CryptoSigilization

CryptoSigilization In "Sigils, Servitors and Godforms", Marik describes the technique by which a phrase is converted into a sigil in the system proposed by Austin Osman Spare in The Book of Pleasure: Spare analyses the structure of the letters of the phrases that make up the sentence containing the magickal intention, removes repeating letters, then combines them, and finally simplifies them into an iconic symbol. This symbol will be sufficiently remote from the original sentence that it cannot be identified. This process is used to encode the will of the individual into a discrete unit of magickal functionality. Looked at from another perspective, the practitioner is also applying a simple cryptographic algorithm to create a ciphertext. In a conventional cryptosystem, a block of plaintext is subjected to an algorithm paired with a key in order to produce a result that cannot be read without possession of the appropriate decryption key. This is not to suggest that the two processes are completely analogous, as a sigil is not meant to be reversed back into its constituent letters. It is a one-way process. In this respect, sigilization also resembles the application of a hash function. A hash function is another cryptographic entity which receives an input of variable length, and produces a fixed-length output. This process is used to ensure that data is not modified during transmission through unsecured networks. Like sigilization, the process is one-way. This process of concealment and abstraction serves to shield the meaning of the sigilized phrase from the conscious mind of the magician, which may hamper the efforts of the subconscious mind in empowering it. This effect is of course contingent on the ability of the magician to forget the sigilized phrase subsequent to its encoding. To create another analogy, this process can be compared to the compilation of source code into an executable program. Vargr 8/26/04 www.spikevision.org

In "Sigils, Servitors and Godforms", Marik describes the technique by which a phrase is converted into a sigil in the system proposed by Austin Osman Spare in The Book of Pleasure:

Spare analyses the structure of the letters of the phrases that make up the sentence containing the magickal intention, removes repeating letters, then combines them, and finally simplifies them into an iconic symbol. This symbol will be sufficiently remote from the original sentence that it cannot be identified.

This process is used to encode the will of the individual into a discrete unit of magickal functionality. Looked at from another perspective, the practitioner is also applying a simple cryptographic algorithm to create a ciphertext.

In a conventional cryptosystem, a block of plaintext is subjected to an algorithm paired with a key in order to produce a result that cannot be read without possession of the appropriate decryption key. This is not to suggest that the two processes are completely analogous, as a sigil is not meant to be reversed back into its constituent letters. It is a one-way process. In this respect, sigilization also resembles the application of a hash function. A hash function is another cryptographic entity which receives an input of variable length, and produces a fixed-length output. This process is used to ensure that data is not modified during transmission through unsecured networks. Like sigilization, the process is one-way.

This process of concealment and abstraction serves to shield the meaning of the sigilized phrase from the conscious mind of the magician, which may hamper the efforts of the subconscious mind in empowering it. This effect is of course contingent on the ability of the magician to forget the sigilized phrase subsequent to its encoding. To create another analogy, this process can be compared to the compilation of source code into an executable program.

Vargr
8/26/04
www.spikevision.org