i had to turn to judaism, christianity was turning bonkers! what, with the nag hammadi library running rampant, and the vatican's cowardly lack of constraint, its sloth, its general absence... with the nag hammad library running rampant, no one is going to believe the greek fairytale of revising the "old" testament; it's still the only testament... just read two lines of the historian josephus, align that with the emperor nero, and, by my guess, the book of revelation, was probably the first book written in the tome.

i've already written about this,
   the *etz ha-chayim, oh no, these times
do not require a rebel spinoza
questioning chronological authenticity,
to keep the idea of a trinity,
   i already said my yesod "person"
and the subsequent dynamic for man...
    for man cannot meditate on either
    the keter (crown) nor
                            the malkhut (kingship),
in that the father is represented by
   the keter, and not the malkhut -
but akin to lucifer not merging into satan,
the heresy of the son becoming the father
is also a heresy with regards to
  the etz ha-chayim dynamic,
                                 which is as follows:
he, who has the malkhut of gevurah
  (kingship of strength)
is he who has the keter of chokhmah
   (the crown of wisdom)...
  ah... i'm stuck...
           i have to divide the tree in half,
and bring to realisation, which quality
is associated with the keter,
         and which with the malkhut...
i have to understand,
    and then the inverted complication -
a matisyahu song supplies the energy
behind the thought: king without a crown -
since the keter is but an ornament,
              and can be the highest tip,
  or the lowest ebb in what's actually
           the malkhut (kingship) / authority:
esp. one that doesn't require pomp & circumstance
of a public affair,
  the part where you don't wear
you sunday's best to church.
  and so too the revision with the revision -
life would be so un-interesting
         without the "plagues", pangs of either
doubt, or love...
             some settle for the uncertainity
of love, others who oppose narcissus,
cherish the racing emotions of doubt -
    and can see the cognitive speculo,
   dare i say, the cognitive kaleidoscope?
let's keep it german -
                          gedankespiegel...
beside the point,
   funny how the ejection of the jews from
europe occured,
   how the muslims came,
   and how someone born into
a christian "tradition" spotted a lot of sense
in what the jews kept for the past cenutries...
i'm enraptured by the teachings...
             i have no qualm with the, ugh,
passed sentence...
  for i do not believe in man ever attaining
the keter: ehyeh asher ehyeh
   ambition... for it is so grand,
      that i dare not act out the part
or seek a route toward representing it,
  however ambitious man can be,
           there is no man in the world, present,
future, or past, that can be the keter
expression of the tree's dynamic...
                         no man...
                                                 ever:
no utterance from a divinity, as divinity per se,
can ever come from the mouth of flesh.
yet i find myself asking,
   have i made a just system of
  dissecting the etz ha-chayim?
   after all, the keter is a Σ,
   otherwise also: the summum bonum,
i.e. that which is unattainable by man,
   with that said, the highest good self-evidently:
for what man would transgress his
     status ****, to reach for the castles
     made from clouds, in aspiring divinity?
prior to this ambition,
      the highest peak was of everest
   and a demi-god...
   after? everest humbled, and the saints were born.
nonetheless, i'm finding it hard
to attire the other qualities,
   is the keter superficial,
   as a wedding ring is on a finger
                                is to state a love and
the embedded laws of monogamy?
   or is the keter the ad infinitum potency
   of meditation, that leads to only the humbling
of donning the kippah?
                       here i'm cross-eyed
                   with regards to = ÷ (equally dividing)
the qualities between
   the keter: ehyeh asher ehyeh
                           and malkhut: adonoy -
thus said, the greatest point made by the tree
is a message: understand beauty -
                                           binah tiferet,
ah... the entry point of the disparity -
    no man can claim the dynamic of
                keter-chokhmah -
the crown-of-wisdom,
                                  no matter if donning
a liturgy of fancy attires,
    popes can speak the most baseless accounts
of what needs to be done...
   hence the superficial aspect of the keter
emerges...
        but indeed there is one,
  who can provide a malkhut-cholhmah,
               how many philosophers can say:
i have no university degree, i have no superficial
symbol of being, said authority,
  and still topple those who have "authority"
in what they attire themselves in,
  but nonetheless have no authority to show
when being unmasked?
                       as it stands, i will not make
this into a systamatic musing,
   where i might have dissected
                                  the entire etz ha-chayim,
while pondering whether
  the keter or the malkhut are to
be alligned with chokhmah (wisdom),
      binah (understanding), chesed (love) -
  keter-chesed - that's obvious:
   the superficial kind of love - as apparent
with lack of intervention;
          gevurah (strength) -
          malkhut-gevurah: the strenght to
not intervene;
                       tiferet (beauty),
                    hod (splendour),
                                 netzach (victory).
i exclude the yesod (foundation) from this
deliberation, since the yesod is reserved
solely for man to ponder the already mention
qualities, while at the same time excluding
the two impossibilities of attaining either
the crown, or the kingship (mastery) of each
of the stated aspects...
                   now that i can conclude,
      for god, the keter is what he is,
    but when looked upon by man,
             and in vanity trying to attain:
   only the source of superficiality,
           of fakery,
                            or the crown of myrrh,
the spectacle of golgotha,
                                   and idols,
    and iconoclasm...  and all the more fakes
             celebrated as pop culture...
                                        pseudo-martyrdom.