u/T_Towers

Hey gang, long time lurker, first time poster. I tried summoning archangel Michael because he’s got a sword and I like collecting swords.

I forgot to do the banishing and just started doomscrolling. Afterwards no other summoning of angels I do seems to work, they’re all leaving me on read.

I’ve read the Key a ton of times and Solomon never said anything about these angels gossiping and talking shit. Tips on how to up my rep?

EDIT: guys Michael probably doesn’t even know how addictive reels & TikTok is now a days. Can someone contact him and explain for me?

Hi there fellow witch-toks! I just finished reading a book I found on the mall on witchcraft and am so excited to start performing hexes and curses on my ex 🔮💅

I made a blood pact with the Horned One. I pricked my finger and it hurt, so you KNOW it was serious. I’m pretty sure he’s Satan? Or Baphomet? Idk, same vibes 🖤

The book told me to draw this mysterious pentagram, so I did. I don't know what it's meant to mean but symbols look so cool and very witchy and powerful, so I put it on my altar, my journal, my mirror, and my tote bag 😍

Then I took a picture and asked my best friend CHATGPT, and apparently some of it comes from Solomonic ceremonial magic? Like, something about YHWH? That sounds kind of patriarchal, so I just ignored it. ✨🧙‍♀️

Because remember: magic is all about intention, vibes, and not reading. Also, I made sure to say “as above, so below” at least three times, because my favorite influencer said that means everything is valid as long as you believe hard enough

Blessed be, babes ✨✨

I know the title is inflammatory, and it may irritate some people. However, when Baphomet is examined through the lens of occult history rather than modern shock-value imagery, the conclusion becomes hard to avoid: Baphomet, as he is commonly imagined today, is not historically established as a real deity, a spirit, demon, or even worse: Satan himself.

The first major association people usually encounter is the Knights Templar. In 1307, the Templars were accused by King Philip IV of France of heresy, blasphemy, and worshipping a mysterious idol called “Baphomet.” But these accusations were politically convenient, and many of the so-called confessions were produced under torture. Torture is not a reliable method for discovering truth; it is a reliable method for producing whatever answer the interrogator wants. On top of that, there is a strong historical argument that “Baphomet” may have been a corruption or misunderstanding of “Mahomet,” the medieval European form of Muhammad, rather than the name of an actual demon or god.

Independently of the Templar trials, the Baphomet known in modern occultism was largely popularized in the nineteenth century by Éliphas Lévi in Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, published in two volumes between 1854 and 1856 and later translated into English as Transcendental Magic. Lévi’s famous image of Baphomet, the “Sabbatic Goat,” (figure IX in his book) was not presented as a literal devil to be worshipped. It was a symbolic figure: a visual synthesis of opposites, including male and female, above and below, mercy and severity, matter and spirit, light and darkness.

https://preview.redd.it/8nxlpo8x2e7h1.png?width=952&format=png&auto=webp&s=940b5e5be55f46dce3bba6575398ec9555279c5b

This matters because Lévi’s Baphomet is not a “character” in the way Satan is a character in Christian theology. It is closer to a symbolic diagram of magical philosophy. Baphomet isn't even a spirit. The goat’s gesture points both upward and downward, expressing the Hermetic principle of correspondence. The torch between the horns represents intelligence or illumination. The androgynous body represents union and equilibrium. In other words, Baphomet is not being used as a literal being, but as an emblem of the magical absolute.

Lévi makes this even clearer when he discusses magical power. He writes that two things are necessary for the acquisition of magical power: the emancipation of the will from servitude, and the instruction of that will in the art of domination. In that context, he connects Baphomet with the “Great Magical Agent,” also called the astral light: the living, 'universal magical force' that the trained will must learn to direct. He identifies this force with several serpent-symbols, including the old serpent of Genesis, the brazen serpent of Moses, the serpent of the caduceus, the Goat of the Sabbath, and the Baphomet of the Templars (literally mentioning how this Baphomet is of the Templars, not a spirit, demon, etc in and of itself).

So, historically and occultly speaking, the popular idea that Baphomet is literally Satan is weak. The medieval evidence is unreliable and politically tainted. The name itself may come from a misunderstanding of Muhammad. The modern image comes mainly from Lévi, who used Baphomet as a symbolic representation of equilibrium, initiation, and the astral light. Baphomet, in this sense, is not a demon standing behind occultism. It is an occult symbol that later culture, especially Christian panic and modern Satanic aesthetics, transformed into something far more literal than Lévi intended.

I have searched this forum to see whether anyone has commented on certain problems I have with this book, but I have found only one or two posts that seem relevant.

Personally, the first thing that made me question the book was the pentagram as Huson presents it. Huson showcases the sigil shown in this post and asks witches to carve it into their books. However, he does not expand on the sigil or explain its origin. The sigil immediately reminded me of Solomonic magic, so I looked into *The Key of Solomon* and related texts. It does, indeed, appear to be an altered form of the Solomonic pentagram: the pentagonal figure of Solomon, described as a figure “made in O or ) and worn upon the breast with the seal of the spirit on one side of it.” It is meant to “preserve [the exorcist] from danger, and also to command” (*The Goetia*).

Paul Huson's Book of Shadow's Sigil

So why urge readers to make a version of this sigil? Why replace the symbols in the middle, “Soluzen,” meaning “I command thou spirit to come unto this circle”, with someone’s witch name? Furthermore, Huson did not even remove the top sigil of Abdia, which, although not especially explained in Goetic sources, is Hebrew [Obadiah (עֹבַדְיָה)] for “servant of YHWH.” I very much doubt that most witches would want to identify themselves as servants of YHWH.

I understand the power of meaning and reinterpretation, but there must be limits. Later, while reading the section titled “Your Witches’ Working Tools,” I came across the knife, the cord, the censer, and the cup. Each of these tools is assigned specific sigils that the reader is meant to write or carve onto them. However, these sigils seem to be either Solomonic or invented, and they appear to mean nothing when arranged in the order Huson gives them.

Is this really meant to be a foundational book on witchcraft? Is Paul Huson a fraud, or am I missing something? I am turning to the community for answers and insight.