The Truman Show (Exegesis)

The Truman Show (1998, PG)
Directed by Peter Weir
Written by Andrew Niccol
With Jim Carrey, Ed Harris, Laura Linney, Noah Emmerich


If we are to render The Truman Show’s Baudrillard-esque hyperreality into the Kabbalistic Tree of Life, the nature, and even the validity, of the Tree is called into question. A hyperreality, a “reality” TV show where the “protagonist” does not even know he is the star of the most popular and successful play/show/film in history – does such an outlandish but all too imaginable world even lend itself to the Tree’s notions of horizontal dualistic balance and vertical hierarchal (or subversive) influence?

Jim Carrey plays Truman, an amiable and likeable young man who is married to a beautiful blonde woman and lives in a picture perfect suburban town where everybody smiles and there is absolutely no crime or unhappiness. Before the true nature of his environment is revealed (I might ask if we could even call it “true”), there is a feeling of a 50s sitcom parody – everybody speaks in giddy tones and canned phrases. Every day is like every other day – literally. Each morning when Truman leaves his house for work, he greets with the same expression his jovial neighbor who is always in the same spot, and who’s dog always jumps on Truman, who always pretends to be surprised at the dog’s forwardness, and so on and so on. There is the token best friend who always seems to show up at the right time, without fail. Downtown, Truman always bumps into the same acquaintences at the same corners. Everybody in Truman’s world is participating in a ritual-like procession through the day; it has never been any other way.

Since its release in the late 90s, there have been several movies sharing The Truman Show’s motifs of artificiality, disguised appearances, and suburban hypocrisy rooted in 1950s middle class society. Watching it again in 2007, one cannot help but initially comparing it to such films as American Beauty, Pleasantville, Donnie Darko, all of which (Truman Show included) owe at least some debt to the revolutionary depiction of suburban dystopia in David Lynch’s 1986 surrealist noir Blue Velvet. The images that come to mind are: white picket fences, impossibly vibrant flowers, manicured lawns, and neighbourhoods where you comfortably wave to everyone but fear to enter their respective abodes. However, the world of Truman differs both descriptively and analytically. Unlike the afore-mentioned films, The Truman Show is not concerned with the skeletons in the closets, the decay beneath the perfume, the hypocrisy lacing artificial beauty and communication. I think such notions are, in 2007,moot points and facts taken for granted by Generation Y and its cynicism (of cynicism).

It is no secret to the reader, I will presume, that the beginning of “The Truman Show” was Truman’s birth; since then the show has been broadcasted 24/7 worldwide. He lives in a dome near Hollywood, and has never stepped foot outside of it; everybody around him are high-paid actors, and the biggest events in Truman’s life were influenced and staged by writers, namely his creator Christof (Ed Harris). The trajectory of the movie follows Truman as he first slowly becomes suspicious of his environment, then challenges it as a child tests the waters of his/her household, then rebels against conformity and external control, then briefly relapses due to fear of the unknown, and finally decides to break free from it in a kind of biblical exodus – rather than being exiled into the desert, Truman undergoes a self-exile into the “vast” waters that he has a childhood-fear towards. With the entire world watching, Truman triumphs over the stormy wrath of his creator, avoiding near death; he reaches the edge of the dome, on which the sky is revealed to be painted, and goes through the required and trite archetypal scene where Creation meets Creator…Frankenstein and Prometheus, Parent and Child, God and Adam/Eve/Moses/Job. Truman supercedes his creator in strength and will, and walks out into the “real world”, and so the film ends.

Funny at the beginning. Sad in the middle. The ending is intended to be liberating and joyful, but I found it extremely troubling…not because the events themselves are disturbing, but because of the way they are presented – or more accurately, not presented. The movie falls victim to the hyperreal contrivance it seems to earlier condemn in the “show” itself.

