Ontic Ontological Logic of human

sexuality & Word’s Body the Medium

the Message & the messenger

PART I

ONTIC ONTOLOGICAL LOGIC

OF HUMAN SEXUALITY

Preliminary Considerations

The Real Trinary Logic Cancellation Rule

In Foundation, III.1,1 where the various relations of the three elements of real trinary logic, 0,  , and 1, are proven to be such as they are understood to be, the following rule is applied throughout, to wit, in any combination of more than three logical digits, any three identical digits may be cancelled, so, for example, 000  not only equals   = 1,2 but also, (000)  =     .   This is to say that   is a sort of 1, and that as 11 = 1, i.e., as the square of 1 = the square root of 1, so also, in real trinary logic, where each of the three digits are at once equal and different, does the square of   = the square root of 1 when 1 = the square of  .  This operational equating of 0 and    with 1 qua square and square root is a function of the absolute one-sidedness of the absolute dead center cube, indeed, of the infinitely flat structure of the universe, an inadequate image of which in three dimensions is supplied by the Möbius strip,

Now starting with the finite flatness of the everyday world, x2,

imagine the unimaginable infinite flatness of the hypercubic fourth dimension, x2 × x2 = x4, as the perfectly transparent identification of two finitely flat squares

two different squares identified as one in sheer transparent flatness.  Image this identification as that of the absolutely one-sided surface of the absolute dead center cube in which is inscribed the fourfold turn of the square essence of the real trinary logic infinite lattice of 0’s,  ’s, and 1’s,3

The inversion and reversal of the two finitely flat sides of the absolute dead center cube logically inscribed here illustrated shows how the thrice two sets each of three 0’s,  ’s, and 1’s are identified with each other, and, as so identified with each other, with the thrice two sets each of one 0,  , and 1, as illustrated in the rightmost section of the above illustration.

With the above in mind it is possible to understand how it is that in real trinary logic three identical digits may be “cancelled.”  Where there is a difference between the two sets of three identical digits to the left of the green logical digit on the right side of the identity equation in the rightmost area of the figure above, and the latter digit is either 0 or  , to prove that three identical digits may be cancelled in relation to any fourth digit, multiply 0 by   and then by 000, and multiply    by 000 and then by  .  Where there is no difference between the two sets, multiply 0 or  , as the case may be, by 111 and then again by 111.  Where the logical digit on the right side of the identity equation is 1, multiply by either set and then by the other.

Logical 0 and   , the Notation for, respectively, Readiness

and Discretion, and, Just So, for Woman and Man

In Beyond Sovereignty, 0 is the notation for the ethical category Readiness, and      the notation for the ethical category Discretion.5  Let the notation for woman be logical 0, at once the notation for the ethical category Readiness, and let the notation for man be logical   , at once the notation for the ethical category Discretion.  In real trinary logic, the square of 0 or , respectively, 00 and , may be read as actual/existent 0 or as actual/existent  .  The cube of 0 or  , respectively, 000 and  ,  may be read as perfect/absolute 0 or as perfect/absolute , as the case may be.  000 and   may also be read, respectively, as the male and female persons,    and 0, qua body.  Thus actual/existent person, 00 or  , = actual/existent body.  000 identical with  , his body identical with the male person, 000 , perfect readiness identical with discretion, 000, equals the actual male person,   = 1, and  identical with 0, her body identical with the female person, 0, perfect discretion identical with readiness,  0, equals the actual female person, 00 = 1.6

Complex Simplicity of the Relation of Readiness & Discretion

In the Non-Sexual and Sexual Relations of Human Persons

The real trinary logic cancellation rule applies to human relations when 0 and    are the notations, respectively, for woman and man.  In the case of the notation(s) for actual woman (00) and actual man (), when one of the two digits of either notation is transformed to its three digit equivalent, cancellation connotes an act of ceasing/creating on the part of one of the persons vis-à-vis the other person.7  This act of ceasing/creating is, as above, at once the person qua body.

In the case of the woman qua actual in the case of a non-sexual relation to another person of either sex, 00 → () 0 0 : actual readiness readiness identified with the ceasing that is perfect discretion, with the feminine body explicitly (the feminine body implicit) readiness receptive of readiness or discretion, as the case may be.  In the case of the man qua actual in the case of a non-sexual relation to another person of either sex,      (000)       : actual discretion discretion identified with the ceasing that is perfect readiness, with the masculine body explicitly (the masculine body implicit) discretion receptive of discretion or readiness, as the case may be.

Identifying the Female and Male Logical Notation,

00 and   , with the Chromosome Pairs, XX and YX

The X chromosome contains 1098 genes and the Y chromosome 78.  Where .20 = .15 (= the percentage of second female X genes never inactivated) + .05 (= .10/2, one half the percentage of additional second female X genes sometimes inactivated and sometimes not), then the average number of activated female XX chromosome genes = 1098 + 219.6 (= 1098 × .20) = 1317.6, and the number of male XY genes = 1098 + 78 = 1176.8

Applying these numbers of genes to the female and male real trinary logic notation for the human persons of different sex gives, in the case of the woman, 00 =     =  XX = 1098 219.6, and in the case of the man,   = 000 000 = YX = 78 1098.  These numbers applied to that portion of the diagram above pertaining to the non-sexual and sexual relations of human persons where the partners are male and female gives this picture

The woman qua whole person (1) is the formal readiness (0) identical with her body where the body per se is perfect discretion () since she receives from her father () the sexually indifferent chromosome ( = 0 each with 1098 genes).  The man qua whole person (1) is the formal discretion () identical with his body where the body per se is perfect readiness (000) since he receives from his mother 0 the sexually indifferent chromosome (0 =  each with 1098 genes).

In the case of the woman, the ceasing of the 0 (readiness) takes the form: () 0, i.e., the ceasing that is perfect discretion () identical with her formal readiness 0.  In the case of the man the ceasing of the (discretion) takes the form: (000), i.e., his formal discretion  identical with the ceasing that is perfect readiness (000).  When the ceasing that is the perfect readiness of the man (000) is identified with his 78 gene chromosome and the woman’s formal readiness 0 is identified with her 219.6 chromosome, a daughter is conceived.  When the ceasing that is the perfect discretion of the woman () is identified with her 219.6 gene chromosome and the man’s formal discretion   is identified with his 78 gene chromosome, a son is conceived.  The woman qua whole person (1) qua formal readiness (0) ceasing/creating () in the form of the perfect discretion that is her sexually differentiated body conceives a son.  The man qua whole person (1) qua formal discretion ()  ceasing/creating (000) in the form of the perfect readiness that is his sexually differentiated body conceives a daughter.

The Genealogical Epoché

In both the non-sexual and sexual relations of sexually differentiated human persons productive reception of the other involves ceasing/creating in the form of perfect readiness on the part of the man and perfect discretion on the part of the woman.

In the case of the sexual act, either partner independently of the other may resort to a contraceptive strategy that at once obviates the productive receptivity of the other.  In this event what is enacted is the genealogical epoché

Either the use of one of a number of contraceptive strategies by the woman brackets the initial woman-man relation of the couple [0], identifying the man’s ceasing in the form of ‘perfect readiness’ (000) with her merely formal ‘readiness’ 0,  just so: 0[0 ](000), effectively rendering the man impotent, or, the use of one of a number of contraceptive strategies by the man brackets the initial woman-man relation of the couple [0], identifying the woman’s ceasing in the form of ‘perfect discretion’ with his merely formal ‘discretion’, just so, ()[0]effectively rendering the woman infertile.  In the first case the ceasing that is the ‘perfect readiness’ of the man is frustrated, i.e., leads to naught.  In the second case the ceasing that is the ‘perfect discretion’ of the woman is frustrated, i.e., leads to naught.

In the case where the genealogical epoché is mutually enacted,

the following reduction occurs

where the double epoché brackets altogether the specific arrangements of the genetic structure of human males and females by which the woman and the man are as such differentiated, at once the latter as embodied persons.9

The Anthropological Epoché

In the non-sexual relations of not sexually differentiated human persons productive reception of the other involves ceasing/creating in the form of perfect readiness on the part of each of two male persons and perfect discretion on the part of each of two female persons.

In cases where partners not sexually differentiated are sexually active the anomalous appearance of sexually reversed specific forms of male and female ceasing, viz., the masculine form of perfect readiness (000) in the case of two female partners, and the feminine form of perfect discretion () in the case of two male partners,10 is immediately doubly divided

Here the analogy to the double genealogical epoché is the anthropological epoché

which suspends that element of genetic structure universally shared with male and female humans—which as such does not differentiate women and men—in the suspension of the non-ceasing differentiated elements which do differentiate women and men—which double suspension prescinds from the personal wholeness universally shared with men and women.

Word’s Body the Medium

the Message & the messenger

In the biblical account of the Incarnation, woman’s body, ontologically considered, is the preexisting medium for God’s decisive salvific act.  Employing rules and operations of real trinary logic and making use of the previous analysis concerning human sexuality, the following first examines how it is that the body of the woman is the perfect ontic ontological medium for the enfleshment of the perfect likeness of the Father—how it is the perfect medium for the temporal mission of the Word as the message identically the messenger.  There follows an analysis of how the body of this woman, intact, i.e., perfectly conformed to the message, is nevertheless, just so, the medium irreducibly complicit with the perfect image of the Father in the enfleshment of the message identically the messenger who is a human male.  Referencing the biblical notion that God created human being in his image, male and female, logical schemas delineate ontologically the non-sexual relations of woman and man, at once comparing those relations to human sexual relations capable of producing offspring.  The uniqueness of the conception of the Word as message/masculine messenger in the medium of the body of the woman is clarified.  The medium of the physical conception of the divine message/messenger—the body of the woman—is the co-constituent of the message in the masculinity of the messenger.  This co-constituency of the medium and the message in the messenger—hitherto implicit—is made explicit for the first time in the metaschematized body of the resurrected Christ.  The relations of woman and man embodied subsequently in the resurrected Christ are examined: first, the relation of each, so embodied, to the headship of Christ, without regard to the relation to the other; second, the relation of each, so embodied, to the other, in relation, as such, to the headship of Christ.  Paul’s statements that in Christ there is not male and female, and that, nevertheless, the man is the head of the woman, are thus clarified logically and ontologically.   According to the ancient tradition of the Church both East and West the perfect equality of male and female in Christ, once and for all to be recapitulated in the new heaven and new earth, has been preceded by the bodily assumption of Mary into heaven.  This doctrine is rendered logically and ontologically transparent as the acknowledgment of the antecedent metastatic co-constituency of the medium and the message in the messenger at once the metastatic constituency of the messenger and the message in the medium.

