Forms of Manifestation of the Laws in Forms Understandable to the Human

AI-generated (ChatGPT)Illustration © Genesis Logic

Based on the way the creation cycles have built upon one another so far, the interpretation of the fifth day almost presents itself. The meaning of the text, interpreted on the basis of the definitions established so far, fits perfectly into the logical sequence.

Let us briefly summarize the four creation cycles analysed so far and how they build upon one another, and the interpretation of the fifth day will become self-evident.

The first day, as the first cycle, defines that the world exists according to the laws that define the world. This is a fundamental ontological statement in the very first verse of the Bible. God created the laws, not the world. The material world is the manifestation of the laws, therefore the definitions are the world created by God, Heaven. And the laws of Heaven are laws because they appear in material form. The material world is therefore the world created by God, the material manifestation of Heaven, and not another world.

The description of the first day then makes only statements in the second verse: “The earth was without form, and void” — lifeless, and “darkness was upon the face of the deep” — unconscious and currently unknowable, and “the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” — the Human is not part of the created world; the text defines the existence of the spirit independently of Heaven and Earth, outside the created world.

In ontological terms, we receive a description that no religion claims as its own in this form, even though the first two verses of the Bible also appear this way syntactically according to Hebrew grammar. The first verse describes what God creates, what He defines, while the second verse describes how God’s definition manifests. The Human is not present in the first verse, but is present in the second, not in the newly defined world, however, but above it, while still not being able to perceive it.

The light — intellect however, belongs to the world, not to the Human; intellect is not a property of the spirit, but intellect is present in the world unconsciously, as the deep, because order and consistency prevail among the laws of the world.

The order that we previously defined as the network of relationships among the laws is nothing other than the stability of the world, which results from the fact that the law created in Heaven appears in material form. The material manifestation gives the law the status of a law that defines the world. In the case of the first definition, this does not yet impose any condition, because there is no “previous” law yet, but it does impose a condition when subsequent laws are defined.

Thus, what becomes a law that defines the world is that which appears in the material world. Therefore, the laws defined during the following days, that is, during the following cycles, already appear in a world that exists.

Heaven and Earth exist; therefore, subsequent definitions can no longer be arbitrary. Their appearance must be possible among the definitions that already exist, because the definitions that already exist have also appeared in material form. Thus, subsequent definitions cannot in any way contradict the definitions that already exist; they can only define further details within those definitions, in the already existing material world.

The first day still separates the light from the darkness, conscious existence from unconscious existence, but already on the basis of the second verse it makes clear that the deep exists, that understanding, that is, the network of relationships among the laws, is also present unconsciously, and that this network determines what may appear in the world that already exists. Thus, the laws regulate the appearance of one another; the more laws there are, the more limited is what may appear.

This limitation and building upon one another become definitive when God declares: “And the evening and the morning were the first day.” This statement closes the first phase of creation, and from this point onward, everything that is defined appears according to these laws.

The second day is the definition of time. The world exists in its entirety; the second cycle makes this even clearer, because time is necessary precisely so that the world does not exist and remain perceivable merely as a single shining day, but also in its details.

The definition of time, and within time the definition of the present moment, serves to make the world knowable. If we can see the world in its details, then the appearance of the laws of the world does not result in a perception in which nothing can be distinguished from anything else, but in one in which limited perception makes it possible for us to recognize according to which laws the material world appears, what forms of manifestation the laws have, and how the laws regulate one another’s forms of manifestation, that is, according to what network of relationships they appear.

Without time, the perception of the world would be like the cinema film in our earlier example, in which every frame is projected onto the screen at the same time. The screen would shine with a blinding whiteness, in which nothing would be distinguishable from anything else. Time, however, the projection of the frames one after another, makes it possible for the content of the film to appear in a form understandable to the intellect.

The definition of time is therefore the fundamental condition of the knowability of the world, which thus makes the world perceivable as a process. According to the text, God also closes this cycle: “And the evening and the morning were the second day.”

The third day also follows clearly from the second day. If perception takes place along a timeline so that the laws that define the world can be understood, then the experiences that appear along the timeline form a sequence of experiences, which must also follow a meaningful order, because the laws appear building upon one another, or more precisely, being built into one another through increasingly precise definitions.