What exactly is the point of this movie? As I’ve said, it is not an unveiling of the ugliness beneath the fake beauty of the world, for the world in The Truman Show is not the world for us, only for Truman. And from his perspective, that which he discovers within his environment is not some sort of evil or darkness or perversity. Christof is right when in an interview and also in his dialogue with Truman that there is absolutely no badness in the Truman’s world. The people are actors, and are aware of themselves and their relationships as performative illusions. And even more interestingly, they are not trying to deceive the millions of TV-viewers into believing they are genuine persons. Although a “reality show”, the viewer knows that the characters are still acting. The characters in American Beauty do engage in deception but the actors in the Truman “show” don’t engage in deception towards their neighbours (i.e. the viewers) but towards ONE SINGULAR PERSON.

So then, is the movie saying that not everything is what it seems? Such a juvenile and simple theme is not, I hope, what underlies the film. I might say that everything IS what it seems. THAT IS THE POINT OF REALITY TELEVISION, POST MODERN MEDIA, AND THE TRUMAN SHOW MOVIE ITSELF. Truman happily lived a good 25 or so years in a completely fabricated world. Was it, then, fabricated during those 25 years, or a comfortable and accepted reality? Even the TV Viewers began to see the entire life of Truman as a real life; of course Truman is a real person, and of course what happens to him is reality! Does it matter that his best friend is an actor being fed lines through a mic? Maybe, maybe not. It certainly doesn’t matter for the TV Viewers, and until the timeframe of the movie it didn’t matter for Truman either. Politicians speak from script; God speaks through script; Prophets and priests speak through script(ure).

The Kabbalistic Tree is God, because God is all. But God is not a tree. The Tree of Life is essentially an unbounded circle. I do not wish to degrade all of the present discussion by regressing into a silly concordance of Sephirah and characters, such as saying that Christof is Kether, Truman is Malkkuth or perhaps even Shekhinah in exile…They could very well be these things, but stating them will not help our understanding. Continuing that metaphor would unfortunately lead to the insignificance of Kether /the Creator in the formation of the world (Truman’s exit from the dome), etc etc.

So what is at the heart of the film?
1. The fear of the actors when Truman changes what the script calls for. Their identity and very existence dissolves in such instances, and the only option available is to physically charge into Truman to block him – think of the hospital scene when, to prevent Truman from looking into a surgery which is not meant to be an actual surgery, a random goggle of handicapped old men frantically wheel themselves into Truman’s path. There is an extreme anxiety in everybody, as though they will die – as characters, as jobs, as egos - if Truman escapes.
2. The lack of any shot of the outside world that is not of people watching the Truman Show. Just as Baudrillard predicted, and just as we’re already seeing in youth, the importance of “illusion” and “media” breaks through the barrier of the screen and invades the territory of reality. The movie is called The Truman Show not because its about the show but because the movie is the show.
3. The staircase at the edge of the dome leading to a doorway in the sky – Jacob’s ladder, the ascension of Enoch into Metatron, death, renewal, and all of the above.
4. Why do we feel it is a happy ending? In the context of the movie, we really do not know what it is outside the dome, the doorway leads only into blackness, Truman has lost his God and his family and his community, and he has also left himself. For if he leaves, he is no longer Truman.

The mistake of the filmmakers is ignoring number 4, and shrinking from the disturbing implications in Truman’s self-exile. They avoid what I feel is an unavoidable parallel to theology and myth – and to acknowledge such does not necessitate the belief in God at all.

In a future essay, I will expound on Baudrillard’s notion of the “hyperreality”. The hyperreality is hinted at in this film, but does not come to our full attention. Why? Because the movie suffers from hyperreality!
Am I going in loops? Am I losing logic in this review? The answer is yes, and it’s the movie’s fault.

Many people don’t seem to remember the very last scene in the movie. It is this scene that makes me want to burn every reel of the film for its dishonesty, cowardice, stupidity, and…yes, effectiveness as a liberating and concluding joke. I am not going to say what it is said in hope that the re-reader and destroyer of my review will feel the desire the emanate into the film itself rather than using some nameless hunter of Shekhinah’s pseudo-review of a pseudo-honest movie.

