Is Solomon's Magic Real or Fabricated?

[Angelkesfarl]

Is Solomon's Magic Real or Fabricated?​

The Prophet Solomon (Sulayman, son of David, peace be upon them both) is one of the greatest historical and religious figures mentioned in the Abrahamic scriptures.
However, his character is surrounded by significant historical and religious controversy, specifically concerning the magical books attributed to him (such as the Keys of Solomon or the Solomonic Psalms) and the crucial question: Was Solomon a Prophet or a Sorcerer?
And did he truly author those books?The Firm Islamic Viewpoint: Solomon Was a Prophet, Not a SorcererThe Holy Qur'an affirms Solomon's prophethood and describes him as a King and a Prophet, granted unique abilities by God that were given to no one else before or after him.

However, these abilities were pure divine miracles (mu'jizat), not acquired magic (sihr).Analysis of the Central Verse (Surah Al-Baqarah: 102)The decisive argument on this matter comes from Verse 102 of Surah Al-Baqarah. This verse clearly distinguishes between what God bestowed upon Solomon and what was falsely attributed to him.Allah says.......
-Translation of the meaning:"And they followed [instead] what the devils had recited during the reign of Solomon.
And Solomon did not disbelieve, but the devils disbelieved, teaching people magic..."Key Points in the Verse and its Interpretation (Tafsir):Solomon's Innocence (And Solomon did not disbelieve):

This statement is a clear divine declaration absolving Solomon of the accusations of practicing magic and disbelief (Kufr).
In Islam, magic is considered a form of Kufr (or a path leading to it), and the verse negates Kufr for him, thus negating the practice of magic.

The Source of Magic (but the devils disbelieved): ​

The verse clearly identifies the source of this magic and the associated books as the devils (Shayatin), not Solomon. The Shayatin were writing books of magic and placing them under Solomon's throne (or burying them), claiming them to be "Solomon's knowledge.
"The Devils' Purpose (teaching people magic): The goal was to corrupt faith and mislead people, making them believe that Solomon was a sorcerer, thereby encouraging them to follow the devils' books that were unjustly attributed to him.

What Was Granted to Solomon?​

(Divine Miracles)Solomon was not a sorcerer, but a Prophet endowed with miracles that confirmed his prophethood and divine power:Subjugation of the Wind: The wind obeyed his command (We subjected the wind to him, flowing gently by his command wherever he directed).
Subjugation of the Jinn and Devils:
The Jinn and devils were subjected to him to work by his command, not for use in magic (the devils made for him whatever he wished of sanctuaries and statues).Understanding the Language of Animals: He was given the ability to understand the speech of birds and ants.Flowing of Molten Copper (Ayn Al-Qitr): A source of molten copper was made to flow for him to use in large constructions and works.These are all divine gifts (miracles) that cannot be acquired through study or magic, and they differ fundamentally from magic, which is an acquired art reliant on the assistance of Jinn and devils.

Historical Conclusion: ​

The Books Attributed to SolomonBased on the Islamic interpretation
The Final Verdict:
All books that attribute magic to Solomon (which promote the summoning of Jinn and devils through demonic rituals) are fabricated texts authored by the devils or those who followed them, and were inserted into history to tarnish the image of Prophet Solomon and turn people away from Monotheism (Tawhid).Why Were These Books Published and What is the Benefit of Their Publication?

The Devils' Primary Goal (Theological Distortion): The main objective is to link magic with a recognized sacred figure (Solomon), thereby granting magic a false religious legitimacy and removing the barrier of prohibition and disbelief (Kufr) in people's eyes.Historical Propagation: After the demise of the devils who authored them (as some narrations suggest), people collected and transmitted these books through the ages, mistakenly believing they contained a genuine Solomonic "secret" for controlling hidden forces, which led to their widespread circulation in both Western and Eastern cultures.

Sowing Discord (Fitnah):​

These books serve as a permanent means of sowing discord among people and pushing them toward Shirk (polytheism) or Sihr (magic), which is the very purpose Iblis (Satan) swore to fulfill.Closing Question for Discussiono you agree with the Islamic viewpoint that all magical books attributed to Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him) are fabricated texts? If so, is their role today limited to theological deception, or do they hold historical or literary value worthy of study (with caution)?

 

[FireBorn]

I’d say the biggest problem with Solomon isn’t whether the magical texts attributed to him are authentic or not, it’s whether Solomon, as described in scripture, ever existed at all. There’s currently no archaeological evidence that definitively supports the existence of a historical King Solomon. That makes the whole question of authorship moot for some of us, and puts pressure on your question and belief.

