Baphomet information

Baphomet is a deity which the Knights Templar were accused of worshipping^[3] that subsequently became incorporated into various occult and Western esoteric traditions.^[4] The name Baphomet appeared in trial transcripts for the Inquisition of the Knights Templar starting in 1307.^[5]^[6] It first came into popular English usage in the 19th century during debate and speculation on the reasons for the suppression of the Templar order.^[3]^[5] Baphomet is a symbol of balance in various occult and mystical traditions, the origin of which some occultists have attempted to link with the Gnostics and Templars,^[4] although occasionally purported to be a deity or a demon.^[3] Since 1856 the name Baphomet has been associated with the "Sabbatic Goat" image drawn by Éliphas Lévi,^[7] composed of binary elements representing the "symbolization of the equilibrium of opposites":^[1] half-human and half-animal, male and female, and good and evil.^[2] Lévi's intention was to symbolize his concept of balance, with Baphomet representing the goal of perfect social order.^[2]

^ ^a ^b Strube 2017.
^ ^a ^b ^c Introvigne 2016, pp. 105–109.
^ ^a ^b ^c Stahuljak 2013, pp. 71–82
^ ^a ^b Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Templars" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 26 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 599. In the 19th century a fresh impetus was given to the discussion by the publication in 1813 of F. J. M. Raynouard's brilliant defence of the order. The challenge was taken up, among others, by the famous orientalist Friedrich von Hammer-Purgstall, who in 1818 published his Mysterium Baphometis revelatum, an attempt to prove that the Templars followed the doctrines and rites of the Gnostic Ophites, the argument being fortified with reproductions of obscene representations of supposed Gnostic ceremonies and of mystic symbols said to have been found in the Templars' buildings. Wilcke, while rejecting Hammer's main conclusions as unproved, argued in favour of the existence of a secret doctrine based, not on Gnosticism, but on the unitarianism of Islam, of which Baphomet (Mahmoed) was the symbol. On the other hand, Wilhelm Havemann (Geschichte des Ausganges des Tempelherrenordens, Stuttgart and Tübingen, 1846) decided in favour of the innocence of the order. This view was also taken by a succession of German scholars, in England by C. G. Addison, and in France by a whole series of conspicuous writers: e.g. Mignet, Guizot, Renan, Lavocat. Others, like Boutaric, while rejecting the charge of heresy, accepted the evidence for the spuitio and the indecent kisses, explaining the former as a formula of forgotten meaning and the latter as a sign of fraternité!
^ ^a ^b Field, Sean L. (April 2016). Jansen, Katherine L. (ed.). "Torture and Confession in the Templar Interrogations at Caen, 28–29 October 1307". Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies. 91 (2). Chicago: University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Medieval Academy of America: 297–327. doi:10.1086/684916. ISSN 2040-8072. JSTOR 43883958. LCCN 27015446. OCLC 35801878. S2CID 159457836.
^ Cite error: The named reference Michelet was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Cite error: The named reference Waite was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[Strube-1] Strube 2017.

[Introvigne-2] Introvigne 2016, pp. 105–109.

[Stahuljak2-3] Stahuljak 2013, pp. 71–82

[EB1911-4] Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Templars" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 26 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 599. In the 19th century a fresh impetus was given to the discussion by the publication in 1813 of F. J. M. Raynouard's brilliant defence of the order. The challenge was taken up, among others, by the famous orientalist Friedrich von Hammer-Purgstall, who in 1818 published his Mysterium Baphometis revelatum, an attempt to prove that the Templars followed the doctrines and rites of the Gnostic Ophites, the argument being fortified with reproductions of obscene representations of supposed Gnostic ceremonies and of mystic symbols said to have been found in the Templars' buildings. Wilcke, while rejecting Hammer's main conclusions as unproved, argued in favour of the existence of a secret doctrine based, not on Gnosticism, but on the unitarianism of Islam, of which Baphomet (Mahmoed) was the symbol. On the other hand, Wilhelm Havemann (Geschichte des Ausganges des Tempelherrenordens, Stuttgart and Tübingen, 1846) decided in favour of the innocence of the order. This view was also taken by a succession of German scholars, in England by C. G. Addison, and in France by a whole series of conspicuous writers: e.g. Mignet, Guizot, Renan, Lavocat. Others, like Boutaric, while rejecting the charge of heresy, accepted the evidence for the spuitio and the indecent kisses, explaining the former as a formula of forgotten meaning and the latter as a sign of fraternité!

[Field_2016-5] Field, Sean L. (April 2016). Jansen, Katherine L. (ed.). "Torture and Confession in the Templar Interrogations at Caen, 28–29 October 1307". Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies. 91 (2). Chicago: University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Medieval Academy of America: 297–327. doi:10.1086/684916. ISSN 2040-8072. JSTOR 43883958. LCCN 27015446. OCLC 35801878. S2CID 159457836.

[Michelet-6] Cite error: The named reference Michelet was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[Waite-7] Cite error: The named reference Waite was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Baphomet information

and 21 Related for: Baphomet information

Baphomet

Statue of Baphomet

Sigil of Baphomet

The Baphomet

Theistic Satanism

BreachForums

Aleister Crowley

Creatonotos gangis

Satanism

Horned deity

LaVeyan Satanism

Leviathan

Religious symbol

Demonization

List of occult symbols

Goat

The Satanic Temple

Blac Chyna

Pentagram

MonsterVerse

Satan