Siouxsie's 21st Century Emanation

Remember that band Siouxsie and the Banshees? If you do, you probably still listen to and don't need to remember the punk-turned-goth-turned-something else band. They began recording in the late 70s with their LP debut The Scream, and released their last album The Rapture in the mid 90s. The titles of their first and last releases form a kind of bridge spanning their career - the initial Scream of teenage punk youth that was shaped and defined over time into a mystical Rapture that rejects the body in favor of the spirit. Such rapture of course is the signal to stop creating music and let the past speak for itself. Giving into the rapture is to enter the musical collective unconsciousness. Just like with many of the mystics from the Middle Ages and the prophets from before the time of Christ, Siouxsie and the Banshees began and perpetuated a movement (one of aesthetics and music rather than theology) that has now forgotten its Source. I do not intend, in drawing these parallels, to raise the band to a transcendent and "mystical" state, in the traditional sense of mysticism; however, apart from music critic circles and the self-sustaining isolated packets of the 21st century's "goth" or "post-new wave" cultures, Siouxsie and the Banshees is no longer listened to, nor even known about. I won't take the time for specifics, but there is an entire population of contemporary female-led rock bands that owe their existence to what Siouxsie Sioux started with the Banshees. I'd guess the climate is more aware of such in the U.K., but in America there is a pocket of empty space where the Banshees once were.

My point is that, through the matching bookends of "Scream" and "Rapture", we see in the band's career an evolution from childhood to adulthood, from atheism to secular spirituality, from artistic rabble-rousing to artistic humbleness, and lastly, an evolving sense of "expression". Similar to the growth of mystics, theologies, lit theories, and philosophical movements, the band's notion of "expression" was initially that of "unveiling the mask", of exposing the naked body, of shocking symbols, Brechtian didacticism of anti-authority and self-identification. In other words, it was the punk rock's need to distinguish itself from its predecessors by Screaming. By circa. 1996, the notion of "expression" outgrew the small frame of the young Screamer. It now was aware of itself as an aesthetic entity outside of itself and inside of the once-opposed realm of Popular Music. The awareness of one's true self, of being able to look back at its younger self like a stranger, creates an ecstatic state of being - boundaries aren't drawn with black lipstick anymore...they are dissolved. The self fragments and becomes meaningless. Meaningful for others, for the world, but not for the Self anymore, because now the Self has disappeared into the sweet oblivion of the Kabbalah's Ein Sof, of no Ego or pride. I differentiate this oblivion and loss of the Self from the more common, pseudo-Buddhist understanding of it - that it is Death and the loss of Consciousness. Consciousness is different than the Self. The fragmentation of Self actually perpetuates consciousness; i.e., it's the moment when we shed our old skin and mutate into a wiser creature. We fragment the Self so that we can re-assemble the pieces to explore new possibilities of form, voice, and energy.

Hence, the Rapture, an album that isn't really that good. Self-dissolution - your first lover's last goodbye kiss - is never going to be pretty. If there's any beauty in it, it's the Beauty of the tragic hero's fall, the beauty of Hamlet's self-destruction, the beautiful endings of film/books/myths that make us cry and HATE it for ending.

To keep in congruence with Siouxsie herself, I'll stop losing myself in the language of past aesthetics and anachronistic speculation. Siouxsie Sioux is no longer of the Banshees, nor using the last name "Sioux". She has released a solo album under the name "Siouxsie", and the album rocks. It is obviously her, but it is also obviously recorded in the 21st century for new sensibilities and only a slight sense of nostalgia for what she once was.

Here are the videos for the first two singles "Into a Swan" and "Here Comes That Day", and a list of tour dates for the U.S. in 2008.






