The Social Network for the Occult Community

All Beliefs are Welcome Here!

Baphomet: The O9A View

Thus the O9A explanation of the origin of the term, and their various depictions of a female Baphomet, is far more plausible - esoterically, and otherwise - than the conventional explanations and depictions. Furthermore, it should come as no surprise that the O9A has for decades used the term Baphomet as one of their many tests for mundane-ness, since "if someone uses, for example, the 'standard' accepted explanation of Baphomet, and Laveys inverted pentagram, it is a reasonable conclusion that they have just accepted such things as "truth". The ONA alternative – the ONA heresy in such matters – should cause them to pause, if, that is, they possess some genuine, innate, Occult ability; if they have the qualities to progress along the Sinister Path. The ONA alternative should set them thinking, for themselves; should point them toward doing their own research, and even using, developing, their latent Occult abilities."

Not exactly ground-breaking stuff as a Litmus test.  Any person that proliferates the occult, should be aware of Montague Summers that made the same leap at the end of the 19th century.

Only, the way he interpreted it was simply an absorption of knowledge.  'Sophia' being the female gender assignment to knowledge vs. its masculine counter-part. 

Still, if you're going to apprehend a symbol for your endeavors and be truly "Hermetic" then saying Baphomet is the "Mistress of Blood" ain't it.  
I do like the artwork though :)

Views: 523

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

We have a Mother / Goddess column , and a Father / God column

in the Code I work with and teach...there are eight symbols each

column , yet there is a straight line symbol which can be , and is

added to each column , or , one next to each of the eight symbols ,

per column...

Now , when we add one to the top of each column , the symbol set equals by number value



By Gematria :

Baphomet = 215

( Society = 215 )

Code = 134

Symbol = 176

For = 350

Code = 134

= 1009

( Note "Satan" = 1009 )

When we place one straight line symbol

Is / Isa

Next to each of the sixteen symbols however

we attain a number value of


16 x 7 = 112


Yin + Yang = 112


Alkhemi = 111


Further :


Without the two Is / Isa


the arrangement of the 16 symbol set equals

by number value



Baphomet = 215

Alkhemi = 111

Symbol = 176

With = 110

Solve = 176

And = 44

Coagula = 131

= 993


Baphomet is regarded as a Dark Goddess...a sinister female entity -- The Mistress (or Mother) of Blood. According to tradition, she is represented as a beautiful, mature woman, naked from the waste up, who holds in her hand the severed head of a man.

She is regarded as one manifestation of one of the Dark Gods, the Bride and Mother of Satan, and rites to presence Baphomet in our causal continuum exist, for example, in the "Grimoire of Baphomet"

ONA Glossary of Terms

Image result for grimoire of baphomet ona

According to "one" Tradition , Dave , yes , that is true...

According to another you are not showing the male organ ,

which is the other half of the androgyne of Baphomet , which

is shown in many old illustrations...

The same way , the oldest statues in India , for example , are

shown as androgyne / hermaphrodites...

It’s the opening statement in the Grimoire.

Right off the cuff, They (ONA)  probably make as good an intellectual tussle of it as anyone, because none of it was ever cut in stone.

True, what I find interesting is they are extremely animate about their litmus tests for interpretations of Satanism, and circle of opposing ( or other) views, such as the TOS or Cos.

So yes, according to ONA manifesto, they have the litmus test for all such things. Some , quite frankly, is not popular by any means, but difficult to argue with nevertheless, because their writings are indeed well researched. Not to say that at least some of it is arguable.

Also, any and all Satanic teaching or doctrine, for example, is always a blend of ideas that usually spans at least a few centuries, and as it should in some cases, further back. Even ONA maintains that the concept of Satan is as old as civilization itself, in so many words.

So the term “Mother of Satan”, for example, indicates as it should, something of primordial origins.

What it may come down to is that the “multi dimensional” concepts that have been expounded over the last part of the Aeon in which we currently exist, will all be necessary in order to piece together the whole picture, and what comes out of it from there is whatever one feels necessary to their guide their own practice.

The ONA happens to have a very deep lot of literature that outlines the concept of esoteric Satanism in extremely detailed and  competent terms, far beyond the extent that other’s have endeavored, again, although out of an obvious blend of things

What else is also controversial and some find objectionable, is some of the modern sociological and ceremonial aspects of it.

