How come Aaron Leitch has never seen a spirit?   12 comments

Ok, folks I just had to blog about this one…

This morning, at work, I encountered a rare instance where I had a few minutes of downtime at the end of my shift.  So, having nothing better to do at that moment, I decided to see what ol’ Google had to say about “aaron leitch” (yes, I do that from time to time!).  Past all the usual links to my website, blog, Facebook, defunct MySpace page and my books, I found this gem:

How come Aaron Leitch has never seen a spirit?

You can imagine how that grabbed my attention.  LOL  If you click on the above link – which is a summary of the thread – you’ll find some interesting comments.  Such as:

“…it appears he has never evoked a spirit to physical manifestation.   Why is that?”

I love this one:

“He calls their name and leaves out cookies. Im not sure that is traditional.”

Maybe they read my essay on Santa Claus and got confused?  Of course, someone asked the obvious question:

“Ok, how do we know he has never evoked a spirit to visible manifestation? Has he said so?”

But then we see this reply:

“Yes on many occasions. He said that it does not bother him and it is not a concern. “

Of course we aren’t offered any quotes to back up that claim – which is interesting.  I, for one, would love to see someone quote me – from my blogs, books, forums or anywhere else – actually claiming that I have never seen a spirit.  LOL

Over the years that I have been an author and forum-poster I have learned two truisms:

1) If people can get the wrong impression about what you write they will.

2) People can always get the wrong impression of what you write.

You guys know that I pride myself on writing some of the most down-to earth documents about magick ever written.  No needlessly big words or jargon intended merely to make me look smart and make you feel “out of the loop.”  If I am asked (or am addressing) a question, I answer it in plain simple English – suitable for translating into plain simple (insert your language here).  Yet, the above two rules apply to my work just as surely as they do the work of Aleister Crowley – who regularly inserted in-jokes and blinds and red herrings because he found it fun to do so.

I am, perhaps, more forthcoming than most with my work – freely sharing my techniques and results, and lately even adding photos into the mix.  Of course, that doesn’t mean I share every magickal secret I know with you guys.  There are many layers to what I do, and you can bet I’m not going to share every bit of it with the world.

For example, take a look at the photo I posted of the ingredients for my Abramelin Oil.  Have you noticed that one ingredient is wrapped in a white paper towel?  Why do you suppose I would do that?  And, given that, what else do you suppose I’m not telling you?  Sometimes what I leave unsaid is as important as what I say.  😉  But enough about that.

Here is another interesting quote from the above-linked thread:

“To me it seems that he writes many times as if he were a skeptic. Maybe thats why.   At times I fee like asking him “Ok, do you believe in magic or not???”

That one makes a little more sense.  I purposefully write as if I were an academic studying magick from a cultural perspective, rather than as a “rabid true believer” who accepts everything occult as pure-distilled fact.  Or, as it was stated – as a skeptic.  Why?  Because I want my work to be read by people outside of occult circles, people who may be skeptics themselves – but who might actually take an interest in the subject matter as a valid aspect of the human experience.

Note my membership in the Societas Magica – an academic, rather than an occult,  group.  Well-respected scholars are finally looking into these subjects with open minds, rather than looking down their noses at it, and us.  I want to encourage them.

Plus, I’m just not “into” dumping a bunch of my personal beliefs and things that my spirits have told me on you – dear reader – and expect you to just accept them without critical thinking.  We’ve got enough occult authors out there that do that – and will call you plenty of names if you dare to question or challenge them on any of it.  What my spirits tell me is my fucking business, and it really isn’t going to impact how you work anyway.  So, I’d rather just stick to documented facts and let you do the Work for yourself.

I registered for that forum in order to clear up the questions those folks have about me.  I’m not sure if I’ll even go back to see how they respond.  I may or may not, but ultimately I’ve had my say and they will believe what they choose to believe about me regardless of my explanations.  They’ve already applied the “two rules” to me anyway – so “what’re ya gunna do?”

