The Image of Baphomet: Upsetting Folks Since 1855.

Originally posted by SolarIce
reply to post by Cuervo

 

Maybe so...It would just be another reason to the list of why I dislike religion. Infact I agree with you, because I always felt the crucifix was a strange way to remember Jesus, sure he died for our sins, but to remember him as a bloody mess?...

Yeah... kinda twisted, eh? Just like the whole symbolic cannibal thing they do. Jesus mentioned it once as a kind of parable to think about and, 2,000 years later, people are still pantomiming eating their savior.

That's why I mentioned the cross being used by Satanists. It fits Satanism better because it symbolizes the death of their enemy. It's very strange how history played out with the chosen symbolism each religion adopted.

rickymouse:

Look at the position of the wings in relation to the staph. This guy is a doctor of medicine

Yep, it's a gynecologist.


Thanks everybody, for coming by to post and add to the Bapho-Lore.

I am just now going to start getting caught up on posts, I will be right back.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Great post.

It is only a piece of art; and not a bad one at that. If people get the wrong meaning from it, that is their problem.

I would say it's more of a marketing campaign rather than art. But of course it's artists that create them so maybe it deserves both monikers.

It's funny that nothing has really changed no matter how far back in time you go...

reply to post by Xoanon

Funny how minds think alike!

I was going to do this same topic. You beat me to it.

Great info. Great thread. S&F

Originally posted by timewalker
reply to post by Xoanon

 

Funny how minds think alike!

It's not funny at all. Where do you think your thoughts come from?

Do you believe that any of your thoughts are original? Do you think you create thought, or simply receive thought from the mental atmosphere? The mental plane is packed with thoughts from thousands of years of people "thinking" and charging up the mental plane with their "ideas" and "emotions." When you look at an old symbol, like Baphomet, you "tap into" the thoughts associated with that symbol that have been created by others, received, re-charged, and re-transmitted, time and time again, over the centuries. These "thought forms" are charged energy spheres, just waiting to be pulled down into the mind of someone "tuning in" today. The more you think and contemplate a symbol or topic, the more thoughts flow into your mind, and with sufficient concentration you receive a "flood of ideas" related to that thing you're focusing your attention on.

This is exactly the same way "scriptures" are used. When you read certain verses, you tap in to a tremendous "emotional energy field" that resonates with your mind, spirit, and body, and you can literally "feel the energy" flowing through you with the right verses read when using the appropriate attitude. The scriptures are then just a "symbol" much like Baphomet. Something that when contemplated and given undivided attention will result in "revelations" of one kind or another.

But, if you pick the text of the scriptures up and just try to understand it, say, by taking it apart analytically, or by logic alone, it often seems meaningless, or just nonsense. You have to "tune in" to the text, and let the ideas flow into your mind, and then you discover the hidden power behind all these symbols, whether image or spiritual text.

I'll bite...

Really? Complaining about this? Has ATS slumped down that far, that it's beyond the realms of internet respectability? Seriously, if the Christian Zealots around here cannot understand this picture and thread, research the advert itself, and/or prefer to wallow in their own tepid pool of zealot ignorance, then nothing can help Op.

This used to be a place for ideas and out of the box thinking. Even now, those that would complain about this advert are spamming this board with their beliefs in any thread they choose, and making sure their Jesus avatars are big and bold.

I don't see any Pagans or Satanists complaining, do you? All this over an ad. These people need to get off the internet for a bit, take a nice summer stroll, and stop sipping from the Cup of Jackassery.

reply to post by Cuervo


Hi Cuervo,

Thanks for taking an interest and essentially keeping the thread going full steam. I have gone over your posts and I would like to share a couple of things with you that I think you might find entertaining.

I never have seen this discussed anywhere outside of a couple of close friends and I, but I don't think that it can be emphasized enough, the potential that A. Crowley had, to commit shenanigans and foment literary hoaxes.

He was the ultimate prankster, remember, if you will, the story wherein he takes hammer and chisel to a statue of Oscar Wilde and wears the fig leaf in to a local bar.

And he hated Arthur Waite, who was his contemporary and direct publishing competition; Waite outlived Crowley by a few years. Also Crowley was and still stands as one of the world's most prolific writers; I am talking, like, Stephen King-prolific. I, and others that have been following the game closely, would be entirely unsurprised if it were to be found out that Crowley had 'doctored' up and obfuscated Waite while A.C. Performed his own translations of Levi. That was Crowley's whole thing, he was always 'fixing' everything and claiming to have had restored it to its earliest and truest glory.