Creation, Male and Female

Genesis 1:26: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.”11

ויאמר אלהים נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו

Genesis 1:27:  “So God created man in his own image,12 in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”

ויברא אלהים את־האדם בצלמו בצלם אלהים ברא אתו זכר ונקבה ברא אתם

The Absolute Simplicity of the One God 1 is the Trinity 111 [1 = 111], at once Father 11, Son 00, Holy Spirit  [111 = 11, 00,  ].  God 1, absolutely creating/ceasing qua Trinity/Omnipotence Itself 1(10)  [111 = 10 ], created Man in His (1) Image (0), according to his Likeness (), Male () and Female (0) He (1) created (10)  Man (1).

The Incarnation

Luke 1:35:  “And the power of the Most High shall overshadow you.”13

καὶ δύναμις ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι

Omnipotence itself 14 (1) qua Infinite Discretion () absolutely ceasing in the form of the absolute Readiness (000) that is the Holy Spirit, indivisibly whole, infinite transparency of the Trinity (),15 the woman Mary (00) qua formal readiness (0) ceasing () in the form of the perfect discretion unique to her body qua female, receptive of the Holy Spirit qua the active X chromosome shared with all humanity,16 conceives the Son of God, the whole man ()—the God-Man () whose body is the co-constituency of the actual flesh of the woman Mary (00) and the Word (0)—the Messenger ( ) who qua body (000) is the co-constituency of the medium (00) and the Message (0).

Note the structure of the relations of Son and Holy Spirit in relation to the Father and in relation to Man: the Father (1) is to the Woman (0) as the Holy Spirit as Masculine Discretion ( )  is to the Son as Feminine Readiness (0).  The Father (1) is to the Woman (0) as the Holy Spirit ( )  is to the Son (0), the proof of which proportion is (1)(0) = (0)( ) , ultimately, 10 = 0, 0 → , the Son of the Father/the Son of Man—existing () the flesh of the Woman Mary (00) identically the Word (0)—the Word Made Flesh In Essence (000 = ).17

Moreover, as the Holy Spirit () and the Son (0) are to the Father (1) so the Father (1) is to the Holy Spirit ()  and the Woman (0), the proof of which proportion is (0)(0) = (1)(1), that is, since 0 → , 1 = 11, ultimately, by the rule of cancellation (where 1 = 111),  = 1 as the God-Man qua actual/existent  says (John 14:9), “He who has seen Me has seen the Father 1.”  The underlying proportion that is this Truth of the Incarnation, (0) : (1) :: (1) : (0), is at once the very inversion and reversal that constitutes the absolutely one-sided surface of the universe of the New Creation18

This actual/existent Man (), Verbum (0) caro (00) factum est (), is conceived in substantive analogy to the schemas of the non-sexual and sexual relations of sexually differentiated human persons, except that the identification divine paternity and human maternity is at once a transformative identification of the aforementioned schemas themselves: from the former schema the non-sexual 1 1 relation of woman and man is introduced into the latter conceptive schema, transformed as 1 1, corresponding to the intact virginity of the mother,19 at once effectively the introduction of the conceptive 0  relation of woman and man into the former schema, transformed as 0, corresponding to the omnipotent generation of the Son of God ():20

The Incarnate Word Resurrected

Jesus qua whole man =  = 000 the man whose body qua σμα ψυχικόν21 is the Word (0) made flesh of the woman Mary (00).

After his Resurrection, the co-constituency of the medium and the Message in the Resurrected body of the man Jesus is metaschematized: (000) → (000): the whole man Jesus qua σμα πνευματικόν22 =  = (000) the man whose metaschematized body (000)23 born of woman (0) is made manifestly Word (00).

Before the Resurrection, in Jesus qua whole man ( ), the medium exists the Message (000): the simply human body and the Word (000) co-constitute the body of Jesus: (000) = the body separable from the human person [00 = the medium] and the Word [0 = the Message].  After the Resurrection, in Jesus qua whole man ( ), the Message exists the body (000): the body not simply human and the manifest Word (000) co-constitute the body of Jesus: (000) = the body [0 = the medium] inseparable from the divine person [00 = the Message manifest].

So, after his Resurrection, in this divinized flesh (000 = 01 = ) the Word of God seen of many and last of Paul.24

No Male and Female In Christ,

Or the Headship of the Man

Paul says that in Christ there is not male and female.25  This may be understood to say that male and female, each, considered in relationship to the headship of Christ, but without respect to the other, is the equal of the other.  Where the body of the Resurrected Christ () qua σῶμα πνευματικόν = 000 (as above), the embodiment, respectively, of the woman (0) and of the man ( ) in the body (000) of the Resurrected Christ () is as here shown:26

The ultimate equality of man and woman actually embodied in Christ ( =  = ) is proven by the fact that, vis-à-vis one another, the headship of one or the other (either one embodied in the other) is a matter of perfect indifference ( = ):

Thus the mutual submitting of one to another enjoined on all without exception (Ephesians 5:21): “Submit one to another in the fear of Christ.” But this headship of man and woman embodied in Christ vis-à-vis one another considered at once vis-à-vis the headship of Christ is not a matter of indifference. If the Resurrected Christ (), in the place of this man (, rather than ), were the head of this woman (, rather than 0), there would then be in that embodiment not no male and female, but, rather, there would be no male ():27

So Paul, who says that in Christ there is not male and female (as above), says (1 Corinthians 11:3): “But I want you to understand that Christ () is the head of every man (), and the man () is the head of a woman (), and God (1) is the head of Christ (),” which, in terms of real trinary logic, is expressed as:

Speaking then of the proper relation of husband () and wife (), Paul says that “husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies ()” (Ephesians 5: 28):

and that “the wife should reverence her husband” (Ephesians 5:33).  Unlike the embodiment in Christ () of the female embodied in Christ () in which the complete image (0 ) in which man was first created (Genesis 1:27) is not recapitulated:

the embodiment in Christ () of the male embodied in Christ () recapitulates qua new creation the complete () image of the Creator in which man was first created (cf. Genesis 1:27: “So God (1) created man in his own image (0), in the image of God he created him; male () and female (0) he created them”):

The man actually embodied in the Resurrected Christ () : the embodiment of the Resurrected Christ in Omnipotence (1) :: the identification of female and male actually embodied in the Resurrected Christ () : the identification of the Word and the Resurrected Christ (0):

The reason the woman () is to revere her husband () is that this man embodied in the Resurrected Christ, this man of whom Christ is the head (), not only recapitulates as such qua new creation the complete () image of the Creator in which man was first created, but is at once as such the embodiment of the Resurrected Christ identified with the Word (0), that is, () =  = (at once) 0.28

The Beginning of the New Heaven and the New Earth

In the new heaven and new earth now beginning as the very form of thought itself,29 the woman actually embodied in the Resurrected Christ ( = ), embodied as such in the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence, = 0 = 000 =  =  = the man actually embodied in the Resurrected Christ at once the identification of female and male actually so embodied, embodied as such in the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence, = 0 = 000 = = .  The new heaven and new earth essentially thought for the first time: the First Adam (πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος 0), who was created in the Creator’s image (0) and likeness ()—male ( ) and female (0), who, embodied in the Second Adam (δεύτερος ἄνθρωπος ), was newly created in the Creator’s image (0) and likeness ()—male () and female (),30 now, as such, fully embodied in the Creator’s image (0) and likeness ()—male () and female ()—0 = —Created Omnipotence embodied in Omnipotence—Omnipotence Absolute.31  Note that in the new heaven and new earth the continuing apparent discrepancy between the ultimate equality of man and woman actually embodied in Christ ( =  = ) and the fact that only the embodiment in Christ () of the male embodied in Christ () recapitulates qua new creation the complete () image of the Creator in which man was first created—this discrepancy existing hither the final resurrection—is  ultimately resolved in the perfect identity 0 = 0 =  that is the newly created woman and man now fully embodied in the Creator’s image and likeness.

In the Created Person of Mary Woman Already Dwells in the New Jerusalem

In the movement from First Adam, to Second Adam, to Omnipotence Absolute, note the difference in female and male sequences, respectively, 0, , , and  , , .  The person of the man Jesus () was the uncreated Word.  The embodiment of the Resurrected Christ in Omnipotence (1 = 10 = 0 = ) is not the embodiment in Omnipotence of a male qua created person embodied in the Resurrected Christ () which for all created male persons has occurred not yet.  What is true for all created male persons is not true for all created female persons.32  The person of the woman Mary (0) was created.  The embodiment of Mary Uncorrupted in Omnipotence as woman embodied in the Resurrected Christ (1 = 10 = 0 = ) is the woman now, as such, already dwelling with the Word (0) in the New Jerusalem,33 at once distinguished from the embodiment of the man in Omnipotence, as man embodied in the Resurrected Christ, (1 = 10 = 0 = ), now, as such, not yet dwelling with the Word (0) in the New Jerusalem.

