavens.  You knew the weather was going to get warmer when these stars appeared in the sky, and that it would start growing cold when those stars appeared, etc.  

This essentially simple concept grew over thousands of years into some pretty complex systems.  Various geo/celestial events (solstices and equinoxes, harvest seasons, lunar cycles, eclipses, etc, etc) were marked as “holy days” and became sacred to various gods and demons.  These, then, evolved into the vast networks of temples and festivals one could find, for example, all up and down the Nile or the Euphrates.  Over time, every single day became sacred to one deity or another!  (There was a point in Egypt’s history where you could, conceivably, have traveled up and down the Nile attending one agricultural festival after another and never work a day in your life.)

These sacred/festival days resulted in the very first “magical calendars” – lists of the sacred days, and even hours of the days; to which deities and demons these times were sacred; and what petitions you could put before them at those times.  These (with the inclusion of Babylonian star lore) then evolved into the systems of “decan magick” that would eventually form the basis of much of the Solomonic goetic tradition – where spirits assigned to different planets, stars, signs, decans, etc are conjured and petitioned for any conceivable purpose.  

Other traces of these old magical calendars remain, as well.  We can find, in texts like the Key of Solomon, obscure lists of names and magical functions for all 24 hours in a day.  However, their practical application must have already been on the decline, as such lists are usually provided without context and do not seem to impact the rituals outlined in the rest of the literature.  (Though we may see a version of this preserved in texts like the Hygromanteia and Heptameron, where much stress is put on assigning Names and entities to every day, hour, season, and even the Sun and Moon.)

We can also see reflections of this in other areas: such as Farmers’ Almanacs that still provide planting and harvesting instructions based on astrological folklore.  Or the massive calendars of feast days associated with Saints, and the proper timings for specific masses and other ceremonies, in Catholic and Orthodox Christianity.

But it all started NOT with some primitive assumption the stars were shooting out beams of energy that affect the Earth.  Instead, it began with a rather common-sense observation that the cycles of the stars and planets line up with the seasons here on Earth.

Astrology isn’t about “Rays”.  It’s about Time.  The hands of a clock do not “create” time, they merely indicate it.  Likewise, the heavenly bodies do not create or project upon us the energies of life.  (Well… the Sun does, and one can argue the Moon does as well, but I’m speaking mystically here!)  Instead, they merely indicate the ever-changing seasons and cyclic energies that are native right here to our little ball of mud spinning through space.  “As Above, So Below” still applies, but we are radiating the energies, not receiving them.

At least that’s how I see it.

Zorge,

Aaron

Magick Circle as described in the Grimorium Verum – hand-painted by Carrie Leitch

Over the years, I have found it somewhat difficult to explain to students the “mechanics” of how protective Magick Circles actually work.  Thanks to popular fiction, and even descriptive terms in the grimoires (such as calling a Magick Circle a “fortress”), we tend to imagine the Circle as some kind of astral barrier through which hostile spirits cannot penetrate.

Now, this post isn’t a complete overview of Magic Circles – but I will briefly explain these figures aren’t really “fortresses” that manifest around you in the spirit world.  No, these mandalas (yes, that’s where where they came from and that’s what they are) with their closed and repeating geometrical figures operate more like “spirit traps” than “buttresses.”  Spirit traps – from spirit-bottles filled with broken mirror shards, to sprinkling seeds or sand across your window-sill – work by confusing and/or enthralling the trespassing spirit.  These spirits do not have bodies and cannot be blocked by walls – nor by simple figures drawn on the ground.  But they CAN be easily misdirected and confused.  A circle (just by itself) could be enough to confuse a spirit who is trying to get across it to you.

And therein lies the rub.  If the figures on the ground are not a barrier, then how does it divert or confuse the spirit?  It would be like drawing a labyrinth on the ground – no walls – and expecting someone to be unable to find the center.