Check this out, my friend, this is supposed to be Waite translating Levi...

KNOWEST thou that old queen of the world who is on the march always and wearies never?

Every uncurbed passion, every selfish pleasure, every licentious energy of humanity, and all its tyrannous weakness, go before the sordid mistress of our tearful valley, and, scythe in hand, these indefatigable labourers reap their eternal harvest. That queen is old as time, but her skeleton is concealed in the wreckage of women's beauty, which she abstracts from their youth and love. Her skull is adorned with lifeless tresses that are not her own. Spoliator of crowned heads, she is embellished with the plunder of queens, from the star-begemmed hair of Berenice to that-white, but not with age-which the executioner sheared from the brow of Marie Antoinette.

Her livid and frozen body is clothed in faded garments and tattered winding-sheets. Her bony hands, covered with rings, hold diadems and chains, scepters and crossbones, jewels and ashes. When she goes by, doors open of themselves; she passes through walls; she penetrates to the cabinets of kings; she surprises the extortioners of the poor in their most secret orgies; she sits down at their board, pours out their wine, grins at their songs with her gumless teeth, takes the place of the lecherous courtesan hidden behind their curtains.

-Eliphas Levi. The Dogmas and Rituals of Transcendental Magic

That just sounds an awful lot like an allusion to and foreshadowing of Crowley's Babalon to me.

Here is a little more that seems to be a set up for Crowley's Aeon...

After this funereal procession come two little children, radiating with smiles and life, the intelligence and love of the coming century, the dual genius of a newborn humanity. The shadows of death fold up before them, as does night before the morning star; with nimble feet they skim the earth and sow with full hands the hope of another year.

But death will come no more, impiteous and terrible, to mow like dry grass the ripe blades of the new age; it will give place to the angel of progress, who will gently liberate souls from mortal chains, so that they may ascend to God. When men know how to live they will die no longer; they will transform like the chrysalis, which becomes a splendid butterfly.

Same citation as above.

And this just plain reads like Crowley...

IAM the messenger of the suns, and I renew my strength continually in their burning heat, that I may dispense it on my journey to young worlds which have as yet insufficient warmth, and to ancient stars which have grown cold in their solitude.

All of that to say, that I really do think that for these guys it was about books first. I know that they were all deeply involved in tapping humanity's deepest narratives, but I also think it had a great deal to do with the addictive fever of writing and disseminating.

Crowley was the best at it and I believe that he saw it as a game and understood where to make his moves while others in the field were just standin' there starin'. So, for what it is worth, I think that Crowley worked over both Levi and Waite in one fell swoop!.

reply to post by Xoanon


I apologize for my ignorance in advance, but, i only wanna know one thing: Does this mean that the "sigil of baphomet" is of no concern?

Reason why i am asking is cos at my mother's funeral last week we had some douche-butt family members who wore it in church. I only found out today, and i am to confront them because imo they had no respect at my mum's funeral.

I have been researching baphomet and i have read on wiki as you stated here on your thread. It will be great if i can get some feedback from someone whom seems to be in the know.

Much appreciated

reply to post by KaelemJames


No problem KaelemJames,

This is a good opportunity to remind that Levi, the guy that drew the Baphomet image, himself referred to the image as an "Sabbatic Goat".

As in Witchcraft (!).



People do that sort of thing, like wear that shirt to the funeral, when they know that it will deliver a shock. So you can imagine right away that the thing to do is not to provide the shock.

That is part of the way that 'witchcraft' works. And that is why that image that is posted here is so potent, it has a place to fly home to roost in people's minds.

It might also interest you to consider that the more a person delves in to and 'understands' (agrees with, in the Uspensky-an sense) stuff related to composite symbols like Levi's Baphomet, the more that is able to fly home to roost, for good or for bad.

It ain't nothin', laugh it off.

If you are a reader, it does not hurt to develop an interest in Sociology and Anthropology, knowledge from those fields can help make you feel safe.

reply to post by Xoanon


Thank you for the quick reply, Xoanon

I'm not that young but, never too old to learn.

I knew when i was told what these family members did, they did it to "shock" some others they do not get along with. When i spoke to them they made sure "it" was outta sight. I would have had my say if i did see it, luckily i did not. I am taking it a bit personal, but I will let this be and keep quiet..and laugh it off Won't be having any barbeques with them in the near future though.

