Evocation/Goetia?/EA?/Circles?


#1

In evocation, I notice many variables in place when you evoke an entity. In the Goetia, there are specific formulas one must employ in order to summon the demon. The entity is forced in into a triangle with threats, where the demon is obligated to fulfill the requests of the magician. The circle is so ornate that it would take weeks to complete, and it is covered with threats through the names of archangels and YHWH.

Then I see EA’s circle. He claims it is writing given to him by demons. I don’t doubt it. I have never seen him do anything that appears contrived. It’s all legit as far as I’m concerned. The channeling he used must have been intense.

Then, in EA’s video of a seminar where he includes a picture of his office space, there’s a circle with a triangle in the center of it, written in chalk on the floor. In another video, while summoning Azazel, EA creates the circle by laying rocks out, and pouring salt around the circle to absorb energies. I don’t remember quite why, but I do recall there was more than one reason. Finally, in the last evocation, I see EA with torches set in a circle.

Now, when I evoke, different methods have worked at different times. However, if full appearance is what the magician is striving for, is the Solomonic Circle the only way to go? Is the variation I see in the circles because they serve a different purpose; prophetic revelation, enhancement of power, full appearance, tutelage; or is this just coincidence?

Are variations the norm? Should they be? Does it all come down to intent, and what brings you to the place, mentally, where you can get close enough.

Thanks for any insights, everyone.


#2

The format people use tends to be based upon what we personally think is the nature of reality, and what we believe to be the nature and motivation of the entities we summon forth.

If you think demons are evil dirty nasty things that need to be handled with threats and name-dropping, that system makes sense - if you think they’re brethren in some way, i.e., spiritual entities in a universe where you yourself are a spiritual entity embodied in flesh, then that kind of approach would make no sense.

I’ve invoked entities directly into parts of my body, because in my belief system that makes sense, and for other people this would be anathema - but then I find the idea of threatening an entity pretty bizarre, so it’s not so much the case that “there’s no wrong way to do this” (which also kind of implies that there’s not really a right way) but that you have to operate based on what you in your heart believe to be the nature of things.

For example, I don’t insist entities take on full physical appearance because I think this physical world is a level of existance and not somehow more “real” than any other, so to me that would be like expecting them to get a social security number and a drivers license before they can interact with me - to me it would be pointless compliance with the norms of my world.

Other people feel differently and insist anything that won’t form into physical shape is your own imagination… both sides can make a congruent and convincing case for why they believe this, and come up with plenty of examples that “prove” that to be the right way.

It’s this difference in core beliefs, and we all have plenty of experience and writings from other magicians to back up our own personal views, that causes the sometimes heated arguments you get on forums about the “best” way to do things, because there will always be people who want to name-call those who use different methods; we’re talking about some very deep-seated beliefs here, and seeing someone trample all over them as though they’re delusional or just plain old WRONG can be a hard thing for any of us to ignore, even the most mellow and confident magician.

If in doubt at first, use a tried and tested method where the paradigm behind it makes sense to you, and then develop your own methods and understandings from that. Err on the side of caution maybe, but also with respect to entities, and don’t try to use a method that gives you the chills when you’re reading about it or that calls upon a model of the Divine that you don’t really believe in at your heart, or that you have negative feelings about.

You’re the one who’s going to have to live with the consequences of your actions, not the internet stranger telling you how things are, or the author, or the long-deceased grimoire scribe who was so sure they were the only one with the truth.


#3

There is a piece I can contribute, but in a somewhat roundabout manner, to build on what Lady Eva referenced.

The format of the evocation doesn’t appear to be as important, at least in certain regards as to the outcome of the evocation. You do this because you desire/need a result of some kind, is that not right?

Then work towards reaching these results, however there is a certain necessity to know that some ways attain better results than others. For example, I might be able to rush into an evocation, completely unprepared and still call down a particular entity which I can communicate with, but in that flustered state of mind with a lack of viable objectives; the outcome would be terribly botched. Contrasted with an evocation performed with a clear objective and ample preparation, in a manner of speaking the consciousness of the operator is as key as the ‘methods’ the operator may deem fit to use.

Now, when I evoke, different methods have worked at different times. However, if full appearance is what the magician is striving for, is the Solomonic Circle the only way to go? Is the variation I see in the circles because they serve a different purpose; prophetic revelation, enhancement of power, full appearance, tutelage; or is this just coincidence?

But to answer one of your questions. The western tradition seems to be the primary one that is concerned with the notion of evoking to full appearance, however the human mind has a tendency towards rendering things it may not fully grasp into a format which it can.

If I were to walk past a Hindu or Taoist ritual being performed at one of their festivals or temples (and my senses are sufficiently heightened for the day), I will notice that some of the entities that are gathered notice me and then gravitate towards me for some communication. Now, they are not explicitly evoking anything to full appearance in any sense, so why is it I somehow perceive the vague ‘physical forms’ of these beings when they truly do not have such forms?

We may consider such things, but let us not be too mired in just thought. Action is needed most times, action to get things done.