I personally have no interest in the “male –female” interpretation of it, regardless of the cultural trail.  Does not make much sense to me, if I were to take it on my own., and disregard any so called, “standardized version”, or  “socially acceptable” versions, The concept of Satan, for example, as the male aspect, makes more sense, rather than the need for a “hermaphrodite” ha ha, hope filly not to be confused with “hermetic”,

The concept of Baphomet as female, or a female aspect of Satan, or whatever the interpretation of Satan is, is not alien to many other ancient cultural interpretations of it, such as the Egyptian or Sumerian.

But the ONA does not like to go back that far, their tradition seems to be more rooted in northern Europe and Scandinavia, with “Baphomet” as a more modern discernible concept of a female Satanic entity blended into their doctrine.


That's nice...

Do I agree ?

No , I have my own sources , I trust far more...

Baphomet is an androgynous symbol for the code I work with ,

and have been teaching for 23 years...Knights Templar , were

one of my Tradition's descendants , and knew this , and the

code very well...

But our Tradition goes back to the first humans , which they are

just now beginning to find...( 300 , 000 yrs old now...they are getting

closer to what we know they will eventually find...)...;)

As far as a female , however , our Tradition does have what you might

call a female "Satan"...

But the true name , long before the Hebrew version , made from three

symbols , which compare to the mother letters in Hebrew , "Aleph , Mem ,

and Shin" , and when fit together those symbols make the shape of the

Birth Goddess , or squatting mother goddess , with the "Shin" meaning

"Spiritual Fire" , is :

Sh - Ea - Th - An

There are many , many layers of meaning to those symbols and glyph...

So , on one level , there is an agreement...the female version of Sheathan ,

was covered up...but Baphomet is an entirely different situation...

I am glad for your Grimoire...but I will gladly sit down , in real life , with

any of that tradition , at the top , and show them their mistake...;)

Just so you can tell them what I said , however , 1009 *can* break down

into :

Dark = 225

Mother = 41

Lord = 102

Sh - Ea - Th - An = 641

= 1009

I cannot qualm with the beliefs and traditions of anyone else, because, in the final scheme of things, your belief or your tradition is unique unto yourself, it may be what you are made of, just as you yourself are unique. If someone else tags along, all well and good. Whether I agree with it or not, is really a moot point, and vice versa.

However, I don’t think the ONA interpretation of Baphomet is being sold as what Baphomet could or should be to everyone else, a dictation of  the ONA.  

Even though Baphomet is extremely important to ONA doctrine, she is simply a female acausal entity that is presenced in a certain type of ceremony by a human priestess, or “Mistress of Earth”, if you will, engaged in a certain type of ceremonial magical practice, IE blood ritual. The term “Baphomet” is simply being employed in order to give a “Satanic” designation to that entity.

The ONA claims the “Septenary” and “Runewitha” traditions as the trads they deem to be uniquely Satanic. Even though I have not studied these trads in depth, they are Northern European in their origins as far as I can tell, the term Baphomet is not originally associated with such trads any more than the term Satan (or Satanas), or the “Star Game” ritual. Again , these terms are presented to illustrate a point relevant to esoteric Satanism per se, as the ONA understands it to be. Not the melodramatic type of Satanism expounded by the COS, mixed with a little sorcery, for example. Whether anyone thinks it is narcissistic, unacceptable, inappropriate, amoral, historically wrong, inaccurate, or dogmatic, is entirely another issue.

I could be wrong, but I also do not think anyone who represents the ONA would waste much time on debating the origins or esoteric mythological or historical  past of Bahomet. That would be a rather insignificant issue to them. But of course, that is just my personal opinion, based on my own study of the ONA, and what you say about the Knights Templar, is of course, true as well.

“The ONA alternative should set them thinking, for themselves; should point them toward doing their own research, and even using, developing, their latent Occult abilities."

I think that would be more of the sum and substance of the issue.

That is a fair post , Dave , and well said...

I shall check the link , and watch the video , in the next

twenty four hours...or thirteen , just for the *hecka* of it...;)

If you want a good brain teaser check out the "Darkness Converges" website, and dig up the letters exchanged between Stephen Brown and Michael Aquino.


© 2019       Powered by

Badges | Privacy Policy  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service