Siouxie Sioux - 2008 Tour Dates
Feb 8 - Fillmore @ Irving Plaza, NYC
Feb 9 - Fillmore @ Irving Plaza, NYC
Feb 12 - Fillmore, San Francisco
Feb 13 - Fillmore, San Francisco
Feb 15 - Henry Fonda Theatre, LA
Feb 16 - Henry Fonda Theatre, LA
Feb 18 - House of Blues, Orange County
Feb 19 - House of Blues, Orange County
Feb 21 - 4th & B, San Diego

The Evolution of Alice in Wonderland

Below are pictures and videos of Alice's many emanations throughout the world, beginning with the original woodcuts and ending with Marilyn Manson's upcoming 2008 adaption of Alice, Phantasmagoria: The Visions of Lewis Carroll, which stars Manson as Carroll, model Lily Cole as Alice, and rumors of Angelina Jolie as the Red Queen and a Johnny Depp role (the mad hatter, perhaps?)
Enjoy.

(Original Woodcut) (Disney's Alice





(Japanese Porn)




Jan Svankmajer's Alice (1988)






(American Mcgee's Alice, PC Videogame)







(Phantasmagoria: Visions of Lewis Caroll)

Fans at this Covenant show were randomly handed video cameras, and cameras were also installed in random locations at the venue - this video is the result of that footage. Besides being an intensely exhilirating song, the video is a fascinating look at perspective, distortion, and the medium of collage.

David Lynch Foundation Lecture Fucks Up

For the past few years, David Lynch has been promoting his self-designed Transcendental Meditation program, The David Lynch Foundation, and has been visiting universities and schools throughout the US and the rest of the world.

A video has surfaced, as well as an article in Time, detailing a lecture in Germany where the audience broke out into emotional protest over what Lynch's German "partner" was saying.

Before watching the video, know that TM and the David Lynch foundation have nothing in mind but peace, the effacement of negativity, positive creativity, and all other good things. What we see here is a very sad but perfect example of what is lost in translation. It is clear that Lynch had not been aware of what exactly the German speaker believed or planned to say, and that there had been miscommunication from the beginning.

The most disturbing aspect of it all to me is not that the German speaker evoked Third Reich-like language - although it was disturbing and dissapointing in its undermining of Lynch's cause, no matter how intentional - what made me feel overwhelming sadness and helplessness was the expression on David Lynch's face as the students began yelling at the speaker, all in german. He has no idea what they are saying, and has no idea what has just occured. He sits there quietly, a perplexed look on his face, and can do nothing. Only until a female student approaches him to translate the ensued chaos, does he step forward. But even then, he doesn't really fix anything. Lynch did not make a mistake in spirit, but a mistake in logistics and taking the time to truly ensure that he understood the territory he was stepping into and the people he was assosciating with.

Below the video (in 2 parts) one will find the David Lynch Foundation's reply to the youtube postings.





The David Lynch Foundation replied in the comments on YouTube:

David Lynch here. I don't want to have anything to do with Hitler. We all know he was not a good person who did terrible things.

I want to support Invincible Universities to develop the full potential of the student—enlightenment—and to have students meditating together in a group to enliven and radiate the unified field—the field of peace—into the atmosphere, into the collective consciousness of every nation.

Invincibility in this case means dynamic peace—a situation where no harm can come from within the country and nothing destructive can come from the outside to harm the country.

Sometimes misunderstandings are troublesome. So I want to make perfectly clear that the university for enlightenment and peace will make this a peaceful world — a peaceful world family — where anyone can travel anywhere in the world and meet a friend, not an enemy.

Dynamic peace is not just the absence of war—it is the absence of negativity, which is the seeds of war. These universities, established on a permanent basis, will put an end to thousands of years of war and oppression, and prevent a man like Hitler from ever arising again.
Expand Vessel

