Hadit + Nuit = Ra-Hoor-Khuit?
-
Dwtw
It seems a commonplace of Thelemic philosophy to espouse the idea that the conjunction of Hadit and Nuit produces their 'child' Ra-Hoor-Khuit.
I fail to see any justification for this in the Book of the Law. It is true that Crowley held to this belief, but it does not appear to originate in Liber AL.
The Vision and the Voice culminates in Heru-Ra-Ha proclaiming that he is the crowned and conquering child, but the child of whom it is not said.
Adjunct to this, Heru-Ra-Ha is described in Liber AL as either one or both of the deities Hoor-paar-kraat and Ra-Hoor-Khut.
But elsewhere in Liber AL, Hadit identifies himself as Heru-pa-kraath.
Any thoughts?
Litlluw
R. Leo Gillis -
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
These are excellent, observant questions.
In the old Egyptian religion, of course, Horus was (in most forms) the child of Isis and Osiris. The Isis-Osiris-Horus trinity is, at some level, the formula being brought forth here.
You are right that the "child" idea really isn't expressed in Liber Legis. However, it does seem to have been in Crowley's mind from the beginning and through the whole period of the reception.
After reflection, I think the argument would go something like this: The three primary deities from Liber L. are archetypal expressions of Mother - Father - Child. That is, Nuit is a very sublime and pure expression of All-Mother or Every-Mother; Hadit of All-Father or Every-Father; and HRH = RHK etc. an expression of All-Child or Every-Child.
Thinking of them this way rather than in a mythological genealogy sense, it is evident that the Eternal All-Child is child of the Eternal All-Mother and the Eternal All-Father.
It's not really a big deal in my mind that RHK is child of N. and H. - but it's a formula I use over and over. As I now think of it in the framework of your question, I think this relationship has always been subsumed for me into the bigger scheme just mentiioned. That is, I've always known the Child to have come forth from the Infinities. They are, in any case, the Unmanifest in contrast to Horus who is the visible object of worship.
That's my thought at the moment. - Again, excellent exegetical question.
@hreefold31 said
"Adjunct to this, Heru-Ra-Ha is described in Liber AL as either one or both of the deities Hoor-paar-kraat and Ra-Hoor-Khut.
But elsewhere in Liber AL, Hadit identifies himself as Heru-pa-kraath."
I wanted to address your last point separately. Your last sentence is something frequently cited but not actually what is said.
The actual clause in CCXX 2:8 is, "Who worshipped Heru-pa-kraath have worshipped me....' This isn't the same as saying, "I am Heru-pa-kraath."
Consider the sentence construction and compare it to parallel uses. Suppose we had a sentence (and BTW I'm not saying it is the equivalent to the above, but it makes a good example) which said, "Whoso has worshipped the silence has worshipped the inmost center." This has meaning without affirming "the silence is the same thing as the inmost center."
Both Hadit and HPK can be attributed to Kether - but this is for different reasons in each case. There is definitely a relationship - but one would not say that Osiris is Maat simply because both are attributed to Malkuth. One can find similarities between Bacchus and Adonis, and even things that they express in common in their dual attribution to Tiphereth, but the mythologist would not say that Bacchus is Adonis.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Both Hadit and HPK can be attributed to Kether - but this is for different reasons in each case. There is definitely a relationship - but one would not say that Osiris is Maat simply because both are attributed to Malkuth. One can find similarities between Bacchus and Adonis, and even things that they express in common in their dual attribution to Tiphereth, but the mythologist would not say that Bacchus is Adonis."
Jim - Hadit/HPK = KETHER?! If anything, I would associate Hadit with the Father principle of Chokmah (the point of light emerging from the nothingness of Kether). In a previous posting I suggested Nuit = Kether, as I understand the essential quality of Kether to be the nothingness of consciousness.
The only way I might see Hadit = Kether is if Kether is associated with the highest point of consciousness and above that the world and consciousness vanishes into samadhi, thus linking Nuit with Ain Soph.
The fundamental distinction is between nothingness vs. consciousness to find the corresponding sephiroth for the principles of Hadit or Nuit.
Also, I've never heard of Maat being associated with Malkuth. I understood her to be the principle of justice, perfection, non-duality etc. I can see how Osiris might be associated with Malkuth as the King of the Dead and Underworld.
