As we progress with our examination of Liber AL vel Legis, we come to this excerpt, that seems to be a delineation of Ra Hoor Khuit’s name, but before we proceed to that analysis, let us look at the rest of the excerpt:
There is not much trouble equating Nuit to “the Star.” Plenty of instances can be found in AL and the comments referring to her as the Universe full of stars (as Nut she is goddess of the nighttime sky), plus she is called a star in places.
Likewise with Hadit as “the Snake,” as is fairly obvious from the second chapter of AL that he equates to the Kundalini Serpent of Tantric Yoga.
Now what seems left in this excerpt in the delineation of R.H.K.’s name itself; if so, it goes thusly:
RA = the Sun
HOOR = Strength & Sight
KHUIT = Light
The use of commas in this phrase (see above) seems to justify this division.
But now we are confronted with trying to justify this conclusion. We are faced with the question: “Does it work?”
Ra as the Sun god of old Egypt is an obvious connection here, and seems to fit quite easily.
Hoor as strength does not give us much problem either. Hoor/Horus as the hawk is a strong and powerful bird of prey. In fact, Ra Hoor Khuit twice refers to Strength as one of his chief attributes: “I am the strength, force, vigour of your arms.” (AL III:17) and “I am the Hawk-Headed Lord of Silence & of Strength…” (AL III:70). So far so good.
Hoor as Sight is also no problem. Sharp-sighted birds of prey such as the hawk can spot their quarry from a phenomenal distance. (In fact, I’ve heard that hawks can spot their prey by body-heat with a sort of Infra-Red vision!)
Khuit as Light is a bit more difficult. Khu is part of the Egyptian soul. Crowley wrote in his comment on I:8 that “…the Khu is the magical entity of man,” and the Schuelers maintain that the Khu relates to the Spiritual Body. It is going to take someone more familiar than the present author with Egyptian thought and religion to decide if this correspondence works.
So if we accept this as true, what does it say? Have we found something? or are we just being cute? If we substitute the real names for the above mentioned attributes we get: Ra Hoor Khuit is for the servants Nuit and Hadit. It does not say he is the servant of Nuit and Hadit (though in a way he is), it says he is for the servants of Nuit and Hadit. We know he is the active force in the establishing of the New Æon, and his own chapter is full of promises and rewards for those that aid the Æon. Very well then; it does seem to work.
What follows next is the true acid test. Does this conclusion agree with, or compliment, Crowley’s own commenta-ries of AL. It is here we have a big problem! In both “The New Comment” and “Comment D” Crowley maintains that Hadit is calling himself the Star. Yet if we look at the commentaries as a whole, assigning this one attribution to Hadit doesn’t seem to fit. No one wants to disagree with his own prophet; and so the best we can do here is blush profusely and go on. Also, this difference doesn’t really impinge on the point we’re trying to make.
Of all the comments, the only one that treats this excerpt much at all is in “Comment D” where we read:
"He … exclaimed that the sun, source of all light and life on earth, strength to do and sight to perceive, as also light, the simplest form of play between twin forces, are the guerdon of those who know themselves as they are."
While phrased differently these two interpretations are not mutually self-exclusive. They both maintain that the Sun, Strength and Sight, and Light are types of rewards which may be attained.
So what we appear to have here is two levels of interpretation of the same excerpt from The Book of the Law.