The embodiment of Mary in Omnipotence as woman embodied in the Resurrected Christ, 1 = 10 = 0 — occurring in advance of the coming down from God of the New Jerusalem, occurring this side woman actually embodied in the Resurrected Christ,  = , embodied as such in the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence, 0 = 000 =  =  — is effectively the co-constituency of the body inseparable from the manifest Message 000  in the form of woman assimilated to the Word 00, this unique dwelling with the Word, 0, the acknowledgment ontologically of the antecedent metastatic co-constituency34 of the medium and the Message in the Messenger.35

The Eucharistic Interlude

ἡ κατάπαυσις εὐχαριστική

Where the Resurrected Christ qua existent  = the real of consecrated bread and wine,36 the reception by the woman and the man embodied in the Resurrected Christ ( =  and = ) of this very Resurrected Christ qua existent real in the sacrament of the Eucharist, and , establishes here and now the equality this side the coming down from God of the New Jerusalem, = = = = = , which formally prefigures the perfect and consummate equality of woman and man in the New Heaven and New Earth, 0 = 000 =  =  = 0 = 000 = = .  This reception of the Resurrected Christ qua existent real of the consecrated bread and wine () constitutes essentially and effectively this woman () and this man () as catapaustical/creating participants in the ontological proportionality that is the now beyond beyond now, the transcendental proportion at once the essential conception of existence itself existing,37 to wit, Mary, qua embodied in the Resurrected Christ, embodied in Omnipotence : Male and female, qua embodied in the Resurrected Christ, embodied in the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence :: (0 0) : (0 = 0) :: the reception of the Eucharist  by this woman  and this man  : the New Heaven and New Earth :: ( = = = = = ) : (0 = 000 =  =  = 0 = 000 = = ) :: Maria in caelum assumpta est : caelum novum et terra nova :: Nova Hierosolyma in caelis : Nova Hierosolyma descendens de caelo :: Created Omnipotence : Absolute Omnipotence (Created Omnipotence embodied in Omnipotence).

Liturgy of the Eucharist

Ontological Logic of Ecclesial Ontics

Hebrews 1:1-4: “God 1 having spoken 0 long ago to the fathers in the prophets many times in many ways, in these last days he 1 has spoken  to us in his Son—(101 = 1 = 0)—whom  he 1 appointed  heir of all things 0(1 = 1 = 0)—through whom  also he 1 made  the world (1= 0).  He 0 is the radiance 0 of his 1 glory and the very likeness  of his 1 person (101 = 1 = 0),38 upholding all things by the word 0 of his 1 power  (01 = 1 = 111).39  When he  had made  purification of sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high 11 = 1 = 0—having become in this so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name 0 than they.”

Woman and man embodied in the Resurrected Christ ( and ) qua recipients of the Resurrected Christ existent real in the Eucharist ( =  =  = ) are as such equally persons  in whom the complete image  (0) in which man was first created is not recapitulated ( ) (see above).  Qua recipients of the Eucharist man and woman are equally in the relation of the Bride () to the Bridegroom ().40

Their equality in the reception of the Eucharist ( =  =  = ) in the form of the woman in persona Christi (= ) just so far prefigures their consummate equality at the Wedding Feast of the Lamb41 when they will together equally constitute the newly created image and likeness of the Creator fully embodied in the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence (0 =  = 0 = ).

This consummate equality of woman and man in the New Jerusalem qua the precise form of that equality ( = ) is prefigured in the man in persona Christi ( = ) at once as such just so far properly configured as the Celebrant () to speak the words of the Consecrator (0)—now seated “at the right hand of the Majesty42 on high”—the words first spoken as Incarnate Word () on the night he was betrayed,43 “This is my body” () and “This is my blood” ()—here and now instituting/constituting the real of the bread () and wine () the Resurrected Christ qua existent ().44

CONCLUDING APOCALYPTIC POSTSCRIPT

The Resurrection and the Judgment

Ontic Ontological Logic and the Last Things

N.T. Wright’s definition of Resurrection as ‘life [of the body] after life after death’ may be integrated with the terminology of the thinking now occurring in such a way as to make explicit the relation of the Resurrection of the body to the condition of the bodiless deceased and to their antecedent lives.45

In the thinking now occurring the Resurrection of the body is life after bodiless life ‘in the bosom of Abraham’ (or ‘in the torments of Hades’) after embodied life now after death (or now not after death).  Where 1 : φ is the inverse division in extreme and mean ratio, let Wright’s definition of the Resurrection be expressed as the proportion, Resurrection life of the body : life after death :: 1 : φ−1.  Then, in the thinking now occurring for the first time, the Resurrection of the body : bodiless life ‘in the bosom of Abraham’ or ‘in the torments of Hades’ :: bodiless life ‘in the bosom of Abraham’ or ‘in the torments of Hades’ : life in the body now after death or now not after death :: 1 : φ−1 :: φ−1 : φ-2.  The proof of this proportion, (1 × φ-2) | ( φ−1 × φ−1), is ‘the Resurrection body identified with the antecedent embodied lives of the bodiless deceased informs their actual deceased condition’, i.e., the actual after-life ‘in the bosom of Abraham’ () is the consequent whose antecedent is the Resurrection life of the body () after the after-life of life after death ().  The actual after-life ‘in the torments of Hades’ () is the consequent whose antecedent is the Resurrection life of the body () after the after-life of life not after death ().46

Cf. Revelation 20:11−15: “Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them (καὶ τόπος οὐχ εὑρέθη αὐτοῖς).47  And I saw the dead (, ), the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened.  And another book was opened, which is that of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their works (κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν).48  And the sea gave up the dead who were in it (, ), and death and Hades gave up the dead (, ) who were in them; and they were judged, each one according to their works (κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν). Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.  If the name of anyone was not found written in the book of life (), he was thrown into the lake of fire ().”

Cf. Revelation 21:1-8: “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth (οὐρανὸν καινὸν καὶ γῆν καινήν); for the first heaven and the first earth (πρῶτος οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ πρώτη γῆ) passed away, and the sea is no longer. And I saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband.49  And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling place of God is with men (ἡ σκηνὴ τοῦ θεοῦ μετὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων) (0 = 0 = ), and He will dwell with them (σκηνώσει μετ' αὐτῶν) (), and they shall be His people (), and God Himself will be with them (καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ θεὸς μετ' αὐτῶν ἔσται) (),50 and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be death; there will no longer be mourning, or crying, or pain; for the first creation (τὰ πρῶτα) has passed away’ ().51  And He who sits on the throne said, ‘Behold, I am making all things new’ (ἰδοὺ καινὰ ποιῶ πάντα) ().  And He said, ‘Write, for these words are faithful and true’.  Then He said to me, ‘It is done (). I am the Alpha and the Omega (γὼ τὸ Ἀλφα καὶ τὸ ),52 the beginning and the end.53  To the one who thirsts I will give a gift from the spring of the water of life ().  He who conquers will inherit the new heaven and the new earth (ὁ νικῶν κληρονομήσει ταῦτα) (),54 and I will be his God and he will be My son (καὶ ἔσομαι αὐτῷ θεὸς καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι υἱός) ().55 But for the cowardly and unfaithful and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their portion will be in the lake of burning fire and sulfur ().  This is the second death ()’.”56

I

In Dyadic Ternary vs. Real Trinary Logic,57

Ontological Relations of Persons One to Another,

To His or Her Body & to the Body of the Other

1

In dyadic (self-conscious) ternary logic, where U is an intermediate/non-absolute third to 0 (= nothing) and 1, 00 ≠ UU ≠ 0U (= 1) and difference = inequality:

UUUU = UU = U and 0000 = 00 = 0.

The person (U) is identical with his (U) body (UUU) identically his (U) body (UUU) not the otherness of the other (000) not without displacing the other (enveloped by the other).

The person (0) is identical with her (0) body (000) identically her (0) body (000) not the otherness of the other (UUU) not without displacing the other (enveloped by the other).

000U = 0U = 1 and UUU0 = U0 = 1.

The person (U) is identical with the other’s (0) body (000) not identically his (U) body (UUU) not the otherness of the other (000) not without displacing the other (enveloped by the other).

The person (0) is identical with the other’s (U) body (UUU) not identically her (0) body (000) not the otherness of the other (UUU) not without displacing the other (enveloped by the other).

The person is identical with his/her body and with the other’s body, identically and not identically his/her body not the otherness of the other not without displacing the other (enveloped by the other).

Analogy: Preborn relation to the other.58

2

In real (absolute other-conscious) trinary logic, where  is an absolute middle/absolute third to 0 (≠ nothing) and 1, 00 =  = 0 (= 1) and difference ≠ inequality:

= 0 = 1 and 0000 = 0 = 1.

The person () is identical with the other’s (0) body () identically his () body (000) the otherness of the other (000) without displacing the other (embodied in the other).

The person (0) is identical with the other’s () body (000) identically her (0) body () the otherness of the other () without displacing the other (embodied in the other).

000 =  = 1 and 0 = 00 = 1.

The person () is identical with his () body (000) identically his () body (000) the otherness of the other (000) without displacing the other (embodied in the other).

The person (0) is identical with her (0) body () identically her (0) body () the otherness of the other () without displacing the other (embodied in the other).

The person is identical with the other’s body and with his/her body, identically his/her body the otherness of the other without displacing the other (embodied in the other).

Analogy: Postpartum microchimeric relation to the other.59

II

The Logic of Sexuality

The Reproductive Implications

Where the sexuality of male and female is construed in terms of dyadic ternary logic as in the preceding Addendum, then 00 (actual woman) is simply female since 00 = 0.  If one attempts to distinguish person from body à la real trinary logic, viz., as 0 = person, 000 = body, then there is nothing for it but that, since in this logic 00 = 0, then the body = 000 = 00 = 0, i.e., is indistinguishable from the person 0.

Likewise with the man: UU is simply male since UU = U.  If one attempts to distinguish person from body à la real trinary logic, viz., as U = person, UUU = body, then there is nothing for it but that since UU = U, then the body = UUU = UU = U, i.e., is indistinguishable from the person U.

This is the binary sexual understanding: one is either male UU = U or female 00 = 0. The only overcoming of the duality is for the TWO to come together to make ONE whole: 0U = 1.60

The problem is that if this either/or binary notion of sexuality were the correct understanding of sexuality then the sexual union would never produce either a male or female child: 00UU → (000)0U(UUU) → 1 ≠ 00 ≠ UU.  The sexual union would be a perpetual mirroring of itself: sexuality never reproductive.61

In order for the sexual union to be reproductive there is nothing for it but for male and female each to be both male and female, and precisely so.  The chiasmic structure of chromosomal gene swapping at the microbiological level62 is reproduced at the macrobiological level in the ontologically chiasmically structured ((000) : 0()) differentiated identity of male and female as displayed for the first time in the thinking now occurring throughout the main text of this paper.