Today, I had an inspiration!  A better way to explain exactly how this works from the spirit’s point of view.  In order to understand how this works, we have to think of the astral/spiritual plane not as similar to the material world – but instead as similar to the aquatic world!  (Not a leap at all, considering the astral plane has been related to Elemental Water for quite some time…)

Now imagine you want to work within this flowing river we call the astral plane.  But you need to protect your working area from – let us say – piranha.  To do this, we’ll imagine you possess a device that can create a whirlpool of water around you – leaving you dry and safe on the inside, and all the water swirling around you in a strong current.  That water is not a wall.  Another person could easily dive through that wall to either join you in the circle, or to escape from it.  But the piranha?  We’ll leave aside the real-world fact that one or two could conceivably work their way through the whirlpool and end up flopping around at your feet before dying – as this is just a thought experiment and spirits aren’t fish.  LOL  Instead, we’ll focus on the ones who can’t figure out why each time they try to swim near you, they suddenly get swept around and away from you.

We could easily move this same analogy onto land – switching out the fish for flies, and the swirling water for one of those air-blast units stores and warehouses install to keep the insects out.  Again – you and I can easily step through, while the flies are utterly unable to fly through the downward current of air.

I could go on – but I’ll summarize all of this in the following way:  Magick Circles are more about currents than they are about barriers.

There is a conflict in the grimoires I struggled with for quite some time. Well, I say “in the grimoires”, but the conflict was really within myself – centered upon my personal relationship with these books and the Divinity described in them. The problem was simple enough: I am a Gnostic, and as a Gnostic I don’t “worship” the Demiurge (“Creator”). Yet, the invocations provided in the grimoires are directed to the Creator Himself.

To the old Sethian Gnostics, the Creator was a demonic entity who created the world as a prison for the Light. They, and the Gnostics who followed, worshiped nothing less than the Highest God, and their goal was to circumvent the Demiurge and return to the Kingdom of Light.

But the grimoires are not Gnostic texts. Sure, they are gnostic (little “g”) in nature, and there is no doubt about the influence of Gnosticism on these texts and the entire Western Occult Tradition. But the grimoires are mainstream Christian – written largely by Catholics and Protestants. And, of course, we have some older Jewish grimoires, and even Arabic ones. But none of these are Gnostic. And, as such, they make no distinction between the Creator and the Highest God.

Now, if you follow my Facebook postings, I’ve discussed this to some extent already. At least, I’ve discussed who this “God” fellow is the grimoires keep going on about – and how He differs from the Christian orthodoxy of the time they were written. You can read the whole thing here:

In that post, I talk a little about the differences between the older Sethian Gnostics, and the later Valentinian Gnostics. The latter took a much less antagonistic view of the Demiurge, suggesting he was not an evil demon – but merely an indifferent Workman who did the job that was placed before him. In this view, reality and all of its suffering isn’t because we are being tortured in a prison; this is simply the furnace of a Great Athanor, purifying the gold within us so we might return Home once again.

In fact, the Valentinians suggest the Highest Unknowable God, the Christos, and the Demiruge are actually three facets of the Greater Whole. And, as such, they tended to play it pretty loose with the titles they placed upon these Divinities. The Ancient of Days could be the wizened old Demiurgos, sitting upon His Throne in the Seventh Heaven, or just as easily refer to the Highest God instead. The Savior could be the Logos Himself, or it could refer to the Holy Spirit who is the child of the Logos and Sophia. And, most importantly here, the Creator could refer to the Demiurge OR the Logos. Because while the Demiurge was the foreman of the construction site, and was in charge of the physical building of the world, He wasn’t exactly the Architect who designed it all or put the plan into motion.

And this is how I approach the grimoires. I see their many invocations of the Creator and Master of the World (under such names as YHVH Zabaoth – see my FB post for more on that) not as invocations to the demonic Demiurge of the Sethians, but more toward the Christos/Logos as the Architect (not to mention all three – Highest/Logos/Demiurge as One) in the Valentinian style.

Greetings, Talismanic Mages!

