Book of Law Study Group 1.1

Book of the Law Study Group 1.1

Kicking off our study of the Book of Law (BoL, Liber Al vel Legis), here is the opening line of Chapter 1.

Aiwass said:

1. Had! The manifestation of Nuit.

Click to expand...

http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/index.htm
http://hermetic.com/crowley/index.html
http://lib.oto-usa.org/libri/liber0220.html

Other threads in this study group

This seems a pretty simple sentance, but when I sat down and thought about it, I had/have a whole heap of questions. The first thing I realized, is that although I had read this line a dozen time before, I had no idea what "Had" was. Never even thought about it! Is this "had" the verb. Or is "Had" a title, or a name, or what is it?

A little googling, lead me to discover that Had is an alternative name for Hadit, who along with Nuit (also in this sentance) is one of the primary deities/principles of Thelema. Hadit is the male to Nuit's female, a divine couple.

So I thought this might be a good time for us to talk about who Nuit and Hadit are, how they are related to each other. Why did Crowley choose these Egyptian deities to express the principles of the BoL (if indeed he choose them at all), and how to they relate to the revealing of the BoL. What does this sentance say about their relationship to each other and to the BoL, Crowley, and Aiwass (the entity that dictated the book to Crowley).

Hence, BoL 1.1 Cause there are so many questions in my mind

Is not Nuit the feminine principle who is everywhere and nowhere at once? If so, then could Hadit be portrayed here as being the [active], [manifested] expression of that omnipotence?

\m/ Kat

I'm just gonna jump in and brain dump a little...

I always think of Nuit as the circumference of the circle and Hadit as the point at its center. He impregnates Her and She gives birth to Him. She is the infinite night sky (her nipples are galaxies, her girdle the zodiac) and He is the crystalization of her power (father and son). Also, He reveals Her as much as She hides Him. (later on: "Nu! The hiding of Hadit.") Consciousness and unconsciousness.

Crowley's Intro to BOL said:

"This Book explains the Universe.

The elements are Nuit— Space— that is, the total of possibilities of every kind— and Hadit, any point which has experience of these possibilities. (This idea is for literary convenience symbolized by the Egyptian Goddess Nuit, a woman bending over like the Arch of the Night Sky. Hadit is symbolized as a Winged Globe at the heart of Nuit.)"

Click to expand...

In Infinite Light, He is the particle and She is the wave, because they are inextricably bound to each other and constantly creating/destroying each other. They are only separate so that They can unite. Which reminds me about the Supernal Triad in Qabalah. Above the Abyss, all is mystery. Chokmah & Binah united/wed in Kether, but then everything is in Kether.

Sim, I do also love the idea of Had! as a verb. Past perfect of "To Have."

Where is Aeon?

thorhammer said:

Is not Nuit the feminine principle who is everywhere and nowhere at once? If so, then could Hadit be portrayed here as being the [active], [manifested] expression of that omnipotence?

Click to expand...

This gave me a wonderful idea Kat (well I think so at least ) Could we look at Nuit as being Time (including past and present) and Hadit as being Now, the thing at the centre that all other Time revolves around and through? It's an idea that I find appealing at least.

Scion said:

Sim, I do also love the idea of Had! as a verb. Past perfect of "To Have."

Click to expand...

Yes exactly, That is actually what I'd assumed it meant, until I read a bit more. But if your going to have a goddess, seems like Nuit would be the perfect one to be had

And an image of the Aeon card from the Crowley tarot may not go astray here. It is based on the Stele of Revealing, which is an important part of the story of the reception of the BoL.

It depicts Nuit, the sky goddess arching over the top of the card, and Hadit, the winged globe, nearer to the bottom. In between them is two aspects of their child, who comes up later in the BoL.

Scion said:

In Infinite Light, He is the particle and She is the wave, because they are inextricably bound to each other and constantly creating/destroying each other. They are only separate so that They can unite. Which reminds me about the Supernal Triad in Qabalah. Above the Abyss, all is mystery. Chokmah & Binah united/wed in Kether, but then everything is in Kether.

Click to expand...

Duuuuude . . . totally. Loving that bit.

Scion said:

Where is Aeon?

Click to expand...

Good question. He's been conspicuous in his absence for a while now . . .

similia said:

This gave me a wonderful idea Kat (well I think so at least ) Could we look at Nuit as being Time (including past and present) and Hadit as being Now, the thing at the centre that all other Time revolves around and through? It's an idea that I find appealing at least.

Click to expand...

Oh, how wonderful! Like Hadit is that intangible moment that is always dying? Now is different to . . . now. And if we were to take that a step further, then Hadit as Now would be the link that joins the past and present, so that the one could affect the other. Like it's the consciousness that gives sound to the tree falling in the woods?

similia said:

But if your going to have a goddess, seems like Nuit would be the perfect one to be had

Click to expand...

Now now. Play nice. Respect the Goddess

\m/ Kat

thorhammer said:

And if we were to take that a step further, then Hadit as Now would be the link that joins the past and present, so that the one could affect the other.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I really like that idea. Especially interesting if you apply that thinking to Scion's post.

Scion said:

He reveals Her as much as She hides Him

Click to expand...

Now reveals the past and future, as much as the past and future hide the now....

Thorhammer said:

Now now. Play nice. Respect the Goddess

Click to expand...

Actually I think this may be the best way to respect Nuit, but we'll come to that later in the Chapter

Is there any significance in using the name Had, instead of the name Hadit. In mythology is there any distinction of meaning between the two names, or perhaps there is some reason found via gematria even?

similia said:

Why did Crowley choose these Egyptian deities to express the principles of the BoL (if indeed he choose them at all), and how to they relate to the revealing of the BoL.

Click to expand...

"Hadit" was actually a mistranslation of the hieroglyphics on the Stele of Revealing by a translator at the Cairo Museum. It doesn't mean anything in Egyptian. In Arabic it means "a divinely inspired utterance." The correct translation of the hieroglyphics is Behdety, a form of Horus worshipped at Behdet. Here is a particularly informative article. Regardless of its origin, Hadit is what Crowley went with and so that is what we have. It is the winged sun disk on the Stele of Revealing.

Abrac said:

It doesn't mean anything in Egyptian

Click to expand...

Thanks Abrac thats an awesome article. I wonder how the abbreviated name "Had" came about from all that.... It seems from that article that Houdit/Hudit was a common (though incorrect) translation, and Crowley further changed it to Hadit for Qabalistic reasons. Presumably then there must also be some reason (likely Qabalistic) for the change to "Had" in the opening line.

Following the lead of the example given from Crowley, it may come down to
Cheth-Daleth (12), Heh-Aleph-Daleth (10), or perhaps just Heh-Daleth (8) (is that maths correct..., I am not sure).