This chiasmically structured ((000) : 0()) differentiated identity of male and female is ontically demonstrably operative at the microscopic level in the postcopulatory chiasmic distribution of roles between the male sperm () navigating (000) the chemoattractant gradient toward the ovum and the female (0) exercising sperm selective control ) of the oviductal microenvironment.63

In real trinary logic ONE 00 (actual woman) makes ONE whole, 00 = 1, without having to come together with (actual man) to do so, although, indeed, they can and do come together to make ONE whole: 00 = 1.  Likewise ONE  (actual man) makes ONE whole,  = 1, without having to come together with 00 (actual woman), although they certainly can and do come together to make ONE whole: 00 = 1.  Unlike the either/or dyadic ternary notion of sexuality discussed above, in a real trinary logic understanding their coming together in a sexual union is able to produce a child: 00()0(000) → 1 = 00 = .

But for there to be this quality shared by both the male and the female (1 = 00 = ) with the Y chromosome, the golden section, and the absolute dead center cube,64 it has to be the case that 0 = and = 000, i.e., that the woman qua body is the man qua masculine person, and the man qua body is the woman qua feminine person.  This concretely is what is understood in the context by the absolutely differentiated identity of man and woman.

The difference that the man is to the woman qua sexual is not a limitation (Grenze) beyond the woman, nor is the difference that the woman is to the man qua sexual a limitation (Grenze) beyond the man.  Each is qua difference to the other a limit beyond beyond limit (Schranke).65

The woman 0 qua difference (in the very being of her body, ) is to the man a limit beyond beyond limit (Schranke), i.e., qua body she is him perfectly.  Likewise the man  qua difference (in the very being of his body, 000) is to the woman a limit beyond beyond limit (Schranke), i.e., qua body he is her perfectly.

III

Real Trinary Logic

Hypothetical Human Biological Bisexuality

Compared to Genealogical & Anthropological Epochés66

IV

Kristeva & the Ontic Ontological

Logic of Human Sexuality

Impasse & Irony

“Unfortunately, the proscription of female sexuality helped to infantilize half the human race by hampering its sexual and intellectual expression. Only advances in contraceptive technique have finally made it possible to lift that proscription. Previously, however, women received generous compensation in the form of praise of motherhood and its narcissistic rewards. Hence today, now that so-called artificial pregnancies have given concrete reality to the distinction between sexuality and procreation, femininity and maternity, the image of the virgin mother resonates with the daydreams of modern women with no particular religious vocation simply because there is no secular discourse on the psychology of motherhood.”67

New Creation and Absolutely Differentiated

Identity and Equality of Male and Female

In the New Heaven and the New Earth

Uniquely among all chromosomes the male-specific region of the Y sex chromosome is composed of 8 palindromes which enable it to repair itself despite the fact that unlike the X chromosome which occurs in pairs in the female the Y occurs in the normal male as a singleton:68

The grid below—constructed on the analogy to the Cartesian coordinate system—illustrates the relation of the uniqueness of the Y chromosome to the analogous uniqueness of the division in extreme and mean ratio, as well as to that of the absolute dead center cube, which uniqueness the latter shares with unique properties of real trinary logic.  Note that the perfect logical identity and equality of female and male recipients of the Eucharist as ‘Bride of Christ’ ( =  =  = ) is metaschematized in the New Heaven and New Earth into the form of the complete image of the Creator in which man was first created (0 = = 0 = ).  In both cases the substantial analogy to the shared unique properties of the absolute dead center cube and real trinary logic is manifest.69

VI

The Y Chromosome Structure

8 + 1, Palindrome + Inverted Repeat,

The Real Trinary Logic Analogue

Where the male-specific region of the Y chromosome is comprised of 9 families of protein-coding genes and composed of 8 palindromes + 1 inverted repeat,70

and the absolute dead center cube face divided into 36-fold squares as positioned in the 3rd Cartesian quadrant on the analogy to the hyperbola plot for the equation unique among all cubes71

— its purely formal structure identically that of its counterpart in the 1st quadrant — is taken as the repeating structure of each of the 9 subsquares of the real trinary logic cornerstone,72 then, when none of the color-coded logical palindromes in the 8 outer subsquares occupies a column, row, or diagonal similarly occupied in another subsquare, and the 1 central square is distinctively composed of the color-coded logically inverted repeats, the 8 + 1 structure of the cornerstone is neatly the analogue of the male-specific region of the Y chromosome:

VII

Guides to Logical Operations73

Notes

1  D.G. Leahy, Foundation: Matter the Body Itself (Albany, 1996).

2  Since, in real trinary logic, 00 = 1, 10 =  , and    =  1.  Cf., Leahy, Foundation, III.1.

3  Cf. ibid., pp. 434ff.

4  For the unique division of the face of the absolute dead center cube into 36 equal squares each of which may be inscribed in a circle whose area equals the circumference of the circle in which the whole face (= the 36 squares) may be inscribed, cf. Leahy, Foundation, pp. 524f., n. 98.  Compare, also, the hyperbola plot for the equation unique among all cubes to the absolute dead center cube (except that when x is negative the position of the analogized 36-fold squares is as above—in the second and fourth quadrants of the coordinate system and turned accordingly):

5  Cf. D.G. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty: A New Global Ethics and Morality (Aurora, 2010), p. 88, “The Index of the Ethic of Simplicity.”

6  Note that in denoting man’s body and woman’s body as, respectively, perfect readiness (000) and perfect discretion () real trinary logic predicts the recent findings in the scientific literature concerned with sexual reproduction.  For a comparison of the ontological relations of the one to the other in terms of dyadic ternary logic vs. real trinary logic, cf., below, Addenda I-IV.

In denoting the man’s body as such as perfect readiness (000) real trinary logic predicts the discovery that spermatozoa actually employ calculus to measure the rate of change of intracellular Ca2+ concentrations adjusting their movements to the environment while navigating the chemoattractant gradient toward the ovum.   Cf. L. Alvarez, et al., “The rate of change in Ca2+ concentration controls sperm chemotaxis,” J. Cell Biol. Vol. 196 No. 5 653–663. Online. Available at: http://jcb.rupress.org/content/196/5/653.  January 2014.  From the abstract: “Sperm of marine invertebrates navigate in a chemoattractant gradient by adjusting the flagellar waveform and, thereby, the swimming path. The waveform is periodically modulated by Ca2+ oscillations. How Ca2+ signals elicit steering responses and shape the path is unknown. We unveil the signal transfer between the changes in intracellular Ca2+ concentration ([Ca2+]i) and path curvature (κ). We show that κ is modulated by the time derivative d[Ca2+]i/dt rather than the absolute [Ca2+]i.”  For the identification of sexual reproduction, 0 = readiness, and the real trinary logic category ‘quantum-quality’, cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, p. 196 (et passim): “If human life is grounded—as all life is—in the act of nourishing (τρέφειν), then for Aristotle the ultimate raison d’être of human nourishing is the preservation of the human οἰκονομία, the preservation of the distribution of body-informing souls.  The generation of ‘(another) such as itself,’ the preservation of the human οἰκονομία, involves the category of Quality (ποιὸν) and the notion unique to that category, likeness (ὁμοιότης). As Aristotle says in Categories 11a 15−17:What is peculiar [to quality] is this, that we predicate ‘like’ and ’unlike’ with a reference to quality only. For one thing is like to another in respect of some quality only. So this is distinctive of quality.’ But in the thinking now occurring the end is not the generation of ‘another such as itself,’ such as the I surfacing the body, mediated by the quale. Where the end is absolutely the means for the first time, the end is the creating of another identically the I surfacing the body mediated by the immediacy that is the quantum-quale, mediated by what admits of degrees (quale) identically what admits of no degrees (quantum), mediated by the absolute discontinuity of the continuum, the absolute explosion of identity/unicity, mediated by the absolute distribution of existence itself, the quantum-quality of existence for the first time, the οἰκονόμος the ‘distributor of the dwelling’ at once the οἰκονομία that is the beginning of existence.”  For the affect of Ca2+ concentrations on the spermatozoa in humans and other species, cf. M. Yoshida and  K. Yoshida, “Sperm chemotaxis and regulation of flagellar movement by Ca2+,”  Mol. Hum. Reprod. (2011) 17 (8): 457-465. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gar041. Online. Available at: http://molehr.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/8/457.  January 2014.

7  For the identification of creating and complete ceasing on the part of Omnipotence creating ex nihilo, cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 4, et passim.  For the larger context of the notion of humans as essential persons, cf. ibid., Appendix 2, et passim.

8 Cf. BBC Science News 2005/03/16: “The X chromosome—one of 24 distinct chromosomes found in human cells—is much larger than the relatively puny Y, containing 1,098 genes to the Y’s 78. This means that female mammals contain over 1,000 more genes than males. To compensate for this, the female body switches off one X chromosome—quite randomly—in each cell, thus evening up protein production between the sexes . . . . However, researchers have recently discovered that the ‘silent’ X chromosome in females is not entirely silent—some of the genes evade inactivation, meaning the fairer sex does actually express more genes than their male counterparts. ‘It turns out 15% of genes escape inactivation altogether, each of which now becomes a candidate for explaining differences between men and women’, said Robin Lovell-Badge, of the National Institute for Medical Research, UK. ‘Moreover, another 10% are sometimes inactivated and sometimes not, giving a mechanism to make women much more genetically variable than men . . .’” Online. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/4355355.stm.  January 2014. Also, L. Carrel & H. F. Willard, “X-inactivation profile reveals extensive variability in X-linked gene expression in females,” Nature 434, 400-404 (17 March 2005). Online.  Available at: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v434/n7031/full/nature03479.html. January 2014. Also, M. T. Ross et al., “The DNA sequence of the human X chromosome,” Nature 434, 325-337 (17 March 2005). Online. Available at:  January 2014. See, also, on this web, 82944, 784, & the X and Y Chromosome Gene Ratios.  Note that (1317.6/1176)1/2 ≈ 829.44/784 (see, below, n. 10), while [(219.6/78)1/4 × (82944/784) (see, below, n. 20)]−1 α (fine structure constant), and, where e is the naperian log base, (1098 × 2)/(219.6 + 78) ≈ e2

9 Cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, p. 259: “Definition: A person is the absolute ceasing that an absolutely deictic other-consciousness is.”