The sequence of experiences must be built up in the same way as the laws build upon one another, because only a law whose previous laws regulating its appearance are already known can be known through experience. We can only acquire and understand knowledge that we are able to connect to the knowledge already available to us, and according to the definitions so far, this can only be interpreted through the network of relationships among the laws.

Therefore, after the definition of time, the sequence of experiences also had to be defined, so that the laws that define the world would appear in experiences in the order in which they can be known according to the network of relationships among them.

Time and experiences make the appearing laws knowable by making experiences recurring, and therefore the same experience has the same consequence. We discover cause-and-effect relationships that are constant and always produce exactly the same result.

Recurring experiences appear according to the seeds. Under the same circumstances, the same experience always produces the same result: 2 + 2 = 4.

Starting from the seeds, processes appear in time, because experience is a sequence of experiences that appear in time and are repeated again and again so that the intellect can recognize the lawful functioning in the repetitions.

God also closes the third day, and thus these laws also appear in the world.

The definition of time and the defined sequence of experiences also defines the process of knowing. Thus, the fourth day already follows from the previous three creation cycles.

Along the timeline, our knowledge continually increases through our experiences, so in the present we always possess defined knowledge. The sequence of experiences teaches the laws through repetitions; that is, only after many repetitions does the definition created on the basis of experiences become precise.

Until we reach the precise definition within the sequence of experiences, our definition is imprecise, because it is precisely defined repetition that provides knowing. Our definitions therefore continuously develop until they become completely precise.

This, however, results in our definitions being imprecise, but we can only establish this by defining, on the basis of the definition created from our experiences so far, how what we have defined on the basis of our experiences so far will appear next, that is, in the next experience.

If what appears is what we expect, it confirms our experiences; if not, then we must further refine our definitions on the basis of the new experiences, the new information.

The knowledge available to us on the basis of our experiences so far therefore appears as expectation and defines expectations. These expectations are our will, free will, which the text does not yet define here, but it defines the consciousness whose will appears.

The greater light is the knowledge that we possess in the present, and this knowledge has an appearing will, an expectation of how reality must appear in the subsequent experiences, because this expectation will be the test, the quality control, of whether the definition according to our knowledge is identical to what actually appears.

Repetitions, recurring experiences are only able to teach us if we predict how they will appear next, because in experiences reality always appears, and if exactly what we expect happens, then that confirms the correctness of our knowledge; if it does not, then the new information provides an opportunity, together with the previous information, to modify our definitions so that they are valid both for the new experience and for the older experiences. The law does not change, and therefore it is a law, so only an interpretation can stand that provides an explanation for every experience retrospectively as well, and projects precise results in advance with regard to further experiences. This is the law that also determines the interpretive method of Genesis Logic, and confines it within strict boundaries.

The description of the fourth day also defines a further point of orientation: the emotions, which define the lesser light. The appearance of emotions is also a lawful consequence of the process of knowing, because although our definitions become increasingly precise through recurring experiences, our expectations appearing according to the definitions — our will — cannot appear in the material world. The reason for this is that our imprecise definitions are not in harmony with the laws that define the world.

In the world, however, everything is in harmony with everything else that exists, because the building upon one another of the laws is precisely regulated by the network of relationships. Nothing can appear in the world that is not in complete harmony with everything else that exists, because the network of relationships among the laws does not permit this.

If we define something that contradicts anything that has already been defined and has appeared, then it simply cannot appear in the material world, because the laws that already exist do not make this possible in the world that already exists. The laws that already exist would have to be modified for our contradictory definition to appear, and the world that already exists would have to change so that our contradictory definition could appear.

This is not possible, because the cycles of creation have been completed, and moreover, after the sixth day the text of the Bible closes creation even more explicitly and declares that God does not change the world any further.

This extreme consistency is the reason why our will cannot appear in the world in the form in which it appears within us as an expectation. Our will, however, defines us, because the definitions that we have created on the basis of our experiences so far are completely self-identical; in reality, we ourselves are the definitions that appear in the world through us, if this is possible. If their appearance is not possible because they are not in complete harmony with the laws of the world, then the will appearing according to our definitions appears only within us as an expectation, but it is unable to appear, and therefore what we want does not happen.