Solomonic Pentacle of Venus – Eli Cohen

The following is a clarification about Solomonic Talismans I recently posted to Facebook:

Apparently there is some confusion over the subject of Solomonic Talismans, how they are made, and exactly what I’m teaching about them. So let me clear up a couple of points.

When someone mentions the “charging” of Solomonic Talismans, I tend to point out there is no mention of “charging” such Talismans in the texts. There is simply no point where the practitioner is instructed to direct their personal energy at a Talisman and “empower” it. This is a modern concept (specifically energy-model magick), not found in the grimoires.

So, how do the Solomonic Talismans work? Primarily, they are empowered by the time they are made. Just as you were born and took your first breath – thereby setting your natal chart for life – so too is this true of Solomonic Talismans. After it is fashioned, you consecrate it – either on the day/hour of the Talisman’s Planet, or on the day/hour of Mercury. (Think of the making of the Talisman as birth, and the consecration as the Christening.) One could argue this consecration is the “charging” – and that’s fine. (Actually, you do give the spirit its “charge” – that is its instructions – at that time. So there you go.)

But some folks are getting confused, thinking I am making a blanket statement about ALL Talismans ever. Or even that I am stating this is how it MUST be done, even with Solomonic Talismans. That is not the case.

First and foremost, the Key says its Talismans are not just for use during evocations, but can also be carried for various kinds of protection. Now, honestly, it probably assumes you know to perform the evocations with the Talismans first, THEN carry them for protection. But, that phrasing in the grimoire has given rise to several extra-Solomonic Traditions making use of the Talismans in their own way. Hoodoo being one great example – wherein a Talisman can be charged by merely placing it next to a relevant Psalm in a Bible for seven days. Or, even better, the methods developed by our own Balthazar Van Der Merwe (def. check out Balthazar’s Conjure on YouTube!).

EVEN the Key of Solomon agrees that an election isn’t always necessary:

Key of Solomon, Book II, Chap. I:
“So exact a preparation of days and hours is not necessary for those who are adepts in the art, but it is extremely necessary for apprentices and beginners, seeing that those who have been little or not at all instructed herein, and who only begin to apply themselves to this art, do not have as much faith in the experiments as those who are adepts therein, and who have practiced them.”

So, the more adept you are, the less you are restricted by the magical timing. (Andreas Erneus points out this may apply to evocation instead of Talismans – but I’ve generally taken this passage to heart for everything.) And, indeed, when I do work for myself, I rarely bother with elections (unless I’m making a full Talisman). That is to say – as I have years of experience AND altars here to every Angel I work with, then I don’t have to worry so much if the Moon is waning, or Mercury is Rx, or even if I’m working in the proper hour. Because those angels live here, I’m not calling them long-distance.

But, for clients, I follow all the timing every time – because they are paying me to do things RIGHT, not for my personal theories on how I can do it quicker and easier. To me, that’s just honest business practice. You do NOT half-ass a Talisman or other magical tool and fail to inform your clients you are doing so.

Having said all of that – if YOUR Tradition tells you to point at a Talisman and direct energy into it, or breathe life into it, that’s fine. (The GD does that – and guess what Order in which I’m an officer?) I’m not telling you that your tradition is wrong, nor am I suggesting charging Talismans “doesn’t work.” Simply stating the facts of what is and is not in the Solomonic texts is NOT an attack on your Tradition.

Of course, if you try to tell me that “everyone knows” you are “supposed to ‘charge’ Solomonic Talismans”, I’m going to inform you that you are incorrect. 😉

Some time ago, I made a video discussing these exact same matters:

Greetings Dee Enthusiasts!

The (Surviving) Dee Collection at the British Museum

It’s not often John Dee pops up in the mainstream – so when he does, you can bet it’s going to get attention from the Angel-botherers. Especially the ones, like me, who count Dee as something of a personal hero. So it’s little surprise this article from CNN is currently making the rounds:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/06/world/obsidian-mirror-aztecs-queen-elizabeth-i-scn/

Before you get too excited, there is nothing really ground-breaking here – that is, for most of you who are likely reading this blog and clicked on this particular post. It just says they ran some tests that prove the obsidian mirror in the British Museum’s John Dee Collection is, indeed, from Mexico. Honestly, this was something we already knew – it’s an Aztec mirror. The test just finally proved it. For some reason.