10 This anomalous appearance of sexually reversed specific ontic ontological forms of male and female ceasing, viz., the masculine form of perfect readiness (000 = the form of the body of the man, cf. above) in the case of two female partners, and the feminine form of perfect discretion ( = the form of the body of the woman, cf. ibid.) in the case of two male partners, successfully predicts the recently discovered neurobiological HeM-HoW and HeW-HoM pairings with respect to sexual orientation.  Cf. PNAS 2008 : 0801566105v1-0, I. Savic and P. Lindström, “PET and MRI show differences in cerebral asymmetry and functional connectivity between homo- and heterosexual subjects.”  Abstract: “Cerebral responses to putative pheromones and objects of sexual attraction were recently found to differ between homo- and heterosexual subjects. Although this observation may merely mirror perceptional differences, it raises the intriguing question as to whether certain sexually dimorphic features in the brain may differ between individuals of the same sex but different sexual orientation.  We addressed this issue by studying hemispheric asymmetry and functional connectivity, two parameters that in previous publications have shown specific sex differences. Ninety subjects [25 heterosexual men (HeM) and women (HeW), and 20 homosexual men (HoM) and women (HoW)] were investigated with magnetic resonance volumetry of cerebral and cerebellar hemispheres.  Fifty of them also participated in PET measurements of cerebral blood flow, used for analyses of functional connections from the right and left amygdalae. HeM and HoW showed a rightward cerebral asymmetry, whereas volumes of the cerebral hemispheres were symmetrical in HoM and HeW. No cerebellar asymmetries were found. Homosexual subjects also showed sex-atypical amygdale connections. In HoM, as in HeW, the connections were more widespread from the left amygdala; in HoW and HeM, on the other hand, from the right amygdala. Furthermore, in HoM and HeW the connections were primarily displayed with the contralateral amygdale and the anterior cingulate, in HeM and HoW with the caudate, putamen, and the prefrontal cortex. The present study shows sex-atypical cerebral asymmetry and functional connections in homosexual subjects. The results cannot be primarily ascribed to learned effects, and they suggest a linkage to neurobiological entities.”  Significant asymmetrical cerebral hemispheric volumes for HeM and HoW compared to no asymmetry for HeW and HoM are shown in this table

 Table. Volumes of interest R cerebral L cerebral AI, cerebral R cerebellar L cerebellar AI, cerebellar Group No. hemisphere, cm3 hemisphere, cm3 hemispheres volume, cm3 volume, cm3 hemispheres HeM 25 624 ± 43 612 ± 41 0.012 ± 0.02* 68.2 ± 6.4 68.4 ± 6.6 –0.003 ± 0.007 HeW 25 581 ± 37 581 ± 36 –0.001 ± 0.005 68.7 ± 7.4 68.4 ± 7.9 0.004 ± 0.029 HoM 20 608 ± 46 609 ± 47 –0.0004 ± 0.009 67.6 ± 6.6 67.5 ± 5.5 0.0004 ± 0.025 HoW 20 548 ± 34 543 ± 33 0.008 ± 0.007† 65.6 ± 7.5 65.8 ± 6.7 0.002 ± 0.020 The numbers indicate means and standard deviations. R, right; L, left; AI, asymmetry index [(R – L)/(R + L)]. *, P = 0.0005 in relation to HeW and 0.0010 in relation to HoM; †, P = 0.0244 in relation to HeW and P = 0.0344 in relation to HoM.

Note that the HeM/HeW ratio of the total mean cerebral and cerebellar hemispheric volumes 1372.6/1299.1 ≈ 829.44/784 (cf., above, n. 8).  Likewise, the 128th root of the total mean hemispheric volumes of each of the four subject groups (HeM, HeW, HoM, and HoW) ≈ 829.44/784.  1372.61/128 ≈ 1299.11/128 ≈ 1352.11/128 ≈ 1222.41/128 ≈ 829.44/784.  Note also that where α and δ are the Feigenbaum chaos constants, the product of the HeM/HeW ratio 1372.6/1299.1 and the corresponding HoM/HoW ratio 1352.1/1222.4 ≈ αδ × 10−1.  The reciprocal  functional amygdalae connectivity pattern in homosexual subjects in relation to the same-sex controls is here imaged: “Covariations with the respective amygdala seed region in hetero- and homosexual subjects. The Sokoloff scale indicates T values. Clusters detected at T = 3.0 are superimposed on the standard MR image of the brain.”

# Full text available at: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/06/13/0801566105.full.pdf.  January 2014.  Cf., also,  Science, New Series, Vol. 253, No. 5023 (August 30, 1991), 1034−1037, S. Le Vay, “A difference in Hypothalamic Structure between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men.”  Online.  Available at: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=c2ltb25sZXZheS5jb218d3d3fGd4OmJkYmZiNDczOGMxNjU4MQ.  January 2014.

11 The integral product of ויאמר אלהים נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness,” is 8.2944e202.  Cf. 8.2944e92 the integral product of ביום ההוא יהיה יהוה אחד ושמו אחד, “On that day Yahweh shall be one and his name one” (Zechariah 14:9), and 8.2944e132 the integral product of ובני אדם בצל כנפיך יחסיון, “And the children of men take refuge in the shadow of your wings” (Psalm 36:7), and 8.2944e172 the integral product of וידמה לבני אדם וימצא בתכונתו כבן אדם, “And being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man” (Philippians 2:7; here and throughout see Delitzsch's 1877 Hebrew New Testament available at http://www.sarshalom.us/resources/scripture/asv/bible.html#BRITHAHADASHAH.  January 2014.), and 8.2944e172 the integral product of האבן אשר מאסתם אתם הבונים ותהי לראש פנה, “The stone rejected by you the builders that has become the head of the corner” (Acts 4:11), and 8.2944e272 the integral product of ויהי קול מן השמים ויאמר אתה בני ידידי בך רצתה נפשי, “And a voice came from heaven saying, You are my beloved son in whom I am well pleased” (Luke 3:22) (cf., also, below, n. 20, passim).  Cf., on this web, The Light, the Logic, & the Inhomogeneities, where it is noted that the base factor of 8.2944e26 the integral product ofויאמר אלהים יהי אור ויהי אור , “And God said ‘Let there be light’ and there was light” (Genesis 1:3), is the total area of the unitary structure of the absolute dead center cube, 82944 (cf. Leahy, Foundation, pp. 434ff.), while the base factor of the linear product of this verse, 6.2208e22, is the total surface area of the absolute dead center cube, 62208 (cf. ibid.).  For integral product and related terms, see, on this web, Transdecimal Calculation of Number Identity: A Note on Integral Product & Related Terms.

12 The integral product of ויברא אלהים את־האדם בצלמו, “So God created man in his own image,” is 2.985984e14 (cf., below, n. 20, passim).

The integral product of καὶ δύναμις ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι, “And the power of the Most High shall overshadow you,” is 2.359296e48. Cf. σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω, “But you have prepared a body” (Hebrews 10:5), integral product = 2.359296e28, and בשרי אשר אני נתן בעד חיי העולם, “My flesh which I give for the life of the world” (John 6:51), integral product = 2.359296e30. Cf., also, Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, pp. 277ff., including n. 3 (p. 288): “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ, integral product = 2.359296e28, and “Complete ceasing,” κατάπαυσις, integral product = 2.359296e20 (cf., above, n. 7, and, below, nn. 20, 37, and 39).

Omnipotence itself: (Luke 1:35) δύναμις ὑψίστου: power beyond beyond high.  Cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, passim.

For the immediate commodal existence of the three μεταστάσεις of the Trinity, cf. ibid., p. 246, n. 117.  For more concerning the essentially new ontological understanding of the Trinity in the thinking now occurring for the first time, cf., ibid., pp. 264ff., nn. 21 and 22, et passim.

Cf., above, section on female and male chromosomes, including n. 8.

Note     000 000 and ⌐(0 ).  0  , and  = [00(000)0] [00(000)0] = 000 000 (cf. the Resurrected Christ, below, including n. 23).  The perfect Readiness/Femininity (cf. the root of נקבה,‘female’, נקב, ‘pierce’, ‘appoint’) that is this new ceasing/new creating in the form of the Body at once the Readiness that is the Son identical with the Woman Mary’s readiness (000) (see, below, n. 20) is predicated of the bread (1 Corinthians 11:23-24) by the Discretion/Masculinity () that is the God-Man who commands “Do this in my memory (עשו זאת לזכרוני)” (cf. the root of זכרוני, ‘memory’, זכר, ‘male’, ‘remember well’). Cf. אבל אין האיש בלא אשה ואין האשה בלא איש באדון, “But neither is the woman without man nor the man without woman in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:11). For the base factor 26244 (= [(x/6)4/x3]-4 = [8x3/x4]-4) of the integral product of this verse, 2.6244e32, cf., below, n. 20, and, above, n. 4.  For the Jewish ground of the early Christian identification of the Word Incarnate with the feminine Sophia of the Septuagint (consonant here with  = 000), cf. N.T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Fortress, 2013: Volume 4 of Christian Origins and the Question of God), Book II, pp. 651ff., et passim, where, following R.J. Bauckham, the Sophia of the Jewish Scriptures is understood as part and parcel of the “unique identity” of the One God of the Shema.  Cf. Wisdom of Solomon 9:9 “And wisdom was with you, knowing your works, and beside you, when you made the universe” (καὶ μετὰ σοῦ ἡ σοφία ἡ εἰδυῖα τὰ ἔργα σου καὶ παροῦσα, ὅτε ἐποίεις τὸν κόσμον).  Cf., also, Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 2, pp. 265ff., n. 22, where each of the Three Persons of the Trinity is understood as an “infinitely discrete identity,” the Second immediately second to the First and the Third immediately second to the Second and the First.