Regarding the nature of his power: Solomon, as depicted, was a prophet, not a priest. Prophets have direct experiences, visions, divine contact, commands from Deity and spirit. Priests follow ritual structure, liturgy, formal ceremony, they act as intermediaries through sanctioned rites. When someone contacts spirit directly outside the accepted religious system, they’re often called a sorcerer, not because the power is different, but because the scaffolding is.

That distinction matters: it's not just semantics. The exact same act, calling on spirits, commanding forces, is "prophetic" when it's your religion, and "sorcery" when it’s not. The difference between priest and magician and prophet and sorcerer is an interesting idea for another thread for sure.

As for the texts themselves: Virtually none of the Solomonic grimoires Key of Solomon, Testament of Solomon, Lemegeton, etc. date to his lifetime. Most were written centuries later, ranging from the 3rd century CE up through the 14th or 15th centuries (or so). So in that sense, they were not written by Solomon. This isn’t just the Islamic position, it’s supported by academic dating, and the literary record.

That said, whether they are "fabricated" is another question. If you're asking from a religious lens, then yes they're heretical. If you're asking from a magical lens, then it depends entirely on the efficacy of the system. Many (not all of course) occultists today judge a text not by its authorship, but by whether it works, leaving the dogmas to the religious institutions they came from.

You're coming from a faith-based system where magic is defined as forbidden and misleading. But you're also asking occultists (many of whom deliberately walked away from religion) for our opinion. That’s a bit of a crossroads, because you’re not just asking about history, you’re asking us to reflect on your theology. And most occultists have already rejected the frameworks of “authorized vs. forbidden” or “divine vs. devilish.”

In that sense, your question is interesting, but also partially incompatible. Some view these grimoires not as theological texts, but as technical manuals for spirit contact. They hold value only if they produce results, and if they don’t, they’re discarded. That’s the practitioner’s metric.

Lastly, You’re on a sorcery forum. Many here work with spirits that Islam would classify as devils or jinn. So if you sincerely hold the Islamic belief that magic is shirk, one might ask: what’s your goal here? If it’s inviting to Islam, then that needs to be explicit. But if it’s discussion, it should be understood that most here have very different first principles. I see you do magick yourself, so I am left kind of scratching my head over this entire premise.

I tried to keep it respectful of religion, this is about as dialed back as I will ever get.

 

[Angelkesfarl]

I’d say the biggest problem with Solomon isn’t whether the magical texts attributed to him are authentic or not, it’s whether Solomon, as described in scripture, ever existed at all. There’s currently no archaeological evidence that definitively supports the existence of a historical King Solomon. That makes the whole question of authorship moot for some of us, and puts pressure on your question and belief.

Regarding the nature of his power: Solomon, as depicted, was a prophet, not a priest. Prophets have direct experiences, visions, divine contact, commands from Deity and spirit. Priests follow ritual structure, liturgy, formal ceremony, they act as intermediaries through sanctioned rites. When someone contacts spirit directly outside the accepted religious system, they’re often called a sorcerer, not because the power is different, but because the scaffolding is.

That distinction matters: it's not just semantics. The exact same act, calling on spirits, commanding forces, is "prophetic" when it's your religion, and "sorcery" when it’s not. The difference between priest and magician and prophet and sorcerer is an interesting idea for another thread for sure.

As for the texts themselves: Virtually none of the Solomonic grimoires Key of Solomon, Testament of Solomon, Lemegeton, etc. date to his lifetime. Most were written centuries later, ranging from the 3rd century CE up through the 14th or 15th centuries (or so). So in that sense, they were not written by Solomon. This isn’t just the Islamic position, it’s supported by academic dating, and the literary record.

That said, whether they are "fabricated" is another question. If you're asking from a religious lens, then yes they're heretical. If you're asking from a magical lens, then it depends entirely on the efficacy of the system. Many (not all of course) occultists today judge a text not by its authorship, but by whether it works, leaving the dogmas to the religious institutions they came from.

You're coming from a faith-based system where magic is defined as forbidden and misleading. But you're also asking occultists (many of whom deliberately walked away from religion) for our opinion. That’s a bit of a crossroads, because you’re not just asking about history, you’re asking us to reflect on your theology. And most occultists have already rejected the frameworks of “authorized vs. forbidden” or “divine vs. devilish.”

In that sense, your question is interesting, but also partially incompatible. Some view these grimoires not as theological texts, but as technical manuals for spirit contact. They hold value only if they produce results, and if they don’t, they’re discarded. That’s the practitioner’s metric.