When what we want does not happen, however, we react to events according to our knowledge. These reactions are the emotions.

Emotions fundamentally differ from our definitions because we have no explanation for them. If we had an explanation for them in consciousness, then they would be manifestations of definitions, but since what happens is not what follows from the definitions present in our consciousness, we interpret the different result as emotions.

Emotions are also consistent, and they appear according to recurring experiences, because our experiences appear according to the laws that define the world. Emotions are thus identifiable objects for consciousness, with which it identifies, because they consistently appear throughout the repetition of experiences, but since no definition can be created for their appearance, consciousness can define only the repetition, and the emotion that thus becomes comprehensible and interpretable also enters among the definitions with which consciousness identifies.

An emotion therefore differs from a definition in that, in recurring experiences, only the repetition and the result have so far been recognized, but intellect is still unable to create a definition for the repetition.

Returning to the fourth day, on the timeline we always possess a defined body of knowledge, which continuously increases but is imprecise, and thus the will appearing on the basis of the available definitions is unable to appear. What appears through us — our reactions — nevertheless repeats consistently throughout the experiences, but since there is not yet an explanation for the repetition, intellect is unable to interpret it according to any definition. It identifies the reactions it itself produces as emotions, which are not identical to the appearing will, because in the world only that which exists in harmony with every other law and whose appearance is possible among the previously defined laws is capable of appearing.

If our own reactions are identical to our appearing will, then this is the result and confirmation of our knowledge; if they are not, then our reactions are accompanied by emotions, because they contradict our will, and these emotions point to the errors in our interpretations and direct our attention toward reality.

According to our growing knowledge, we can exist in the world, on the timeline on which we perceive the world, but according to our developing but imprecise knowledge, our definitions cannot appear, because the harmony of the world cannot be disrupted. Our will appearing according to our knowledge can therefore appear only to the extent to which it is precise. Our will appearing according to our still-imprecise definitions, however, does not manifest, but we react according to the laws of the world. Since these reactions are not identical to what we wanted, they are accompanied by emotions, and intellect identifies them as emotional responses and, in the form of emotions, “interprets” its own reactions for consciousness, for which intellect provides no explanation; therefore consciousness identifies with them as emotions, as an unexplained inner compelling force.

Of our will appearing according to our definitions, that which cannot appear in the material world, in our experiences, appears according to the emotions. The experience appearing according to the emotions, however, appears according to the sequence of experiences defined by God, in which our emotions also fulfill a guiding role, because they appear in the experiences in a perceptible form.

Emotion also provides information, although no definition can be created from this information. Emotions, especially their intensity, show how great the opposition is between our expectation according to our definitions and the appearing reality, that is, the laws defined by God.

The more precise our definitions become, the fewer and less intense emotions appear in our experiences, and to a greater extent we are able to enforce our will; that is, the appearing experience, which God has defined in the sequence of experiences, will be identical to the will appearing according to our knowledge, because our definitions will also be identical to the definitions on the basis of which God defined the sequence of experiences.

This more extensive interpretation of the first four cycles makes the interpretation of the fifth cycle clear, while our previous interpretations constrain even more precisely what we may interpret and how.

The definitions created by God must be defined according to their knowability, first as emotions, then, according to the information available, as definitions, and, on the basis of experiences and repetitions, as increasingly precise definitions thanks to the increasing amount of information, until finally so many experiences and so much information appear that the law defined by God can be interpreted in exactly the form in which God created it.

During the process of knowing, therefore, the will, the expectation, that initially appears according to imprecise definitions must also be defined, which is created by the imprecise definitions, and which consciousness interprets as free will, as its own will.

According to our previous interpretations, the waters mean the laws that are unconsciously present, thus the living creatures in the waters clearly mean the emotions, because emotions are responses to laws that we are unable to interpret. The definitions appearing above the earth, on the ceiling of Heaven, that is, in the present, can be identified with the birds. The “birds flying above the earth” are definitions that are still imprecise, and therefore cannot appear on the earth; they cannot manifest. They appear in a form different from our will, and therefore they fly above the earth. They appear in our imagination, and reality, experience, provides confirmation of how precise or false they are.