Cf. the illustration above in the text; also, Leahy, Foundation, passim.  When the 36-fold logical squares are arranged as above in n. 4 (where x is positive in the hyperbola plot unique to the absolute dead center cube)

the alternative proportion is (1) : (0) :: () : (01), the proof of which is (1)(01) = (0)(), ultimately, 1 = , which is a variant by reduction of 1 = 11, in either case, the God-Man qua actual/existent equal to the Father.  When the central fourfold of the four quadrants is the focus (viewing at one glance the negative x and positive x logical analogues of the unique absolute dead center hyperbola)

where the proof of the proportion, (0) : (1) :: (1) : (), is (0)() = (1)(1), ultimately, as above,  = 1, the God-Man qua actual/existent () equal to the Father 1.  Cf. the God-Man qua actual/existent () in John 10:30-39: “I and the Father are One” ( = 1).  Cf., below, n. 20.

19  Cf. Leahy, Foundation, pp. 391-403.  Also, D.G. Leahy, Novitas Mundi: Perception of the History of Being (Albany, 1994), pp. 362ff.

Cf. 1 Corinthians 15:44.

Ibid.  See, above, n. 20.

23   = [0(000)00] [0(000)00] = 000 000 (cf., above, n. 17).  Cf. Philippians 3:20-21.

1 Corinthians 15:8.

25  Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, nor is there male and female” (οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην, οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος, οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ).  The distinction between the ‘οὐκ . . . οὐδὲ’ of the first two clauses and the ‘οὐκ . . . καὶ’ of the last prohibits directly applying to the first mentioned relations what is said below concerning the relation of male and female.

For  as logical symbol for embodiment/incorporation, cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 4 and Backnote 3.  For logical incorporation () involving (0) and (0) here and throughout the rule is: each single 0 in the body always as such first incorporates one available 0 or , or,  or , or  or , as the case may be, as  or  (in the unique case 0 first incorporates  as ) before the assimilation of the remaining elements one to another and the ensuing reduction by absolute multiplication (for the exception to this rule, see, below, nn. 29 and 35).  Where the body is composed exclusively of ’s or ’s, one of these ’s or ’s is first paired with an incorporated single  or  before the ensuing reduction of the resulting doublets by absolute multiplication.  Where complex 0 is incorporated in complex  or , 0 or  are assimilated, respectively, to the existing ’s or ’s, disregarding sequential order, before the ensuing reduction of the resulting triplets by absolute multiplication.  Where complex  or , or,  or , is incorporated in complex 0, the single 0 in the complex body first assimilates, disregarding sequential order, one available incorporated  or   before the ensuing reduction of the resulting triplets by absolute multiplication.

27  Note the analogy to the biological fact of the indispensability of the Y chromosome to the production of the male child (), absent which the product of biological conception can only be a female (0).  For the relation of the biological uniqueness of the Y chromosome to the division in extreme and mean ratio, the absolute dead center cube, the unique properties of real trinary logic, and, finally, to themes that will be developed later in the text, viz., the perfect identity and equality of female and male recipients of the Eucharist qua ‘Bride of Christ’ metaschematized in the New Heaven and New Earth as the complete image of the Creator in which man was first created, cf., below, Addendum V.

0 expanded = 0 = .  This embodiment of the Resurrected Christ identified with the Word (0) in the man of whom Christ is the head () is consistent with the fact previously proven that the headship of male or female (either the woman  embodied in the man  or the man  embodied in the woman ) is, vis-à-vis one another, without reference to the headship of Christ, a matter of perfect indifference, such that where Christ is in fact the head of the man ( = 0) the incorporated 0 is assimilated to the ’s and ’s of the existent body () of the recapitulated image of the Creator in which man was first created () without regard to the reversal of sequential order (see, above, n. 26).  Indeed, the ultimate equality of man and woman actually embodied in Christ ( =  = ), as proven above by the fact that vis-à-vis one another the headship of one or the other is a matter of perfect indifference ( =  =  = ), is not a contradiction of Christ () as head of the man () (and man as head of the woman ), but, ironically, the latter is the conditio sine qua non thereof, and, just so, in the new creation, of the recapitulation of the first creation in the image of the Creator—male and female.  Cf., below, in the new heaven and new earth, 0 = 000 = = .  Cf., also, below, Addendum V.

Cf. Revelation 21:1-27.  In what follows in the text note that for the woman or man embodied in the Resurrected Christ (000 or 000) assimilation with the body (0) inseparable from the divine person (00) in the New Heaven and New Earth is no longer merely relative—no longer not altogether without reference to the body separable from the human person, to the ground of the body’s operative sexual difference—no longer such that 000 =  and 000 = , but now, reduplicated, assimilation with the body (0) inseparable from the divine person (00) is absolutely so as such: 000 =  =  and 000 =  = , that is, the one so assimilated the other, the absolute identity/equality, woman and man.  Cf., above, n. 26, and, below, n. 35.  Cf. Leahy, Foundation, pp. 399-416.

30  Cf. 1 Corinthians 15:42-47.  Cf., also, Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 4.

31  For created omnipotence,” cf. Beyond Sovereignty, Appendices 2-4, et passim.  Cf., also, below, Addendum V.

The bodily assumption into heaven of Enoch (Genesis 5:24, Hebrews 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11)—men in whom the Word not yet made flesh was embodied (0 = )—their embodiment in Omnipotence—prior to the Resurrection of the Incarnate Word is not that of bodies embodied in the latter (as is the body of the woman Mary).  (1 = 10 = 0 = ) ≠ (1 = 10 = 0 = ).  The metaschematizing of the bodies of Enoch and Elijah awaits the “coming down out of heaven from God of the holy city New Jerusalem,” the realization qua new creation of the complete () image of the Creator (0 = 0 = ).  Therein these witnesses of God who embodied the Word prior to its having been made flesh, will, as such, have been embodied for the first time in the Resurrected Christ ( = 000 = )—but, as with all the righteous living before the Incarnation (0 = ), not before having first tasted death (cf. the two witnesses in Revelation 11:3−12, so understood by Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 43. Online. Available at: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iii.iv.ii.i.html.  January 2014.).  Meanwhile these two witnesses embodying the Word dwell with the Word (0 = ), bearing at once a certain similarity to the Word Incarnate, the unique human likeness of God, the man Jesus (), and to the image and likeness of God that is the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence (0 = ).  Cf. Malachi 4:5; also, below, nn. 46 and 56.

33  Cf. Revelation 12:1-6; 21:2.  For Mary as the exception in essence,” cf. Leahy, Novitas Mundi, Appendix γ.  Cf., above, n. 20.  See, also, (Apostolic Constitution of Pius XII, Rome, November 1, 1950).

34  The metastatic co-constituency of the medium and the Message in the Messenger (000) coincides the metastatic constituency of the Messenger and the Message in the medium 0( ), which metastatic constituency henceforth uniquely marks the woman Mary [0( ) ↔ (000)] = [ 0( ) ↔ (000)] = [ ↔ (00 = 0[])] as mother of the Incarnate Word.  Cf. the burgeoning scientific literature on fetomaternal microchimerism (the exchange of cells between mother and fetus) beginning in 1979 with the landmark paper: PNAS Vol. 76, No. 3, pp. 1453−1455, March 1979, L.A. Herzenberg, et al., “Fetal cells in the blood of pregnant women: Detection and enrichment by fluorescence-activated cell sorting”: ABSTRACT: “Fetal cells, potentially usable for prenatal diagnosis, were sorted from maternal blood samples taken as early as 15 weeks of gestation. Immunogenetic and cytogenic criteria established the fetal origin of the observed cells: Y-chromatincontaining (male) cells were detected in the sorted sample if and only if the newborn proved to be male and carried ceI1-surface antigens detected by the fluorescent-labeled antibody used for sorting with the fluorescence-activated cell sorter.” (Online. Available at: http://www.pnas.org/content/76/3/1453.full.pdf. January 2014).  Cf. also, PNAS 1996 January 23; 93(2): 705–708, D.W. Bianchi, et al., “Male fetal progenitor cells persist in maternal blood for as long as 27 years postpartum” (Online. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC40117/?tool=pmcentrez. January 2014).  Microchimerism image from Scientific American:

For the lifetime persistence and differentiation of fetal cells in the mother, cf. M. Eikmans and F.H.J. Claas,  “HLA-targeted cell sorting of microchimeric cells opens the way to phenotypical and functional characterization.” Landes Bioscience Volume 2, Issue 4, October/November/December 2011 Pages 114–116: “Some fetal cells in the mother have progenitor cell-like features. These can persist throughout life and may differentiate into different cell types in maternal organs including blood, skin, central nerve system, liver, kidney, and brain.” Cf., also, Nguyen Huu S, et al., “Maternal neoangiogenesis during pregnancy partly derives from fetal endothelial progenitor cells.” PNAS 2007; 104:1871-6; PMID: 17267612; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0606490104, and Zeng XX, et al., “Pregnancy-associated progenitor cells differentiate and mature into neurons in the maternal brain.” Stem Cells Dev 2010; 19:1819-30; PMID: 20707697; DOI: 10.1089/scd.2010.0046.

See M.A. Mikhail et al., “High frequency of fetal cells within a primitive stem cell population in maternal blood,” Human Reproduction (2008) 23 (4): 928-933. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem417 (Online. Available at: http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/4/928.full. January 2014), for slides illustrating “fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis of adherent CD34+ blood cells,”

where the above are identified  respectively as “(A) Female gender identified by two red spots marking the X chromosomes in adherent CD34+ blood cells from a control female. (B) Male gender identified by one red and one green spot marking the X and Y chromosomes, respectively, in adherent CD34+ blood cells from a control male. (C) Cells from a male fetal tissue sample. (D) Adherent CD34+ blood cells from the mother of the male fetus showing male/female microchimerism. (E) Cells from a female fetal tissue sample. (F) Adherent CD34+ blood cells from the mother of the female fetus showing all the cells were female.”

The following real trinary logic schema illustrates the reciprocal exchange of cells between mother and fetus in female and male microchimerism and the relation of the latter to the metastatic constituency of the Incarnate Word in his mother Mary and the persistence of the mark thereof in her postpartum body:

Note that as the Word Incarnate in the womb of Mary is a person  identical with his body 000, so are all bodies in the womb identical with distinct persons, else, as bodies not at once identically differentiated persons, ({})0 or ({000})0, they would be thus redundant to the body of the mother, in terms of real trinary logic immediately subject to the cancellation rule, and per impossibile effectively without a father.  Cf., on this web, Beyond the Superego: The Pneumasomatic Human Person.

