The Book of The Law Study Group 3.39
RLG
Dwtw
Note that the line "and thy comment upon this the Book of the Law" is clearly interpolated in the original manuscript. The sentence still reads fine without it. This raises the question of whether Crowley forgot to write it in and then went back and did so, or if it was deliberately placed there to validate 'the comment' as having a rightful place in the printing of the book on 'handmade paper', etc.
Litlluw
RLG
http://lib.oto-usa.org/libri/liber0031.html?num=55
Note that the line "and thy comment upon this the Book of the Law" is clearly interpolated in the original manuscript. The sentence still reads fine without it. This raises the question of whether Crowley forgot to write it in and then went back and did so, or if it was deliberately placed there to validate 'the comment' as having a rightful place in the printing of the book on 'handmade paper', etc.
Litlluw
RLG
http://lib.oto-usa.org/libri/liber0031.html?num=55
Aeon418
Verse 39 = 93?
Some people claim that the Comment is an intrinsic part of the book and therefore a Class A text in it's own right. But the odd looking line and the word count would seem to back up the arguments of the opposite camp that hold the view that the Comment is merely an add-on.
[EDIT: Interpretive waffle to follow as time permits.
]
On the same interpolation theme, it's interesting to note that there are 103 words in this verse (including the ampersand). If you remove the suspect line (10 words) you are left with a grand total of 93 words. That's rather suggestive to me and possibly points to the relationship between the Book of the Law and the Comment.
Some people claim that the Comment is an intrinsic part of the book and therefore a Class A text in it's own right. But the odd looking line and the word count would seem to back up the arguments of the opposite camp that hold the view that the Comment is merely an add-on.
[EDIT: Interpretive waffle to follow as time permits.
]Aeon418
Crowley thought the literal fulfillment of this verse was his publication of, The Equinox of the Gods.
http://hermetic.com/crowley/equinox-of-the-gods/
That's all well and good, but what could it possibly mean for the rest of us?
Firstly I think R.H.K. is the speaker again. Ankh-af-na-khonsu's little monologue is over and we're back to business as usual. Okay, take it away R.H.K.
The initial thing I get from this verse is a sense of time. The first instruction, "a book to say how thou didst come hither", sounds very much like a common magical diary practice where the student has to write their own autobiography to help them understand the chain of events that led them to their present circumstances.
A reproduction of this ink and paper for ever!
For ever is a long time, and I fail to see how any kind of physical reproduction can be made to last for ever. Some people actually do copy out the Book of the Law by hand as a way to strengthen their link with the text, but as worthy as this practice is it's still not going to last for ever. Unless of course the reproduction is in a non-physical form. Crowley often urged his students to memorise the Book of the Law, or portions of it. Does this act of memorization somehow imprint the text into the stream of human consciousness? I don't know.
For in it is the word secret & not only in the English. In one sense this line can be interpreted to mean that there are hidden secrets in the original manuscript. Maybe they aren't restricted to the English language. As we've seen frequently in this study both Hebrew and Greek are useful to understanding the text. Also there are things in the text that have nothing to do with languages at all. The chance shape of the letters, etc. In this verse itself we see a line that looks like it may have been inserted later.
But maybe this "word secret" is something less literal. It may possibly be a consequence of the internalization of the text. Just like ritual can act as a doorway or bridge to different levels of consciousness, so can the memorization of a sacred text. Once the text is inprinted in consciousness it begins to communicate more than is there in the plain English. The text may say one thing, but subconsciusly you feel or intuit that the text is saying something else entirely. It's a bit like reading the Tarot. First you make a conscious connection with the symbolism, then you allow that same symbolism to act like a conduit for subconscious intuitions.
The comment? A less literal interpretation may be that the comment on the Book of the Law is your life itself. Your life is the beautiful paper made by hand that is written in red ink (Hadit/Will) and black ink (Nuit/Love). It reminds me of a quote from Liber Aleph.
Crowley formalised this instruction in the practice of saying Will before meals. But there are loads of other ways, direct or indirect, in which the Law can be given.
Then they shall chance to abide in this bliss or no; it is no odds. By all means spread the word, but don't try and shove it down people's throats. If they're not interested it's no big deal. You can't forcibly convert anyone to Thelema. The very idea is laughable. You can show them the door, but walking through it is their choice. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Example:
Thelemite: Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Complete stranger: Screw you ass hole!
Thelemite: Love is the law, love under will.
http://hermetic.com/crowley/equinox-of-the-gods/
That's all well and good, but what could it possibly mean for the rest of us?
Firstly I think R.H.K. is the speaker again. Ankh-af-na-khonsu's little monologue is over and we're back to business as usual. Okay, take it away R.H.K.
The initial thing I get from this verse is a sense of time. The first instruction, "a book to say how thou didst come hither", sounds very much like a common magical diary practice where the student has to write their own autobiography to help them understand the chain of events that led them to their present circumstances.
A reproduction of this ink and paper for ever!