Following your advice as my heart told me to leave it, too. In the end, i am not gonna lower myself to start an argument at this time. Better to stay away from them for a while.

Again, thank you for your reply, and explanation

Originally posted by Xoanon
And he hated Arthur Waite, who was his contemporary and direct publishing competition; Waite outlived Crowley by a few years.

I think you meant that the other way around.

Originally posted by Xoanon
All of that to say, that I really do think that for these guys it was about books first. I know that they were all deeply involved in tapping humanity's deepest narratives, but I also think it had a great deal to do with the addictive fever of writing and disseminating.

I would really hate to believe that but I can't say it's not true.

Originally posted by Xoanon
Crowley was the best at it and I believe that he saw it as a game and understood where to make his moves while others in the field were just standin' there starin'. So, for what it is worth, I think that Crowley worked over both Levi and Waite in one fell swoop!.

I don't know. I guess I just see it as it's presented. Eliphas was translated by Waite and both Waite and Crowley were deeply influenced by Eliphas. I enjoy the works of all three men so for me to delve much deeper than that may take away my enjoyment.

Kind of like when I found out that Bill Murray is a jerk on-set or that Beavis and Butthead were both voiced by the same guy... just ruins the magic for me.

reply to post by GreatOwl


Heya GreatOwl,

I have also enjoyed your posts, thanks for enriching the thread.

Before I sort of respond to your posts I wanted to say...

I don't mean ever to come across as pedagogic, or teachy, I know that we are all just here, sort of sharing stories that we have accumulated along the way. Your posts regarding Jesus and Lambs and Goats jogged my noggin'...

You know, Jesus is also The Lamb because of his sacrifice? A way that I have come to look at it is that Jesus follows and prays to his father because His Father is not here. That is what the whole commando raid is all about in the first place.

It is the sacrifice of separation and death, that Jesus makes for us all, that gives Him the power to pierce the scales of The Serpent, and enter the sub-lunar realm to announce The Word. That's what I hear, anyway.



Also, I would like to offer that the breasts also may mean 'giving-of-one's-self', as they do often symbolize in medieval Alchemical artwork.

But, It is true that the breasts are apparent on the Devil Trump (#15) in the earliest of Tarot decks, the Tarot of Marseilles.

Back soon.

X.

reply to post by Cuervo


Yeah, you are totally right, A.C. outlived Waite by 5 years or so. Thank you for catching that.

Kind of like when I found out that Bill Murray is a jerk on-set or that Beavis and Butthead were both voiced by the same guy... just ruins the magic for me.

This really cracked me up. I get where you are coming from. I am in a place where I am enjoying trying to rip the veil off of everything. But I respect your sovereign right to suspend your disbelief.



X.

Hi everyone,

Here is a really beautiful way to read and view Eliphas Levi's book.

I have it linked straight to the image and chapter relevant to this thread and the image is of excellent quality...

Transcendental Magic, Its Doctrines and Its Rituals. By Eliphas Levi..

You can also go to the beginning where there are brief explanations, by Levi, of all of the plates in the book, including his Baphomet.



X.

reply to post by Cuervo


Hey, check these out Cuervo...

From: Aleister Crowley's translation of Eliphas Levi's, Key of The Mysteries

TRANSLATOR'S NOTE

IN the biographical and critical essay which Mr. Waite prefixes to his "Mysteries of Magic" he says:

"A word must be added of the method of this digest, which claims to be something more than translation and has been infinitely more laborious. I believe it to be in all respects faithful, and where it has been necessary or possible for it to be literal, there also it is invariably literal."

We agree that it is either more or less than translation, and the following examples selected at hazard in the course of half-an-hour will enable the reader to judge whether Mr. Waite is acquainted with either French or English. (ed. A.C. as translator then goes on to showcase many of Waite's French to English language translations.)

And then A.C. wraps up his criticism of Waite with...

"We are obliged to mention this matter, as Mr. Waite (by persistent self- assertion) has obtained the reputation of being trustworthy as an editor.

On the contrary, he not only mutilates and distorts his authors, but, as demonstrated above, he is totally incapable of understanding their simplest phrases and even their commonest words."

www.hermetics.org/pdf/Levi_Mysteries.pdf

Not that I am complaining about A.C., I have never cared for A.E.W. myself, I just wanted to reinforce what I was saying about Crowley and his corrections.

Ultimately, a symbol can only mean what you project on to it. That's why symbols are so powerful: they capture the individual mind with its own referentials.

They most especially capture the minds (or projections) of fearful people or people trying to see the worst possible scenario. Apart from the quest to find boogeymen, it is highly entertaining to decode symbology as long as we all know it's a sport (fun and games) and not definitive judgment.

Some think the drawing of Baphomet is that of the d'evil, while others saw it as an alchemical balance. "Levi" pushed the Devil notion because people of his day (just like today) want to be provoked so they can cast (quick) judgment. At the end of the day, the drawing only means what you want it to mean. Just like a hammer or a gun, it's value or meaning is in the hand of the holder (or projector).

Originally posted by SolarIce
reply to post by CrippledAhole

 

Actually the "image" is more or less a symbol, and this symbol represents Evil, so I truly hope you understand the history behind what you proudly wear.

Come on, good and evil are subjective. I understand the history very well, or atleast I did at one time my mind is slipping these days.

reply to post by SLAYER69

As to the George Washington statue, I think it's quite simple. Our founding president was on board the train that this is a nation Under God and (by the sculptor's choice) he was pointing to God in heaven just like Tebow at the end of a touchdown. Because if God is in heaven and helped create the United States of America, then God deserves a shout out even more than after a touchdown. It is also important to recall that Geo. Washington reportedly received a miraculous vision while crossing a river (The Potomac?) with instructions from an angel on how to win the battle he was going into... thus, according to legend, God very much was involved with setting up this nation under God.

The sword extended in his other hand is a symbol (in my projection) of the fact that liberty must be fought for (continually). The sculptor wanted us to see that Geo. Washington would expect the following generations to continually fight for liberty from abusive governments and overlords like our Founding Fathers and Settlers experienced in the days of the British Colonies. We would do well to take note of this message since today's over-debted, stressed out Americans would rather escape their lives into the TV than be involved in their community, their city, their county, their state, or their federal government... at any level. But beyond that symbolic meaning that I read into it, the extended arm with the sword on it could just be a nice way to artistically balance out the sculpture with a perfect design technique known as "dynamic imbalance." Design theory provides a lot of framework which matches tons of other related and unrelated, inspired and uninspired art works preceding and succeeding it.

Originally posted by twoandthree
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

As to the George Washington statue, I think it's quite simple. Our founding president was on board the train that this is a nation Under God and (by the sculptor's choice) he was pointing to God in heaven just like Tebow at the end of a touchdown. Because if God is in heaven and helped create the United States of America, then God deserves a shout out even more than after a touchdown. It is also important to recall that Geo. Washington reportedly received a miraculous vision while crossing a river (The Potomac?) with instructions from an angel on how to win the battle he was going into... thus, according to legend, God very much was involved with setting up this nation under God.

I looked and could not verify this but I believe this wasn't a "nation under god" until early 1900's. At least our money didnt say in god we trust until the 1900's. Can anyone verify this?

Also, I think the people that spiritually identify with the Baphomet drawing... and who typically use the word Satan as if he were God are part of common heresy.

Q: Say what?

IMO A: Since the first coming of Christ, there have been splinters of the church that have believed Satan and God (or Lucifer and Jesus) to be the same god. It's a heresy that's a lot like seeing the Deity as a Yin-Yang sign.

Q: Why would anyone ascribe Yin-Yang, black and white as one, for the God?

IMO A: Because it is a difficult theological discussion to pinpoint why the True Benevolent God allows evil to exist. It is a common heresy to then collapse the argument into the solitary (perhaps false) answer that even if evil is just temporary, it is a force used and controlled by God (Satan must ask before he inflicts harm) so at least temporarily, God has this black-and-white nature, yin-yang style, according to this popular heretical explanation of the theological problem.

Of course, there are other answers to this theological "problem" which are resolved with a bigger leap of faith. But the fact remains that this dual-nature God (as an answer to that common theological quandary) has persisted for two thousand years now. And it is within such a state of mind by which someone can call out God, Jesus, Lucifer, and Satan as synonyms.

--> In understanding the heresy, I find it very difficult to categorically sweep anyone who uses these names equally into the group of 'Satanic.' Perhaps, well-meaning individuals trying to understand an infinite God fall into this heretical viewpoint along their growth journey, but hopefully later they grow to know the true God better and deeper for the Lord Jesus Christ is good.