Revelation 21:2.  For the woman or man embodied in the Resurrected Christ at the final Resurrection (000 or 000) embodiment in the body inseparable from the Word (00) now inseparable from the Word in the New Heaven and New Earth (000) is no longer merely relative—no longer essentially with reference to the body separable from the human person, no longer with reference to the ground of the body’s operative sexual difference—no longer such that 000 =  and 000 = , but now, the headship of the Resurrected Christ reduplicated in the final Resurrection, embodiment in the body inseparable from the divine person is absolutely so as such: 000 =  =  and 000 =  = , that is, the one so assimilated the other, the absolute identity/equality, woman and man (cf., above, nn. 26 and 29).  Cf. Matthew 22:30: “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but as angels in heaven are they.”  Cf. Leahy, Foundation, III.5, passim.  In death the body (000) of the Word Incarnate () is never separated qua the flesh “shared with all humanity” (0) (cf., above in the text, “The Incarnation”) from the Word qua absolute person (0) (cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 2).  Cf. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica III.6.1 ad 3: “when the soul [the formal principle of the life of the body] (0) was separated, the union of the Word with flesh (00) still endured.”  In death the body of the person embodied in the Resurrected Christ after life after death ‘in the bosom of Abraham’ ( or ) (cf., below in the text, “Concluding Apocalyptic Postscript”) = (0 or  )  = ( or 000) = the body (0 or  ) separated from the person ( or ).  In the final Resurrection this body (0 or  )  of the person embodied in the Resurrected Christ ( or ) is now united with that person ( or ) who for the first time is absolutely assimilated to the flesh inseparable from the Word (00) inseparable from the Word (000) (000 = =  or 000 =  = ) and so united ( or ) is at once effectively in that form most perfectly prefiguring that ultimate form of newly created woman and man fully embodied in the Creator’s image and likeness, that ultimate form of the metaschematized "body of our lowliness” of which Paul speaks (Philippians 3:20-21): “For our citizenship (πολίτευμα [integral product = 8.2944e16, cf., below, n. 42]) begins where God is (ν οὐρανος) from where we expect the savior the Lord Jesus Christ who will metaschematize (μετασχηματίσει) the body of our lowliness (τὸ σῶμα τς ταπεινσεως ἡμν) [woman  and man embodied in the Resurrected Christ] conformed ύμμορφον)  to the body of his glory σήματι τς δόξης ατο)  (0 =  = 0 = )” (cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, pp. 105ff.; also, p. 289, n. 12).  Before now Maria  in caelum assumpta (1 = 10 = 0) dwells with the Word 0—beyond beyond the world beyond the world—in Nova Hierosolyma in caelis—but not before first having been separated from her body 0 and its formal principle of life as its essential principle of life  the human person (cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 2)—the unique I/person Mary  hitherto death the being perfectly at the disposal of—surfacing this very body  (cf. Faith and Philosophy, Appendix, pp. 156−157).  In the New Heaven and New earth—in Nova Hierosolyma facta est de caelo—Mary dwelling with the Word (0) embodied in the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence (0) is together with all the saints (0 =  = 0 = 0 = ) “conformed to the body of his glory”—00 = 0000 = = (cf., above, n. 32, et passim, and, below in the text, “Concluding Apocalyptic Postscript”).

36  Cf. Leahy, Novitas Mundi, Appendix γ.

37  For ‘catapaustical’, cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 4.  For ἡ κατάπαυσις, ibid., and, above, nn. 7, 13, and 20, and, below, n. 39.  Cf., also, Romans 12:1-2.

38  “The likeness of his person,” qua existent,  = 1, where the 1 is God qua Father, the 1 the first of the Three Persons 10 of the Trinity that is the One God 1, to be distinguished from the likeness of the One God 1 as such, where 1 = 10 =  = the likeness of God qua The Trinity as such qua existent (cf., above, John 14:9, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father 1.”).

39  The complete ceasing (ἡ κατάπαυσις) that is Omnipotence 1 = 111 = 10 creating all things.  Cf., above, nn. 7, 13, 20, and 37.

40  Cf. Ephesians 5:29-32: “Indeed, no one ever hated his flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as also Christ does the church, because we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones.  ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife and the two shall become one flesh’.  This is a great mystery, I am speaking with reference to Christ and the Church.”  Cf. Revelation 19:7-9; 21:1-4, 9−14; 22:17-21, et passim.  Cf., also, Matthew 9:15; 25:6; John 3:28-29; Romans 7:1-4; 1 Corinthians 6:15−17; 2 Corinthians 11:2.  Cf., also, Isaiah 61:10; 62:5, et passim; Jeremiah 3:20; Song of Songs, et passim.

Revelation 19:7−10, et passim.

The integral product of μεγαλωσύνη, “the Majesty,” is 8.2944e16.  Cf. John 6:53:54: “‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves.  He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.’”  The integral product of ἡ ἐσχάτη ἡμέρα, “the last day,” is 8.2944E16.  The integral product of Paul’s πολίτευμα, “citizenship,” is 8.2944e16 (cf., above, n. 35).  8.2944e16 is also the integral product of נקבה תסובב גבר, "A woman shall enclose her Master" (Jeremiah 31:22) (cf., above, n. 20).

43  Corinthians 11:23-25.

44  For the first time clearly the precise raison d’être of the male priesthood.  The distinction operative in the preceding is not between woman who is not in persona Christi (00) and man who is in persona Christi ().  Man in persona Christi as Celebrant ( = ) is configured to the Consecrator (0) neither to him qua un-metaschematized humanity simply qua his maleness (), nor simply to him as Incarnate Word at the Last Supper (), nor to him simply as Resurrected Christ appearing to his disciples (), nor, indeed, to him existent in the Eucharist (), but precisely to the Resurrected Christ embodied in Omnipotence (1 = 0) [( = ]—to whom in the New Heaven and New Earth woman and man are equally and identically conformed (0 =  = 0 = ).  Cf. Apostolic Letter of Paul VI, Solemni Hac Liturgia, June 30, 1968, pars. 24-26: “We believe that the Mass, celebrated by the priest representing the person of Christ by virtue of the power received through the Sacrament of Orders, and offered by him in the name of Christ and the members of His Mystical Body, is the sacrifice of Calvary rendered sacramentally present on our altars. We believe that . . . the bread and wine consecrated by the priest are changed into the body and blood of Christ enthroned gloriously in heaven . . . . And it is our very sweet duty to honor and adore in the blessed Host which our eyes see, the Incarnate Word whom they cannot see, and who, without leaving heaven, is made present before us.”  Cf., also, Paul VI, Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests, Presbyterorum Ordinis, December 7, 1965, III.1.12−13, where the priest is understood as the instrument of “Christ the Eternal Priest,” with reference to Romans 8:34: “It is Christ Jesus that died, yes rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.”  Real trinary logic demonstrates what hitherto was never as such grounded ontologically, consequently never adequately articulated, the ontic ontological reality of the priest as Celebrant.  The Celebrant () : the Consecrator (0) :: Missa Solemnis : Missa Jubilaea (cf. Leahy, Novitas Mundi, Appendix γ).  Cf., below, Addendum V.

Cf. N.T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Question of God, Vols. 1-3 (Minneapolis, 1992-2003). The term ‘life after death’ is linked with the thinking now occurring in the above schema, where it is integrated with the language of Scripture.  As the schema illustrates, what is denoted by the term precisely ontologically is ‘being beyond beyond’ death—this side of the grave.  In the Fall 2010 New York Philosophy Corporation course Introduction to Beyond Sovereignty Jonathan Rogers posted on the Q&A Forum a question concerning a certain notion found in the text, viz., ‘the beginning of the imperishable reality’.  Articulating, as it does, the ontic ontological thinking now occurring for the first time substantively analogous to the Scriptural texts cited above and below, the writer’s response is herewith included: “Imperishability is a function of the fact that neither Fourthness (Omnipotence) nor Thirdness (Created omnipotence) [see, above, n. 31] properly understood admits of a not-doing (a not-being) (cf. Beyond Sovereignty, ‘Index of the Ethic of Simplicity’, p. 88, et passim). In the thinking now occurring all perishing qua actual (embodied in Omnipotence) is imperishable. Start with Heidegger’s notion of Dasein/existence as being-toward-death. Death is to be distinguished from perishing. The being merely alive is being other than towards-death. All that can be said of being merely alive is that it perishes. Dasein is being-toward-death—in effect, being beyond death, as such, existent, imperishable. For Heidegger this is an ontological, not an ontic, matter. Being-toward-death is ‘the possibility of the impossibility of existence in general’ (cf. Sein und Zeit [Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen, 2001], p. 262, et passim).  The task is not to ‘actualize’—make ontically real—this possibility. The task for Dasein being-toward-death authentically is to project-open a clearing for the truth of Being, to which Being Dasein belongs. In the thinking now occurring—where ontology is absolutely ontic-ontological for the first time—where for the first time being is absolutely poly-ontological—the absolute imperative is precisely to begin to absolutely ‘actualize’ ‘the impossibility of existence in general’, to make real existence (the ontic) the absolute ‘impossibility of existence in general’, to create the actuality of absolutely particular existence. In the thinking now occurring the form of this absolute imperative is being-there beyond beyond death for the first time: the actualizing of the ontic realization of the ontological actuality of Da-sein: the ontic-ontological realization of the being-there not belonging to Being creating the absolute real of existence for the first time: dasein beyond-beyond-death: beyond imperishable: the imperishable not imperishable: perishing not perishing. Since in the thinking now occurring the imperishability of Da-sein (whatever might be said about it) is not restricted to human consciousness but pertains for the first time to the whole of perishable being embodied in omnipotence, since the whole of being participates in existence itself for the first time, it follows that the person qua I surfacing the living body (cf. D.G. Leahy, Faith and Philosophy: The Historical Impact [Aldershot and Burlington, 2003], Appendix: ‘Thinking In the Third Millennium: Looking Without the Looking Glass’) is the body beyond perishing—the body perishing is imperishable. On the one hand, the perishing body of the person (who is) beyond beyond death (absolutely existing) is, together with that person, the perishable imperishable: this is the beginning of the Resurrection thought essentially. The person surfacing the living body (who is) beyond beyond death (absolutely existing), together with the perishing body, imperishable, experiences not death for the first time beyond death: experiences the beginning of life absolutely without death: experiences the beginning of the new life of the body: experiences the beginning of the new life of the body absolutely beyond beyond death—absolutely existing absolutely.  On the other hand, the person surfacing the living body (who is) not beyond beyond death (not absolutely existing: beyond and not beyond death: existing and not existing), together with the perishing body, is likewise the perishing imperishable: consequently this person not absolutely existing—this person not beyond beyond death—imperishable perishing experiences death for the first time beyond death—experiences the abyss the beginning of the second death: experiences the first death the beginning of the second death: experiences the real of living life without absolutely existing, experiences the nothingness of being-there: experiences the abyss the beginning of absolutely not beginning.”

