Khabs is plural? Why?
-
-
The khabs is in the khu, not the khu in the khabs. The stars are in the soul, not the soul in the stars, if I recall correctly.
-
I always thought it was the same as saying 'the light is in the stars, not 'the stars are in the light'! - worship then the stars and behold my light shed over you.'
-
I believe it is a direct reference to Hadit, being the core of every star.
The starry night, and the core of every star, is in one's heart. Not just one heart beneath the starry sky.
We may also reference Liber 075 with:
"The Goddess is none. She to whom all Gods are but specks of light in the Deep Well of Her Womb."
Nuit comprises all the stars, as she devours them. Thus one heart cannot be beneath the starry sky, as the soul is self-consuming, the Angel devours one within the firmament flare.
Hail Eris!
All Hail Discordia!! -
Crowley wrote something to the extent that the Khabs of one exists in the Khu of others.
"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 centre, as she, the circumference, is nowhere found. Yet she shall be known & I never." -AL II: 2-4
In an infinite body any point can be the center. The circumference will extend equally and eternally from all points.
-
I think this has wandered off-topic, has it not?
The single purpose of this thread is expressed in the following question:
@gerry456 said
"Khabs is plural? Why? Shouldn't it be singular, as in "Atman"?"
-
Which is why I kind of answered with obvious hints of "singularity" versus "plurality".
Most star systems are binary.
They have a mama and a papa.
Hail Eris!
All Hail Discordia!!
It's not.