Parents Who Fuck For Children And God, Their Children Will Fuck With Their Minds

The problem with some 20^th century goddess traditions is that they unwittingly, or perhaps intentionally, get trapped in the mire of a matriarchy substituting past patriarchy, poorly disguised as something radically different from God the Father, Yahweh, and Zeus. It is not a matter of perpetuating some duality of gender through a polarized spiritual lens. In many respects, matriarchy/patriarchy is the very essence of duality or polarity, of antagonistic opposites, of bitter enemies that reconcile through copulation, only to separate again after the birth of their offspring. The preconceived notion of the offspring serves as a deus ex machina, an illogical equilibrium to an already illogical polarized “relationship”. And as soon as the offspring is given a form of its own, the illusion of balance shatters like a mirror - the mirror is in the offspring’s eyes, reflecting back to the dual-gendered parents their true forms, their real identities, which are so hideous! An oozing and stretching of countless faces, lips, genitals, colors, muscles…the very dissolution and fragmentation of their once singular identities! If only these two enemies in love could cast away their p(m)atriarchy’s handcuffs – two rings, always one in regards to one, one versus the other, one defined by the other. The final irony to it all is their dualistic understanding enabled a singular stagnant state of being. Although computer engineers will bear secular witness to the reductionist language of 1s and 0s as the true form of expression and communication, the building blocks of all numerical – and even aesthetic – value – even so, there are numbers beyond One, and beyond Two. Most importantly, Zero does not exist in our lives. Even in one’s absence is their a negative numerical value. Zero is death, or rather the fear of death.

Those two allegorical parents believed to be Two, when they were still only one versus one. Their attempt to join together, 1 + 1, ended up equaling a third being. But they clung on to that fallacy of an equation: 1 + 1 = 2 (?). The sum, as we all know, is never 2 – now there is a third, and some day will awaken to a fourth, and so on ad infinitum. Their child, Three, destroys their equation of (designed for) equilibrium. I repeat, the illusion of balance shatters like a mirror – the mirror is in the offspring’s eyes, reflecting back to them their true, 100+ digits form. If only, like their ancestors, they saw freedom in multiplicity and mutability. If only, like their ancestors, they saw Three’s two (?) eyes as circles, two loops of infinite dots and infinite time a reminder of the two rings, the two enemies in love, the two questions and the one solution….brought together, Three’s circular eyes become ∞… they are not their ancestors; the “distorted” mirrors of Three’s eyes are not circles, they are Zeros, the negation of circles, the negation of value. Their fear, itself a fittingly cowardly thing, flees the light sparkling in the corner of Three’s eyes. The fear is of death, and death is fear – the one last devolution of duality into singularity, linguistic logical loop severed and terminated. Rather the self-annihilation of one’s one Self and one’s one Other (itself too one Self / Its Self Two One Self), rather that than giving each other lobotomies followed by castrations.

Expand Vessel

An Overview of Kabbalah

An important Kabbalistic term is Ein Sof, translated as “infinite” or “limitless”. Ein Sof is the nothingness of God, His perfection and unity before the emergence of the primordial point. It is the “root of all roots”, the “cause of all causes”, and the unknowable face of God; Ein Sof is absolute reality.[1] But it is not God Himself. Ein Sof is the veil concealing Him from creation. For our purposes, Ein Sof refers to the veil found above, behind, and before Kether, the first Sephirah. The veil is drawn because it is ultimately impossible to understand, explain, or signify God. Kether and the primordial point are the first instances of anything appearing in front of this veil. The transition from concealment/veiling to manifestation - from nothing to being - is paradoxical; there is no way to truly perceive, understand, or speak of Ein Sof, yet the Kabbalists do all of those things through the Sephirot. This discrepancy between the concealed unity of Ein Sof and the unconcealed multiplicity of the Sephirot, or that between the signified and the signifier, is expounded in Chapter IV.

The first question asked, then, is of the nature of the primordial point’s emergence from behind the veil, and its subsequent emanations. “[And God said]; we define this ‘saying’ as an energy that was culled, as it were, in silence from the mystic limitless through the mystic power of thought. Hence ‘and God said’ means that now the above mentioned palace [Binah] generated from the holy seed with which it was pregnant”.[2] The emanation and unfolding of the world is speech. In the characteristically succinct but eloquent words of renowned Jewish scholar Gershom Scholem: “The process of life in God can be construed as the unfolding of the elements of speech”.[3]

The unfolding of the world through speech is represented in the Tree of Life, which is a diagram, a symbolic map of the unfolding of the world. The ten Sephirot are connected and organized in multiple ways, although their basic outline remains the same. They can be arranged (to mention only a few possibilities) under three pillars, as three triangles, as four levels or worlds, and under the headings “Supernal” and “Inferior” (or “Upper” and “Lower”, respectively). First, we will look at a few of the arrangements of the Sephirot, and then move on to basic characteristics of each one.

