baphomet_leviOK, it’s now time to deal with one of the last major lingering issues that pundits continually throw about in order to attack Freemasonry; yes, as the title suggests, it is now time to write about the topic of Lucifer.

I am often asked by unknowing individuals about this topic; which means this issue is perhaps one of the most destructive lies told today, as it had been throughout our history. Sadly, as enlightened as our society has become today, it would rather believe a lie then research the topic in order to discover the truth for themselves. We (Freemasonry) have made many valiant efforts to reassure the public that Freemasonry harbors no such views or conducts such activities. Nevertheless, as Pike affirmed, “the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason”  (Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, 1872, p. 104).​ I will, therefore, endeavor to better explain the topic to the satisfaction of the uninitiated public.

Freemason Eliphas Levi wrote that God’s goodness is eternal, not evil; and asked the question, according to the creed of the church, would it not be blasphemy to believe in Lucifer? Yes, of course it would be; that is why we don’t:

“good alone is infinite; evil is not; and hence if God be the eternal object of faith, then the devil belongs to science. In which of the catholic creeds is there any question concerning him? Would it not be blasphemy to say that we believe in him” (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  11)?

Levi went on to debate the definition of Lucifer:

In Holy Scripture he is named but not defined. Genesis makes no allusion to a reputed revolt of angels; it ascribes the fall of Adam to the serpent, as to the most subtle and dangerous of living beings. We are acquainted with Christian tradition on this subject; but if that tradition is explicable by one of the greatest and most diffused allegories of science, what can such solution signify to the faith which aspires only to God, which despises the pomps and works of Lucifer” (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  11).

And here is the first indicator that we (Freemasons) do not worship the spirit of darkness (i.e. Satan):

Lucifer—Light-Bearer—how strange a name, attributed to the spirit of darkness! Is it he who carries the light and yet blinds feeble souls? The answer is yes, unquestionably; for traditions are full of divine disclosures and inspirations. “Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light,” says St. Paul. And Christ Himself said: “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” So also the prophet Isaiah: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning” (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  11).

I know, I know, you are more than likely scratching your head at this point. Well, this double sided viewpoint will start to make more sense in a moment. Levi continued with a specific explanation about Lucifer by asking the question is Lucifer a person or a force, etc?:

Lucifer is then a fallen star—a meteor which is on fire always, which burns when it enlightens no longer. But is this Lucifer a person or a force, an angel or a strayed thunder bolt? Tradition supposes that it is an angel, but the Psalmist says: “Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire.” The word angel is applied in the Bible to all messengers of God—emissaries or new creations, revealers or scourges, radiant spirits or brilliant objects. The shafts of fire which the Most High darts through the clouds are angels of His wrath, and such figurative language is familiar to all readers of eastern poetry (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  12).

So Levi raised several additional questions about Lucifer. Yet, I am confused; I thought we already knew that Lucifer was Satan, the Devil. I thought the issue had already been resolved; I guess not. He (Levi) now asks the question, is Lucifer nothing more than a diseased imagination?:

Having been the world’s terror through the period of the middle ages, the devil has become its mockery. Heir to the monstrous forms of all false gods cast down successively from their thrones, the grotesque scarecrow has turned into a mere bugbear through very deformity and hideousness. Yet observe as to this that those only dare to laugh at the devil who know not the fear of God. Can it be that for many diseased imaginations he is God’s own shadow, or is he not often the idol of degenerate souls who only understand supernatural power as the exercise of cruelty with impunity (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  12)?

Levi, in the next paragraph, better states his point, which is, does the Devil even exist, that it may be nothing more than a superstition, a ridiculous invention:

But it is important to ascertain whether the notion of this evil power can be reconciled with that of God—in a word, whether the devil exists, and in such case what he is. There is no longer any question of superstition or of ridiculous invention; it is a question of religion alone and hence of the whole future, with all the interests, of humanity (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  12).

Next he debates the reasoning powers, especially as it relates to spiritual powers vs materiel desires. Be patent, Levi is simply laying the groundwork for another point:

Strange reasoners indeed are we: we call ourselves strong-minded when we are indifferent to everything except material advantages, as, for example, money; and we leave to their own devices the ideas which are mothers of opinions and may, or at least can, by their sudden veering, upset all fortunes. A conquest of science is much more important than the discovery of a gold mine. Given science, gold is utilized in the service of life; given ignorance, wealth furnishes only destroying weapons (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  12).

Levi now discusses the influence the Church has had on the understanding of Lucifer; that we have deferred our reasoning to that of the Church.

For the rest, it is to be understood absolutely that our scientific revelations pause in the presence of faith, that—as Christian and Catholic—our work is submitted entirely to the supreme judgment of the Church. This said, to those who question the existence of a devil, we would point out that whatsoever has a name exists; speech may be uttered in vain, but in itself it cannot be vain, and it has a meaning invariably. The Word is never void, and if it be written that it is in God, as also that it is God, this is because it is the expression and the proof of being and of truth. The devil is named and personified in the Gospel, which is the Word of truth; he exists therefore and can be considered as a person. But here it is the Christian who defers: let science or reason speak; these two are one (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  13).