But, of course, I had a few things to say about the museum’s collection of Dee’s magical tools. (I would warn you it might ruin some of your fantasies…. but you’ve already read the title of this blog post, so…) I first wrote a long comment on the Facebook post where I discovered the article. But once I realized how long it was, I decided to also copy it onto my wall in a post of its own. Now that post seems to be making the rounds all on its own – so I decided to post it here, to make it easier to find and share.

So, without further ado, here are some facts about the British Museum’s collection of “John Dee’s” magical tools, in two parts:

PART 1: The black mirror attributed to Dee is not only unproven to have ever belonged to him, but it seems even more likely it did not. Consider this object is in a collection that includes a large golden re-creation of Kelley’s Watchtower Vision – an object Dee was never told to create, that plays no role whatsoever in the magick, and Dee left no record of having created.

To be frank, NONE of “Dee’s” magical objects in the British Museum are certain to have been his. We don’t *know* he cast those wax Seals. Even the now-lost Table of Practice was described as being quite colorful; but Dee was told, when he asked the Angels about using color, they “had no respect of color.” So either Dee decided that meant he could add color, or not, as he wished (which is possible) – or he didn’t make that Table.

Considering these items are in a collection of things very unlikely to have belonged to Dee, AND the fact that old wizards at the time LOVED to claim they had artifacts from ancient wizards they didn’t really have…. well it’s not looking good for the “Dee” collection. (Maybe it should be renamed the “Stuff People Have Claimed Once Belonged to John Dee” exhibit?)

PART 2: Also, and I can’t stress this enough!, Dee never, ever, at ANY time in the journals, used a black mirror to scry the Angels! Not with Barnabus Saul. Not with Kelley. Not with Arthur. Not with…. damn I forget the last dude’s name. [NOTE: there were actually at least two: Bartholomew Hickman and a Mr. Nicholls – the latter of whom did not win Dee’s favor.] But not with any scryer at any time did Dee EVER use a black mirror.

He used a clear quartz stone [sphere] in a frame made for a crystal ball. And this was NOT the stone the Angels “gave” to him.

That one was yet another stone – about the size and shape of an egg, but also kind of flat. IOW – sort of like a lens. That one was for scrying the Parts of the Earth (aka – spying on foreign nations), and while we have the record of an Angel directing Dee to find it, there is no later record of him using it. (I say he probably did, but we don’t have those records. More than likely they were in a separate top-secret military journal that only the Queen and/or Walsingham could see.)”

Greetings Gnostics and Enochites!

One of the most obscure figures found in Dee’s diaries (speaking here of the celestial actors) is the angelic being known as Galvah (interpreted to mean “The End”). She appeared to Dee and Kelley only after most of Liber Loagaeth had been transmitted. In fact, it was specifically Her job to reveal the 49th and final Table of the Book – which itself was said to encompass the End Times and the reign of the Antichrist. Supporting this, Kelley envisions Her being swarmed by vile and dangerous animalistic demons, who fawn upon Her rather than intimidate or attack Her.

If you read only this entry in the journals, you might be forgiven for assuming Galvah is a dark and possibly evil being. Perhaps She is Lilith, or even the Whore of Babylon! This latter would associate Her quite nicely with the Book of Revelation, itself a prophecy of the End Times.

Yet… Galvah is referred to at one point, by the angel Illemese, as “Wisdom.” And another angel – named Madimi – calls Her “mother.” Well, unless you’re in the “Enochian angels are really demons” camp, this doesn’t do much to support Galvah being Babalon the Harlot. As many of you, who have read my Enochian books, are already well aware, I have long argued Galvah is in fact Sophia – Wife of God, Mother of Angels. This would be one of the Gnostic underpinnings of the Enochian system. Her name as given in Dee’s journals – “Galvah” – seems to be directly related to the Table of Loagaeth She was transmitting. The last one.

