DoM cipher language

Does anyone know how to go about creating a statement for a petition (Ritual 1 - Demons of Magick) if the language i’m writing in includes special characters not found in Gordon’s cipher table?

In the book, he advises utilizing your mother tongue (i guess the purpose of it is to evoke a clear feeling of what you desire in the visualization process; focus deeply on the meaning of the words)

Should i just omit it and spell it out using only A-Z? i would still know what it says but it would come out half-baked and could ruin the moment. Maybe even confuse me a little, i’m afraid.

I can of course just write it down in english but i’m not sure if i’d be able to pour in my emotions to the same degree.

1 Like

If the special characters are part of your mother tongue, then I would just include them in the cipher.

1 Like

Do you mean mix it up? special characters in plain alphabet in between the cipher symbols?

What kind of special characters are we talking about?

If it is something like an accent above an e, for example, include it above the ciphered equivalent.

1 Like

The cipher in Winterfield’s book is not even the real Transitus Fluvii (Passing the River), as he claims it to be. Some of those letters were made up and derived from a mix of Theban, Celestial, Malachim. It’s a frankensteined alphabet.

This cipher, originally made by Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa, is the man behind this occult alphabet (Passing the River; circa 1510), and it is not made for the modern Latin alphabet. It is designed after the Hebrew alphabet, so it only has about 22 letters.

I am using Agrippa’s version by supplementing and omitting some letters to accommodate the original Transitus Fluvii.

I would highly suggest researching Theban alphabet (circa 1518, by Trithemius = Agrippa’s teacher) and using it instead, your ritual shouldn’t fail even with a different cipher. I have petitioned to Stolas with the original Agrippan cipher and it worked just fine.

In the case that you are using an ñ, just spell it out with n & y/i (example: Niña can be converted into Ninya or Ninia). Hope that helps, lemme know if you got questions.

5 Likes

From what i remember, Gordon doesn’t claim the cipher to be Transitus Fluvii but that it is related to it and was found in a private occult collection.

Honestly i think i’m gonna try out the one in the book and perhaps later experiment with Agrippa’s.

I’m not using “ñ”, i want to use characters like “ą”, “ł”, etc.

Thanks for the suggestion and a history recap though :slight_smile: @Vilnask

1 Like

You’re welcome. He did say that in the book though. In all honesty, I got turned off from this author because of his alterations on Agrippa’s legacy, just saying. (I know many of you look up to G.W., but he deserves to be called out).

Screenshot_34

1 Like

that’s what i’m gonna do. I have one more question though, if you don’t mind.

Example:
My language has 2 ways of spelling the letter “u” - it can be either “u” or “ó”

How would i go about spelling the latter one?

Is putting an accent above a ciphered “o” gonna do the job? I want to make sure that the demon will understand me, as Gordon gives quite a lot of room for accuracy with shapes. I wouldn’t want this trick to be disregarded as random strokes and symbols assigned to the wrong letters. @DarkestKnight

I would put the accent above the ciphered “o,” and as long as it works for you, it will work for the demon.

@Vilnask the quote you underlined from the book proves what you said to be incorrect. Winterfield did not claim the cipher was the Passing the River Script, he says it is “clearly related” to it.

3 Likes

Hmm, i’ve read the screenshot but from what i see it states the following:

This is not Transitus Fluvii. It is related to it but in itself unique.

Nonetheless, it’s good to acknowledge Agrippa and it’s a pity that Gordon didn’t think to mention his name in that chapter

1 Like

I wouldn’t want this trick to be disregarded as random strokes and symbols assigned to the wrong letters.

well this is the reason why I highly recommend looking into the actual Agrippan version. You’d need to break down the phonetic equivalent of these letters to accommodate the letters that you needed to work with.

“closely related”

Still, frankensteined and “related” are two different meanings lol. In this scenario, it’s like saying it’s the traditional Chinese, but his version is a hiragana alphabet littered with kanji, in which cases you’d need to study both chinese and kanji.

1 Like

I can see how that works with “ñ”, but i’m afraid that letters like “ą” or “ł” can’t be further broken down and replaced with standard ones to match the sound…

My best bet is probably to go with @DarkestKnight suggestion.

Thank you all for your help kind people :slight_smile:

1 Like

This is a really good example of is it or isn’t it a blind in a modern book! Haven’t worked it… would love to know what works best for anyone who tests both!

1 Like

It is indeed best to trace back or double check “facts” you see in modern writing, doing so will give you more edge and knowledge, I hope everyone acknowledges. “Uniquity” never defined an amalgamation of components, especially with language, unless they wanted to bend something: understanding. A good example is blending modern Thai alphabet and Hindi. They may look slightly coherent when written on paper, but they just won’t make sense to the native users. It will make sense if an author publishes it though, after a century or so… and in this way it will be remembered under his brand.

Even modern alphabets work, but for the sake of the ritual, I would definitely write in an occult alphabet too. Of course, anyone is welcome to try anything, be it the G.W. version or Agrippa’s. For beginners, take the G.W. version as suggested, because the Transitus Fluvii is not really for everyone. There is a reason why the Agrippan alphabets are not so popular in modern circles, it belongs to esoteric literature and I think it will stay there for a while.

Goodbye.

1 Like