In case you groovy folks following my ramblings here are interested, I’ll share with you how I responded to them.  Hell, maybe it will clear up some questions even you have had about me.  😉


Aaron Leitch here, and I would like to clear up a few points:

1)  Yes, I have indeed seen spirits, had visions, heard sounds, smelled smells, had scientifically-unexplainable manifestations and more.  I have never stated, anywhere, that I have never seen a spirit.  Wink

However, I have stated that I am not “naturally wired” to interact with the spirits in a visual manner.  I seem to be better wired for sound, and sometime smell and always for “feeling.”  But, like Dr. Dee, I can’t count on visuals every time, so I often employ a skryer (a very talented one to whom I also happen to be married).

In my writings, I try to get across the idea that evocation is NOT about getting the visuals or other “special effects.”  They are damn fun when they happen!  But they aren’t the point of the work – and there should be at least one author out there that is willing to admit it.  I think this is where some of you have gotten the impression that I’ve “never seen a spirit.”

2) Do I believe in magick or not?  Most certainly I do!  However, I don’t just write for “true believers.”  My writings are fit for study in academic circles as well as occult circles – so I often take what might seem to be a disconnected stance from the material.  I present magick as a cultural thing – with a real function to fulfill in society – not just something that I practice myself and desire others to “believe in.”

As for Enochian magick – you can be sure that much of Dee’s material (especially the Heptarchia) has sources older than Dee himself.  Enochian magick wasn’t just handed down to humans by angels who carved the words in stone.  They chose Dee because he already had a certain basis of knowledge in his head (and at his fingertips) which they needed in order to build the Enochian system as we know it.  (Such as when Dee asked for the form of the Seal of the True God, and was told, “It is already perfected in a book of thine.”  Said book turned out to be Liber Juratis, and the angels only had to supply new lettering to go with the existing figure.)

Most of the Heptarchia was constructed this way.  Some have said that Dee’s work was the “culmination” of all the magick that had come before him, after which he bounded off into new realms with Liber Loagaeth and the Great Table of the Earth.

I hope this has answered some of your questions.


Posted January 30, 2012 by kheph777 in rants

Tagged with

12 responses to “How come Aaron Leitch has never seen a spirit?

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. It may be that sometimes, people expect a little more “show”.
    Maybe a photo, or better, shooting an authentic appearance of an angel, preferably a big one, of those who make special effects.
    You could command it to first open a big circle of light on the ceiling, opening the ceiling to bring up the blue sky with clouds and then he came down with a celestial music. This should be easy for an angel, uh? During the ritual you’d be levitating above the ground.
    You could also create a communication audible to those who read your blog. But no sound files.
    Just give orders to the “spirits” to speak in the ears of those who are visiting your site.
    It would be a great success!



  2. By Jove, Gilberto, I think you’ve got it! 🙂 🙂 🙂


    • Thanks Aaron. Sorry, may be the angels don´t want came with their own music, so may be I can make a sound track for it.
      I have some works at Myspace, may be an idea, as I have done some works on soundtracks for TV documentaries before.
      Some years ago I recorded a 26 minute track for a fire ritual. Just an idea.


  3. tl;dr: Aaron did not arrive on teh interwebs last Tuesday and feeding trolls or getting sucked into flame wars is not his style. But answering questions is.

    With regard to things Aaron leaves unsaid, he has been more forthcoming in print with “secret” subject matter than any other published occultist I can name. Anyone who actually studies his work – especially Secrets – and applies it in their own practical magick will fill in the blanks in accounts of his own workings without even trying. Any who don’t figure out the stuff he leaves unsaid will get complete results with no extra hazards – maybe a little slower, but nothing that is necessary has been left out of Aaron’s howto docs.

    I work hard to avoid “believing in” magick or anything else – it’s a habit I picked up early in my own little Gnostic quest and it has served me well. A “belief” is a fixed opinion that builds a brick wall right down the middle of Reality. The mind automatically magnifies everything on one side of that wall while minimizing or avoiding everything on the other side. Beliefs radically limit their hosts’ ability to learn and grow.