Makes sense – but doesn’t it seem a bit too “on the nose”? I mean, sure She came to deliver the last Table – and that Table deals with the End Times. So, I’ve always taken for granted that Her name here was primarily centered around Her specific task – to reveal the final Table. But, there has to be more to the name of the Mother of God here… To be fair, I did settle on something of an answer: She is, in fact, one half of the phrase “Alpha and Omega.” The Christos/Logos is the Alpha, and Sophia is the Omega. (In fact, I have written that “Galvah” means something closer to “omega” than to the simple phrase “the end”.) There you go – the deep mystery of Her name revealed!

But…. not really. Don’t get me wrong – I believe this interpretation to be correct. But it doesn’t go very far to explain WHY. It doesn’t give us insight into what Dee, or his angels, were thinking. Why is Sophia the Omega? Why was She sent to reveal the final Table of Loagaeth, instead of (for example) Abaddon/Apollyon – the actual Angel of the Apocalypse who appears in Revelation? (For that matter, why didn’t Raphael reveal it as he had the other 48 Tables?)

The answer, I believe, is found in the Book of Revelation. Above I mentioned the Whore of Babylon, but don’t forget there is another Lady with a starring role in that old pulp: the famous Woman of the Apocalypse. That’s Her pictured at the top of this post (complete with demonic creatures from the Revelation fawning at Her feet.) From Revelation 12, a Divine Woman in the heavens, crowned with the stars, clothed with the Sun, and the Moon at Her feet. She is persecuted by the Dragon but flown to safety by the Angels, where She finally gives birth to a Child. Tradition holds this to be Mary Herself, giving birth to Christ. Or that She is the celestial Mary giving birth to the Church. But Hermeticism calls her Aima Elohim, the Mother of the Gods (or Mother of Angels). She is equated with the Gnostic Sophia, the Jewish Shekinah, as well as with the Hermetic Soul of the World. In Dee’s journals, Galvah is presented in just this way – referred to as the mother of the “Family of Light” angels (Madimi and her siblings) and Kelley’s vision depicting the spirits of nature rushing toward Her and fawning upon Her. As if She were Mother Nature… because She is.

But whether we call Her Sophia, or Mary, or Shekinah, or Aima, or Wife of God, or Mother of God, or Mother of Angels, or Soul of the World, (or etc), there is one title by which She is most widely known even to common folk: the Woman of the Apocalypse. And therein, I believe, lies the key to understanding why She appears as “Galvah” in Dee’s journals. She came, very specifically, in her form of Woman of the Apocalypse in order to reveal the Loagaeth Table concerning that very Apocalypse. (Keep in mind, we are in this case using the word “apocalypse” in it’s erroneous – yet common – meaning of “the end of the world”.) In this sense, “Galvah” is almost literally a shorthand for Her title given in The Book of Revelation. And this tells us everything we need to know about with whom, exactly, Dee and Kelley believed they were speaking.

Zorge!

Greetings Enochian Scholars and Mages!

Dr. John Dee

I’m about to receive some blowback on this one, folks, so get ready! Modern Enochian practitioners (and researchers) are making a massive error. And, here’s the real shocker: it’s coming from a misunderstanding of Dee’s journals.

This error seems to have crept into Enochian study (and practice) sometime around the 1990s – but perhaps it was born even earlier. (Frankly I, blame the whole thing on the Golden Dawn – though only indirectly.) It specifically concerns the practical use of the Book of Loagaeth. If you’ve put any study into the tables of Loagaeth, or seen Enochian discussions online, you’ve doubtlessly run into this already, so you’ll be familiar with the following words:

“And of the First leaf, it is the last of the book.”