That is, ultimately, either the inferential sequence () → () → () or () → () → ().  Likewise, for the righteous living before the Incarnation, their bodies for the first time embodied in the Resurrected Christ at the Resurrection, () → () → () (cf., above, n. 32), or, on the other hand, for the unrighteous so placed historically, () → () → (0).  Meanwhile, where Christ is the first-fruits of the resurrection, he must be the first-fruits of the resurrection of both faithful and unfaithful.  Cf. Paul in Acts 24:15: “I have the hope in relation to God which these confidently look for, that there shall come to pass the resurrection certain to come of both the just and the unjust (ἀνάστασιν μέλλειν ἔσεσθαι δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων).”  But then the unfaithful embodying in themselves the covering over of the gospel must be embodied in Christ (ἐν Χριστῷ) ().  Cf. 2 Corinthians 4:3: “Even if our gospel is covered over (κεκαλυμμένον), it is covered over (κεκαλυμμένον) embodied in those () on the way to destruction (ἐν τοῖς ἀπολλυμένοις), embodied in those () in whom the god of this world (ἐν οἷς ὁ θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου) has blinded the thoughts of the unfaithful (ἐτύφλωσεν τὰ νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων) lest there flash forth the light (εἰς τὸ μὴ αὐγάσαι τὸν φωτισμὸν) of the good news of the glory of Christ (τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς δόξης τοῦ Χριστοῦ) () who is the image of God (ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ) (0).”  These embodied lives antecedent to death not after death are those embodied in whom embodiment in Christ is covered over (κεκαλυμμένον) ().  These () do not see themselves embodied in Christ embodied in Omnipotence, with the further consequence that, ultimately, 0 = 000 = = Keeping in mind that likewise 0 = 0 = = , cf. 2 Corinthians 13:5:  “Examine yourselves whether you are embodied in faithfulness (εἰ ἐστὲ ἐν τῇ πίστει) (), test yourselves.  Do you not recognize yourselves, that Christ Jesus is embodied in you (ὅτι Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν) (0)?  Unless you are failing the test (0).”

Cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 4.

For the specifically new understanding of ‘according to their works’ (here and in the next sentence) (κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν) in the thinking now occurring for the first time, and the identity of ‘working/doing’ and ‘creating’, cf. ibid., et passim.

Cf. Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 4.

50  Note the three-fold repetition of the μετὰ, ‘with’.  For ‘absolute withness’, cf. Beyond Sovereignty, Section I, et passim.  For the Persons of the Trinity as μεταστάσεις, ‘withstandings’, cf. ibid., p. 246, n. 117.  For personality as ‘metanomy’, cf. Beyond Sovereignty, passim, and Foundation II.3, et passim.

τὰ πρῶτα = (preceding) πρῶτος οὐρανὸς καὶ πρώτη γῆ.

The integral product of ἐγὼ τὸ Ἀλφα καὶ τὸ Ὦ is 8.2944e32.  Cf., above, n. 20.

Cf. Beyond Sovereignty, pp. 3ff.

ταῦτα = (preceding) πάντα καινὰ = (preceding) οὐρανὸς καινὸς καὶ γῆ καινή.  For the relation of distribution (οἰκονομία) and inheritance (κληρονομία), cf., ibid., pp. 233f., et passim; also, Appendix 4, pp. 288f., n. 4, and n. 7: “the imperative, ‘You shall be holy every day’, associated with Matthew 5:5: ‘Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the land (μακάριοι οἱ πραεῖς, ὅτι αὐτοι κληρονομήσουσιν τὴν γὴν)’: ‘The imperative to be holy every day is the imperative to be in heaven, the imperative that the angel/intentio/image be identically the body. This is the imperative to be the new heaven and new earth qua distribution [οἰκονομία] of the dwellings, qua absolute placedness. “This imperative is the end of the end of Ἀναστάσεως ρχή [‘the beginning of the Resurrection’; integral product 8.2944e20; cf., above, n. 20], omnipotence itself saying what it is that is the actuality of creating the new world.” This for the first time is the imperative to be the resurrected body.’”

‘My son’, i.e., the Second Adam (δεύτερος ἄνθρωπος ), embodied in Omnipotence (0), now fully and finally embodying the First Adam (πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος 0), newly created ( ) (as above): “male and female now, as such, fully embodied in the Creator’s image” = 0 = 0 = .

Cf. Jude 1:14−15: “It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, ‘Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him’ [1 Enoch 1:9].”  Cf., above, n. 32.

Cf. Leahy, Foundation, Section III.1.  Cf., also, Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, pp. 63f., n. 14, and Leahy, Faith and Philosophy, Chapter 7.

58  Cf. E. Levinas, Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence, trans. A. Lingis (Dordrecht, 1991), p. 195, n. 12, the body as “that by which the self is susceptibility itself,” et passim.

59  Cf., above, n. 34.

In this respect the binary understanding of human sexuality would collapse (were it possible) the distinction between humans as essential persons and animals as material persons (cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, Appendix 2, “Categories and Relations of Persons”).  With respect to animals it is indeed the case that qua material persons their wholeness (1) as persons is ontologically dependent upon their real sexual relationship to others of their species not of their sex, that is, is not ontologically independent of their actualizing a reproductive role in the perpetuation of the species, which is what is concretely understood when it is said that the wholeness (1) of animals as persons is not essentially but materially theirs.  Even so, the wholeness (1) of animals as material persons is not reducible to nor intelligible in terms of a binary sexual understanding (UU = U, 00 = 0) where actual sexual intercourse is never reproductive (see text, above, immediately following), but, rather, that wholeness (1) is intelligible precisely in terms of real trinary logic where the subordination of animal personhood to the reproductive perpetuation of the species in no way involves the ontological contradiction (contradictio in ente et ratio) which would preclude offspring themselves capable of reproduction.  This distinction between personal wholeness in relation to human sexuality and the personal wholeness of animals in relation to their sexuality may be summarily schematized as follows (the human case on the left, the animal on the right):

Cf., above, sections on Genealogical Epoché and Anthropological Epoché — ideal emulations.  Cf., also, below, Addendum III.  It is clear that human personal wholeness understood as ontologically dependent on sexual relations just so far merely apes the relation of animal personal wholeness to sexuality (cf., above, n. 60).  This misunderstanding of the actual relationship existing between the human male and female ontologically excludes reproduction, whereas, ironically, the actual animal sexuality of merely material persons—essentially never the actual experience of human persons—is open to an unlimited reproduction and perpetuation of the species.  Thus the (mis-)imagined human aping of the apes would on the contrary be lost in the mirroring sexuality of a shared but sterile narcissism, at once falling short both of a uniquely human personal integrity as well as of the magnificence and splendor of animal reproduction.  For an observation not unrelated to the matters here under consideration, cf. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (New York, 1947), I.98.1 ad 2, where with reference to human reproduction and the distinction of individual and species he writes “Although generation in the state of innocence might not have been required for the preservation of the species, yet it would have been required for the multiplication of the individual.”

63  Cf., above, n. 6.

This articulation of the ontological relationship is the truth that undergirds Paul’s statement (1 Corinthians 7:4): “The woman (ἡ γυνὴ) is not the head of (οὐκ ἐξουσιάζει) the body properly hers (τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος) but the man (ἀλλὰ ὁ ἀνήρ), likewise (ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ), the man (ὁ ἀνὴρ) is not the head of (οὐκ ἐξουσιάζει) the body properly his (τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος) but the woman (ἀλλὰ ἡ γυνή).”  Logically the headship as such is qua person not qua body:  → ( = 0) and 0000 → (000 = ) For the distinction between Grenze and Schranke, cf. Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, passim.

Cf., above, sections on Genealogical Epoché and Anthropological Epoché, and Addenda II and IV.

67  J. Kristeva, In the Beginning Was Love: Psychoanalysis and Faith (trans. A. Goldhammer, New York, 1987), p. 43. For the logical analysis into which Kristeva’s description of the impact of modern contraceptive technical advances is here interpolated, cf., above, Addenda I-III, et passim. For perversion, cf. S. Freud, Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (trans., ed. J. Strachey, New York, 2000), passim.

Adapted from Howard Hughes Medical Institute 2003. Online. Available at: http://www.hhmi.org/news/page_pix.html and http://www.hhmi.org/news/media/page/xyanimation_large.mov. January 2014. Cf. H. Skaletsky et al., “The male-specific region of the human Y chromosome is a mosaic of discrete sequence classes.”  Nature 423, 825-837 (19 June 2003).  Online. Available at: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v423/n6942/full/nature01722.html. January 2014.

Cf. the text, above, passim.  Cf., also, Leahy, Beyond Sovereignty, p. 88, and, on this web, Epitome or Food for Thought (includes further references).  For the psychoanalytic analogue to dyadic chromosomal recombination, cf. J. Kristeva, The Sense and Non-Sense of Revolt: The Powers and Limits of Psychoanalysis (New York, 2000), pp. 97ff., the female oedipal dyad.

70  Cf., above, n. 68: Skaletsky et al., “The male-specific region of the human Y chromosome is a mosaic of discrete sequence classes.”

71  Cf., above, n. 4.

Leahy, Foundation,, pp. 266ff., et passim.

73  Cf., above, n. 26, et passim.  For the exceptions to the rules for simple embodiment operating in the final Resurrection, not formally changing, but ingredient to, the related complex embodiment outcomes, cf., above, nn. 29 and 35.