For ever is a long time, and I fail to see how any kind of physical reproduction can be made to last for ever. Some people actually do copy out the Book of the Law by hand as a way to strengthen their link with the text, but as worthy as this practice is it's still not going to last for ever. Unless of course the reproduction is in a non-physical form. Crowley often urged his students to memorise the Book of the Law, or portions of it. Does this act of memorization somehow imprint the text into the stream of human consciousness? I don't know.For in it is the word secret & not only in the English. In one sense this line can be interpreted to mean that there are hidden secrets in the original manuscript. Maybe they aren't restricted to the English language. As we've seen frequently in this study both Hebrew and Greek are useful to understanding the text. Also there are things in the text that have nothing to do with languages at all. The chance shape of the letters, etc. In this verse itself we see a line that looks like it may have been inserted later.
But maybe this "word secret" is something less literal. It may possibly be a consequence of the internalization of the text. Just like ritual can act as a doorway or bridge to different levels of consciousness, so can the memorization of a sacred text. Once the text is inprinted in consciousness it begins to communicate more than is there in the plain English. The text may say one thing, but subconsciusly you feel or intuit that the text is saying something else entirely. It's a bit like reading the Tarot. First you make a conscious connection with the symbolism, then you allow that same symbolism to act like a conduit for subconscious intuitions.
The comment? A less literal interpretation may be that the comment on the Book of the Law is your life itself. Your life is the beautiful paper made by hand that is written in red ink (Hadit/Will) and black ink (Nuit/Love). It reminds me of a quote from Liber Aleph.
It is the Law to give. Spread the word.
Crowley formalised this instruction in the practice of saying Will before meals. But there are loads of other ways, direct or indirect, in which the Law can be given.
Then they shall chance to abide in this bliss or no; it is no odds. By all means spread the word, but don't try and shove it down people's throats. If they're not interested it's no big deal. You can't forcibly convert anyone to Thelema. The very idea is laughable. You can show them the door, but walking through it is their choice. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Example:
Thelemite: Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Complete stranger: Screw you ass hole!
Thelemite: Love is the law, love under will.
Grigori
Crowley considered Liber ABA (Book 4) to fulfil this command didn't' he?
This is interesting, I never noticed the subtle direction here. The book itself is not printed on hand made paper, its only the comment that is to be printed this way? I've never seen any version of Liber Al that includes hand made paper, and not even just the comment page. But what about the original, when Crowley composed the comment/s, did he use such paper and ink. Who has the originals?
Not one Thelemite has yet given me a free book just for dining with them LOL Well, actually, one time someone did...
Aeon418
No, it was the The Equinox of the Gods. It is the fourth part of Liber ABA, but was originally issued as a separate volume in 1936. The first edition was printed on Japon vellum and had a pocket at the back which contained a photo-lithographic facsimile of the 65 sheets of the original hand written manuscript.
The Preface to The Equinox of the Gods.
Maybe, maybe not. As has already been pointed out, the line concerning the comment looks like it was inserted into the text later. (How much later is anyone's guess.) If you remove that line the verse still reads fine.
In The Equinox of the Gods Crowley says he used a Swan fountain pen and 8"x10" type-writer paper. There's a watermark on the paper: "Alex Pipie & Sons, London. Standard Typewriting." Crowley used black ink, but some punctuation and line numbers were added later in a combination of red ink, pencil, and orange crayon!
They were given to the O.T.O. after someone found them in a basement. Seriously! See for yourself.
http://hermetic.com/legis/raiders-of-the-lost-basement.html
Aeon418
Ooops. I've just realised you were talking about the Comment/commetaries.
As far as I know there's nothing special about either. I believe the first appearance of the "Comment" was in a diary entry.
The commentaries were written over a period of time on various types of ordinary paper. I think some portions were dictated. After that it was turned into a typescript.
Grigori
If I'm understanding correctly, the options are
1) The BoL instructs Crowley to print the BoL on handmade paper with black and red ink. As yet, this has never been done.
2) Crowley added in some text that makes this appear to be a direction specific to the "comment". The comment and commentaries were not written in this way. To my mind, this means that the validity ascribed to the comment in the BoL is invalidated, as no comment has been written (or published at least) that was done so in the manner directed.
I prefer option 2, as it means I can stop burning books and referring to myself as a centre of pestilence LOL
Aeon418
The first edition of, The Equinox of the Gods, was printed on vellum (animal skin). Does that qualify as handmade paper? I would say yes.
That's one possibility. It does seem rather self-serving that Crowley's comment should be singled out for this kind of special treatment. On the other hand it may be an intentional quirk of the dictation process that is designed to communicate something "not only in the English". Is it a coincidence that a verse hinting at secrets should have something strange about it?
I don't think it matters how they were written because the instructions in this verse concern printing.
Also it's worth noting that Crowley eventually came to the conclusion that his extensive commentaries were the not the Comment mentioned in the Book of the Law.
I still think the 1936 printing of, The Equinox of the Gods, was Crowley's best attempt at fulfilling the printing instructions.
Also a comment of some sort is stipulated by the Book itself. The first mention is in I:36, followed by three references to it in the third chapter (III:39, 40, and 63). Crowley himself identified the "Short Comment" as the one indicated. How you then interpret that Comment is a different can o' worms.
ravenest
I think Crowley would have made ALL of his publications like this, if he could, he liked beautifully made books.
Okay but did a Thelemite ever dine 'AT' you? Is that like someone talking with you or talking at you?
It may not mean anything but the combination of red and black writing in the one text often appears in ancient Egyptian manuscripts.
