Magical Path

Three Books of Occult Philosophy (Llewellyn’s Sourcebook)

Henry Cornelius Agrippa. Llewellyn Publications 1992, Paperback, 1024 pages, $26.00

[Chapter LXX, Of Occult Philosophy, Book I. (part 4)]

That proper names of things are very necessary in Magicall operations, almost all men testifie: For the naturall power of things proceeds first from the objects to the senses, and then from these to the imagination, and from this to the mind, in which it is first conceived, and then is expressed by voices, and words. The Platonists therefore say, that in this very voice, or word, or name framed, with its Articles, that the power of the thing as it were some kind of life, lies under the form of the signification. First conceived in the mind as it were through certain seeds of things, then by voices or words, as a birth brought forth, and lastly kept in writings. Hence Magicians say, that proper names of things are certain rayes of things, every where present at all times, keeping the power of things, as the essence of the thing signified, rules, and is discerned in them, and know the things by them, as by proper, and living Images. For as the great operator doth produce divers species, and particular things by the influencies of the Heavens, and by the Elements, together with the vertues of Planets; so according to the properties of the influencies proper names result to things, and are put upon them by him who numbers the multitude of the Stars, calling them all by their names, of which names Christ in another place speaks, saying, Your names are written in Heaven. Adam therefore that gave the first names to things, knowing the influencies of the Heavens, and properties of all things, gave them all names according to their natures, as it is written in Genesis, where God brought all things that he had created before Adam, that he should name them, and as he named any thing, so the name of it was, which names indeed contain in them wonderfull powers of the things signified. Every voice therefore that is significative, first of all signifies by the influence of the Celestiall harmony: Secondly, by the imposition of man, although oftentimes otherwise by this, then by that. But when both significations meet in any voice or name, which are put upon them by the said harmony or men, then that name is with a double vertue, viz. naturall, and arbitrary, made most efficatious to act, as oft as it shall be uttered in due place, and time, and seriously with an intention exercised upon the matter rightly disposed, and that can naturally be acted upon by it. So we read in Philostratus, that when a maid at Rome dyed [died] the same day she was married, and was presented to Apollonius, he accurately inquired into her name, which being known, he pronounced some occult thing, by which she revived. It was an observation amongst the Romanes in their holy rites, that when they did besiege any City, they did diligently enquire into the proper, and true name of it, and the name of that God, under whose protection it was, which being known, they did then with some verse call forth the Gods that were the protectors of that City, and did curse the inhabitants of that City, so at length their Gods being absent, did overcome them, as Virgil sings,

—– That kept this Realm, our Gods
Their Altars have forsook, and blest abodes.

Now the verse with which the Gods were called out, and the enemies were curst [cursed], when the City was assaulted round about, let him that would know, finde it out in Livy, and Macrobius; but also many of these Serenus Samonicus in his book of secret things makes mention of.

Although I don’t believe in the concept of things having a “true name” per se, I do recognise the importance of associating a word with the concept that the word represents (symbolises). This fits with the idea that “the map is not the territory” – that is, a word is not the concept it represents – it is only a map (symbol) for that concept. Having a word to describe an abstract concept is a beginning; however, it is far more important to have a clear mental notion of a concept, which may only be represented by a group of words (rather than a name), such as an analogy or metaphor. For example, we may have a concept (or concepts) of God, but it may not be possible to really express in words what God is, or our experience with God. We may have to describe the concept or experience in analogy and metaphor. So it is the connection and strength of association we have between a word and a concept that gives it power. It may be essential to have experience with the concept in some form to be able to truly identify with it. An atheist is unlikely to be able to persuaded to the existence of God without have some kind of experience of God to make a connection and identification with the concept.

This all raises the question: how can words for a magical language be formed? Should they be arbitrary, or should there be some process of ‘divining’ or ‘channelling’ the name in some way, such as through a meditative process. The way in which the Enochian language, alphabet, and angel names were received could offer some clues – although Enochian has been criticised for the fact that it’s grammar is very similar to English, suggesting a certain bias on the parts of Dee and Kelley.

In his essay on “Metaphor” (in artificial languages), Rick Morneau argues that metaphors are best avoided when constructing a language (or when writing in a conlang). His arguments are sound, given that languages such as English, make heavy use of metaphor. Morneau gives examples of metaphors, such as “prices rise, soar, plummet, nosedive,” and “the work is uphill, downhil, or at a standstill.”

From an esoteric perspective, metaphor and simile are regularly used to help explain abstract concepts such as God,  the Higher Self, the soul or spirit, etc. The Gospel of Thomas is a good example: (20) “[Heaven is] like a mustard seed…”; (50) “The Father’s kingdom is like a person who has [good] seed. …”; (96) “The Father’s kingdom is like [a] woman. …” While these are similes, a good example of a metaphor is the “dark night of the soul” described by Saint John of the Cross in a poem and follow-up commentary.

The benefit of metaphors is that they bring to mind images and related concepts, if the person reading/hearing the metaphor is familiar with the concept(s) that comprise the metaphor. For example, Assagioli’s Egg Diagram is a visual metaphor for the psyche, which is rich in symbolism. As with an actual egg, the “shell” is permeable t indicate that “stuff” can move between the boundaries, which delimit, rather than act as concrete separators. Some Psychosynthesis authors choose to refer to this diagram as the Oval Diagram, which to me is counterproductive as it removes the metaphorical associations, disempowering the symbol.

So, while I agree that metaphors may be unhelpful for many artificial languages I wonder if  metaphors could be left out of an esoteric language. Obviously similes can be used extensively (“x is like y”), but metaphors such as the  “dark night of the soul” seem so rich, especially when such things have been experienced. When the concept used as the metaphor is common, and likely cross-cultural, then it should be easily recognised. The abstract concept needs a different kind of understanding, often experiential. To me, “dark night  of the soul” is a lot less awkward than “the journey of the soul is like travel during a dark night.”