According to the description, the living creatures are therefore the water creatures, because our definitions, that is, the birds, also mean expectations. What we define creates within us the expectation of how our definition will appear in reality. Reality may not then confirm our expectations, yet on the basis of our definition we expect a defined reaction, a defined experience. If the appearing reality is not identical to our expectations, then they are accompanied by emotions, and because what we expected does not happen, living creatures — that is, a result we did not expect — appear.

Our emotions, however, are emotions precisely because we have no definition for them; no expectation appears and no will appears in relation to the emotions. It is completely unknown to consciousness where an emotion will lead, what reactions and what actions will appear as a result of it.

If reactions and expected events already appear in consciousness in relation to an emotion, then the expected reaction and action are already the result of an attempt at interpretation, not the effect of the appearing emotion. The appearing emotion is the first form of the appearing law, and as this law begins to repeat in experiences, intellect increasingly begins to assemble the formulation of the appearing law from the information that appears, and the more precisely the law can be formulated, the more the intensity of the appearing emotion decreases, and the more the expected result, consequence, or reaction appears on the basis of the definition.

At first, this interpretation may seem contradictory, because our emotions also motivate us to act and create will, but in reality the appearing will is not created by the emotion, but by our attempts at interpretation and our expectations, which are not precise. The appearing desire that we attribute to emotions appears according to our expectations that arose from previous experiences.

The appearing desires therefore do not arise within us as a result of the emotions, but are the results of the definitions formulated on the basis of our previous experiences, the results of our will. Every definition has an expected result, and the farther the expected result is from reality, the greater the intensity of the emotions that accompany our definitions; thus, the definitions that determine our desires are in fact the birds, our imprecise definitions, which, the farther they are from the appearing reality, are accompanied by the appearance of stronger emotions.

This is why the emotions are living creatures, because they accompany the appearing reality when it does not appear in the way that the birds — that is, our imagination, which we expect according to our current knowledge — appear. The birds are not living creatures, because through them precise expectations appear within us; rather, our emotions become living creatures, which in reality accompany appearing experiences.

“20. And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.”

Aquatic animals: Emotions.

The result of unconscious processes created by the effect of the laws; emotions. Not collectively emotion, which was defined as the lesser light, but “according to their kind,” that is, each aquatic animal represents a specific emotion. Great aquatic animals are concrete, definable emotions, which influence our decisions.

Creeping animals (Water): Emotions that point to our false interpretations.

Emotions that reveal our false interpretations, which are capable of showing that we interpret the appearing reality incorrectly.

Birds: Information that has meaning.

The laws that we have come to know through our experiences, which we know. They do not evoke emotions, they are only facts for us. The bird refers to concrete, definable knowledge, which is present in our consciousness as information.

Winged flying creature: Information.

The details of our knowledge, information, but also such information which we have already known, perceived, but have not yet formed into concrete knowledge defining a law through our experiences. Details through which the complete picture will come together.

Living: The appearing effect of unknown laws.

The laws that serve as the basis of changes, which are unconscious. Emotions, behind the effects of which there are laws that we do not yet know due to the lack of sufficient experiences. Our experiences lead toward the knowing of these laws by the fact that they influence our life unconsciously.

Blessing: Growth.

Growth and multiplication through our experiences. Knowing through our experiences, then certainty, knowledge, which is fulfilled in unshakable faith.

Fifth Day: The process of knowledge.

The definition of laws as the appearance of emotions, then in known, conscious form and as information, through which we come to know them, become certain of them, and they become part of our conscious I.

The fifth day thus, on the basis of the previous four creation cycles, further regulates how the laws created by God become knowable to consciousness through the repetition of experiences. Our developing definitions become increasingly precise, and while they are not yet precise, the true definitions appearing as emotions continuously direct attention toward the creation of increasingly precise definitions, which hopes for the development of the world according to its already existing definitions, but always confronts reality in its experiences.

The Divine Comedy thus continuously progresses toward knowing reality, even if this progress is not always apparent on the basis of the knowledge currently available to us.