The Devil’s Advocate
Many of my readers are no doubt aware that in response to Oklahoma allowing a 10 Commandments Monument at the Starehouse, the Satanic Temple has commissioned a Satanic Monument that they wish to install as well. The idea being that if it is religious freedom to have a Christian Monument at a government building, it should be ok to have a Satanic One.
I for one think its Brilliant.
They raised more money than they needed and hired an artist in New York to sculpt the monument. It is almost finished and can be seen in the picture above.
Today on Facebook, various occultists are now upset, calling it an opportunity wasted by the ignorant because the image does not adhere to Eliphas Levi’s drawing from Transcendental Magic. No breasts, no Caduceas.
I’m not a Satanist but will play Devil’s Advocate today. These are smart people or they would not have gotten this far. They have read Levi. They know the history behind it. They know the name goes back to the Crusades and has been connected with everything from blaspheming the name of the Prophet, to Greek for Baptism of Wisdom, to various coded theories.
They know what Levi’s drawing meant to Levi, but they saw something else in it. So did Crowley for that matter, and so do Chaotes. I doubt any of them think of the Goats head as representing the horror of the sinner at the punishment he must bare, as Levi did.
Their artistic rendering is in keeping with the vision of the artist, who is being moved by spirit (or genius, or daemon, whatever this Satanic Artists get moved by). It is no more “wrong” as a representation of Baphomet, than other depictions of dieties that differ from older depictions. My own meditational Yidam, Vajrakilaya, gets represented in numerous forms in accordance with the visions of different Tertons – why should this being be any different?
Perhaps this artist wished to express the masculine ferocity and goat-like stubbornness, over the feminine and alchemical qualities. Fitting considering what they plan on doing with it and the absolute outrage that it will cause when trying to get it installed.
But of course this thing is never going to actually be installed in the Oaklahoma statehouse. It’s just not gonna happen. But the statue is well suited to do what it was meant to do: shock and upset people into debate. I think that the inclusion of the children are there specifically to upset people for this purpose.
The removal of the breasts was probably done so that they could not be denied installing it on the basis of obscenity. The Caduceus in Levis drawing could be interpreted as a penis, which would have the same effect.
Besides, why should they adhere to Levi’s 19th century interpretation of name and image any more than Levi did to Crusader accounts of the name?*.
Just 10 years after Levi’s Drawing was published, numerous artists started using the image, usually also lacking the breasts and caduceus, in an effort to discredit Masonry.
The beauty of Baphomet is that it is wonderfully undefined.
It is not a waste of an opportunity. Its an opportunity that they created by their work and ingenuity, and they are putting it to use to push their message. Without their message and work the opportunity would not exist. Certainly other groups have had plenty of chance to do something similar but have chosen not to. I say let them have their day, and whether we agree with their message or particular interpretation of Baphomet, let us acknowledge their activism for religious freedom and pluralism that benefits ALL of us.
*Honestly, all of the occult world needs to pull its head out of the ass of the late 19th and early 20th century, but that is a post for another day.
