I have been avoiding the Nec:. Long time go I read it was fake then I see bits and pieces saying it is a forgery; it was all invented by Lovecraft; blah blah.

But it appears a lot of people consider it a real work in which they apply it and seemingly get their desired results.

I am clueless, just began watching a Doc. on lovecraft, so far I really like everything- and I also find a really Full Stirring in my chest encouraging me to give it a read- But I am very anti fiction- I have never been able to follow for very long- except for bram stokers Dracula. Where do I find whatever is supposed to be the “Real nec:.”? if there is one. any opinions and info would be greatly appreciated.

Donald Tyson wrote one based on the works of Lovecraft, but I have never been much of a fan of Tyson’s work for a lot of reasons. The Simon Necronomicon and the works of Joshua Free use the name Necronomion but are more based on the Mespotamian pantheon, as opposed to Lovecraft, and in my opinion hold much more value than Tyson’s series. I’ve read the books by Joshua Free and have to say I still prefer the books by “Simon” more, but I have had my copy of Simon’s Necronomicon for almost 20 years now, so I may be a tad bias here. Asenath Mason wrote a book called ‘Necronomicon Gnosis’ which I would highly recommend checking out as well.

1 Like

I’d followon what Andreeje wrote, the Simon (the usually referred to published book) is something, although it is “hip” by many writers to bash on it
(there is even an author who has a chapter that gives many reasons it & HPLovecraft’s works don’t make sense/can’t be real/“so I’ve heard as I know this person, etc”… and then gives his own “dream-inspired” works as if his are real(?) which then seem to question his whole comment about HPL
-a cultural things I guess (just as Casteneda’s works are questioned by many, vs specific applications of the underlying “current”).

I’d split up relations into 3 groups (sort of as above comment)

  • with a 4th being the commenters, that say "Since that Necronomicon stuff 'isn’t real here are my ideas…"
    1st being HP Lovecrafts (early “supernatural” writings, informed by this Dreams and imagination, thus inspiration or did he “contact something?” unclear, but he ‘claims’ he didn’t intentionally put esoteric ideas in… thus he could have tapped something uncon, or actually he could have inserted ideas and just claimed he didnt do so…
    mainly in these writings this is a book/text that is referenced, and spoken about by characters as something “practitioners” have studied, there are a few sections quoted, but only bits (they paint a world-view, as well as allow tapping a “current”)… there are some internet pages that collect the handful of quotes (a few pages total), which have page numbers in the hundreds, so implying there are many other pages unknown.

second the Simon, which many complain why use that title, while this book says a) it is a publishing of a received document that had this title on it (so just using what was given), and b) stating that the meaning of the name is meant and not explicitly the Lovecraft use (like 2 people with a same name, not implying they are the same person)… which others interp it was trying to have a reference to that wellknown intentionally…
The Simon seems to have refs to Meso-Sumer (but whether to them, or to another system, based on- like Hermetic vs Greek-based… some similar references… which)… which seems to have a few different sections to it, each a different/distinct aspect (ie the 50 names, vs the “background-mythos” section, vs “Gate walking”, requiring the Watcher summoning, requiring the conjuration of the fire… based upon use of an herb… not listed)… and I’d strongly contrast, those that “Follow a system” (may not all be exactly, but the fundamental components are needed) vs those that were “inspired by a system, but develop something new from it”… I think any using the Gate, and thus the Watcher, can Only be that second developing new, as the first seems to require an unlisted component (unless think it was written incorrectly, some publication even say XYZ works as well?)

and I wonder if the Joshua Free works would be in the first (HPL) or second (in trad of Simon’s manuscript technique’s directly) or more so completely on its own? -as the assumption that Simon’s work is Mesopotamian-Sumerian (which may not be directly) but then to interpret all other works that seek to derive and connect with Meso-Sumer systems are therefore related to Simon (and to that Historical-Magickal culture) vs a derivation…

many other writings are neat, but they seem to be in the line of "since all this is made up anyway (implying they question if any Objective Essence/Energetic-currents and-or Entities do exist with this system, or if any do at All?)- therefore just make it up… [if one can’t/hasn’t contacted Entities in a clear fashion, they may believe pretending or actual is the same… but when actually connecting, as well as plugging into an Energetic Pattern: do XYZ and over there things click… once contact something, then one can feel when there isn’t something. -that’s my sense of many that say, real or imagined what’s the difference…] but inspiration, cultural-concept, to work within can be beneficial

so unless your thoughts in the “mythos” section (which if so rather than some of the more recent writers you might try to understand/read the works of Kenneth Grant (vs the many who subsumed his ideas… issue being KG is a bit harder to read, as it seems he actually did the explorations he mentions, which affected how he writes/thinks?)…

vs if you were to approach the Simon works- I’d look for the essential prereq principles (and decide if you seek to do it “as is” vs “adapting it” (in terms of the second it seems EA has referenced Adapting it, and had great success, but as I understand EA actually worked out an underlying logic to the entire before he started and stuck to it, vs some how do a bit of this and of that from the bk, and there isn’t an underlying system-supporting their progress through it)

(either of the above one can read much that question- but one can read many comments about how EA’s system doesn’t work also… as well as a “received” discovered Grimmoire (as HPLovecraft’s references seem to be Finding/Discovering a Grimmoire via SoulTravel/Dream-Teachings (not a small-dr, but a BigDr as some systems differentiate)…
that may be compared, or may not, to the KoF (and OAA), in terms of the first published Grimmoire by EA (as opposed to BoA which as it explains wasn’t “received as is” already written ~KoF, BoA was developed by his explorations)…
thus the question if the Necronomicon you are referring to is either of those two.

seems my posts end of long so often: more twists and turns and a shorter-concise of referring to popular-understanding vs differences:

anyway a thought after I posted the above was how the principles of the Watcher Rite ties to the Naga-summoning of Indonesian magic in some ways (and perhaps the concept of Lovecraft’s Shuggoth- but that clearly is not the same as the usual imagine-protection as both emphasize the Danger of “these protectors” -

  • ‘These Guardians, Watchers, care not what they Watch’, but will walk the circle as long as the requirements are observed. -if they are not followed, beware (the Beings in this text are said, per a ch in that text, to not be banished nor affected by Modern Energies and such…

‘thus are they more real than NewAge PopOccult or less real?’ in part determined by the distinguishing of the different types… as above The Necronomicon isn’t just one thing (unless there is an actual source of all of these?)-

The Necronomicon is a book dreamt up by Lovecraft. Yes, there are books bearing that name. The Simon nec is the most famous. It has little to nothing to do with Lovecraft. You cab disregard that book entirely. It does have its uses, but not in a true Lovecraftian context.
My favorite Necronomicon attempt is the Tyson Necronomicon. He stays relatively true to the mythos and hints at how to work with the old ones. You just need to have a sharp eye. The rest on that series is fairly crappy, except for 13 gates.

Look into the Psuedonomicon by Phil Hine. It details his work with the Lovecraft entities. Konstantinos also details a working with Cthulhu in his book Nocturnicon, I believe.

As for the Necronomicon, it is indeed “fake,” the name having been coined by HP Lovecraft for his fiction. There is no “real” book. But just because it is fake, doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. The Chaos Magick paradigm is well known for using “fictional” characters to work magick. There is plenty of articles available online detailing the evocation of characters from comics and anime. All that is required is belief.

1 Like