From the Zohar: “God summoned to issue forth from this complete Light which was in the centre a certain radiance which is the foundation of the world, and on which worlds are established…The whole was then united in the Central Pillar, and it produced the foundation of the world”.[4] The center pillar is aligned with Ein Sof, the source of all, and Kether. Also falling along this pillar are Tiphareth, Yesod, and Malkuth. The center pillar represents equilibrium and the balance between opposing Sephirotic energies.

The opposing energies (which find equilibrium in the center pillar) are polarized into the left and right pillars. The Zohar continues, “From that complete Light, the Central Pillar, extended the foundation, the Life of worlds, which is day from the side of the Right.”[5][6] and masculine. The right pillar represents the sun. It is also considered to be positive

“Meanwhile the Left flamed forth with its full power, producing at all points a kind of reflection, and from this fiery flame came forth the female moonlike essence.”[7] The left pillar represents the moon, the feminine, and is a negative force. Together, we see that that the right and left pillars are, respectively, force and form, light and reflection (sun and moon), and active and passive.

There are specific titles for the three pillars: the right is known as the Pillar of Mercy; the left is either the Pillar of Severity or the Pillar of Judgment, and the center is the Pillar of Mildness or Equilibrium. The ten Sephirot descend through these three pillars in a zigzag-like, lightning bolt arrangement (see Appendix A). This pattern helps shows that the Tree starts in equilibrium, passes through the active and passive pillars, returns to equilibrium, and so on for a few cycles until it reaches its end in equilibrium - the very same state in which it began.

The Tree is also organized into three “trinities” or triangles. Dion Fortune, a nineteenth century female mystic, designates these trinities by combining original Kabbalistic text and the esoteric writings of her contemporary S.L. MacGregors Mathers. She organizes and labels them as follows: firstly, the Supernal Triangle (containing Kether, Chokmah, and Binah); secondly, the Ethical Triangle (containing Chesed, Geburah, and Tiphareth); and thirdly, the Astral Triangle (Netzach, Hod, and Yesod). The last Sephirah, Malkuth, is not included in any of the Sephirotic triangles. [8]

The Sephirot are also divided into four levels or worlds. The highest level is called Atziluth, or the Archetypal World, containing Kether. Chokmah and Binah are placed in the second level Briah, the Creative World. The third level is Yetzirah, the Formative World, containing, in descending order, Chesed, Geburah, Tiphareth, Netzach, Hod, and Yesod. Finally, we have Asiah, the Material World, as the fourth level, containing only Malkuth. The translation of these four worlds varies from source to source - Dion Fortune’s terminology will be used for our discussion of the worlds, as well.

The divisions that most concerns us, however, are as follows: Kether is considered to be Arik Anpin, or the Vast Countenance. From Arik Anpin emanates the Supernal Father, Chokmah, and the Supernal Mother, Binah, which correspond to the Right and Left Pillars. The son of the Supernal Father and Mother is represented through the next six Sephirot – this son is known as Adam Kadmon, or the Lesser Countenance (as opposed to the Vast Countenance). Finally, there is the Queen and consort of the king, or the Inferior Mother (as opposed to the Supernal Mother). She is represented through Malkuth, and its function Shekhinah. [9] The terminology for all of these subjects is endless- presently, the titles most often employed (apart from Sephirotic names) will be the Supernal Mother (Binah), the Inferior Mother (Malkuth), Arik Anpin (Kether), Adam Kadmon (lower six Sephirot), the king (Tiphareth) and Shekhinah (Malkuth as consort).