Lastly, You’re on a sorcery forum. Many here work with spirits that Islam would classify as devils or jinn. So if you sincerely hold the Islamic belief that magic is shirk, one might ask: what’s your goal here? If it’s inviting to Islam, then that needs to be explicit. But if it’s discussion, it should be understood that most here have very different first principles. I see you do magick yourself, so I am left kind of scratching my head over this entire premise.

I tried to keep it respectful of religion, this is about as dialed back as I will ever get.

The Imperative of Prophethood and The Price of Efficacy
Greetings and respect to you, FireBorn, for such a focused and compelling response.

You have expertly touched upon critical points at the intersection of theology and operative esotericism, particularly regarding the distinction between "Prophet" and "Sorcerer" and the metric of "Efficacy."

However, allow me to elevate the discussion to a level that transcends both the traditional academic and the conventional magical frameworks—for this is the very essence of the challenge I pose:

1. The Archaeological and Historical Challenge: Prophethood Precedes Artifact
It is true that the definitive material archaeological evidence for the existence of King Solomon (peace be upon him) in the magnitude described in religious texts remains inconclusive in the Western narrative. This is indeed a strong point of pressure on the literalist Western faith narrative.

But in the perspective I adopt (the methodology of Revelation):

Artifact Follows Prophethood: We assert that Solomon’s existence (as a Prophet and Messenger) is a metaphysical and historical certainty that precedes our limited material capacity to unearth the remains of his kingdom. Our current failure to find his artifact does not negate his past existence; it puts pressure on the methodology of archaeological investigation, not the veracity of the Revelation.

Function Precedes Structure: To us, Solomon was not merely a King of "Judah"; he was a Universal King, and his authority was fundamentally spiritual (the subjugation of wind and Jinn). The material structure of his authority is a secondary manifestation of that spiritual power, which may not leave traditional material traces.

2. The Distinction Between Prophet and Sorcerer: The Metric of Revelation
You are absolutely correct in describing the difference between the Prophet, the Priest, and the Sorcerer. But the crucial point is not the Act itself (Spirit Contact), but the Source and the Authorization.

The Prophet: His action is predicated on Absolute Divine Command (Wahy); he receives, he does not coerce or demand. His ability to 'command' the Jinn was a specific Divine permission serving Monotheism, not an acquired technique.

The Sorcerer: His action is based on Acquired Art (Jahd Muktasab); he requests, coerces, and supplicates powers without Divine permission, and often against the will of those very entities.

The Criterion is Servitude: When Solomon engaged with spirits (Jinn), it was Servitude to God (serving a Divine project). The Sorcerer does so as Servitude to the Self (serving his own desires). This distinction is what defines the theological context of the actions.

3. The Metric of Efficacy and the Fundamental Challenge
Your statement that "occultists judge a text by its efficacy, not its theological source" is precisely the logic that leads to deviation from the core of the Philosophical Triad (God – Man – Cosmos) which I mentioned previously.

Efficacy: The magical text might "work" and give you results. But these results come with an invisible Spiritual Price. Fulfilling the conditions demanded by "unclean entities" is a surrender of spiritual and human freedom.

The Fundamental Challenge: I am here to assert that there is a more effective, safer, and spiritually uncompromising system—the system of Tawhid (Monotheism) and Sufism—which you yourself acknowledged. We do not reject sorcery because it doesn't work; we reject it because it works at the wrong price.

4. Angelkesfarl’s Practice: Inherited Sacred Science
You shrewdly observed: "I see you do magick yourself." This puts pressure on my theological premise.

As I clarified to our friend MorganBlack: I am here not to engage in the sorcery of Shayatin, but to study and analyze The Architecture of the Shadow.

But, to be explicitly clear: what you term "Magic" is for me an Inherited Sacred Science (‘Ilm Ruhi Mawruth) connected to:

The Science of Letters (Hurufiyyah): This is dealing with the power of numbers and Divine Names (Asma Allah) to structure the Microcosm (the Awfaq / Squares)—an operation of spiritual construction that does not require the aid of unclean entities.

The Granted Authority (Sultah Al-Mamnuhah): I operate within the framework of Human Vicegerency (Khilafah Insaniyah) granted by the Divine, which authorizes man to influence the cosmos in ways that do not violate the Creator's Will, but rather utilize the mechanisms of Creation (such as the Cosmic Squares).

This distinction is what separates the "Magic" that leads to Polytheism (Shirk) and the "Spiritual Science" that leads to Monotheism (Tawhid). I do not practice sorcery; I practice the Science of Microcosmic Control using the keys of Divine Wisdom.

Thank you for raising this critical point, which allows me to clarify the fundamental difference between the two methodologies.

Angelkesfarl