Many authors will tell you this is what the Angels (specifically the Mother Galvah) said to Dee and Kelley about the Book of Loagaeth; that the first table (which represents God) is really the last (which represents Earth). This certainly reminds one of the old Qabalistic axiom: “Kether is in Malkuth and Malkuth is in Kether.” In order to use Loagaeth, they say, you must understand this infinitely circular nature of Creation, and thereby know the key: that you must work the Book from the LAST table to the FIRST!

And doesn’t that make sense? If the first table of Loagaeth represents God and the final one the Earth, then it seems right to begin at the Earth and work our way toward God. After all, that’s how the Path of Initiation works on the Tree of Life – beginning with 1=10 (in Malkuth) and working upward toward 10=1 (in Kether). Same thing with Loagaeth, right?

Would I be writing this if that were even remotely correct?

Sorry, but that’s not what Galvah said to Dee and Kelley. Nor did she say anything about the circle of nature or working the Book of Loagaeth backward! What she actually said was:

“The first leaf (as you call it) is the last of the book.” [True and Faithful Relation… p 19]

I know that doesn’t sound so different than what I quoted above, but often (and especially in Dee’s journals!) the smallest of details can make the biggest differences. In this case, it’s that little parenthetical comment Galvah made – often deleted by authors who quote her: “(as you call it).” That little comment is important, because it was actually a call-back to something Dee himself had written months previously:

“…in my mind it seemeth requisite that as all the writing and reading of [Angelical] is from right to left, so the beginning of the book must be (as it were, in respect of our most usual manner of books, in all languages of Latin, Greek, English, etc) at the end of the book. And the end, at the beginning, as in the Hebrew Bible. [Five Books of Mystery, Peterson ed., p 411]

In case that was a bit word-salady (Dee lived at the same time as Shakespeare), here is what he is saying: If Angelical is written and read right-to-left (like Hebrew), then it stands to reason the Book of Loagaeth should be written just like a Torah. Hence, the “first page” of the Book by Western standards will actually be the LAST page of the book.

This can be a bit hard to visualize – unless you’re Jewish or Arabic, of course! So if you need to wrap your mind around this, try this exercise:

1 – Grab a book, any book – so long as it is written in a Western language (so, for instance, NOT Hebrew or Arabic). Place the book face up, unopened, on the table in front of you. You’ll be looking at the front cover.

2 – Now open the front cover and look at the first page. It might be a title page, or maybe just a blank page that precedes the title page. All familiar so far, right?

3 – Close the book and turn it face down. It should still be right side up – but you are now looking at the back cover.

4 – Now open the back cover and look at the last page in the book.

5 – Finally close the book again and look at the back cover.

If the book you are looking at were written in Hebrew (like a Torah), you would currently be looking at the FRONT cover of the book. You would read the book by opening the cover from left-to-right, and as you read you would turn the pages from left to right. Flip the book over to what YOU call the front cover, and now you’re looking at the BACK cover of a Torah. For all intents and purposes, from your Western-minded perspective, you would be reading the entire book backwards. In case it helps, here is a photo of a Torah opened to its first page (though to us it looks like the last page):

This is what Galvah was telling Dee: that the first leaf of Loagaeth should actually be where DEE would assume the last page of a book should fall. She was simply confirming what Dee had postulated some time beforehand. So, in the end, the Mother Galvah was not expounding upon the cyclic nature of the Universe. Nor was she instructing him to work the tables of Loagaeth backward! She was just telling Dee to turn the book over.

Sometimes the reality isn’t as sexy.

ADDENDUM: Oh yeah! About the Golden Dawn and their Path of Initiation upward on the Tree of Life: this is why I said I indirectly blame them for this error. Because modern occultists often forget just how deeply the GD affected modern esotericism – and sometimes take things that were original (or at least unique) to the GD as if they were a “given” for all occultism. A great example is our case here: the GD chose to work their Pathways from the bottom upward, while the much older Merkavah Mystics chose to work theirs from God downward. Not only did Dee live quite some time before the GD, but he was heavily influenced by the Merkavah system. Therefore, the tables of Loagaeth are intended to be worked from the highest heaven we can open (table 2) and work our way down to the Earth.