Levi confirms the fact that evil does exist; however, does this evil emanate from one source, like that of a Devil?:

Evil exists; it is impossible to doubt it; we can work good or evil. There are beings who work evil knowingly and willingly. The spirit which animates these beings and prompts them to do ill is bewrayed, turned aside from the right road, and thrown across the path of good as an obstacle; this is the precise meaning of the Greek word diabolos, which we render as devil (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  13).

Further research into the word diabolos came up with the following definition:

The Devil (from Greek: διάβολος diábolos “slanderer, accuser”) is the personification and archetype of evil in various cultures. Historically, the Devil can be defined as the personification of whatever is perceived in society as evil and the depiction consist of its cultural traditions.

Even more specific, the word personification can be defined as: “an imaginary person or creature conceived or figured to represent a thing or abstraction.” Therefore, at least according to Levi, by way of the use of the word diabolos, the Devil is nothing more than an imaginary creature.

Levi further defines evil as being, “a devil” or diabolos, an imaginary creature; he did not say the devil, no, he wrote “a devil,” as though it was not a single entity, rather it was a combination of entities, a personification; and even more importantly, he leave the open ended question, who is the father of the devil?:

The spirits who love and perform evil are accidentally bad. There is therefore a devil who is the spirit of error, wilful ignorance, vertigo; there are beings under his obedience who are his envoys, emissaries, angels; and it is for this reason that the Gospel speaks of an eternal fire which is prepared, and in a sense predestined, for the devil and his angels. These words are themselves a revelation, so let us search their meaning, giving, in the first place, a concise definition of evil. Evil is the absence of rectitude in being. Moral evil is falsehood in action, as the lie is a crime in speech. Injustice is of the essence of lying, and every lie is In injustice. When that which we utter is just, there is no falsity. When that which we do is equitable and true in mode, there is no sin. Injustice is the death of moral being, as lying is the poison of intelligence. The false spirit is therefore a spirit of death. Those who hearken to him become his dupes and are by him poisoned. But if we had to take his absolute personification seriously, he would be himself absolutely dead and absolutely deceived, which means that the affirmation of his existence must imply a patent contradiction. Jesus said that the devil is a liar like his father. Who then is the father of the devil (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  14)?

In short, the answer to the question of who is the father of the devil is, whoever gives the idea of the devil, the diabolos, the personification, his power is the father:

Whosoever gives him a personal existence by living in accordance with his inspirations; the man who diabolises himself is the father of the incarnate spirit of evil (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  14).

Yet, despite this historical fact, pundits of the Craft, like the Pharisee who hated Jesus and his teachings, continue to throw about the false idea of Lucifer, which is nothing but a hybrid creation or a pretended hero of the black eternities:

But there is a rash, impious and monstrous conception, traditional like the pride of the Pharisees, and in fine there is a hybrid creation which armed the paltry philosophy of the eighteenth century with an apparent defence. It is the false Lucifer of the heterodox legend—that angel proud enough to think that he was God, brave enough to buy independence at the price of eternal torment, beautiful enough to worship himself in the plenary Divine Light; strong enough to reign still in darkness and in dole and to make a throne of his inextinguishable fire. It is the Satan of the heretical and republican Milton, the pretended hero of black eternities, calumniated by deformity, bedecked with horns and talons which would better become his implacable tormentor (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  14).

Believers in the devil have made him king of evil, as if evil were a kingdom; that intelligent men would succumb to this false fear; that eternal lie; that somehow, God tolerates this contradiction or that he is the devil of God:

It is the devil who is king of evil, as if evil were a kingdom, who is more intelligent than the men of genius that fear his wiles. It is {a) that black light, that darkness with eyes, that power which God has not willed but which no fallen creature could create; that prince of anarchy served by a hierarchy of pure spirits; that exile of God who on earth seems, like Him, everywhere, but is more tangible, is more for the majority in evidence, and is served better than God himself; that conquered one, to whom the victor gives his children that he may devour them; that artificer of sins of the flesh, to whom flesh is nothing, and who therefore can be nothing to flesh, unless indeed he be its creator and master, like God; that immense, realised, personified and eternal lie; that death which cannot die; that blasphemy which the Word of God will never silence; that poisoner of souls whom God tolerates by a contradiction of His omnipotence or preserves as the Roman emperors guarded Locusta among the trophies of their reign; that executed criminal, living still to curse his Judge and still have a cause against him, since he will never repent; that monster accepted as executioner by the Sovereign Power, and who, according to the forcible expression of an old catholic writer, may term God the God of the devil by describing himself as a devil of God (Eliphas Levi, The History of Magic, 1860, p.  14).

This topic will be discussed further next month in part II. Nevertheless, until the next article is finalized, please remember and reflect upon a very important quote from Albert Pike, who wrote, “The symbols of the wise are the idols of the vulgar” (Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, 1872, p. 819). This point is significant, because, although we may utilize ancient symbols in our teachings, we do not worship them; they are simply used to teach greater meanings and for instruction. And unfortunately, due to a lack of knowledge and understanding, the profane (vulgar) use such symbols as idols, like that of baphomet (See picture above) to represent the devil or lucifer. Yet, that was not its intent, as will be discussed next month.

So Mote It Be!

Hank Kraychir