    Beliefs are very convenient, they save the brain a lot of work by enabling snap judgments about complex subject matter, so they grow like weeds the moment your back is turned. And like the weeds they are, beliefs will take the whole place over unless they are periodically torn out, roots and all. It helps to have Existentialism and Neuropsychology in your toolshed, when it comes time to prove to yourself that a deeply rooted belief is both logically absurd, and at best one of many possible arbitrary interpretations of incomplete data.

    Transient, conditional beliefs are more like domesticated plants than weeds – they can be cultivated and put to use. A working magician usually develops a large collection of them. This kind of belief is picked up and used when necessary – for instance, while doing an evocation or exorcism – but when the work at hand is done, the belief is cleaned up and put back on its shelf, available for later use but out of the way.

    Putting on a magickal Persona a.k.a. getting into character as a Magician with costumes, props, etc., automatically includes switching on a large cluster of transient, conditional beliefs: That is one of the reasons why magick users from tribal shamans to Catholic priests change their physical appearance and behavior when actually exercising their offices. But getting back OUT of character when the job is finished is equally important, and this is something many beginners in magick may not understand.

    When ritual directions say “visualize” they mean “imagine,” and the ability to pretend one has imaginary friends can be the key to success in practical magick. Every child is a shaman: They work on the astral every day, and the scary monsters that come to them in the dark are often quite real – which is why Wizards introduce their children to friendly, protective “imaginary friends” early on.

    If these observations mess with anyone’s ability to believe in Magick, good! An unexamined belief is a ticking time bomb. Best to put sandbags around it and blow it up now, rather than waiting for it to go off all by itself.


  4. You could just guess the number your critics are thinking in their heads. Or, pull a rabbit-headed angel out of your hat. Maybe burn a magickal seal and make it reappear? Anything? Nothing? Oh damn… that’s right… some people are just asses and won’t be happy no matter what you do :-/

    Nice Dale Carnegie response, though. Way to stay above ’em 🙂


  5. Hello.
    I am the guy who opened that thread on advancedmagic forum.

    First of all, I’d like to apologize if you think this has brought you any harm whatsoever. This wasn’t my intention, as I was really under the impression you hadn’t had any direct experience with spirits, since you never mentioned it in your blog posts.

    Yes, I know what goes on between you and the spirits is strictly personal, but what I’m saying is that you never mention if the spirit has actually manifested visibly during one of your rituals so that you could be sure it was there (this is one of the grimoire requirements for a successful evocation, after all).

    By the way, I have your books and hold your work on Enochian in high regard.

    While I don’t agree with everything you say (specially your use of GD techniques) I find many of your posts interesting and useful.

    Again, I’d like to make it clear it wasn’t my intention to bad mouth or mock you in any way when I posted that topic. I just wanted to be clear as to why you never said you achieved a full manifestation, that’s all.


    • Greetings, Brazilianguy

      Oh no worries, I don’t think you caused any harm whatsoever. I found the entire thread quite amusing, actually. Plus, it gave me a chance to discuss my particular writing style, and *why* you’ve never seen me mention whether or not I get visual manifestation in my work.

      Just a couple of points I would like to address, however:

      First, I disagree that visual manifestation is a requirement for successful evocation. Some (but not all) grimoires mention it, but it is never stated as being a universal requirement. That the spirits arrive, yes. But how you percieve them is not really an issue in the greater grimoiric tradition. (That is one of those things that is between you and the spirits.) Dr. Dee did not get visual manifestation, and I highly doubt anyone will claim he was not a grimoire master. Other medieval records also point out that some people could see spirits while others could not – even when standing in the same room during the evocations.