-
@h2h said
"Jim - Hadit/HPK = KETHER?! If anything, I would associate Hadit with the Father principle of Chokmah (the point of light emerging from the nothingness of Kether). In a previous posting I suggested Nuit = Kether, as I understand the essential quality of Kether to be the nothingness of consciousness. "
I also Hadit as father being reflected down into Kether, but mostly in the same fashion that it's hard to deny Nuit's association with Binah - many attributes in common. (But Nuit is primarily the 0, and other expressions of Her are more commonly given to Binah - ditto with Hadit and Chokmah.)
And Hadit is, in any case, the Yod, which appears both at Kether and Chokmah.
But Hadit is, more than anything, the inmost center and indivisible point, indistinguishable in any sense I can see from Yechidah. - Except that (like the Yod) there is also a "going forth" aspect(as the Point in Kether becomes the Line or Wand in Chokmah, so has Hadit a secondary unfurling serpentine aspect).
That's what I meant.
"The only way I might see Hadit = Kether is if Kether is associated with the highest point of consciousness and above that the world and consciousness vanishes into samadhi, thus linking Nuit with Ain Soph."
Yes, that's a basic Kether chaaracteristic. More simply, though: Think the nondimensional, unconditioned point. That's Kether and that's Hadit.
The fundamental distinction is between nothingness vs. consciousness to find the corresponding sephiroth for the principles of Hadit or Nuit.
"Also, I've never heard of Maat being associated with Malkuth. I understood her to be the principle of justice, perfection, non-duality etc. I can see how Osiris might be associated with Malkuth as the King of the Dead and Underworld."
Maat is the Hiereus of the current Aeon. Her attributions of justice, taken more literally (from Her name, translations of its root, etc.) is closely related to the "regulations" or "laws" of physics, as much as with moral law. She, of course, has a Lamed attribution also.
-
I have always thought of it as N + H = RHK, in this way :
{0} U {1} = {0,1}U being the mathematical symbol for union. The set of {0}, Nuit ,and {1}, Hadit, being brought together to create set {0,1} , RHK.
Tree of Life set : {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, {0,1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9, {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,{0,1...}}
At some point I need to re-read my Calculus texts :X
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I also Hadit as father being reflected down into Kether, but mostly in the same fashion that it's hard to deny Nuit's association with Binah - many attributes in common. (But Nuit is primarily the 0, and other expressions of Her are more commonly given to Binah - ditto with Hadit and Chokmah.)
And Hadit is, in any case, the Yod, which appears both at Kether and Chokmah.
But Hadit is, more than anything, the inmost center and indivisible point, indistinguishable in any sense I can see from Yechidah. - Except that (like the Yod) there is also a "going forth" aspect(as the Point in Kether becomes the Line or Wand in Chokmah, so has Hadit a secondary unfurling serpentine aspect).
That's what I meant."
If Nuit is primarily 0 and Hadit is the Yod appearing at Kether and extending into Chokmah (the Point becoming the Line), then would it not be more accurate to say that Kether represents the unionof Nuit with Hadit?
II:1-4:
- Nu! The hiding of Hadit.
- Come! All ye, and learn the secret that hath not yet been revealed. I, Hadit, am the complement of Nu, my bride. I am not extended, and Khabs is the name of my House.
- In the sphere I am everywhere the center, as she, the circumference, is nowhere found.
- Yet, she shall be known + I never.
The above describes a model of consciousness that corresponds with e.g. the mysticism of Miguel Molinos, the 42 Negative Confessions of the Egyptians, or negative theology. Further if Nuit is associated with attributes of Binah, she corresponds to space and time. In other words, the essential nature of consciousness must be nothingness (or unknowable) in order to experience and discover Nuit.
@Jim Eshelman said
"Maat is the Hiereus of the current Aeon. Her attributions of justice, taken more literally (from Her name, translations of its root, etc.) is closely related to the "regulations" or "laws" of physics, as much as with moral law. She, of course, has a Lamed attribution also."
Interesting. Are you suggesting Maat’s attribution to Lamed links her with one’s HGA?
-
@h2h said
"If Nuit is primarily 0 and Hadit is the Yod appearing at Kether and extending into Chokmah (the Point becoming the Line), then would it not be more accurate to say that Kether represents the unionof Nuit with Hadit? "
You can work this a lot of ways, and I don't find that objectionable.
I just want to emphasize that I hold the attribution of Hadit to Kether as the simplest, purest, least controversial attribution of any in the Thelemic pantheon. Everything else seems secondary to that simplicity.
She's the circumference. He's the center. She's an infinite circle, all-nothing. He's an infinitessimal point. And so forth.
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"Maat is the Hiereus of the current Aeon. Her attributions of justice, taken more literally (from Her name, translations of its root, etc.) is closely related to the "regulations" or "laws" of physics, as much as with moral law. She, of course, has a Lamed attribution also."Interesting. Are you suggesting Maat’s attribution to Lamed links her with one’s HGA?"
I wasn't suggesting anything in particular - and the Maat-Osiris example was just that, an example, to show how deities that seem to be highly different can share a common correspondence despite that.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"You are right that the "child" idea really isn't expressed in Liber Legis. However, it does seem to have been in Crowley's mind from the beginning and through the whole period of the reception.
@hreefold31 said
"Adjunct to this, Heru-Ra-Ha is described in Liber AL as either one or both of the deities Hoor-paar-kraat and Ra-Hoor-Khut.
But elsewhere in Liber AL, Hadit identifies himself as Heru-pa-kraath."
I wanted to address your last point separately. Your last sentence is something frequently cited but not actually what is said.
The actual clause in CCXX 2:8 is, "Who worshipped Heru-pa-kraath have worshipped me....' This isn't the same as saying, "I am Heru-pa-kraath."
Consider the sentence construction and compare it to parallel uses. Suppose we had a sentence (and BTW I'm not saying it is the equivalent to the above, but it makes a good example) which said, "Whoso has worshipped the silence has worshipped the inmost center." This has meaning without affirming "the silence is the same thing as the inmost center." "
Dwtw
Yes, the trinity idea and the 'child-hood' of Horus seem to be thematically connected with Liber AL, but as I say, there is no actual stipulation of that in the text of AL, so I've always found it a bit of a conceptual leap to make.
Another leap is to identify Hadit with Heru-pa-kraat. As you say, Hadit does not say, 'I AM HPK', but the statement is awfully close to an identity. I would conjecture that the statement as made in AL can be construed as being an identity of Hadit and HPK; the words do not exclude that conclusion. But they also do not make it unequivocal. So in the end it's the reader's choice.
But at least this reader's choice has some scriptural justification, while I don't think the same can be said for 'RHK is the child of Nuit and Hadit'.
I've been prone to understand Heru-Ra-Ha as a Horus deity with twin aspects, of HPK and RHK. If Hadit is identified with HPK, then he is the Silence, while RHK is the Strength. Together they form the two poles of the Double Wand of Power.
To me, this formulation is much easier to make if Hadit is NOT considered some sort of Father to RHK, but is more like a twin brother. At least there is some basis for that in Liber AL, whereas Nuit does not say she is anybody's mother, nor does Hadit say he is anyone's father.
And it might be worth noting that the Trinity which issues forth a child is a preoccupation of older kabbalah, both Jewish and Chrisitian, and may not be valid in the same sense in the current Aeon.
Thanks for your comments
Litlluw
R. Leo Gillis -
When we really get down to it isn't anything made manifest the union of Nuit and Hadit? How can anything be manifest that is not in Nuit, and that does not have Hadit in it's core, heart or hub?
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"She's the circumference. He's the center. She's an infinite circle, all-nothing. He's an infinitessimal point. And so forth."
This is expressed in Masonry as the Point Within a Circle. The symbology, and the underlying meaning, are the same. The Pythagoreans expressed that the "Center is everywhere and the circumference nowhere."
An interesting explaination from a Masonic viewpoint here: www.sacred-texts.com/mas/sof/sof17.htm
-
93,
I think Hadit and Nuit are both 0 as they proclaim themselves to be. RHK/Aiwass/Horus is Kether, "the first and least untrue formulation of the Ego." Ego being "I am," and I am referring to Eheieh/Kether...
EIther way, the Hadit + Nuit = RHK is not clear in Liber AL. We have a 'creation' story contained without Nuit's chapter (lines 28-30) and also a creation story in Liber LXV where the Godhead descends into the darkly-splendid abodes and therefore into duality...
IAO131