With a glance at a diagram of the Tree, one will begin to notice other groupings, relationships, and patterns not mentioned here. This is the beauty of the Tree of Life. It is important to keep in mind that neither system is more accurate than the other, nor must one feel the need to force newly learned ideas into one structure or the other. There are elements of one interpretation that will not perfectly fit into, say, the idea of Malkuth as consort to the king. Thus, any paradoxes or incongruities should not be seen as errors. I will try to acknowledge these as they appear. Additionally, it should be stressed that while the ten Sephirot are in a sense “phases” or “stages” of emanation which act upon and shape God’s will, they are simultaneously one with God’s essence. The Sephirot are manifestations of God, but they are also agents acting upon and with God

---

[1] Gershom Scholem, Kabbalah (New York: Meridian, 1978), 89-90.

[2] Zohar I: 16b; Sperling, 69.

[3] Scholem, Jewish Mysticism, 216.

[4] Zohar I: 17a; Sperling, 70.

[5] Ibid.

[6] The terms “positive” and “negative” are not meant as “good” and “bad”, respectively, but in the sense of

magnetism.

[7] Ibid., 71.

[8] Dion Fortune, The Mystical Qabalah (York Beach: Samuel Weiser, Inc., 1988), 59.

[9] Ibid., 60-61.

KETHER

KETHER - FIRST SEPHIRA

Within Kether there is, as of yet, no division. There is no activity as we understand it. However, inherent in Kether are the potentialities of the remaining Sephirot, and the will of God. This will emanates as “thought”, via Chokmah, and then as “intellect”, via Binah. Kether is “the concealed of the concealed”. In other words, Kether itself is not manifested, but it causes manifestation. We may also see Kether as the crown above the head of the archetypal man Adam Kadmon.

Essentially, Kether is the sphere wherein one’s self is annihilated by the proximity to the Godhead. It is the aim of all spiritual and religious experience to reach the state of existence represented in Kether.

The most important name given to Kether is Arik Anpin, “the Vast Countenance”. Arik Anpin is not God, but rather the partly revealed aspect of the Godhead.

Correspondences:

Titles and Names: Arik Anpin Concealed of the Concealed

Ancient of Ancients Ancient of Days

The Vast Countenance The Godhead

Hebrew Letter(s): Alef, yod, nun – Ayin or Ein (“nothingness”)

God-name: Eheieh or Ehyeh ( I am)

Archangel: Metatron

Tarot: The four Aces

Ace of Wands: Purity/Source of Fire

Ace of Cups: Purity/Source of Water

Ace of Swords: Purity/Source of Air

Ace of Pentacles: Purity/Source of Earth

Pillar: Head of the center Pillar of Mildness/Equilibrium

World: Atziloth, Archetypal

Genesis: (1.1) “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”

BURMA MONK PROTEST FOOTAGE

1st Grade Boy Suspended

Fox News article on "violent" 1st grader's suspension


Out west in Oregon a few days ago, a first-grade boy was suspended from Little Butte School. The school acted upon numerous complaints from parents, claiming that their children had been threatened by Ryan Weathers, who is 6 years old. The reason on Ryan's disciplinary report was that he "threatened to shoot two girls in the head".

However, Ryan also drew a picture that depicted a stick figure shooting another stick figure in the head with a gun. He initially blamed another student for the drawing.

The father claims that he's never shown the one handgun he owns to his son. While understanding the other parents' concerns, he said his biggest problem was that Ryan lied, not that he drew the picture.

The picture was apparently inspired by an episode of the Simpsons, where a kid in a classroom shows a picture like the one Ryan drew. net[her] found the source article on www.foxnews.com. It is somewhat disturbing that the sentence about the Simpsons inspiration has a link to The Simpsons TV show section on the website - shameless promotion.

And the physical evidence, the SIMULACRA of simpsons, fox, and the boy's own reflection?
Pupil-less, expression-less stick-people, and a paper gun.