Caroline Tully wrote:
Bit of special pleading by the footnote junkie -
If you assume Hadit is a misreading or more likely mishearing of "Behedet"
(which seems likely as that whats actually on the Stele of Revealing)
then Hadit is a indeed an Egyptian god - "Horus of Behedet" -
perhaps AC discovered his error and thought he'd better gloss things over ??
Could say the same for the "Tzaddhi not the Star" which it so obviously
is - although subject to another Crowley gloss -
perhaps explains the apparent contradictory way this is handled in
published edition of "Book of Thoth"
bb/93
Mogg
> Found it: Editor’s Introduction, Book 4, p.xli : ‘Crowley rarely
> emphasized the traditional Egyptological attribution of these deities,
> and in his commentary to Liber 418, The Vision and the Voice, 2^nd
> Aethyr, he remarks that “Hadit is a mathematical expressions rather
> than a God.”
>
> Yay.
>
> *From:* Society for The Academic Study of Magic
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Caroline Tully
> *Sent:* Saturday, 21 November 2009 12:42 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Help with Crowley ref?
>
> Hello,
>
> Can anyone on the list recall reading a Crowley commentator – perhaps
> it was DuQuette, or Hymenaeus Beta, or one of the biographers -
> regarding Aleister Crowley and Egyptian deities, as in the Liber AL
> deities, saying something like “Crowley wasn’t so much into Egyptology
> when it came to deities”, or “Crowley’s approach to Egyptian deities
> was not Egyptological...” and then explaining that his use of Egyptian
> deities was more about numerological aspects... hang on, memory
> surfacing.... I think it might be a note in the back of ‘Book
> 4’............ Now I’ll check that, but meanwhile, anyone recall this
> comment?
>
> ~Caroline.
>
|