      Second, I’m not sure exactly what you mean by my “use of Golden Dawn techniques.” I am a member of the Order and I certainly use the system. It has been very beneficial to my overall spiritual growth, and I view it as my primary source of “spiritual authority” (as I describe in “Secrets…”) However, if you are thinking that I use the Golden Dawn methods with my Solomonic work, you are incorrect. There are no LBRPs or Lotus Wands or Openings by Watchtower in the grimoires, and I work with the grimoires from a traditional standpoint. You might want to take a look at “Secrets of the Magickal Grimoires” sometime, as it gives a fairly clear picture of how I go about things. 😉


  6. Crystals were not used in evocation of demons. Crystals were only used for communication with good spirits, while for low spirits, that is demons, aerial or infernal, full summoning and manifestation of the spirit was required. This rule has no exceptions with the demons part, and only one with angels: in Key of Solomon angels are summoned like evil spirits, to full manifestation.
    Evil spirits can be worked with outside of evocation, for example in simple spells in Grimorium Verum, however these are not evocation as understood in Goetia, Key of Solomon or Heptameron. If magicians cared to go through difficulties of physical summoning, instead of using easier thing like crystal summoning (which had simpler procedures), we can assume that it had some purpose, namely binding spirit to earthly realm, which allowed for better control and/or opened bigger gap in spheres for a spirit to fulfill magician’s wish, while in crystal summoning the only thing sought for is verbal communication and advice.
    Also it is mentioned in grimoires and journals from Renaissance that seeing spirits in the crystal need skill or talent, but we doesn’t have any mention about the need of a clairvoyant person to help in demons evocation. I believe that scrying uses so called astral vision, while full manifestation physical eyes.
    Thus your arguments are wrong.


  7. John, I direct your attention to Trithemius’ “The Art of Drawing Spirits into Crystals.” This most influential work is entirely about summoning spirits – not angels – into the crystal stone. Therefore, I believe my arguments still hold water.


  8. I think this book is about angels. In conjuration magician says: “”In the name of the blessed and holy Trinity, I do desire thee, thou strong mighty angel, Michael, [Or any other angel or spirit] that if it be the divine will of him who is called Tetragrammaton &c. the Holy God, the Father, that thou take upon thee some shape as best becometh thy celestial nature”. It says “any spirit” but later “celestial nature”, so it probably means “any spirit of celestial nature”. From what I know, celestial spirits means angels. I draw from this logical conclusion, that celestial spirits are subtle, live far from earth and are not subjects for full manifestation (earth binding) like sublunary spirits (which are usually demons). That’s why crystal is suitable tool for communication with angels. But I admit there are no definite proofs for any side of this argument.


    • Aaron, first, I totally loved this:

      Over the years that I have been an author and forum-poster I have learned two truisms:

      1) If people can get the wrong impression about what you write they will.

      2) People can always get the wrong impression of what you write.

      and quoted it today.

      Second, the Art of Drawing Spirits into Crystals is, in my experience, not limited to celestial entities, though it is designed for “good” spirits. You drop the part about celestial nature from the conjuration, or change it to terrestrial, chthonic, or whatever you find necessary. The construction of the hand mirror-like scrying device specifically requires the Kings of the four corners of the material world, and the circle includes the seven planetary governors. You’ve got all the spheres and entities that participate in the Chain of Manifestation represented, making it suitable for celestial and terrestrial Work.

      It does not have the constraints and protections that are recommended for evil spirits though, per the 4th Book of Occult Philosophy. I use it for Planetary Intelligences, Spirits, Genius Loci, and I plan to use it for Heroes too, all traditionally “good” spirits. It also has “worked” in establishing communications with nepheshim and some spirits of a demonic nature who I no longer work with.

      I have a vague memory that there was some confusion about whether the four names of the cardinal spirits were the Angels or the Four Princes of the infernal realms. Using the four demonic princes instead of the angels of the corners of the world would make theoretical sense if you were going to use the technique for evil spirits, but it would imply some form of established relationship with them. I picture the experience going something like, “I know Oriens, and I know Paymon, but they never heard of you!” Trounce trounce trounce.


  9. Hi, I am a skeptic on this subject but I have always held a respectful fascination with the occult. I certainly believe there is good and evil. Being able to summon Angels and Spirits sounds to me like we are delving into things that we are not meant to know about. Having said this, I am a complete novice on this subject and I have no experience in the occult. I certainly believe this can be done, and if it was used for good purposes to benefit humanity and to enlighten one’s self with knowledge and wisdom, then I think this is a good thing. I am interested in buying Aaron’s book,not to practise but to gain wisdom and knowledge on the subject.

    Regards Lochlanny


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: