The science of Pure Mathematics, in its modern developments, may claim to be the most original creation of the human spirit. Another claimant for this position is music. (A.N. Whitehead, Science And The Modern World: Lowell Lectures, p 19, Macmillan, The Free Press, New York, 1925)

Hear this, all you peoples; give ear, all inhabitants of the world,
both low and high, rich and poor together.
My mouth shall speak wisdom; the meditation of my heart shall be understanding.
I will incline my ear to a proverb; I will solve my riddle to the music of the harp. (Psalm 49.1-4 NRSVA)

Before proceeding to examine in greater details the second of the three messianic miracles as concerning the doctrine of the logos, it will be best to say something about semiotic forms in general. This must apply to the previous introduction of the haptika, the discussion of the acoustika to be given here, and of course it will apply also in the case of ongoing discussion of the optika. It is this: the very nature of the things in question, which in a given sense, might be encapsulated in the term 'reality', is not as open as we might either desire or believe. Indeed these very two words, desiring and believing, suggest if anything, the complete opposite. The philosophical and religious grasp of reality is not as methodologically susceptible
as we might wish or believe it to be, as more tried and truer methods subservient to simpler, more available and more immediately achievable cognitive ends. It does not dance to our tune in this way. The failures of logical positivism and analytic philosophy in the twentieth century are a testament to this. How much for example, have we already learned about mind and time, the two central concerns of this study, using relaible scientific and mathematical methods, in an era, nothing if not deemable as 'scientific'? (See A History Of Time: Twentieth Century Time.) These are just those two concerns which dominate the landscape of philosophical and religious enquiry. The same realities, and they can hardly be said to lack immediate relevance to us in living on a daily basis, remain as unyielding as ever to our understanding. In spite of the outstanding achievements of mathematical and scientific methods, they remain enigmas among enigmas. The reality of time and the reality of consciousness, and their relatedness, as well as the reality of transcendence, by which I mean of course 'God', if they are not to remain incomprehensible, must make the fullest and most faithful use of what we take to be the foundational elements of language itself, given the delivery of the messianic miracle narratives. Language itself sits at the core of the problem.

Those foundations are of course  the three semiotic series depicted in the three messianic miracles. The use of such apparently arcane and poetic languages as the messianic miracles and other texts recommend us, namely, semiotic forms, must seem at first glaringly 'unscientific', and still worse, obfuscatory. Doubtless the hermeneutical analogy regarding the formal structure of the fourfold gospel vis-a-vis the temporal nature of the annual cycle will strike some as such. I can only repeat that what we are seeking is neither as void of either poetry or beauty as perhaps some schools of philosophy, which take their cue from scientific thought, would have us believe. They have brought disenchantment and more, in their wake. I have already alluded to the fact that the episteme occasioned by the Pneumatological categories, symbolic masculine and optic imagination are those of pure and applied mathematics respectively. In spite of the relative muteness of the philosophy of mathematics on the issue of its axiological identity, beauty, and its tendentious claims to shed light on logic, mathematics is resolutely motivated by aesthetic consciousness. Its utter reliance on the graphic forms of language alone, the hallmark of its universal character, ought to be enough to alert us to its innately axiological temperament. The concept of value so highly problematic for both disciplines, science and mathematics, is redolent of the reality of transcendence, particularly in the former case, as we shall contend. Thus the method of what we refer to as the theology of semiotic forms can never be superfluous to the needs of reasonable belief in the third millennium. They provide us with indispensable means not merely to the hermeneutic of the miracle narratives in question, as they are to the larger meaning of the gospel as a whole, but also to a Christian theology of language itself. The theology of acoustic semiotic forms in particular, which superficially may resemble certain aspects of mathematical method, will prove not  just vital, but indispensable to the most wide ranging purposes of the gospel of Mark, as these concern both psychology and social 'sciences'. I shall argue that Mark is first and foremost, a psychologist and an anthropologist, given the underlying rationale of his gospel, the perceptual form acoustic memory, and the conceptual form, space : time.

Another but by no means ancillary benefit of semiotic method must be the bridge it forms to the samsaric systems of belief; those of Jainism, Hinduism, and Buddhism in particular. These routinely employ meditative approaches to the nature of reality, alluded to in the term 'mandala', included as part of the title of this site. Their use of mantra, and yantra or mandala, fully accord with the theologies of semiotic forms. There is every justification for understanding and utilising the members of the acoustic series in ways that correspond to the concept of 'mantra'. The acoustika themselves might just as well be called a mantrayana, a mantra vehicle. If theoretical reason is to be complemented by practical reason, by 'skillful means' or upaya according to Buddhist praxes, then we can not forgo what the messianic miracle place at our disposal in any effort to gain greater understanding of the gospels, and an enlightenment of the kind ultimately envisaged in The Transfiguration. The interpretation of that very miracle story notably lends itself to establishing a rapport which is by nature mutual, with the traditions indicated here, as I have tried to show previously. These comments are issued as enjoining readiness to undertake that rapport.

First then, in my judgment, we must make a distinction and ask, What is that which always is and has no becoming; and what is that which is always becoming and never is? That which is apprehended by intelligence and reason is always in the same state; but that which is conceived by opinion with the help of sensation and without reason, is always in a process of becoming and perishing and never really is. Now everything that becomes or is created must of necessity be created by some cause, for without a cause nothing can be created. The work of the creator, whenever he looks to the unchangeable and fashions the form and nature of his work after an unchangeable pattern, must necessarily be made fair and perfect; but when he looks to the created only, and uses a created pattern, it is not fair or perfect. Was the heaven then or the world, whether called by this or by any other more appropriate name-assuming the name, I am asking a question which has to be asked at the beginning of an enquiry about anything-was the world, I say, always in existence and without beginning? or created, and had it a beginning? Created, I reply, being visible and tangible and having a body, and therefore sensible; and all sensible things are apprehended by opinion and sense and are in a process of creation and created. Now that which is created must, as we affirm, of necessity be created by a cause. But the father and maker of all this universe is past finding out; and even if we found him, to tell of him to all men would be impossible. (Plato, Timaeus, 27d-28c)

In spite of Plato's belief, several
hundred years before the gospels, that 'the father and maker of all this universe is past finding out', the gospels exhort us to believe otherwise. They aver that such matters are not to be consigned to the ineffable, forever beyond our ken, beyond all human telling. And that with their telling, is the disclosure of mind to itself, as intelligible just as is God. The hymn to the Word at the beginning of the gospel of John, tells us that the two are inseparable. The Word, mind, is itself God The Son. An equally valid translation of the Greek logov in this context, might be 'meaning'. Intelligibility and meaning of this kind, are affirmed again and again in the recapitulations of the two miracles of loaves, squaring with the semantic of all the narratives in question, beginning of course with Genesis 1.1-2.4a. Thus what those narratives commend are the semioses upon which language itself, as the means of understanding, is in the first instance dependent.  Moreover, they do so in a manner that is nothing less than comprehensive. Therefore the methodical utilisation of the three semiotic series, acoustic, haptic and optic, is no arcane extravagance, no mystery for its own sake, a concession to the human hunger for the recondite. That said, the subject itself is indeed actually profoundly mysterious in just that it does not exist on a par with all other forms of understanding, all other modes of discourse. The word 'word' is part of a metalanguage, in which respect, it is not different from the semiotic series themselves. This is never clearer than in the case that the acoustic semiotic series rather than mathematical analysis, best serves the discussion of both time and mind. In this way, semiotic forms speak, and sing, of God and for God. The acoustic series is the linguistic epiphany of Transcendence.

The panoptic view of scriptural, that is biblical, metaphysics, proposed here, depends in the first place on the isomorphism between the stories of beginning and end. The latter of course refers to the messianic series, the six miracles and The Eucharist which complement the archaeological creative fiat. But there is a further consideration here, The Apocalypse. As difficult of interpretation and as emotionally disturbing as this conspicuously self-avowed 'end' of the written tradition is, it is incumbent on us to consider it. It comports at once with the essential formal features of that particular text, The Feeding Of The Four Thousand, which itself has to do with vision and all that this entails. It entails of course colour, and we find a plethora of visual and colour terms and visual motifs in the work. It is also charged throughout with references to vision itself. We have stressed as much as possible that its own intertextual and intratextual nature, conspicuous in its adaptation of the visions of Ezekiel chapters 1 and 10, as well as much of the material in Daniel, these being the two foremost apocalyptic works of the Hebrew canon, render it seemingly plagiaristic. This of course fits with the authorial adoption by apocalyptists of an alter ego, bearing the authorial power equal to the demands of the message itself. The Apocalypse accepts without demur its own responsibility, its own claim to authority in just this respect. So strong indeed is the rapport between the analogous creation series and messianic series and The Apocalypse as a whole, that its most salient formal features, the series of four sevens, iterates the numerical details of the Pneumatological feeding miracle.
This is just one more of a raft of reasons warranting the identification of its eschatological programmes with those of the four gospels themselves. We have assumed that strategy, as a crux interpretum, as bold as it may seem. The alternative leaves this final work of the canon hopelessly divorced from the complex integration of scripture, and also leaves the latter itself without any actual resolution, as necessarily must be first inferred from the opening verses of Genesis.

The justification for viewing The Apocalypse as belonging to the necessarily scriptural canon of the New Testament, is its belonging to the theology of immanence which permeates, if it does not actually determine, the theological outlook of the New Testament as a whole. Both numerical ciphers, 4 and 7, avow as much. We have argued on the basis of a Christology of the Word, for the consistent and interrelated significance of specific sentient modalities operative within each of the three textual cycles, creation, gospel, and Apocalypse, conformably to the organic syntax  of the sentient modes acoustic-haptic-optic respectively. At the same time, we noted the shift from transcendence to immanence at equal and opposite ends of their co-ordination, peripheries which are adjoined and mediated by the pivotal function of the gospel, corresponding in some manner, to the pivotal function of haptic-somatic consciousness itself, consciousness which is specifically disposed equivocally with regard to the alterity of the same opposites, transcendence : immanence. Haptic-somatic consciousness, of which Luke is the great proponent, is equal in degree of immanence to optic-anthropic consciousness. Even if the latter remains unequivocally immanent in nature, there is an equivalence of degree between the two. The Christological focus of the gospels thus finds its equal in the Pneumatological accentuation of The Apocalypse; the one is as essential to the other, just as the gospel and the theology of creation are mutually requisite. Thus the reciprocity of orality and literacy, of the speaking and written word, have as their fulcrum the haptic-somatic organon.

This means of course, that the theology of semiotic forms can never dispense with the methodological use of hue, nor tones, just as it must also reckon with the feeling, that is, touched and touching, body, the soma both as object and subject. These will be used constantly in the following exposition. But we stipulate in advance of such praxis here, that their integration does not in any way depend on a mystical analogy between colour and sound, such as we find repeatedly in the history of western thought. The primary point of departure is the written tradition itself. Our brief is paramount: the texts themselves. It is not with any supposed correspondence between the abstracted contents of vision or of sound. The three textual centres studied here are the first and last points of reference in the theology of semiotic forms, not the visible hues of the spectrum nor the components of the western musical scales. This must be put plainly at the very outset, and we will recur to it wherever necessary. There is no intrinsic interest on the part of the theology of semiotic forms in the hues or the tones as entities in themselves. The categoreal entities which these semiotic forms represent and articulate are everything. In themselves, the phenomena of sentience are just that, phenomena. The departure of Christian metaphysics from any endeavour to establish some sort of meaningful correlation between the elemental and semiological contents of hearing and seeing independently of special revelation is absolute. It is immediately apparent in terms of the fact that the theology of semiotic forms accounts for the most fundamental formal aspect of the dodecaphonic series as the two whole tone scales. These articulate the analogously related categoreal entities outlined in the stories of Days and messianic miracles, as we are about to put. None of the non-Christian attempts deal at all, with the radical binary-hexadic structure of the dodecaphonic series. The theology of semiotic forms stems from the Christological messianic narratives which clearly enumerate the analogical relation between the conceptual and perceptual poles of consciousness, and these formulate structures which are both binary and hexadic in nature. None of the extant secular 'systems' of correspondence between the formal stuff of our visual and auditory experience even begins to address the fundamentally binary and sexpartite logic of the acoustic forms, and none is concerned with the phenomenon of tonality, with the diatonic and pentatonic structures. Moreover, none relates to a broader construal of the sense-percipient manifold and the subsequent experience of conceptual life. Hence none take seriously the internal logical coherence of the acoustic semiosis. Just as surely, none is poised to address the existence of language within a framework that is either philosophical or theological. (An introductory account of some of these systems is available at Rhythmic Light; a detailed account of Newton's forays is available at Colour Music: Music For Measure.) We must therefore emphatically enter the caveat disavowing any connection between the theology of semiotic forms put here, and such efforts to discuss on the presumptive basis of an analogy alone, the relation between acoustic and optic 'signs'.


The significant details in all four recensions of this miracle story are the same: five loaves and two fish feed five thousand persons, and twelve baskets of remaining fragments are taken up. Only Matthew refers to 'five thousand men, besides women and children' (Matthew 14.21). Only Mark includes the detail 'green grass' (Mark 6.39), although John refers to 'much grass' (John 6.10), and Matthew refers to 'the grass' (Matthew 14.19). Only Luke situates the miracle at Bethsaida (Luke 9.10b). Only John describes its location as having been 'the other side of the sea of Galilee, which is the Sea of Tiberias' (John 6.1), and only he specifies that the loaves were made from barley (John 6.9, 13). But these are inconsequential details, except for Matthew's observation of the persons present, as inclusive of women and children, since it confirms the sense-percipient (perceptual) cognitive mode, knowing, as feminine rather than masculine. Typologically all immanent miracles, whether messianic or healing, correspond to the symbolic feminine. Thus they portend unity over and against identity. This is a gain for Christian epistemology, especially in the era of post-feminist studies, and we need to consider it in some detail.

The fundamental postulate which frames this feeding miracle contextually and consistently with the other two of its kind, is that its prime reference is to acoustic sense-perception. If the miracle at Cana denotes touch, and the Feeding Of The Four Thousand denotes seeing, this miracle in particular denotes hearing. These three events must be taken as an entirety. They formulate an all-encompassing Trinitarian theology, reiterating the doctrine of the imago Dei a propos of the perceptual polarity of consciousness. Within the manifold of sense-percipience, hearing manifests Transcendence, 'God The Father' of classical Christian theology.  This is a fourfold manifold, and the single Eucharistic mode, combining as it does the two so-called chemical senses of smell and taste, confirms the immanent status of sense-perception, but without altering the essentially triadic disposition of the phenomenal modes. No semiotic significance attaches to the osmic/gustic modes of sense-percipience; no series of figures on a par with what we find in the three immanent messianic miracles, is included in any recension of The Last Supper.  Although there is an implicit reference of sorts to something of the kind, by means of the introduction to the pericope The Leaven Of The Pharisees And Of Herod, subsequently to The Feeding Of The Four Thousand and The Demand For A Sign (Mark 8.1-10, 11-13): 'Now they had forgotten to bring bread; and they had only one loaf with them in the boat.' (Mark 8.14). Moreover, that event, The Eucharist, is not considered to be miraculous in the same way that the three Eucharistic messianic miracles are. But the acoustic semiotic series perhaps better than any other, relies upon the Sabbath : Eucharist analogy for the exposition of the doctrine of intentionality. This illuminates the course for the eschatological strand of that doctrine. So that we shall in the discussion of the semeiacoustika incorporate the seventh event(s) into the hermeneutic in progress.

We have already encountered two of the main numerical ciphers of the story, the five which numbers the loaves, and the two which tallies the fish, in the creation story, as the complementary rubrics Day 2 and Day 5, announcing the two conceptual forms, space and space : time respectively. The Day 5 story mentions birds and fish, and sits within that half of the narrative in which consumption and reproduction of living creatures are linked, as they will be in the J creation story. The provenance of these entities, space and space : time, as the both words for 'heaven(s)' in that text suggest, is God, The Transcendent. (Matthew will use the terms 'kingdom of heaven' and 'kingdom of God' interchangeably.) So too space itself is transcendent, a postulate announced in the Day 2 rubric. Such transcendent  space is void of passage as of time. Nevertheless it persists, as announced in the Day 5 rubric, conjunctively with time. It is this entity, the form of unity space : time, and moreover, its agency as a conceptual component of consciousness, which will be vital to the meaning of the miracle story. It is the conceptual counterpart to the perceptual form acoustic memory. The two narratives, Day 5 and The Feeding Of The Five Thousand are mutually inclusive, and their hermeneutic remains essential to the meaning of the gospel of Mark.

The interdependence of the three messianic miracle stories is complete. They end not just the doctrine of the imago Dei, complementarily to that begun in the creation narrative; they establish the basis of a theory of language, which is the theology of semiotic forms. We must recall this here in order to appreciate the coherence and consistency of the narratives. None of them is independent of the others. Their intertextual co-ordination moreover recapitulates the syntax of those three narratives cycles with which we are most occupied in these studies, Genesis 1.1-2.4a, the messianic series, and in its entirety, The Apocalypse; none of which may be understood on its own terms. Their syntax is immediately intelligible in the three figures which dominate each of the narratives in turn, as the arithmetical progression: 5, 6 and 7. In the two miracles of loaves and fish it is repeated: five loaves for five thousand persons, and seven loaves whose consumption results in seven baskets full of fragments. Other figures are included in both narratives, but these are prominent in virtue of their repetition. In the Christological story we hear only once of the number of stone jars, six. Here however the miracle is an event of transformation, so that the quantities are the same, six jars of water produce six jars of wine, effectively resulting in the same pattern of a repeated figure. A reference is given in the introduction to the Pneumatological miracle of loaves and fish, The Feeding Of The Four Thousand, alluding to the Day 6 rubric in virtue of its link with that of Day 3, similarly to that of the Transcendental miracle which preceded it. This is secondary however, for the latter event will resonate with The Apocalypse in a thoroughgoing way. The temporal reference also connects the second of the two similar feeding miracles with the remaining messianic miracle, whose introduction refers to 'six days':
"I have compassion on the crowd, because they have been with me now three days, and have nothing to eat;" (Mark 8.2)
If the symbols 5 and 2 revert to the creation narrative, those of 7 and 4 are proleptic, for we find them not just twice, but as the leitmotif rhythmically resonant throughout The Apocalypse in its entirety. The central and pivotal element of the same purposive co-ordination of these three repeated figures, 5, 6 and 7, referentially to The Transcendent, The Son and The Holy Spirit respectively, is Mark's logically consistent tally of healing miracles, twelve. These clearly recapitulate the twelve categoreal entities articulated in the creation story and messianic series, whose reciprocal integration we have already detailed.

All of which can only mean that in treating the logical structures announced in the three miracle narratives, we must be constantly mindful of their co-ordination. This is certainly so in the case of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, where it is impossible not to deal with either the Christological and hexadic pattern, and just as impossible to ignore the heptadic structures which identify The Holy Spirit and immanence generally.
Since it is the fulcrum of the systematic co-ordination of the three structures, we shall begin with the Christological reference in the text, the figure twelve.

Twelve is the total number of categoreal forms, as stated by the number of baskets containing remaining fragments in the feeding miracle. It can also do double duty as a reference to 'the twelve'.
The figure twelve is commonplace in biblical literature, and is used repeatedly to number the tribes of Israel. Correspondingly, the synoptic gospels refer to the twelve disciples, Mark in fact often using 'the twelve' with just this meaning. John does not enumerate Jesus' disciples in the same way; although if we include Mary the mother of Jesus, who is mentioned by name like four of the other five figures in the narrative, The First Disciples (John 1.35-51), the tally amounts to six, the figure deployed noticeably in the ensuing miracle story. We have noted that individual disciples are on different occasions, associated with particular messianic miracles, the first miracle story functioning as a chreia for Nathanael. This ensures the cross-referential significance of the figure, emphasising the importance of the narratives of 'beginning' and 'end' in terms of their hexadic and analogical patterns. It also affirms the twelvefold series of healing miracles in Mark as a confirmation of the categoreal schema, an invaluable source for further discussion of the nature of these same conceptual and perceptual radicals of consciousness.

The pivotal figure twelve is thus a good point of entry into the hermeneutic of the miracle narrative. It articulates at a single stroke the dodecaphonic series, the series of twelve tones which comprises the western system of musical expression. These twelve tones, acoustika by any other name, announce the twelve categories outlined in the story of the six days of creation proper, and their analogues, the six messianic miracles. They have also already been outlined in the first messianic miracle, a point to which we have just referred. That same narrative is important because it sorts the two groups for us at their first level distinction. It repeats the radical alterity between the six conceptual forms and six perceptual forms, using the metaphor of transformation of one into the other element, water into wine. That these stand not only in a general pattern of relatedness to one another, but more importantly in the isomorphic pattern of one-to-one correspondence between their individual components, is affirmed by this narrative, as well as by other features of other texts with which we have already dealt.

The great value of the acoustic semiosis is not merely its totality as referent to the number of components of consciousness defined in the narratives of beginning and end, but its serial ordering of the two species, conceptual and perceptual, and the clarity with which it puts the great variety of relations obtaining between these. Thus the reason for beginning with the last figure mentioned in the miracle narrative, twelve, is that it confronts us with the serial ordering of both the six conceptual forms and the six perceptual forms. If these radical components of consciousness as elaborated in the stories of beginning and end, are twelve in number, in using the term 'components', we must be cautious of any tendency to reify these entities as self-existently real in just the sense that they are independent of each other. All semiotic forms as themselves belonging to the perceptual polarity of consciousness, are imbued in varying measures with the principle of immanence, that is, unity, one of the paramount metaphors for which is the process of assimilation. To this end, we find the immanent messianic miracles all employ the metaphorical language of eating or drinking in expounding the theology of sense-percipience. At the centre of the three narratives, is placed the Eucharist itself, denoting the actuality of the Eucharistic modes, smell and taste. The optic semiotic forms are the most exemplary in just this respect, and the acoustika the least. That is, the optic semeia more thoroughly than any other semiotic series, manifest the principle of unity; whereas the acoustic semeia are disposed in virtue of the antithetical principle, identity, the hallmark of transcendence.

The two 'antithetical' semiotic forms, acoustic and optic, act in equilibrium, consonantly with the paradigm, transcendence : immanence. The acoustika in particular offer us the opportunity to establish an analytical  method, one which most readily imitates the mathematical treatment of the entities under scrutiny. That said however, acoustic semiosis is methodologically superior to mathematics, not only in just the sense that it is more than merely abstractive, but also in that it offers resources for praxis unequaled in both degree and kind by any alternative religious or philosophical tradition. Thus the theology of acoustic semiotic forms survives the test of pragmatics. Its methodology is one which will justify any use of terms such as 'components', and any treatments which broadly speaking, may be described as analytical, but without the absence of due philosophical deference
to the dialectic between identity and unity of mathematics, precisely because tones are determined relatively to one another. If we are to address realities as evasive of conventional wisdom as both mind and time, it must be by some means other than mathematical methods. These means are provided by the theology of semiotic forms.

The acoustika of course do not simply exist outside of human intervention. But so as to not overstate the case, we say intervention rather than simply invention. The division of the musical scale has been as much the work of humankind, as of nature itself. In this respect, the acoustika are similar, if not the same as the optika. For the latter too exist 'naturally'. Hues occur within nature. But their discernment, their appellation and enumeration, are the work of humankind. The fundamental musical scales which are the cultural legacy of the western world assume a variety of forms. However those which concern us most, are the diatonic and pentatonic scales. Here, I mean by 'western', the musical cultures of those worlds which have come decisively under the influence of Judaeo-Christian  traditions. Those predominant forms which these scales assume are immediately recognisable in both stories of miracles of loaves, as the repeated ciphers, five and seven. Both diatonic scales, the major and minor, are the pre-eminent 'western' acoustic scales. They manifest the same basic formal feature: they are sevenfold. Both major and minor scales, the diatonic ('two tonal') scales, comprise seven identifiable tones. If we assign the fivefold structure to the acoustika, and sevenfold structure to the optika, it is due to the oppositional rapport which relates the two semioses, acoustic and optic, which is reflective of beginning and end. But we have not made this alignment exclusively, nor can we lose sight of the fact that its formulation, like those of all the Christological titles, incorporates two peripheral terms,  by means of the copula, their most salient feature. The optic semiotic series and the acoustic semiotic series both subscribe to the focal and central value of the haptic. They are both intelligible in terms of the two sixfold series which co-ordinate the two narrative cycles, creation and salvation. Thus the hexad best serves the necessary co-ordination of both acoustic and semiotic series. We can see this immediately and plainly as in the following introduction to the acoustic semiotic forms:


There is a great deal of information with which to contend in the theology of acoustic semiotic forms, as this semiosis carries the main burden of doctrinal proposition. This fits with the postulate that acoustic memory furnishes us with the sovereign occasion of the intentional mode, knowing. Notwithstanding the difficulty of ordering the bulk of material, an obvious point of entry is the description of the two whole tone series. These can be readily outlined, and from there we may proceed to the discussion of the six perceptual radicals as occasions of instances of this same mode of intentionality, knowing; to some of the most important relations between the two sets of components; and to the hermeneutic of the miracle story germane to Mark.  


Using a piano keyboard, I have illustrated those very two series, the two whole tone series of semeiacoustika, which articulate the two distinct taxonomies of Genesis and the gospel: the six conceptual and six  perceptual components of consciousness respectively. This is for the benefit of anyone who is not conversant with musical notation. I have used musical notation as well. The above illustrations show just what we mean by a 'scale': a series, a serial form of order, such as are both the series of just six Days of creation, and the series of six corresponding messianic miracles. The musical notation used above may vary. For example the first note has been notated as a C flat, when it might also have been written as a B natural. But the accidentals, flats and sharps, have been chosen, as have the Arabic numerals, in order to emphasise the one-to-one correspondences between the two elementary taxa, the two first order classes of components.

One point to emphasise here at the outset, is the arbitrary choice of the example, which takes the two whole tone series beginning with Cb (C flat) and C natural. This initial tone determines the relation of the succeeding intervals to itself, which is of importance in the diatonic (sevenfold major and minor) scales. The above choice is made on the basis that middle C, C natural in the example, is roughly the centre of the keyboard compass. The relational character of acoustika renders them more than adequate to posit the full gamut of relations obtaining between the categories. So that if Cb is taken as the tonic in the scale C major, D will be the second, E the third, F the fourth and so on. But this does not irrevocably apply. We may speak of these as accidental rather than essential qualities. Thirdness of degree does not belong exclusively to E for example, nor to Eb. (This is one of the more worthwhile observations made by Schopenhauer in volume II, chapter 29, On The Metaphysics Of Music, of The World As Will And Representation.) The innately relational quality of acoustika is complemented by the assignation of the optika to specific radicals. In other words, just as there is no reason to assign a particular tone to a particular category, the obverse is true of optic signification. So whereas the two Transcendental radicals, the conceptual form space : time, and its perceptual equivalent acoustic memory, are represented by the same chromatic value, green, and this functions within all three temporal cycles, the solar cycle, the lunar cycle and the diurnal/nocturnal cycle, while these categories are pronounced by the tones F and F# respectively, the latter may function in any of the twelve loci indicatively of a specific intentional mode. There are as noted, twelve canonical modes of intentionality; six of the conceptual kind and six of the perceptual kind. These are put as above in the two whole tone series respectively. Thus F# is the acoustikon for acoustic memory itself, whose aboriginal mode of intentionality is knowing. That is to say the instance of knowing produced by the perceptual radical acoustic memory is canonical. Acoustic memory acts definitively for knowing, just as haptic memory does for desire. The particular form of knowing for which acoustic memory is responsible, remains sovereign over all varieties of the mode, knowing. It is paradigmatic, or as we say canonical. But this same perceptual radical functions in other intentional modes. So for example, it occasions a form of desire.

A first point vital to the theology of the acoustic semiosis concerning the first-level division of the categories, is that there is no effective 'tonality' operative in either whole tone scale. The diatonic scales, which establish tonality, include seven, and not six, members. But the dodecaphonic series, or the acoustika, are not immediately intelligible in terms of two heptadic series, even though we find seven events in the creation series, and the messianic series. Two sevenfold series would amount to a tally of fourteen and not twelve. Such a tally is not immediately manifest in the divisions of the octave, nor in any of the messianic miracle stories, whereas the number twelve is. In other words, the octave is divided into twelve and not fourteen distinct members. Or what is the same, a whole tone scale is not intelligible in terms of a diatonic scale, nor in terms of two of the same. The first of any step in the exposition of the acoustic semiotic forms, must except the seventh episodes, Sabbath and Eucharist both, as singular. Just as the Sabbath is not a day of creation, but 'the' day of rest, so too, the Eucharist is not a miracle, but the actual ritual meal commemorating the Last Supper. Each of these two events certainly does belong to its proper series, but no account of this belonging, nor indeed of the essential relation between their one-to-one correspondence congruently with that of the one-to-one correspondence of the six conceptual and six perceptual radicals, can be given without first attending to the latter. Both semioses, the acoustic and the haptic, confirm this point: both manifest the Christological hexad, explicitly referred to in both Christological miracle stories, and this same sixfold structure, is central to our project as the theology of the logos, the Word, and the Christian theory of language itself.

The image, and the notation above, illustrate the two whole tone scales alike, and as stated, neither in itself expresses any immediate relation to the sevenfold scales. So that it is not immediately apparent how we should utilise these two hexadic Christological series, one of the most rudimentary structural features of the acoustic semiosis, a propos of either text which concerns us, the story of the seven Days or that of the seven messianic events. Nor is it all apparent how the acoustic semiosis should inform the doctrine of intentionality which these same texts themselves propose. Whole tone scales each consist of just six members; and only two whole tone scales are possible, given the fact that the series in its entirety, is dodecaphonic. Given that the octave is divided and consists of twelve discrete semeia, or twelve 'fragments', the first essential aspect of the dodecaphonic series is the existence of these two whole-tone scales, which are ordered according to the same logical principle: the equal interval between succeeding memers of the scale.. The western musical scales are founded on this twelvefold division of the octave. (I will, at a later point in the hermeneutic of the narratives, account for the divergence between 'western' and non-western musical cultures, in terms of the two stories of miraculous feedings with loaves and fish. Among other things, these narratives also propose the fundamental divergence between linguistic cultures describable as 'western', with its obvious implication 'Judaeo-Christian', and non-western language systems. This belongs to the hermeneutic regarding the divergence between cultures based on linguistic orality and those founded on linguistic visuality, an points in turn to a fundamental axiological disparity. It establishes the basis for a theology of religions, to be taken up in The Apocalypse.) The dodecaphonic scale is an indubitable legacy of Christian culture, and due to the close ties between art and religion, the Christian church has been responsible for its dissemination in the 'west'. The photograph of the piano keyboard shows each of the two whole tone scales by means of the numbers one to six; the first series being in red, the second in black.

Both whole tone series respect an axiomatic logical necessity. They each maintain the same interval, a whole tone, and not a semi-tone, between their components. A semitone is the smallest interval used in the division of the octave. It relates each member of the series to its immediately 'contiguous' neighbour. We virtually hear this 'tactile proximity' constantly in musical expression which engages the interval of a semitone, but never in musical expression which utilises the whole tone scale(s), nor in that of the pentatonic scales. The division of the octave into its two whole tone scales uses a whole tone, equal to two semitones, as the smallest dividing interval. This procedure determines the logical legitimacy of the analogy on which all further postulates rest. A serial form of order must be internally coherent, and this coherence is measured as the interval between each constituent member. It cannot vary, as one Day to the next of the six in the creation story cannot vary. The two whole tone scales consisting both of six members, juxtapose the six conceptual and six perceptual entities of Markan metaphysics. They evince acoustically the isomorphic and analogous relationships between the things denoted in the narrative cycles of  'beginning and end', the story of creation and the messianic series. Thus the existence of two serial forms of order in the acoustic semiosis, the two sixfold whole tone scales, conforms to the hexadic morphology of both narrative cycles, creation and salvation, in virtue of which their components are related analogously to each other, in a comprehensive one-to-one  correspondence. This morphology is innately Christological.

The diatonic scales on the other hand, the sevenfold major and sevenfold minor scales, comprise both intervals, the whole tone and the semi-tone, as the measure between contiguous members. But in both instances of the only two whole tone scales comprising the basic unit of musical expression, the octave, the interval between successive notes is everywhere the same interval, that of a whole tone, confirming the logical notion of a category. Moreover, the entities collected in each narrative cycle, the six 'beginning' entities, and the corresponding six 'end' entities, establish their own various relations with each other. Their primary formal feature is enunciated in the categoreal differentiation between transcendence and immanence. The distinction between which remains, even though their disparity is ostensibly blurred by the recapitulation of the very same categoreal paradigm, transcendence : immanence, within each  of the first-level differentiated categories themselves. Thus there exist what we have called radicals of virtual immanence and those of virtual transcendence within the series of (actual) transcendent entities and (actual) immanent entities respectively. This is a second level distinction. It means that there is an end of sorts within the beginning, and a beginning of sorts within the end. But we discover this structure only when the two polarities are brought into immediate and total analogical reference to one another. It entails therefore, the final emergence of two structural paradigms, which necessitate one another: the fivefold serial form of order which is the pentatonic scale, referred to in the first miracle of loaves, and the sevenfold diatonic scale(s) referred to in the last. But we shall first note some of the logical outcomes of the two sixfold series inherent in the acoustic semiotic series, before examining those two forms in detail.

The two whole tone series are the acoustic semiological articulation of the six conceptual forms and six perceptual forms. Clarity, is the reason for introducing the semeiacoustika in such Christological - hexadic - terms. The two series differ from each other according to the first level distinction between transcendence and immanence. The series numbered in red, and the first six notated tones, are acoustic signifiers of the conceptual components; the series numbered in black and the second series of notated tones are acoustic signifiers of the perceptual components. Within each of these series, however, a further division, the second level distinction to which we have just referred, according to the same categoreal paradigm, occurs. So the first three members and final three members of each sixfold series must denote that second level distinction. The former in the above illustration are marked by the Arabic numerals, the notes marked 1, 2, 3 in red, and notated by means of flats, Cb, Db and Eb, are the semeiacoustika identifying the pure conceptual forms, or forms of actual transcendence. These remain unaffected by the recurrence of the second categoreal division. Their status as transcendent is thus emphasised, and they are established as the normative elements of the conceptual polarity. Those marked 4, 5 6 in red, and notated without accidentals (flats or sharps), F (natural), G (natural) and A (natural), are the semeiacoustika denoting the forms of unity. These are forms of virtual immanence.

The second series of numbers in black, identifies the six semeiacoustika signifying the perceptual radicals, consisting of the three forms of memory, marked by the numerals 4, 5, 6 in black, and notated by means of sharps, F#, G# and A#, and the three corresponding forms of imagination, marked by the numerals 1, 2, 3 in black, and notated without using accidentals, F (natural), G (natural) and A (natural). Forms of memory are normative, and therefore actually immanent; forms of imagination are virtually transcendent, since they are non-normative, and aconsious. Thus the two normative triads are expressly notated with the use of accidentals: flats (b) for the actual transcendent categories, and sharps (#) for the actual immanent categories. They sit at furthest remove from one another in this presentation, representatively of the disparity between transcendence and immanence. They occupy the lowermost and uppermost reaches of the dodecaphonic series. They are mediated by the six acoustic semeia denoting non-normative categories. This fact of polarisation is logically pertinent. There is an extreme degree of divergence between the two normative triads, three pure (actual) conceptual forms, and three (actual) forms of memory. They stand at furthest remove from one another, as defined here, in terms of the dodecadic structures of the acoustic mandala, in accordance with the categoreal paradigm and the Christological titles. But in another instance of the dodecaphonic series, they might be arranged completely otherwise.

This ordering follows the temporal references contained in the messianic miracle narratives, but not their sequence, and applies analogously to the creation series. It is fully observant of the dyadic relationships between individual conceptual and perceptual radicals. In other words, it elaborates the one-to-one correspondences between the members of the two polarities. So for example, in the case of the gospel of Mark, whose theological perspectives are governed by the intentional mode will-to-believe, arising from the conceptual form space : time, and the intentional mode knowing, arising from the perceptual form acoustic memory, these are both marked by the same numeral, four, and notated in terms of the same name for the tone, F.

We have chosen to illustrate the whole tone and other scales, using the octave C flat to C flat. The cyclical nature of the acoustika mean that such a choice is quite arbitrary, somewhat similar to the arbitrariness of a spoken word as a signifier. We shall further comment on this cyclical aspect of the semeiacoustika, it is one obvious characteristic distinguishing them from the optic semeia. The visible spectrum begins at one end, the red, and terminates at the other, the blue, with the colour indigo. But in treating the acoustic semiotic series, we might just as legitimately begin at A# as C flat, or any other tone. The same relational features occur within each octave; that is, the same structural patterns which disclose the variety of relations obtaining between the twelve constituents are manifest within each twelvefold compass.  Had we in fact taken that option, it would have been notated relative to the succeeding sign, so as to represent the dyadic relationship between the conceptual form space, and the perceptual form acoustic imagination. In that event, the A# would have been referred to as B flat, and the succeeding note as B (natural). The innate relativity of the semiacoustika is a topic which will further occupy us. The justification for our actual choice, as noted is the fact that 'middle' C on the keyboard is often taken as a point of reference. It is very easy to locate, and hence an ideal tone to mark the particular acoustic semeion relative to that which designates its normative correlative, C flat. We have assigned the latter to the conceptual category, space, the univocally transcendental category. That is to say, space is commensurate with beginning according to the creation taxonomy.

Each of the two notated whole tone series contains three members distinguished by either sharps or flats. They designate the normative members of their series. These have been notated using accidentals, either flats or sharps, so as to highlight the three normative members of each polarity. In the case of transcendence, Cb, Db and Eb, stand in relation to C (natural), D (natural) and E (natural), as denoting the one-to-one correspondence between the three pure conceptual forms - space (Cb), symbolic masculine (Db) and mind (Eb) relative to the three forms of imagination - acoustic imagination (C), optic imagination (D), and haptic imagination (E). In the second whole tone series, the same correspondence between the three normative categories and the three non-normative categories of immanence, is also signified by the one-to-one correspondences of F# (acoustic memory) to F (space : time), G# (optic memory) to G (symbolic feminine), and A# (haptic memory) to A (mind : body). It should be emphasised that such notation does not conform to conventional musical notation, which depends upon the sevenfold scale, not sixfold whole -tone scales.
(The notation used here and in the following exposition, emphasizes  the co-ordinating morphological value of the Christological hexad relevantly to both semiotic series, the acoustic and optic. The same applies to the use of six rather than seven semeioptika.) So for example the sevenfold major scale which employ the first three tones beginning with flats, namely B major,  (here 'Cb') would be notated exclusively in terms of sharps: C# (here Db)-D# (here Eb)- E natural (as here)- F# (as here)-G# (as here)-A# (as here)-b natural (here cb); whereas the major sevenfold scale whose first three tones are F#-G#-A##, namely F# major, would be conventionally notated using all sharps: F#-G#-A#-B natural (here Cb)-C# (here Db)-D# (here Eb)-E# (here F natural-f#. We shall necessarily address such sevenfold series, but it is vital to emphasise the fourfold division of the semeia according to the morphological scheme of the Days and messianic miracles, and this is irreducibly Christological, that is to say, hexadic, as is given in the two Christological miracle narratives themselves. In other worlds, this notation highlights the normative conceptual categories, as denoted by flats (b) and their non-normative (aconscious) analogues by the equivalent naturals; and conversely uses sharps (#) for the three forms of actual immanence, while the analogues in each case are signified by the equivalent naturals. Thus all of the conscious, normative radicals are designated by accidentals (either flats or sharps), and all of the aconscious, non-normative categories by naturals. In just this way the first-level or normative polarisation of the categories is plainly visible, conformably to the congruent use of semeioptika.

That said however, we should not be confused by confining the reading of the acoustika purely in terms of the ascending order of the scale. The important fact concerning cyclicity which the acoustika rather than the opitka disclose, is the symmetry of direction. There is directedness towards the future, which is definitively exposed by the pure conceptual forms (actual transcendence), and their analogous forms of imagination (virtual transcendence); and directedness towards the past, given by the forms of memory (actual immanence) and their analogous forms of unity (virtual immanence). The space-time continuum is conventionally understood more or less always as the unremittingly unidirectional flow from past to present to future. But taken in their entirety, the six conceptual and six perceptual radicals do not propose an asymmetrical and unidirectional spectrum. Its polarisation consists equally and symmetrically, relatively to the future and the past both. This is put in the circle of fourths/fifths. The conventional musical scale, even though it always consists of descending as well as ascending orders, is usually understand exclusively vis-a-vis the latter, but the cyclical and polar aspects of the semeiacoutiska however resolutely militate against this. At one end, that of the descending scale, the tendency moves towards increasing futures of the proximal, medial and distal; while at the other the same progression from proximal to medial to distal is disclosed, only in terms of the future. The pure conceptual form space, here signified by the acoustikon Cb circumscribes the extreme future at the furthest, descending pole of the scale because its conative mode of intentionality, will proper rather than will-to-believe, is canonical; whereas the pure perceptual form haptic memory, here signified by the acoustikon A# circumscribes the extreme past at the antithetical ascending pole, because it remains the canonical instance of the opposing conative intentionality, desire proper, not the desire-to-know. The given arrangement of the conscious radicals of mind thus defers to the conative, convergent towards a 'sabbatical'/Eucharistic present in which faith and knowing are representative of the proximal future and proximal past respectively. (The use of the word 'sabbatical' here anticipates a sacramental theology of baptism, more of which we shall later address.) The conscious faith of mind and the conscious knowing of acoustic prescribe the near or proximal future and proximal past respectively. Will and desire whose canonical instances are occasioned by the conceptual radical space and the perceptual radical haptic memory respectively, extend the furthest limits of the compass in both directions, future and past, symmetrically.

Were we to organise the aconscious spectrum likewise, the order manifest would likewise insist on the divergent poles disclosed in terms of the perceptual radical acoustic imagination, responsible for the canonical instantiation of knowledge-of-will at the distal future, and the extremest descending end of the dodecaphonic scale: while the conceptual radical
soma, responsible for the canonical instantiation of belief-in-desire, would terminate the ascending pole. It is important to note that this inverts the conscious deference to conative intentionality, which it balances with equal regard for the cognitive. But these facts need not concern us here. We need only to give an account of the reasons for the musical notation as consonant with the deliveries of the P creation and messianic miracle narratives.

The sequences of these two sixfold whole tone series, which we are about to discuss, are to be distinguished from the categoreal paradigm, as well as from the ordering of the conceptual categories in the creation story. The above sequences conform to neither of these. The sequences of the three members comprising each of the four taxa using the template of the annual cycle, do not follow their identification in virtue of the categoreal paradigm, transcendence : immanence. We have already illustrated this in the various mandala which order the sequences of the three radicals of each of the four taxa in the same way: Transcendental-Pneumatological-Christological. This is the serial ordering of the messianic events beginning with the central transcendental event(s) of the chiasmos, and reading the contraposed episodes in tandem. This order confirms the temporal pattern of the events within the twenty-four hour cycle. The same sequence determines the two halves defined as
normative or conscious, and non-normative or aconscious; and applies equally to the two polarities, perceptual and conceptual.

According to the seriality of the two whole tone scales, the pure conceptual forms are thus semiologically arranged in the following ascending sequence: space ... symbolic masculine ... mind, (Cb ... Db ... Eb ; 1 ... 2 ... 3 ; shown in red).
The forms of imagination are semiologically arranged in the following descending sequence: haptic ... optic ... acoustic, ( E ... D ... C ; numbered as 3 ... 2 ... 1 in black). The forms of memory are semiologically arranged in the following descending sequence: haptic ... optic ... acoustic, (A# ... G# ... F# ; 6 ... 5 ... 4 ; in black). The forms of unity are semiologically arranged in the following ascending sequence: space : time ... male : female ... mind : body, (F ... G ... A ; 4 ... 5 ... 6 in red). The four taxa of acoustika are notated and arranged above so as to highlight the one-to-one correspondences between the conceptual and perceptual members of the same dyad. This means that the sequence of the semeia in the second half of the first set, and that of the first half of the second set, are shown ascending, and not descending, reading from left to right. This has been done for the sake of simplicity, emphasising the structural and dyadic relationships between the normative conceptual forms and non-normative forms of imagination in the first line, and that between the normative forms of memory and non-normative forms of unity in the second line. This exposition observes the logical structuring of the dodecadic series. It does not pertain to the 5-7 patterns  of the pentatonic vis-a-vis the diatonic forms. It sets out the taxonomic division of the categories according to their alignment analogously to the template of the annual cycle.

Thus the four taxonomic sequences do not follow the serial order of the Days. That would result in the sequence: mind - space - symbolic masculine, (Day 1 - Day 2 - Day 3); neither do they appear initially to follow the serial order of the messianic miracles, the first three of which are given in the sequence: haptic memory - optic imagination - acoustic memory, (Transformation Water Into Wine - Stilling The Storm - Feeding Five Thousand). The messianic miracle stories do contain certain references to the logical structure of both polarities, conceptual and perceptual, in their references to time, incomplete as these may be. However, the complete pattern can easily be extrapolated from these incomplete references due to the chiasmos.
We again cite the second scriptural warrant for this sequence to be discussed in relation to the acoustic semiotic forms, Transcendental-Pneumatological-Christological. It is clearly articulated as already noted, in both the chiasmos which shapes the messianic miracle series, and chapter 21 of the gospel of John which clearly refers to the same sequential order by means of the numeral 153. This we have taken to refer to the three immanent messianic miracles, as these are serially first, third and fifth. Here then are the criteria which determine the temporal values of the two categories as entireties, as serial wholes. The chiasmos is read beginning with the two central transcendental episodes at its centre:

The chiasmos of the messianic miracle series presents a vast amount of information at a single stroke. If we regard the two sub-species of events, the three feeding miracles and three miracles of 'virtual transcendence', which are those listed on the two sides of the above diagram, left and right respectively, we find the order Transcendental-Pneumatological-Christological, reading from the centre of the chiasmos, outwards; that is, beginning by reading the paired ('beginning'), Transcendental miracles, The Feeding Of The Five Thousand and The Walking On The Water. The use of this model demands the comprehensive grasp of all the entities involved. That means of course not just the six perceptual radicals of consciousness which these miracle stories denote, but their analogues, the six Days. Thus it entails the integration of the two series, pursuant to their isomorphism. For which reason we have ordered the seriality of the pure conceptual forms and also that of the forms of unity according to the logical structure of their analogues in the messianic series. We have nevertheless distinguished the two poles of the first-level distinction, conceptual and perceptual, transcendence : immanence, by means of the two directions, ascending and descending, already innate to the scales. This is congruent with the presentation of semeioptika in the mandala, representatively of the temporal flux in each of the four quarters of the annual cycle. The encompassing ambit of the chiasmos is glimpsed in the figure twelve, contained in The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, which plainly refers to the total number of categoreal forms and their canonical instantiation of modes of intentionality, as do the two Christological miracles taken together, since both contain the figure 'six', a tally repeated in the sum total of Markan healing miracles, twelve. What such a logical form does suggest is contrast, and levels of contrast referentially to mundane time, earthly time, and not simply space : time as a conceptual form.

The 'now' of the permanent present, which is always in flux, is depicted in the Eucharist, the fourth of the immanent messianic events. Its analogue, Sabbath, we have previously noted, will also concern the transient hic et nunc. The two centering supports of the chiasmos, the two Transcendental miracles, The Feeding Of The Five Thousand and The Walking On The Water, the one occurring just after the other, are juxtaposed with the first and last events, the likewise paired Christological miracles, lying at the outermost reaches of the series. Within the same pattern, the two Pneumatological miracles are located as medial. This yields the progression Transcendental-Pneumatological-Christological. But in order to best understand the meaning of the sequences, and their import for temporality as well as for the doctrine of mind, we must not lose sight of the normative status of the pure conceptual forms, in lieu of which, the miracles of 'virtual transcendence' seem to stand. This
fact is clearly presented in the Transfiguration narrative. Like that narrative, the chiasmos redirects us to the creation story, just as do the contents of the other two narratives of miracles belonging to the same taxon, 'virtual transcendence'. All three miracle events of this taxon are listed above in the chiastic diagram on the right hand side. The integration of messianic events with creation events ensures that the contrasts involved in the binary patterns of the two narrative cycles will engage all twelve constituents. Thus there will be more than a single contrastive relation.

Both temporal cycles, the annual solar cycle, and the diurnal/nocturnal lunar cycle, serve the illumination of the systematic contrasts contained in the chiasmos. We read these from the top down of the above diagram. The Christological radicals in every class or taxon, occupy a peripheral position. In the conceptual polarity of the normative order, the Christological category, mind, terminates the series: space ... symbolic masculine ... mind; whereas in the perceptual polarity of the normative order, the Christological category, haptic memory initiates the series: haptic ... optic ... acoustic. Again, in the conceptual polarity of the non-normative conscious, the Christological mind : body terminates the series - space : time ... male : female ... mind : body; whereas in the perceptual polarity of the same, the Christological category haptic imagination initiates the series: haptic ... optic ... acoustic. The same structure positions the Transcendental categories vis-a-vis the remaining members of the four taxa. Space and space : time stand at the beginning of their series, pure conceptual forms and forms of unity respectively, and acoustic memory and acoustic imagination stand at the termini of their series, forms of memory and forms of imagination. Again, the same structure places each of the Pneumatological categories between the peripheries or termini of each of the four taxa, congruently with their locus in the chiasmos.

The acoustika as notated above function consonantly with the optika. We have utilised only six of the latter, following the centrality to the mandala of the Christological and hexadic structures. This means that for the time being we are omitting from consideration the role of the Sabbath : Eucharist. The musical notation just given is consonant with this methodical use of semeioptika because it too utilises a minimum number of terms, six instead of twelve. So for example, both the pure conceptual form space, and the form of imagination acoustic imagination, are designated by the same optic sign, the hue initiating the visible spectrum, red. The same radicals are announced by Cb and C (natural) respectively. The notation used thus conforms to the analogical structures aligning the two series. We say of each of these one-to-one correspondences, that they are mutually contiguous. This means that the two members of each of the six dyads are, so to speak, mutually in touch. They affect each other. We shall elaborate this meaning, but the use of a Christological category, which we know the sense of touch to be, in this context, underlines the fact that the twelve component categories must not be understood as ontologically isolable. Even if it is true to affirm that none of them is insusceptible of identity,
that none of them exists in total independence compatibly with the doctrine of transcendence, it is necessary to affirm also, that neither are they intelligible solely from the point of view of unity. This should be clear already from what was just stated a propos the chiastic form of messianic events reformulating the events of beginning. The word 'mutual' highlights the two-way nature of the relationship between dyadic components, as is explicitly affirmed in the processes central to each of the Christological miracle, 'transformation' and 'transfiguration'.

The ramifications of this are plain and perhaps staggering. For they suggest that in effect the first level distinction is sublated by the two processes indicated by the Christological miracle stories: transformation and transfiguration. There is transition from conceptual to perceptual pole, as given by the theology of
immanence in the first messianic miracle narrative; but equally there is is transition from perceptual to conceptual pole as delivered by the last messianic miracle story. Thus if it is true that there is no self-existently real conceptual entity, the same applies to any alleged reality of an independent perceptual entity. We can therefore say: there is no concept without percept, and neither any percept without concept. We hear the first often enough in the philosophical tradition in the west. It was loudly proclaimed by Hume. Rarely if even, do we encounter the last. It is the unflinching delivery of the narratives grasped in their completeness, as well as in the story of The Transfiguration.

Unlike the pentatonic scales and the diatonic scales which we shall discuss in relation to orality and textuality respectively, the two whole tone scales logically separate the semeia for both series. Moreover the sevenfold scales will occupy us to a very large degree, since the paradigm for intentional modality will be the forty-eight instances of the same. But we must observe the logical clarity with which the two whole tone series observe the first level difference between what the Days denote and what the messianic miracles denote: namely six conceptual and six perceptual radicals. The dodecaphonic series as an entirety knits these together after the very manner of an actual 'text', a piece of writing with interwoven strands, a tissue of connected elements. The intervals between the members of each dyad, that is, between the two semeiacoustika  articulating two radicals which are in one-to-one correspondence with each other according to the systematic analogy of the two series, are in every case the same:  a semitone. There is no smaller, no closer interval. Thus the progression from Cb to C is as that from F to F#, one semitone. But note that the normative member of the transcendent dyads is the lower of the two tones, whereas the normative member of the immanent dyads is the higher of the two. This preserves the radical alterity between the polarities, conceptual and perceptual. The same interval marks the degree of separation between each member of the series, and its preceding and succeeding members. This means of course that the same interval, a semitone, signifies the connection of every category to another with which it is not parallel, that is to say, not coherent according to the one-to-one isomorphism of the two textual cycles. Thus C is connected to C # in the dodecaphonic series, and is notated above as Db, which is to say, D flat; and F # is connected to G. This connectedness has to be accounted for, and will be so. These are two examples of contiguous semeia which are not syntactically ordered as are the 'coherent', ('parallel') dyads. Thus their semeioptika vary, as well as their notation, whereas both the notation and the semeioptika of the coherent forms are identical. So for example, the semeiacoustikon Cb identifies the Transcendental conceptual form, space; and the semeiacoustikon C (natural) identifies the analogous Transcendental perceptual form, acoustic imagination, and both are signified by the same optikon, red. Db identifies the Pneumatological conceptual form, symbolic masculine, it is signified by the sign orange, even though the dodecaphonic series orders it contiguously with the latter, C, the semeiacoustikon for the perceptual form acoustic imagination. Their notation and the semeioptika vary, since they are not 'coherent' or 'parallel' dyads. They do not answer to one another in keeping with the analogical, binary and tripartite logic of the two series. It is this sixfold and Christological serial order which stands at the hub of the integration of the conceptual and perceptual forms.


We are now able to address one of the most significant factors in the miracle narrative, the double pentads. We have alleged that this refers to an inherent morphological feature of the acoustic series as a whole, which consists of twelve tones. (It will be vital to note that this 'whole' is recurrent insofar as the octave is repeated above and below itself. The octave recurs in both directions, signal of futures and past, as these are aligned semiologically with the descending scale and the ascending scale respectively, as with the conceptual pole and the perceptual pole respectively.) The sum of the figures involved in the miracle event, five loaves, five thousand and two fish, equals twelve, and equals the count of baskets used to collect the remaining fragments. The dual fives and the single two account for the dodecad in terms which conform to the hexads mentioned in the Christologies. We have insisted on the co-ordinating function of these Christological miracle narratives, since they rescue from any reification, the two basic kind of conscious ingredients or elements; conceptual and perceptual. At issue is the dialectic between identity and unity. But just as we may not put that there are twelve self-existent constituents of consciousness, twelve fully independent radicals separated according to a first level distinction given in the P creation and messianic narratives, neither can we urge that these form an agglomerative, inchoate mass. The body stands as exemplar here: it consists of distinct members which are nevertheless organically disposed.

The factor of unity is most prominent in the sevenfold major and minor scales, and the factor of identity is prominent in the pentatonic. The coexistent nature of the conceptual and perceptual radicals is clearly manifest in that they both comprise a scale. There are always three or four of either sort. In the pentatonic scales the same applies; there are always two or three of either sort. But there they stand distinctly and apart from one another. This is because of the interval of a semitone. It occurs in the diatonic scales as the degrees 7-8 and 4-3. The smallest interval in the pentatonic scale, is a whole tone, and it contains two intervals of three semitones. These gaps are quite pronounced, and we hear them very plainly. So much so in fact, that it is questionable whether we should even use the word scale of the pentatonic, since it is not as intimately knit together as the diatonic scales. But it bears comparison with the sevenfold scale, and this is most apparent in that both contain a progression of three steps comprising three whole tones. Just previously, we emphasized the rudimentary character of these ascending and descending patterns which three successive whole tones announce. They articulate the essential division of the categoreal entities into four taxa. These three tone which initiate the major sevenfold scale, and (major) pentatonic scale, configure its representation of intentionality. They are always of the same sort, since they are always arranged as a whole tone series. Thus three initial tones indicative of perceptual radicals will be representative of the perceptual modes of intentionality: desiring and knowing, and their aconscious counterparts, desire-to-know and knowledge-of will. Correspondingly, scales which begin with three tones indicating conceptual forms, will be representative of conceptual modes of intentionality: will, belief, will-to-believe, and belief-in-desire.

The consistency of conceptual and perceptual polarities, the factor of unity and its importance to immanence as signaled by the sevenfold, is again manifest in the necessity to consider any scale of this kind in relation to its dyadic equivalent. That is to say the analogical consistency between perceptual and conceptual categories which lies at the heart of the processes of transformation and transfiguration, entails that no perceptual form of intentionality is without its perceptual equivalent and vice versa. This consideration will reveal how the figures 5 and 2 delineate the relative antithesis between the pentatonic scales as proclaimed in the Transcendental feeding miracle and sevenfold scales as proclaimed in the Pneumatological feeding event. We take the two interrelated scales of C major and Cb major arranged so as to maintain the normative status of the Cb relative to the C. (Saying that space, expressed by the Cb acoustikon, is a pure conceptual form, that it is a category of actual transcendence, and that acoustic imagination, expressed by the acoustikon C, is one of virtual transcendence, amounts to sustaining the difference between the conscious and aconscious, and reverts to their disparity in terms of value. Both radicals express the same value, truth, but it is expressed normatively or intrinsicly in the case of the conceptual form, and extrinsically in that of the perceptual radical.) The following notation emphasises
the semitones at 3-4 and 7-8 in both scales. To highlight this the crotchets which notate them are close to one another in those cases; just as it is to the fact that the two scales share two tones. Thus the 7th degree in C, which is B or Cb, is the first, or eighth, the octave, in Cb; and the 4th in Cb, which is E, is the third in C. To highlight this, they are aligned vertically in the two staves. To highlight the fact that these are the only two degrees of the dodecaphonic series shared by the two scales, they are aligned in the following images, and the scale of C major begins with its seventh degree, Cb (B), instead of C:

Just as we have been utilising six and not seven optika, we shall indeed have recourse to the hexadic structures operative within the acoustic series, by reason of its pivotal role. This brings to light a feature shared by the fivefold and sevenfold, their necessarily unequal division as to conceptual and perceptual components. This is first demonstrated in the P creation narrative as an initial set of three and a final set of four Days; and once again in the messianic series itself, with three miracles of virtual immanence, and four events of actual immanence, three feeding miracles and one Eucharist. The same is repeated in various formats throughout The Apocalypse, according to the denoted figures four and seven, announced in the Pneumatological miracle narrative.

The above notation is designed to show as plainly as possible the differences between the two processive orders, ascent and descent, with respect to one of the two cadences in each scale: 7-8 in C major and 4-3 in Cb major. The notation of the first, C major  , except for B (natural), here notated as Cb, observes conventional musical notation. C major contains no sharps or flats. It is readily recognisable on keyboard instruments as consisting of all seven white notes. The notation of the second, Cb major is likewise conventional, only the scale is usually represented in terms of sharps (#), since this involves only five such signs rather than seven flats (b). The two scales have only these two tones in common: Cb and E. All their other tones are exclusively their own. Thus five of the six of these form the pentatonic of the alternative scale; five of the components of Cb make up the pentatonic of C and vice versa. The pentatonic scale formed from what remains when the C major scale is created, consists of all five black notes on the keyboard: Db -Eb - F# - G# - A#. The pentatonic scale formed from what remains of the Cb major scale consists of five white notes on the keyboard: C - D - F - G - A. I have used the same notation as before to clearly indicate the semiotic functions of the acoustika.

Taking the two fivefold or pentatonic sets of left-overs in conjunction, since the two sevenfold scales must be correlated, gives a combined two fivefold whole tone scales. These are not pentatonic scales. Pentatonic scales consist as noted, inclusively of both sorts of radicals, just as do the sevenfold scales. But the incidences of the figures 5 in the narrative are now conforming to the co-ordinating sixfold paradigm of the Christological narratives. The pentatonic in itself cannot and need not consist concordantly with the whole tone scales. It is the business of the sixfold pattern to sort the radicals according to the epistemological-psychological distinction made between concept and percept by means of analogy. The pentatonic for its part must co-exist with the sevenfold, and the two feeding miracle stories, Transcendental and Pneumatological testify to this. The two figures 'five loaves' and 'five thousands' as marking transcendence, therefore insist equally on the principle of immanence. They cannot be understood without relation to the two sevenfold scales, of which the above is one of six instances. If we take five of 'loaves' to refer to perceptual categories, we see them indicated in the two pentatonic scales belonging to Cb major and C major. There are three semeia indexing perceptual categories in the first scale, C major: F#, G# and A#; and in its correlate, the Cb major scale, we find just two: C and D. Conversely taking the five of 'thousands' as a reference to conceptual entities semiologically articulated in the acoustika, we find that the two pentatonic scales account for these. C major yields two from its remaining pentatonic: Db and Eb; and Cb major yields three from its remaining pentatonic scale: F, G and A. For the same reason just given, that the complete one-to-one analogical correspondence of conceptual and perceptual categories is treated in the Christological stories, These two sortals, need not and do not perfectly reflect one another according to the Christological whole tone pattern. The five of 'loaves' are announced as C - D - F# - G# - A# and the five of 'thousands' as Db - Eb - F - G - A.

This procedure maintains the clear functional purposes outlined in the three miracle narratives, since it respects the application of the whole tone series to the Christological narratives, and brings into necessary correlation the two double figures of the Transcendental and Pneumatological narratives, 5 and 7 respectively. This is suggested also by their content, involving bread and fish rather than water. Such a hermeneutic prompts a connection between the nouns 'thousands' and 'loaves', and the subject-object dichotomy.
But the subject-object dichotomy would seem to recur to the central paradigmatic structure, the haptic semiotic series and the concept of the body, soma, insofar as the perceiver, psychophysical person, or sense-percipient subject, is also capable of being perceived, a sense-percipient object, a theme so often taken up in phenomenological discourse, and a fact of which the reference to 'two fish' again reminds us, since the fish can be both eater and eaten. The Day 5 rubric suggested as much. This latter reference in the messianic miracle story is just as important to an intelligible and comprehensive hermeneutic as any of its other details. For the constellation  'five loaves' and 'two fish' indeed puts the story conformably to its counterpart in the P creation, where Days 2 and 5 indicate Transcendence itself. But the most effective instance of reading the polarities as party to the subject-object dichotomy remains that of the Christologies, just as logically too, the body and haptic sense-percipience present us with the ideal situation for its exposition. So it should not come as any surprise that the two pentatonic scales which now meet us, do not conform to the Christological pattern in every detail. The Christological pattern superimposed upon the acoustika endorses its symmetry, but the interrelated scales adverted to in the two miracles of loaves and fish are not symmetrical in themselves. Neither a single pentatonic nor single heptatonic scale can be symmetrical since both consist of uneven numbers. Thus also, any superimposition of the Christological hexad upon the optika will also fail the test of perfect compliance. It is only when we take the two scales as fully consistent that the Christological pattern begins to emerge.

The first three degrees of C major are semeiacoustika expressing three perceptual radicals; whereas the first three degrees of Cb major are semeiacoustika expressing conceptual forms. All heptatonic scales are constituted by semeia which signify both perceptual and conceptual radicals, given in the ratio 3 : 4. But the first three tones of the scale determine the intentional mode as belonging to either polarity. The rationale for which concerns the two outstanding moments when the cadences resolve, and the fact that they express transitions from conceptual to perceptual in the case of a perceptual intentional mode (7-8), and from the perceptual to the conceptual (4-3), in the case of a conceptual intentional mode. Thus the former, of which C major is the example given here, is an instance of both knowing and desire, and the latter an instance of both will and belief, for the conscious order. Thus we are first concerned with the two perceptual modes simpliciter, and the two conceptual modes simpliciter, and not with either the hybrid forms of intentionality or the aconscious forms of intentionality. That is to say the 7-8 cadence in C major and the 4-3 cadences in Cb major. Note that the resolution of the perceptual cadence is ascending, and the resolution of the conceptual cadence is descending. Cadences are crucial to the phenomenon of harmony, and just as vital to understanding the meanings of the two Christological processes. We shall speak of the first a propos of 'transformation' and the Eucharist, given the ciphers of the transition 7-8, and accordingly of the second a propos of 'transfiguration', and so in relation to baptism, in order to complete the sacramental theological strand of the narratives. The clear links between Jesus' own baptism and The Transfiguration, and the relation of these to the Day 1 rubric we have already observed. We should observe too that the direction of resolution nominates a perceptual radical at 7-8. This, the so-called 'authentic' or 'final' cadence, always moves up the scale. The cadence at 4-3, the 'plagal' or 'amen' cadence, always moves downwards, and its final announces a conceptual category.

In either scale, C major or Cb major, the cadences always resolve in the same direction: the seventh or 'leading tone' always resolves upwards to the tonic, or first degree of the scale, also called the eighth or octave; whereas the perfect fourth, also called the 'subdominant', always resolves downwards to the major third. But here we are isolating for consideration the 7-8 in perceptual modality, and the 4-3 in conceptual modality, of which C major and Cb major are examples respectively.
The exceptional roles of the 1st and 3rd degrees (I and III) in establishing harmony are immediately perceptible. (Hear these cadences.) This selection is highlighted by the fact both are signified by the same optikon: red for the 7-8 resolution from Cb (b) to C, in the scale of C major, designating a perceptual mode or modes of intentionality, and yellow for the resolution from E to Eb, in the scale of Cb major designating a conceptual mode or modes of intentionality.

These two points of contact occurring at the tonic, the first (or eighth) degree, and the third degree, bring the otherwise unrelated two sevenfold series into closest association
. Thus not only are they significant for their individual series, C major and Cb major, but they announce and designate the only two members shared by the two scales. The 7-8 cadence in C major then puts one of six occasions in which the two normative perceptual intentional modes occur, according to the theology of acoustic semiotic forms. These are the modes: knowing and desire. The latter of which we have already discussed partly in  treating the gospel of Luke. In other words, this cadence articulates two perceptual intentional modes of one perceptual category. The relation of which to each other we shall directly establish. There are in all six perceptual modes of intentionality, and six perceptual forms. But the ones with which we begin here, are the normative, that is conscious, two of desire and knowing.

The cadence in the Cb major scale which is the 'same' as that in the C major scale, since it too uses one and the same optikon, is the 4-3 transition, not the 7-8 transition. Both the third and fourth degrees of this scale are represented by the same semeioptikon, yellow. But, as already put, the authentic (7-8) cadence in C major moves up the scale, whereas the plagal cadence (4-3) in Cb major moves down the scale. Hence, even though once more, the same semeioptikon denotes the members of the dyad, this time the pure conceptual form mind, expressed by Eb, and the perceptual form haptic imagination, expressed by E (natural), the resolution occurs in virtue of the former. It is an instance of a 'transfigurative' and not a 'transformative' process. Transformative processes, instances of perceptual intentional modes, are transitions from the conceptual to perceptual pole; transfigurative processes are instances of conceptual intentional modes, involving the transition from perceptual to conceptual pole. The 4-3 cadence in Cb major resolves down the scale. The resolutions of the cadences, 7-8 in C, and 4-3 in Cb, obtain in opposing directions, even though in both cases they are designated by one and the same semeioptikon, red and yellow respectively. The 4-3 cadence in Cb major expresses mind issuing as from a datum given in haptic imagination. It tells for two normative or conscious conceptual processes: will and belief. We shall directly distinguish between these, the one being conative and the other cognitive respectively, just as was previously the case  for C major, desire and knowing.

We may now mention briefly the other two cadences in both scales. Alternatively to the use of the same semeioptika for the 7-8 cadence in C major, namely red, the
Cb major scale writes the transition or cadence, 7-8, by means of two different optika, indigo and red respectively. It still resolves with the tonic or eighth degree. The degrees 7 and 8 are adjacent to one another, separated by only a semitone, nevertheless their semeioptika vary, and the semeioptika adjacent to each of these in turn, blue and orange, are fully oppositional. The instance of this type of cadence in the C major scale, is the 4-3 transition, degrees immediately adjacent to one another, being just one semitone apart, but whose semeioptika nevertheless are also different,  since they are green and yellow respectively. This instance of the plagal cadence too resolves at the third degree, moving down the scale. The semeioptika of their adjacent degrees are fully oppositional, since they are blue and orange, again marking the difference as thoroughly as possible. Thus the 7-8 cadence in the C major scale, which has to do with perceptual intentionality, and alternatively, the 4-3 cadence in the Cb major scale, which concerns conceptual intentionality as we shall see, both utilize the dyad. That is, both the conceptual-to-perceptual Cb-C (7-8) transformation, and the perceptual-to-conceptual transfiguration E-Eb (4-3) involve the transition between analogous categories. This is reflected in the use of the same semeioptikon, red for the two members of the Cb-C cadence, and yellow for those of the E-Eb cadence.

These cadences will avail us in tracking the meaning of the two Christological events, 'transformation' and 'transfiguration', which bring into closest affinity the two polarities, conceptual and perceptual. We notice already that they are of two distinct kinds, resolving in either direction, upwards (7-8) or downwards (4-3), just as in the initial mandala, and that pictured immediately above, at the lowest end of the acoustic series we plotted the conceptual form space, designated by the optikon red, and expressed by the acoustikon Cb, whose native conative intentional mode is will, which in its canonical or definitive instance, expresses the distal future, and at the opposing end of the spectrum, designated by the optikon violet, and articulated by the acoustikon A#, (here Bb), we plotted the perceptual category haptic memory, the canonical occasion of the conative intentional form desire, which occupies the distal past. These two directions, the former downwards towards the remote future and the latter upwards towards to the remote past, configure also the two transmutative events for the normative categories; the one in virtue of conceptual consciousness, the other in virtue of perceptual consciousness. The non-normative categories, that is, the aconscious orders, invert the same two patterns of process, but we need not enter their details here.

The scales given above, those of Cb major and C major are of course major, for they begin and end with those tones. They have have relative minors. This means that the very same seven different components which constitute each, are used in another serial order. These minor relative scales begin and therefore end on a different degree. The relative minor of Cb major is Ab minor; the relative minor of C major is A minor. The minor scales must now occupy our attention. Because they exist in three permutations, only one of which is identical in terms of the components which make up the major and its relative minor. Therefore, only in this single variant of the minor scale alone, are the cadences fully identical. The minor scales are vital, and the reason for this touches upon what was just given as the explication of the organisation of the optika and acoustika into consonant and graded series, with opposing termini.


In the Genesis text space, the heaven(s), created on Day 2, remains the pre-eminently transcendent entity. What is identified as named in the Day 2 rubric is heaven, and heaven alone (Genesis 1.6-8). Nothing else is identified and named as such. If by default 'the waters under the vault/firmament' result from the creation of the firmament/heaven, their mode of existence is other than that of transcendent heaven. So too, if mind is on par with transcendent space in terms of such transcendence, then it is nevertheless the case that mind : body remains equally on par with the conceptual form of unity, male : female, which is weighted in virtue of immanence, that is, unity. Thus the Day 1 rubric does in fact speak of the entity existing in opposition to the light. Nevertheless, it defers to the complementary rubric of Day 4, insofar as this antithetical entity is called 'night' rather than 'darkness', (Genesis 1.3-5). The 'heaven' or transcendent space remains unequivocally transcendent. Further to this, all three compound conceptual forms, forms of unity, are taxonomically at least in the first instance, transcendent. They are conceptual and not perceptual categories according to the first level of distinction, the primary taxonomical differentiation between the Days and the messianic miracles, and respectively that between conceptual and perceptual categories.

But (aconscious) forms of unity mitigate transcendence to such a degree that they are virtually immanent in kind, most remarkably the Christological form of unity, mind : body, and the Pneumatological form of unity, male : female. Such mitigation of pure conceptuality determines their agency similarly to the way in which perceptual memory acts in consciousness. These two pre-eminently immanent conceptual forms of unity
in particular, namely soma or mind : body and the symbolic feminine, male and female, function sympathetically with the role of their corresponding forms of memory, the haptic and optic respectively, of which they are in a certain sense, the derivatives. The conceptual categories mind : body, (soma), and male : female, the symbolic feminine, occupy that end of the spectrum of conceptual entities which ranges towards immanence. The least virtually immanent of any form of unity is that of space : time, identified in the rubric of Day 5. So it is that we encounter as the two most salient ciphers of the miracle story which accounts for acoustic memory, The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, just those numbers which reiterate the ciphers of the rubrics, the stories of Day 2 and Day 5. They are reminding us of the distinctly transcendental character of both the acoustic semiosis and the conceptual form of unity space : time.

Identity was ascribed to The Transcendent, 'God', as its fundamental attribute. The acoustic semiotic series we must remember, manifests The Transcendent, "The Father". Acoustic memory identifies The Transcendent, albeit in terms of actual immanence, just as haptic memory identifies The Son, and optic memory identifies The Holy Spirit, within the same taxon, forms of memory. This means that of the three semioses, acoustic memory particularly expresses transcendence, in which it differs antithetically from the optic semiosis, as 'beginning' differs from 'end'. So we may think of each of the twelve tones as a division, a fragmentation, of what is otherwise a whole, with the accent on the actual division of the octave into its components, or parts, rather than the whole. But the whole in this case is not a singular unity, since it consists of 'five' elements. Acoustika bear this primary meaning of multiple parts. Whereas the parts of the optic semiosis, however we enumerate them, even though the miracle narrative clearly suggests the sevenfold, essentially constitute a single continuum, whose division is beset by all manner of logical difficulties, the acoustika are discrete entities. In this, they thoroughly espouse the principle of identity. Acoustika can and do sound simultaneously with one another. This is not possible for the optic semeia. A visible surface is usually one colour or another. The principle  of identity is even more pronounced in the pentatonic scale, alluded to in the messianic miracle story, than it is in the sevenfold diatonic scales. For the pentatonic scale contains no intervals of a semitone. It is not knit together as a gestalt as are the major and minor sevenfold scales, whose intervals are never more apart from one another than a whole tone, and two of whose intervals are separated by the semitone.  But these two scales, sevenfold and pentatonic coexist, a fact which bears upon the relation between immanence and transcendence. The expression figuring the association between fission qua identity and transcendence first delivered in the creation story, is reiterated in each of the four versions of the messianic miracle:

And taking the five loaves and the two fish he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and broke (kate/klasen) the loaves, and gave them to the disciples to set before the people; and he divided ( e)me/risqen) the two fish among them. (Mark 6.41)

... and taking the five loaves and the two fish he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and broke (kla/sav) the loaves and gave the loaves to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. (Matthew 14.19b)

And taking the five loaves and the two fish he looked up to heaven, and blessed and broke (kate/klasen) them, and gave them to the disciples to set before the crowd. (Luke 9.16)

Jesus then took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed (die/dwken) them to those who were seated; also the fish, as much as they wanted. (John 6.11)

In each recension also, the texts refer to the 'twelve baskets of/with fragments' (emphasis added, Mark 6.42 - kla/smata; and Matthew14.20, Luke 9.17 and John 6.13 each - klasma/twn). These 'fragments' or 'broken pieces' are described as having been collected into the twelve 'baskets', (kofi/nwn, kofi/nouv, ko/finoi, kofi/nouv), in all four gospels, just as we find the same details faithfully confirmed in the later recapitulations of both miracles of loaves and fish, by both Mark and Matthew. We are then justified in speaking of each of the twelve tones, that is, each of the twelve acoustika, as discrete, components, or fragments of something whole. But attention must be given to the fact in this case that the whole itself is not a single entity. The miracle uses extant provisions of loaves and fish, and these number five and two respectively, invoking the Day 2 and Day 5 rubrics. The action of division of the provisions may therefore stand as a trope for the division of the spatiotemporal manifold itself. These will be the figures central to the idea of identity and transcendence in the acoustika. But we will not be able to read them intelligibly without the  numerals deployed in the other and oppositional feeding miracle, The Feeding Of The Four Thousand. We can note immediately that in that event, the final remaining  quanta, seven baskets of fragments, is identical with the number of  available loaves at the outset. This figure often represents the fullness of a serial form in the literature, and thus it becomes synonymous with the notion of a telos, or 'end'. This is its precise value in the P creation narrative; it stands for the completion of a process, a totality comprising seven 'Days'. The immediate requisite therefore is to elaborate the hermeneutic of the numerical details in these two miracle stories insofar as they stand in opposition to one another, the first step in which endeavour is available in the dodecaphonic series. For the twelve tones configure the consistency of the pentatonic and heptatonic scales as mutually compatible even as the latter two reify the essential disparity between the 'heavens and the earth' respectively.

In terms of any structural and elemental totality we may ascribe to them, the acoustic semeia formally assert the methodological value of the dodecaphonic series, both theoretically and practically. Its practical value centres on the reality of harmony, and the rudiments of musical expression: tonality, cadences, and so on. This remains a vast resource, hitherto untapped in theology. In addition to having abandoned altogether the decimal modulus of western mathematics, the acoustic semiosis presents itself as does language itself, in its primordial form. Primordiality qua orality is writ large in the creation story. 'In the beginning' nothing is accomplished without the creative utterance of the sovereign will of Transcendence. In the P narrative, everything comes into being as a result of God's word having being spoken. John takes up themes of the will of "The Father" and 'his voice', both prior to and subsequently to his accounts of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand and The Walking On The Water, (John 5.25-30, 6.35-40). In the latter case, the pericopae are suffused with references to 'heaven' by means of the expressions 'bread of heaven'/'bread of life', and with references to Jesus' identity (John 6.31-33, 35-38, 41-51). These references comply with the Christological inflection of the P narrative, given in terms of the prevailing light-time motif ordering the entire the series of 'days'. They re-affirm the Johannine doctrine of the Word incarnate, and attest the viability of the theology of acoustic semiotic forms in particular to Christian epistemology and psychology.

In returning to the theological interrelation of creation, salvation, and last things, which mirrors the structural and numerical patterns of the three feeding miracles, t
he argument in its barest and most abstract shape reads the numerical progression 5-6-7 as the relation of the sense-percipient semioses of acoustic-haptic-optic, and concomitantly, the intertextual  syntax of P creation story-messianic series-Apocalypse. This is another reiteration of the categoreal paradigm transcendence : immanence. As the theology of the logos, and an emergent Christian theory of language,  it also necessarily puts the relation between the incipient or primordial spoken/acoustic word, and the final written/optic word, by means of the intervenient actual word as embodied/haptic reality. In all of this of course, the gospels and the hexadic cipher denoting the Christological miracle narratives are the mediating centres of interest which focus our attention. It is necessary to recall this throughout the following hermeneutic. It calls into account the doctrine of special revelation as well as the Christian understanding of language itself, and timely reminders as to the role these will play in the argument must be made. The double incidence of the figure 5 in the Transcendental miracle story shall be our first concern. We need to observe here in passing some extant arguments referring the 'five loaves' allegorically to the Pentateuch. They seem at first to be sympathetic to our case.

But as already put, one immediate reference of the 'five loaves', is the reflexive one to the five messianic miracles contained in the gospel of Mark itself, and hence perhaps also to the five perceptual radicals which his records nominate, the only absent one being The Transformation Of Water Into Wine, the one denoting haptic memory. Such a reference exploits the absent members(s) of the series, in order to secure the link between orality and acoustic pentad since the sevenfold serial orders all, including that of the messianic series itself, are as epiphanic and textual, patent, explicit, obvious. Optic consciousness is the alter ego of acoustic consciousness. The messianic miracle story notably absent in Mark itself does exactly the same, since the six resultant jars of wine refer metaphorically to the entire six perceptual radicals detailed taxonomically in the six messianic miracles themselves, and at the same time, to their conceptual counterparts, indicated by the metaphor six jars of water (John 2.7). This systematic reference will be later confirmed in the story of Transfiguration. So the duplication of the pentad in the miracle of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand can be understood in the light of the duplication of the hexad in the miracle of Transformation Of Water Into Wine. Both events can be read as stating the necessary relation between conceptual and perceptual polarities of consciousness, if we are prepared to take the 'loaves' as a metaphor for just what the five messianic miracles in Mark designate, perceptual radicals of mind, and the five of 'thousands' as referent to their conceptual analogues.

This particular hermeneutic aligns the categoreal polarities, conceptual and perceptual synonymously with what ordinary language refers to as subject and object, connoted by the term 'thousands' and by the term 'loaves' respectively, notwithstanding the fact that it sets a precedent of sorts for the interpretation of the later miracle of loaves. Certainly the five messianic events which Mark records are in the first place related to their counterparts within the Days series. This almost comprehensively remarks the parallel structures of consciousness, perceptual and conceptual, only one of the six categories being absent. This is the particular categoreal dyad, haptic memory : soma, which best invites consideration of the subject-object dichotomy as noted. In doing so, it effectively emphasises the antithesis  between the pentad and heptad of the later miracle, which we shall connect with intentionality and eschatology. This hermeneutic will lend itself easily to a distinction between 'loaves' qua perceptual forms, the stuff of assimilation, five of the six (or seven) of which are detailed in Mark's own record of the messianic series, as well as the Eucharist, and 'thousands' qua conceptual forms, the corresponding conceptual forms which are the subjects of the Days rubrics. Their interrelation therefore repeats the description of the same given in the two Christological messianic miracles, 'transformation' and 'transfiguration', even if not in strictest compliance with their apparent presentation in these texts. We say 'apparent' just now, because as already indicated,  those particular two categories which are expressed and designated by the semeiacoustika and semeioptika as contiguous but not necessarily dyadic, that is, not formally analogous, are also  party to the two transmutative processes indicated in the Christological miracle stories. More of which later. We can add here in the interests of fleshing out the relation of the conceptual-perceptual polarity to the subject-object dichotomy, that is, in further developing the link between the Christologies and the two miracle of loaves, that the first, the transformative resolution from conceptual to perceptual denotes the process from subjective mode of being to objective mode of being, in keeping with the 'incarnation', and the identity of Eros, while the second denotes the alternative process, the transmutation from objective to subjective mode of being, in tandem with Thanatos, or death and transfiguration, though we might just as well say here, logos. We have yet to elaborate the relation of dichotomous subject-object to the taxonomic differentiation between concept and percept. That task, although its is well ahead of this point in the hermeneutic, will employ the presence of the various antithetical relations in the acoustic semeia.


In passing then, the relevance of an allegorical interpretation of the 'five loaves', will have to meet the issues regarding the formation of the Torah, and the actual constitution of the Pentateuch in the first century C.E., (see Konrad Schmid, Thomas B. Dozeman, Thomas Romer, Pentateuch, Hexateuch, or Enneateuch?: Identifying Literary Works in Genesis Through Kings, Biblical and Early Christian Studies, Society of Biblical Studies, Atlanta, 2011, the introduction to which is available here, and available here is a precis and review. (The expression allegorical is highlighted here in order to draw attention to the fact that such a hermeneutic is not analogical, and as such, not in the first place in keeping with what is of primary methodological concern to metaphysics.) These arguments include the possibility of a fourfold arrangement of scrolls, a 'truncated Tetrateuch' separated from the Former Prophets, which was to become the Pentateuch.) Thus given the protean nature of intertextual, and intratextual structural parallels themselves, we might as well consider this argument for the parallel between the five messianic events themselves, which are included in Mark and Matthew, and a prototypical fivefold version of the Torah, simultaneously with the central significance of the isomorphism between the five perceptual radicals named in Mark's five messianic miracles, and at least five of the six conceptual forms of the P creation narrative. This would conduce to a comparison between the six conceptual forms of the creation story and the structure of the Pentateuch. I repeat the six parallels here:
  1. Day 1 - mind : Transfiguration - haptic imagination
  2. Day 2 - space : Walking On The Water - acoustic imagination
  3. Day 3 - symbolic masculine : Stilling The Storm - optic imagination
  4. Day 4 - mind : body : Transformation Of Water Into Wine - haptic memory
  5. Day 5 - Space : time : Feeding Five thousand - acoustic memory
  6. Day 6 - male : female : Feeding Four Thousand - optic memory
The ascription of every one of these events to a particular scroll of Torah would be a dubious business indeed, precisely because there are multiple accounts of the same events in various scrolls. The least unsuccessful of any such effort might be The Walking On The Water. This certainly resumes creation motifs fundamental to the meaning of the book of Genesis as a whole, where this particular theologoumenon remains more or less confined. We might therefore assume that as the paramount topic of the 'book', visible not just in the P and J narratives, but also in that of the flood Genesis chapters 6, 7 and 8, and the various stories of the generations stemming from Jacob, which ground as it were, the theme of generation, or human beginnings, insofar as they concern re-generation and procreation. The Transfiguration might well be said to exist in a similarly clear relationship to Leviticus, which is fairly single minded in its focus on purity. We have already discussed in part, its theme of purity, of sanctification as setting apart of persons if not places and times. In the story of The Leper, the healing miracle equivalent to this transcendental Christological messianic event, that figure is enjoined: '"See that you say noting to anyone; but go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to the people."' (Mark 1.44). This is surely a reference to the holiness code and to Leviticus 13.49 and Leviticus 14.2-4 in particular. The remaining sea miracle, The Stilling Of The Storm, might be taken as corresponding to the book of Exodus, given its dramatic illustration of the passage of the Israelites through the Sea of Reeds (Exodus 14, 15.1-21). Then again, it might stand in the same relation to the book of Joshua, if we were to adopt a Hexateuch rather than Pentateuch as the final structural parallel to this particular one of the six messianic miracles. Joshua relates the crossing of the Jordan river into the promised land typologically with the former episode in view (Joshua 3.14-17).

But another candidate from the messianic miracles for counterpart to the book of Joshua might be the first, and Christological miracle of the series, given the connection between the central figure Joshua himself, and Jesus. Here, what comes into focus is the story of Moses sending spies into Canaan, and their subsequent report concerning its fertility, which includes the story of the cluster of grapes so large that two men were required to transport them using a pole. This, and the description of Canaan as a land 'flowing with milk and honey', except that this time it comes from Numbers 13.27, might be said to show some referential connection, however slight, with the first miracle story in John. But its presence in Numbers 13.17-24 of course blurs any hard an fast boundary we might wish to draw between one scroll and another in the interests of the allegorical argument.
Joshua chapter 4 records the laying down of twelve stones from the midst of the Jordan, in Gilgal on the east border of Jericho, commemorating the twelve tribes. In the same vein, the division of the conquered territories among the tribes of Israel (Joshua 13.15-chapter 19), alludes adequately to the analogy between the twelve tribal collectives and the twelvefold pattern of the six stone jars of water transformed into jars of wine, which resumes the entire taxonomic purpose of the relation of the creations series to messianic series. But again, no details can be pressed in any allegorical method since myriad anomalies regarding the original scheme arise. 

Yet again even greater problems surround any attempt to accommodate the two miracles of loaves and fish  in any allegorical hermeneutic, although Numbers, as its very title suggests, would proffer itself as an appropriate match for The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, since it contains among its key themes, an account of the census of Israel (chapter 1), and the census of the clans (chapters 3 and 4), as well as a record of Israel having been miraculously fed on both quail and manna, after leaving Sinai (chapter 10.11-11). This, the story of the 'bread from heaven' is told also in Exodus 16.4-36, and again in Numbers 11.7-9. In neither case is there any precisely mathematical match between the all important numerical details of either miracle of loaves and any of these narratives. So too, the subsequent narrative of the visitation of a plague upon those who yielded to their cravings for meat, which is also recounted, hardly makes it a fitting prototype for either Eucharistic miracle story. But we must not overlook the obvious fact of the essential difference in disposition between the perspectives operative here; transcendence in the case of the Hebrew scriptures, and immanence in that of the gospels, a difference which will be repeated in the gospels themselves. The Johannine version of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand uses the elements in the Old Testament narratives which adopt a derogatory stance towards appetition to good effect, in a manner reminiscent of the story of Jesus and the Woman of Samaria (John 4.1-42), at the centre of which is the image of '"... a spring of water welling up to eternal life"' (v 14), and again later in what is part of the most significantly Eucharistic discourse in his gospel:
Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven ( a!rton e)k tou~ ou)ranou~); my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world. " They said to him, "Lord, give us this bread always." (John 6.32-34)
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."
The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" So Jesus said to them, "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 you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever." This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum. (John 6.47-59)
Similarly to the cautionary tone of such accounts is the one given also in Deuteronomy chapter 8, of the forty years journeying in the wilderness, which includes specific references to the manna. This results in a total of three candidates for one or possibly two messianic miracles, if we are urging a systematic pattern of allegorical correspondence between a particular member of (written) Torah as it has come down to us, and a Day-messianic event. There is thus as weak a case for drawing parallels between any putative written Pentateuch itself and the 'five loaves' as there is for the attempts to similarly correlate the five Markan messianic miracles to the same, the written Pentateuch. This serves to remind us of the importance of the concept of orality in the story of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand. In which respect it is to be markedly distinguished from the later miracle of loaves where the ciphers four and seven are prominent, despite their clear associations; associations which reconfigure the essential relation and essential differentiation between language as primordial-oral, and teleological-visual, since the miracle narratives in the first instance concern those perceptual radicals of consciousness, acoustic memory and optic memory. It would be preferable for the allegorical interpretation of the 'five loaves' as referent to the 'original' Pentateuch, if the actual themes themselves could be isolated independently of any contestable final and fivefold ordering of the written Torah.

If I enclose 'oral Torah' in inverted commas, it is with good reason. In the present context oral Torah cannot mean the companion to the written Torah, and as is currently understood in Judaism: Torah sheb'al peh, 'Torah according to mouth', which reached its final forms in the collections known as the Mishnah and (Babylonian) Talmud after the formation of the Hebrew canon, including of course the Pentateuch. The good reason is that such collections of writings bear none of the sense of priority which I am associating with orality in general, even though of course, this follows from the Priestly story of creation. Judaism considers Oral Torah, the counterpart to Written Torah, as subsequent to the latter, since it comments at length upon the scripted form, and in what is nevertheless, another scripture! Thus in addition to
being preliminary to it, the written form of the Torah becomes the measure for the Oral Torah. This is putting the horse behind the cart however, for it controverts both the actual temporal and ontological order of priority. As understood in the delivery of the messianic miracles and here, in the doctrine of the Word, 'oral Torah' could refer albeit allegorically the traditions which exist prior to themselves becoming scripted. It could refer the 'law' or 'teaching' in a specifically oral and hence non-scripted form.

Such an emphasis on orality comports with the pattern established by the juxtaposition of beginning and end, as reflected in the relation of Genesis 1.1-2.4a and The Apocalypse, to which the two stories of miracles of loaves and fish direct us.
The ambit of the final, teleological, and eschatological member of the New Testament canon is determined as a whole, very largely by the principle of unity, the abstract equivalent of immanence. This should be kept in mind when considering its overtly intertextual character, and in just this respect it stands more trenchantly juxtaposed to the theology of creation than anything else in the New Testament, or the canon as a whole. There is no denying the scripted, that is, graphic text itself, which signs its contrast to the primordial orality of Genesis 1.1-2.4a, evinced in its seemingly inordinate pre-occupation with death and destruction. Such a contrast follows necessarily from its essential eschatological premise, and situates it within a larger and fully integrated textual cycle, where the gospel, and its emphasis on process, remains intervenient. If the repeated figure 5 outlines at first, Mark's own tally of perceptual radicals, and consequently their analogous conceptual forms revealed in the Genesis cycle somewhat obliviously to the fact that the full tally is twelve, a fact to which he nevertheless refers by means of numbering the baskets of portions remaining, then it certainly has the merit of insisting on the radical alterity between the pentad with its semiotic affiliations to primordiality-orality, and the heptad with its own clear semiological associations to eschatology and graphic, visual, scripted forms of language. The Genesis creation narrative itself too ostensibly commits Mark's own ostensible fallacy, if we take the heptad rather than the pentad as definitive. It inscribes that which is least susceptible of inscription, the primordial. This primordial and spoken 'heaven', inscribed in the two ciphers of the messianic miracle recurring to the Days 2 and 5, is unintelligible without Mark's own ostensible fallacy. Thus the theology of 'heaven', the theology of transcendence, first put in the P narrative, will only become comprehensible with reference to the theology of acoustic semiotic forms.

My thesis is that the Transcendental feeding miracle story concerns acoustic memory as part of a taxonomy of perceptual consciousness, and so in the very first instance, rather than the Pentateuch, concerns the pentatonic as  has been just now explained with reference to the two sevenfold series. This hermeneutic respects the obvious interrelation obtaining between all three immanent messianic miracles, as reflecting the integration of the three textual cycles, and concurrently the co-ordination of the three modes of phenomenal sense-percipience. The hermeneutic of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand posits the phenomenon of orality/acousticity, and this structure, along with the dodecad, is immediately perceptibly present as a pervasive formal feature of the acoustic semiosis.
It should be noted that any possible correspondence between the themes, however many, common throughout the Pentateuch and the messianic events, occurs in terms of the latter as a taxonomy of perceptual rather than conceptual consciousness. So the story of The Flood for example, as a recapitulation of the theme of creation, accords more directly with the perceptual analogue of the conceptual form space, which is acoustic imagination, rather than with space, since it suggests itself correspondingly to The Walking On The Water. The state antecedent to the beginning as a chaos depicted in the P creation narrative involves water to a pre-eminent extent. But the P creation narrative still more certainly articulates the notion of space and spatial dimensionality than does the story of The Flood. So too with the story of the 'exodus'. This does not immediately resonate with the conceptual form symbolic masculine, even though we might arguably detect it in the motif of the pursuing Egyptian army. Hence just like the story of The Flood, its manifest use of the  water motif again accords with the story of The Stilling Of The Storm. The same is true of the stories concerning the miraculous feedings of the Israelites in the wilderness with manna from heaven. None of the five or six thematic constructs as we have listed them are as scrupulously articulate as the P narrative of 'beginning' in this sense. In effect, they adopt an immanentist tone, not the abiding sense of transcendence that we encounter in that story. For which reason, that narrative remains the logical centre of gravity of the isomorphism between the gospel and the Hebrew canon, and it underpins the hermeneutic of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand put here.

Certainly too, that these themes traverse the barriers of individual scrolls or books fails the apparent concision of the hermeneutical basis of the present study. Since we have construed the messianic series in its entirety in an analogous relation with the P story of creation, and specified the denotative meaning of each of the twelve rubrics, there is no need to further complicate matters, even though certain connections between the theology of creation, the hub of the doctrine of transcendence, and the themes outlined above, may well be worthy of further investigation. The final semantic of the 'five loaves' in the story of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand as understood in the present hermeneutic therefore remains its reflexive and self-referential quality, and its presentation of the acoustic semiotic series. This is not allegorical. Methodologically it employs analogy, which resolutely fights shy of any ad hoc readings of particular elements or motifs in a text independently of the other elements, and which utilises the logical construct of polarity. Such a systematically incorporative hermeneutic, resumes the doctrine of the Word, and directs itself towards the philosophical theology of language.
Hence the feeding miracle story refers to a fundamental morphological features of the acoustic semiosis with which the analogous and serial conceptual forms and perceptual forms resonate. That the story thus appears to include itself in reflexiveness of this kind is a property of which language, or rather metalanguage, in general is always capable, and mathematics on occasion too. We have already remarked upon it as seminal to John's hymn to the logos at the very inception of his gospel.

In the interests of comprehensiveness, we may note here also that such allegorical interpretation of the five loaves as referent to a certain scriptural component, might engage other equally if indeed not better equipped possibilities. There is the collection of scrolls known as Megilloth, incorporating Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Esther, Lamentations, and Song of Songs. For this as a possible interpretation the same arguments regarding the date of the recensions of the individual members and the collection as a whole would have to be met. On this score, they may well be more suitable, since they are much more self-contained and thematically unified individual units.

But still one more referential hermeneutic of this type must also be mentioned: Psalms. This too will have to meet certain requirements, perhaps the chief one being the time of the editing of Psalms as a collection of five individual units. (For an introduction see Michael LebFevre, The Shape of the Psalter: An Introduction,  and Gerald H. Wilson, The Shape Of The Book Of Psalms; see also Kilnam Cha: Psalms 146-150: The Final Hallelujah Psalms as a Fivefold Doxology to the Hebrew Psalter). This interpretation has perhaps more in its favour than the other two comparable ones.
The book's title, Psalms, is a Greek word meaning song. Indeed the psalms were sung as accompaniments to various liturgical celebrations, many of which revolved around the natural temporal order, or the cultic celebrations of past achievements. There are numerous indications in the text as to their musical performance, and explicit references to music within Psalms abound. Thus, although each of these collections of writings, Torah, Megilloth and Psalms, may lay claim to the allegorical hermeneutic that understands the five loaves vis-a-vis a collection of books within the Hebrew scriptures, they may not equally do so. In fact, the best contender of any in an allegorical, and partial, reading of the 'five loaves' would appear to be Psalms, given its innately musical content and related purposes. (In this connection, see John Koopman, A Brief History Of Singing - Antiquity to 1590.) Additionally, all of the themes noted as recurrent throughout the actual Torah are reproduced in Psalms: creation as beginning, and triumph over chaos; sanctity or purity; deliverance from enslavement; the conquest of place and its relation to identity; and the propagation of life. Certainly Psalms sits more sympathetically with the central hermeneutic given here, which construes the miracle story in its entirety, as denoting acoustic memory. Take for example the following references in those final five psalms alone:

I mean to praise the Lord all my life, I mean to play music for my God as long as I live (Psalm 146.2)

Alleluia! Praise the Lord - it is good to play music in honour of our God - sweet is his praise
Repay the Lord with thanksgiving, play the lyre in honour of our God (Psalm 147.1, 7)

Alleluia! A new song for the Lord altogether!
Let them dance in praise of his name, playing to him on strings and drums! (Psalm 149.1, 3)

Praise him with blasts of the trumpet, praise him with lyre and harp,
praise him with drum and dancing, praise him with strings and reed,
praise him with the ripple of cymbals , praise him with the cymbal clash!
Let everything that breathes praise the Lord! Alleluia! (Psalm 150.3-6, The Jerusalem Bible, Psalms For Reading And Recitation, Darton, Longman & Tod, London, 1969)

In considering this hermeneutical possibility, we must be aware of the importance of the primary hermeneutic which requires that the figures involved defer to the acoustic semiosis. This is by nature at variance with the way in which the idea of the scripted word in a clearly given sense, contradicts orality/acousticity. It is The Feeding Of The Four Thousand as we shall see, that refers to the written word, and this it does with the clearest of any reference to the New Testament canon rather than the Hebrew scriptures. We must then deem as secondary any alleged correspondence between Torah, or Psalms, or for that matter, Megilloth, and the 'five loaves', as a fully adequate response to the question of the latter's meaning. For not only are at least two of these collections of books, Pentateuch and Psalms, equally viable in the reading of this particular quanta as an intertextual scriptural reference, but the hermeneutic all but ignores and fails the other numerical signifiers in the text and is incapable of integration with other similar numerical references in the related miracle stories. The primary hermeneutic of the messianic miracle proposed here, concerns the semiology of the dodecaphonic series, the semeiacoustika, as referred to in all details of the miracle narrative, and is integral comprehensively to the hermeneutic of the remaining events of the miracle series as a whole.

The figures delineated in these texts propose the variety of relations obtaining between the categoreal and intentional forms. What demands recognition is the fact that the acoustic semeia are themselves indeed the most abstract of any of the three series of semeia, replicating the same quality of the integers in the narrative. Indeed it is arguable that semeiacoustika are more abstract than numerals. None of the phenomena of musical expression are susceptible of visible representation in that way that the integers are. Indeed we shall have to explore the nexus between optic sentience and arithmos, the episteme which takes number as its cue. Sound, and more particularly, the acoustic semiotic series, possess peculiarly and innately transcendental properties, the reason why we enjoy and love music so much. The acoustic is the most immaterial of any of the three phenomenal modes of sentience, and music is the most metaphysical means of artistic expression. We need not forget that the acoustic, haptic and optic forms of memory, as a class or taxon, all maintain the principle of immanence in relation to the pure conceptual forms, with which they are diametrically opposed. But within that same class, no series is more representative of transcendence than the semeiacoustika, a fact which accounts for their abstract cast in theological terms. The hermeneutic thus takes as the essential meaning of the figure 'five', whether five of 'five loaves' or five of 'five thousands', the two integrated pentatonic scales of the dodecaphonic series which in each of the six cases, express the essential correlation between conceptual and perceptual intentionalities. It places the ciphers of immanence and transcendence in a relation congruent with the commonest division of the twelvefold acoustic semiotic series, 7 : 5. This procedure
is moreover markedly analogical, and so methodologically fully in keeping with metaphysics. That the narrative mentions two fives, indexes the all-important difference sustained semiologically by the two equally sixfold whole-tone scales; these denote the analogical difference between conceptual and perceptual categories. They are alluded to in the variation between 'five thousands' and 'five loaves' respectively, a difference which is adopted and fully extrapolated only in the succeeding sixfold series, outlined in the story of Transformation Of Water Into Wine as the processive transmutation  of the former into the latter.

In relation to any scripted form, any written word or words, the spoken word maintains a property, the measure of its provenance, The Transcendent. Music borrows from, if in fact it does not actually exploit, this essential difference, between what is heard and what is seen. The nature of sound runs counter to the concrete, effectively in affinity with mathematical abstractions. The plurality of five sets of collections of books which we have just reviewed, should remind us of this. If I will allege that the sevens of the alternative miracle of loaves and fish are to be understood in relation to the concrete aspect of the word, the graphic and visible aspect of the same, then this will not contradict what has just been put. It is the nature of the immanent, which optic memory exemplifies, to comprise if not compromise the transcendent. It has repeatedly been urged that there is no immanence without transcendence. There is no reason to forget this a propos of any differentiation between the two natures of language, the oral, primordial and transcendent nature, and its visible, teleological and immanent counterpart. But the word as spoken and heard, rather than seen and somehow heard, functions independently. At least with respect to certain cultures whose languages are framed in virtue of the phonetic rather than the graphic, this is the case. I will not detail these here, but they are of course alluded to in the miracle story, by means of the references to the fragments collected into twelve baskets. This figure surely refers
in some degree simultaneously to the twelve tribes of the Jewish tradition, and to the twelve disciples of the gospel, as well of course, to the total count of categoreal forms outlined in the creation narrative and messianic miracle series. It forms the basis of a typology, applicable at both levels, the phylogenetic and ontogenetic. But in addition to this its psychological import, it is semantically equally epistemological. These are considerations which lie ahead in this study.

The proposition concerning the self-referential meaning of the phrase 'five loaves' bears further consideration in that it may throw some light upon the history of the tradition. While it takes for granted no effective correspondence between the specific five messianic miracles contained within the gospel of Mark, and the Pentateuch, it nevertheless recalls the logical isomorphism between the P creation narrative and the messianic series, which will be developed further by the other members of its class, involving the arithmetical progression six and seven. This is accomplished in the reference to 'five thousands'. These two quanta recapitulate the equal division of the categoreal scheme as consisting of perceptual and conceptual polarities; fact which may help us to make sense of the evidently 'missing' member of Mark's tally. It goes without saying that this can never be an argument for permanently excluding just that particular event, The Transformation Of Water Into Wine, and so neither for excluding haptic memory from the taxonomy of perceptual consciousness, nor the soma from the taxonomy of conceptual consciousness. There is  no valid reason to proscribe the vital role in consciousness of the perceptual category, haptic memory, nor the conceptual form soma, even if for Mark in particular, the role of acoustic memory is paramount. More of this strand of the argument engages the 'sign of Jonah' sayings, as well as to the oblique mention of 'a sign from heaven' and the cryptic question '"Why does this generation seek a sign?"'. These follow the recapitulation of the details of the two miracles of loaves, and are contained in the brief pericope, The Demand For A Sign (Mark 8.11-12). It noticeably also fails to mention either 'Jonah' or 'sign of Jonah'.

The specific five messianic events contained in Mark maybe understood as  exemplary of the structural differentiation between pentad and heptad. This differentiation even so entails the integration of sevenfold and pentatonic scales. But no lasting finality whatsoever attaches to those particular five episodes denoting perceptual radicals and hence also, their particular conceptual counterparts as expressed by the term 'five thousand', contained in the gospel of Mark. In other words, the abstraction 'five', must be allowed to perform as just that, an abstraction. It indicates the structural and functional relation between pentadic and heptadic forms,
5 : 7, mirrored in the relation of the pentatonic to heptatonic in the acoustic semiosis, iteratively of the categoreal division of 'heaven and earth'. The particular excluded messianic event, The Transformation Of Water Into Wine, missing not only in Mark, but also in  Matthew, and Luke, is not forever proscribed. The 'sign of Jonah' sayings confirm this. If Mark's is a 'gospel of secret epiphanies', that particular epiphany which he appears to guard as the most esoteric of all, is nevertheless the present as absent subject of the pericope Seeking A Sign, (Mark 8.11-13). Its lack of any mention of 'Jonah' accords perfectly with the evident economy of his resurrection-appearance stories. (Notwithstanding which, the Matthean parallel combines the phrase 'the sign of the prophet Jonah' with the formula 'three days and three nights in the heart of the earth (Matthew 12.39-42), whereas Matthew 16.2-4 uses only 'the sign of Jonah' (v 4); and Luke 11.29-32 likewise refers to 'the sign of Jonah' (v 29), but does not include the temporal formula. Matthew's temporal phrase no less than the account of The Transformation Of Water Into Wine in John, enumerates the full sixfold tally of messianic miracles, ascribing as we may the three feeding miracles to the 'three nights' and the three transcendent miracles to the 'three days'.

If then Mark
seems to forswear the inclusion of a single messianic miracle narrative in order to promote the theology of transcendence, arguably due to the significance that The Feeding Of The Five Thousand has for him as an evangelist unlike any other, he nevertheless turns this to the best possible end. For he seems to be most careful in forestalling any misunderstanding of the final tally of messianic miracles. The Book of Jonah as I have argued elsewhere, is that member of the Hebrew canon particularly representing the gut, the belly, which is the haptikon, the somatic sign, for the body, soma. The subtext of these synoptic pericopae then, are cryptically allusive to the sign missing from their own gospels, and the one thus sought or demanded and what is more, referred to as such. (John does not mention 'the sign of Jonah', but he does use this name itself in relation to the apostle Peter, firstly, more or less prior to his account of The Transformation Of Water Into Wine (John 1.42), and then a further three times in the epilogue, clearly in relation to the three feeding miracles (John 21.15, 16, 17). This creates a enigmatic link between the author of the Johannine epilogue and the messianic series, which I am contending was passed on in scripted forms, and also between John's gospel and the synoptic gospels. Such facts generate a raft of issues for scholars interested in the tradition history of the gospels, but their detailed examination remains beyond our immediate purview

Mark understands very well that the Eucharist is to follow in due course. Is this not what he intends by saying: 'Now they had forgotten to bring bread; and they had only one loaf with them in the boat.' (Mark 8.14), directly after the pericope The Demand For A Sign (Mark 8.11-13)? The use of the word 'forgotten' in this context is astonishingly ironic, even if it is only in Luke that we find a reference to the memorial function in the Eucharist (Luke 22.29). He understands too that its membership of the canon of a final seven immanent events must mean that one more miraculous 'sign', a 'sign from heaven', is yet missing from his gospel, since he recounts the story about the seven loaves.
Equally, the presence of the cup in the Eucharist ensures the same effect, since it must be taken in reference to the first messianic sign involving wine, precisely the one 'evidently' missing not only from Mark, but from all three synoptic gospels. Here we should recall John's cryptic record of a dominical saying given in the first miracle story, the one about wine: '"My hour has not yet come'" (John 2.4.b) which seems to anticipate the Eucharist, albeit missing from that gospel, and additionally Luke's introduction to The Institution Of The Lord's Supper: 'And when the hour had come ... '(Luke 22.14a).

We have already argued that each of the messianic miracle narratives deals with the existence of a perceptual centre of consciousness, the only missing one i
n Mark being the first 'sign' of the series, the rubric for haptic memory, given exclusively in John's first miracle narrative. But if this is missing from a full enumeration of messianic events in The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, it is accounted for, along with the Eucharist itself, the seventh episode, in The Feeding Of The Four Thousand which he records. For 'seven loaves' sums the entire series of perceptual centres of consciousness, disclosing their relationship to its conceptual pole, while preparing the way for the eschatology attendant upon the doctrine of The Holy Spirit. In accordance with the same purpose, the reference to the dodecad in Mark's own account of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand also indicates the inclusion of haptic memory within his taxonomy of sense-percipient consciousness, since it affirms comprehensively the categoreal analogy between six conceptual and six perceptual radicals given in the Christological miracle narratives. In addition to this, six of the twelve healing miracle narratives in Mark denote the complete compass of perceptual consciousness. That is, his tally of twelve healing miracles includes the story which denotes haptic memory, The Man With A Withered Hand (Mark 3.1-6), iteratively of the first of the messianic signs.

It is important to stress that the hermeneutic does not entail the proscription of haptic memory from the Markan taxonomy of perceptual consciousness, and so the main points bear repetition: 'five loaves' may therefore mean five perceptual categories consisting in a consecutive chain or serial order, and taken in relation to their five analogous conceptual forms. But it cannot mean the permanent exclusion of the single category, haptic memory, missing, as is the first messianic miracle, from the synoptic tradition, by reason of the various factors discussed here, which I repeat are these: having been given in the first messianic sign related in John as six jars of water and six jars of wine, it is given by logical default again by the reference to 'six days' in the complementary narrative, The Transfiguration, since this comprises six units of 'morning and evening' to use the language of the Days series itself; the number of healing events which Mark records also supports the inclusion of the category, haptic memory; as does the figure which enumerates the baskets of remaining fragments in The Feeding Of The Five Thousand; as does also the Eucharist, which would otherwise remain the sixth episode, a status which would contradict its analogous relation to Sabbath. These consistent factors therefore repeatedly put before us the entire taxonomy of consciousness as outlined in the isomorphic narratives cycles of beginning and end. They insist on the inclusion of John's 'first sign' which denotes haptic memory, as essential to understanding the numerical details of the immanent messianic miracles, and so too that of the creation story.

The immanent messianic miracles then depict sense-percipient modality in metaphorical terms as the process of actual assimilation, suggesting the unification of sense-percipient occasions and the person, compossible  object and subject. The figure' five thousand' supports the hermeneutic of 'five loaves', as it marks the five analogous conceptual forms, those particular subjective, or conceptual, radicals parallel to the objective, perceptual, categories of the messianic series as listed serially and taxonomically. This accords with the references in both Christological messianic miracles to the hexad, which perform the same function; that of highlighting the analogous and interdependent relation of perceptual and conceptual categories. The first and last signs of the messianic miracle series present the encompassing structural morphology which correlates both narratives, creation and salvation. In this much, Mark's does not differ from John's Christology. How could it, when the Christology of The Transfiguration, present in Mark, remains pursuant to that of the first messianic sign? Like the figure 'twelve' in The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, both Christological hexads indicate the systematic coherence of the conceptual and perceptual poles of consciousness. Having laboured these observations at some lengthwe may now attend to the broader picture provided by the hermeneutic which construes The Feeding Of The Five Thousand vis-a-vis both the nexus between the two poles of consciousness, and the pentatonic acoustic semiotic series.

The messianic series in its final form is referred to in The Feeding Of The Four Thousand, the Pneumatological event of its class, and is replete with teleological-eschatological overtones. Since it contains the enumeration 'seven loaves', it now prescribes our interpretation of the dual incidence of the heptad in conjunction with the dual incidence of the pentad in the Transcendental feeding miracle narrative. Thus the five messianic miracles contained in Mark may stand symbolically for the pentadic structures in the acoustic semiosis. They may as narratives therefore carry the self-referential quality of language and consciousness generally in just the very that is proposed in the theology of the logos in John. Remarkably, The Feeding Of The Four Thousand is itself one of these five episodes, along with its denotation of optic memory rather than acoustic memory. If we urge this, it  is because the same integration between the seven messianic events and the four sevenfold series of The Apocalypse is suggested by that very miracle story. I am therefore urging that 'five' abstractively defers to the oral and primordial character of the creation, even though the sum total of such events in the P narrative is seven, and that this is so because of rather than in spite of the fact that the very record itself is being written rather than spoken. In combination with which, I am saying that the seven events of the messianic series, and so the seven events of the creation series, have corresponding analogues in the heptads which prevail throughout The Apocalypse, a text which we are enjoined to read aloud as spoken record. The recurrent figure 'five' and the figures '2' in The Feeding Of The Five Thousand interrelate the P creation narrative and messianic series, with specific attention to the identity to Transcendence. More broadly, this affirms the analogical interrelation of conceptual and perceptual poles of consciousness, with particular emphasis on the functional nature of transcendence. As for the immanent side of the equation, the recurrent figure 'seven' in The Feeding Of The Four Thousand interrelates the messianic series and The Apocalypse. These are  complementary perspectives which if anything, by default focus the pivotal and Christological texts in the gospels. They concentrate the two events of transmutation: 'transfiguration' which resumes the conceptual nature of mind, and 'transformation' which depicts its perceptual character. Hence the oral/primordial word is bound to its optic/teleological complement in a comprehensive manner which is nothing if not self-referential, and at the centre of which is the somatic/haptic phenomenon. This hermeneutic relies upon the pivotal and seminal role played by the two Christological messianic events to further elaborate the analogical relation between the two poles of consciousnesses, conceptual and perceptual, congruently with the relation between beginning and end.

Were it not for the fact of this, the consequential relation of the second to the first testament would remain invalid, and the first itself remain unfinished. That is, if in fact there were no actual reference from the scripted revelation to itself qua scripted revelation, paramount in the New Testament, foremost and finally in The Apocalypse, and thereby to the primordial revelation 'oral Torah', the validity of the whole as revelation would be seriously jeopardized if not rendered illegitimate. On its own terms, the P creation narrative, like 'oral Torah' , confers primacy on the oral and subsequently subordinates the actual text as text, as graphic, written, scripted, visible word/words. It lacks theological justification with regard to its own nature. This belongs to the argument that the former canon cannot rest on its own laurels. To do so makes it no more than a beginning, no more than half of something demanding consummation. Its completion, the actual final consummation of revelation is the specific business of The Apocalypse itself. Without it, we have no logical warrant to investigate even the P creation narrative, since by its own self-definition it cannot be taken as finished. Thus the second miracle story, the Pneumatological story involving seven loaves and so on,  provides the validation of any treatment of the text as a whole. The Apocalypse for this reason adopts de jure that particular miracle story as its own formal paradigm. The necessary caveat to which must be the observations that the texts are to be taken in their entirety, and that the last word, so to speak, will remain the eschatological one. This is delivered in the consistent treatment of the categoreal forms, provided by the gospel(s) and The Apocalypse.  It is therefore the correlation subtended by the seven messianic events common in some form or another to all four gospels, and the four sevenfold series in The Apocalypse, which indelibly interpret one another, that justifies our hermeneutic of the messianic series and the creation series, since these are indeed scripted. The further hermeneutical value of this morphology lies in a Christian doctrine of language, with its necessary implications for the doctrine of special revelation itself.

This occasions, not one, but two apparent complementary contradictions: the written record of the creation, and The Apocalypse qua spoken. Mark for his own part, of course knows well enough that his gospel may be read aloud, and will be; there is no need to emphasise the fact. He accepts creation theology and the transcendental character of orality as fundamental premises. Just so, the writer of The Apocalypse is well aware of the innate bias of his own work: it is irrefragably graphic and teleological to just the same degree that the creation is oral and archaeological. Its governing theological criterion is immanence and it is more 'earthly' than any other member of the canon. It not only can be, but must be and must remain written. These facts adduce to a certain reading of the gospel as incarnational in just the sense of the centering Christological categories, soma and the haptic. Taken together, the three feeding miracles place the gospel as central to our concerns, as it mediates the alterity of beginning and end, the 'phonetic' and 'graphic' forms of the word. Its role ensures that we are constantly returned to the question of the relation between conceptual and perceptual structures of consciousness just as these are formally reflected in this syntax of the Word. Before we can return to the same as the interdependent relationship sustained by the two stories of miracles of loaves, and the semantic value of the Christological texts, we shall have to assess the second of these somewhat independently of the first, and that will necessarily involve consideration of the serial forms in The Apocalypse. The reasons for this procedure we are about to state. The various numerical details with which we have to contend
concern the Word and language itself. Their syntax re-affirms the logos theology with which the messianic series effectively begins. Notwithstanding that, the primary hermeneutic provided here identifies the '5' loaves/thousands as denotatng the two acoustic pentads within the dodecaphonic semeia, which it determines as semiological representations of both categoreal entities and their connected modes of intentionality, rather than any text qua text. For the acoustic semiosis is integral to a complete understanding of the relations obtaining between the various categoreal forms, and subsequently the modes of intentionality. Such relations it is perfectly equipped to postulate. The conscious intentional mode, that of knowing, which specifically shapes the gospel of Mark is based on the theology of acoustic semiotic forms. Its analogue within the aconscious is the will-to-believe, whose sovereign or canonical instance is occasioned by the conceptual form space : time. Determined as theologies of Transcendence, these share the same axiological specification: truth. This ensures that their propositional content: what can be known theologically, and the veridical contents of  will-to-believe, remain primary objectives the acoustic semiosis. The apposition of the acoustic semiosis and the genuine propositional content of the gospel is thus inexorable.

All of which brings to light logical difficulty for the Hebrew Scriptures in general which cannot be ignored. They are in the first instance written documents, a fact for which no satisfactory theological justification is made in the texts themselves.
The barest allowance of any kind exists in the Wisdom literature. Nonetheless the real absence of any theological resolution of the issue is surely one theological problem the former canon must face if it is to exist in isolation. Indeed not only is there a deficiency in respect that no theological account of written communication is made, but neither is any sufficient attention given to orality qua orality, making the theology of special revelation for the Hebrew canon doubly problematic. If the same problem does not arise for the Christian special revelation, which I am certainly putting, then that is due almost exclusively to the two miracle stories, and their overarching purpose of integrating both peripheral narratives, the P creation series and the serial narratives of The Apocalypse. This sorts absolutely with the disclosure of the three co-ordinate sense-percipient forms of memory as essential to communication of any kind, and with their presences  both implicit and explicit, in the three texts.


The three textual cycles salient to our study are immediately recognizable as bearing the same sevenfold format. We tend habitually to associate this with its first instance, that is, with the story of the first seven Days, the Priestly creation narrative. But the two heptadic cycles, those of the gospel(s) and The Apocalypse, yet more logically appropriate this structure, a fact which may be cited in further justification for the adoption of the Hebrew scriptures by the authors of the New Testament canon. The legitimacy of this claim takes quite seriously the self-identification of the creation as a beginning. Because of this, and because of its proleptic quality, and its decidedly transcendentalist perspective, the numerical data of the Transcendental feeding miracle story, The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, insist on the value of the pentad, the complement of the heptad, a relationship which is articulated in the barest rudimentary logical features of the acoustic semiotic forms. Having just now argued for a close connection between the creation narratives to the broader outlines of the Torah and having provided the theological rationale for this, we have not reworked the previous hermeneutic. Rather we have indicated how the 'oral Torah' may be aligned with the gospel. The hermeneutic of the Transcendental feeding miracle story is further validated by the broader links between the P creation story and the Pentateuch, for Pentateuchal Torah itself is now arguably party to the analogous relation sustained by the seven Days and seven messianic events. This means that we shall emphasise the role of the concepts of beginning and transcendence in the hermeneutic of the pentad. But before we can come to a more precise understanding of the double instances of the figure five in the miracle story, since our immediate brief here is with the gospel of Mark, we have to concentrate on the heptad, and thus on the link between the gospels and The Apocalypse. It is true enough to say that the final canonical instance of the heptadic structure belongs rather more to The Apocalypse than either the gospels, or the Hebrew Scriptures. The resolve and single-mindedness with which it appropriates the heptadic form first announced in the P creation narrative is peerless, and nothing in either canon, Hebrew Scriptures or New Testament approaches it in terms of formal consistency.

So h
ere we shall have to incorporate some detailed comment on The Apocalypse. Before we can further discuss The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, that specific messianic event which bears an immediate relationship to the gospel of Mark proportionately to the relationship of the first feeding miracle to the gospel of Luke, the latter which we have begun already to explicate, we must address the alternate feeding event, The Feeding Of The Four Thousand. The figures 4 and 7 which leap at us from this narrative, proclaim the certain correspondence between the four gospels and the various sevenfold series in The Apocalypse, of which there are at least six. This correspondence between the gospel and The Apocalypse complements that maintained by the P creation narrative and the series of messianic events. The exposition of the pentatonic acoustic semiosis is best undertaken via consideration of the heptatonic scales, and this requires that we broach The Apocalypse. The acoustic semiosis calls for an account of the pentatonic systems which the first miracle of loaves announce. Accordingly we have emphasized the messianic series relative to the P creation story, and more widely that of the 'oral Torah', the theology of acoustic semiotic forms. But the ciphers of transcendence will be best understood by means of first determining the ciphers of immanence, and this demands realising the relationship between the gospel and The Apocalypse, as suggested by the fact that the miracle story itself indicates the written inseparably from its denotation of the category optic memory. So we shall provide some general support for the argument linking the four gospels with the formally delineated four quartets of The Apocalypse here, as well as some more specific comment concerning the gospel of Mark a propos of the series of letters to the churches.

In imputing any oral character to The Apocalypse, however secondary it might be, we should remark that the heptad is vital to any biblical doctrine of consciousness and to the theology of the Word, due to two very good reasons: scripture is by definition written, and vision is a dominant sense-percipient modality. The reasons for the latter claim turn upon the nature of immanence and the prevalence of beauty as that most accessible, even if most chthonic, of values, and we need not argue the case for it here. It moulds each of the three narrative cycles: creation, the messianic series, and The Apocalypse as a whole. The conceptual and perceptual polarities of consciousness are anatomically displayed in terms of it. It gains momentum progressively, for the P story of beginning is remarkably succinct, whereas the gospel noticeably deliberates in its accounts of the six messianic miracles and the Eucharist, providing much more semantic and numerical detail. In light of which we might contend that the formal accent of the gospel is the Christological one: the sixfold. But of course, The Apocalypse as a whole is thoroughly permeated with the heptadic form, and teems with references to it both explicitly, and formally, by means of the repetition of certain formulae. The two primary textual centres, P creation story and the gospel, must be taken as literary precedents for The Apocalypse. This is the key to its conspicuous and self-avowed intertextuality. As the final member of canon it simply could not have existed without the many prior texts which it integrates, particularly the narrative cycles of creation and salvation, Days and messianic series. Certainly its operative intent is to end the canon, to effectively have the last word, and so it acknowledges this very dependence upon these precedents.

We have argued that the categoreal paradigm transcendence : immanence consists of two terms in relation, having disallowed the unnecessary multiplication of terms themselves. In just this sense, the intertextual character of The Apocalypse remains 'plagal'. Such a description is meant to construe the reliance of the book in its entirety, on scripture taken integrally, but chiefly with regard to the two prior sevenfold narratives as noted. In a way there is in The Apocalypse very little that is new. It is self-avowedly 'plagal' or 'pseudomorphic' in just this sense, the raison d'etre of its formal contours is the isomorphic series of 'beginning and end', the entities categoreal to the Christian doctrine of mind. Its insistence on the heptad is undeniable, beginning with the unnumbered letters to the seven churches (Apocalypse 1.11, 2.1-3.22), which are associated with the seven spirits (1.4), as well as the seven golden lampstands (1.12, 13), the seven stars (1.16, 20), and the seven angels (1.20). Three more sevenfold series follow: seals, trumpets and vials. Many exegetes have proposed additional sevenfold series in the unnumbered visions following the series of seven trumpets (Apocalypse 12.1-15.4), and similarly later texts (Apocalypse19.11-21.8). The book therefore comprises a total of six integrated sevenfold series.
In addition to which, is a plethora of explicit references to the figure seven throughout the work, as well as sevenfold uses of the formula ku/riov o) qeo\v o) pantokra/twr, The Lord God Almighty, (Apocalypse 1.8, 4.8, 11.17, 15.3, 16.7, 19.6, 21.22); the use of the title 'Lamb' ( a)rni/on) to refer to Christ twenty-eight times, which some scholars recognise as the product of 7 and 4, and 'seven of which directly link the a)rni/on with God', (Apocalypse 5.13, 6.16, 7.10, 14.4, 21.22, 22. 1, 3; see Darin M. Wood, The Structure of The Apocalypse); as well as the seven beatitudes, (Apocalypse 1.3, 14.13, 16.15, 19.9, 20.6, 22.7, 14).

We have already noted that the seven letters repeat formulae such as 'the words of ... ' (Apocalypse 2.1, 8, 12, 18, 3.1, 7, 14), and 'He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches.' (Apocalypse 2.7, 11, 17, 29, 3.6, 13, 22), forging an eschatological association between this particular quartet, the seven letters, and the gospel of Mark, the rationale of which we are arguing, is informed by the conscious intentionality of knowing, manifestly due to acoustic memory, and the aconscious intentional mode arising from the conceptual form space : time, which is the will-to-believe. As part of the same literal evidence we might add also the immediate preface to the letters:

Blessed is he who reads aloud ( a)naginw/skwn) the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written therein; for the time is near ( o( ga\r kairo\v e)ggu/v). Apocalypse 1.3)
These are not the only references of their kind. Many others lend themselves readily to a view of the book in keeping with the spoken word. The throne visions and the 'liturgies'  which the four seventh events just mentioned precede, all incorporate notions of the same, for the act of worship is itself verbal. Two further such references can be listed here, both of which in varying ways point to the acoustic semiotic series. The first occurs within the series of trumpets, during the interregnum between the sixth and seventh, and is obviously linked in the seer's mind with the scripted word:
Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven, wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head, and his face was like the sun, and his legs like pillars of fire. He had a little scroll open in his hand. And he set his right foot on the sea, and his left foot on the land, and called out with a loud voice, like a lion roaring; when he called out, the seven thunders sounded. And when the seven thunders had sounded, I was about to write, but I heard a voice from heaven saying, "Seal up what the seven thunders have said, and do not write it down." (Apocalypse 10.1-4)
This text clearly prescribes one of the dominant forms of the acoustic semiosis, the (two) heptatonic scales, which we shall link with the sevenfold pattern foundational to the structure of the work as a whole. The other reference does likewise. It is placed after the description of the series of vials in a passage which appears to be an interpretation of the 'seven heads' belonging to the 'great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads', who formerly appeared as a portent (shmei~on) in heaven, from which '[h]is tail swept down a third of the stars ... and cast them to earth.' (Apocalypse 12.3-4) The later description of the same elaborates it in combination with '"the great harlot who is seated on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the dwellers on earth have become drunk."' (Apocalypse 17.1b-2). The interpretation begins:
When I saw her I marveled greatly. But the angel said to me, "Why marvel?" I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her. The beast that you saw, was, and is not, and is to ascend from the bottomless pit and to to perdition; and the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to behold the beast, because it was and is not and is to come. This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are the seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while. As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth, but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to perdition.' (Apocalypse 17.6b-11)
These threefold references to being, are intratextual and parody the description of Transcendence, who was hymned in the first of the liturgical scenes by the four living creatures in such a way as to combine the visions of Ezekiel with those of Isaiah, fusing the tetradic paradigm of immanence in Ezekiel's vision with the triadic paradigm of Transcendence in Isaiah's vision: '" ... the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come!" (Apocalypse 4.8b). (Here we should note in passing, the apocalyptist's syncretistic depiction of 'four living creatures': those of Ezekiel's vision have four wings (Ezekiel 1.6), whereas those of his own accord with the description given in the commissioning of Isaiah, whose had a vision of the 'burning ones' having six wings (Isaiah 6.1-3). This syncretism of sorts, visible throughout the work as a whole, squares perfectly with its presentation of a theology of world religions.) The interpretation of the passage about the beast which 'is an eighth, but it belongs to the seven and it goes to perdition'  also points in the direction of the  octave, a phenomenon central to the acoustic semiosis. The subtext of this passage then also seems to point to the sevenfold diatonic scale(s). Once more, it is parodic in tone. Given the liturgical and doxological purposes implicit in the book, this is hardly surprising. Worship and praise demand words, if indeed not music.

But the oral character of The Apocalypse is both secondary and indecipherable without reference to the hermeneutical keys already provided by the interrelated series of beginning and end, the Days and the messianic events, which first deliver the doctrine of intentionality. The four sevenfold serial
orders in The Apocalypse formally and comprehensively appropriate that which these have already disclosed, subsuming it within the context of eschatology rather than that of salvation as such. In this much, each series will incorporate not just one of the four cardinal modes of intentionality, but its dyadic counterpart. So in the case of Mark, the series of seven letters to the churches, the first, and 'spring' series of The Apocalypse,  is not concerned merely with the acoustic as with knowing; but with space : time and so too, the canonical form of intentionality arising from the same, the will-to-believe.  On the evidence provided by the relevant texts, such as the stories of Day 5 and The Haemorrhagic Woman for example, as well as the Book of Daniel, a book replete with temporal references, we have defined will-to-believe on the basis of the public rather than private nature of existence. Like knowing, will-to-believe is both public and consensual in this sense. A church as commonly held, is as both Mark and the apocalyptist see it, a collective, a group, a phylum. Both Markan modes of intentionality, knowing and will-to-believe are phylogenetic rather than ontogenetic; or as we may say, ecclesial. They occupy the end of a spectrum which juxtaposes phylogeny to ontogeny, points distinguishing the boundaries of each of the four quarters of the annual cycle which serves as one important temporal template for the doctrine of intentionality. Accordingly the first sevenfold series in The Apocalypse adopts this perspective, the phylogenetic, because of its relevance for the Markan intentional modes, knowing and will-to-believe. (I shall argue that each of the four clearly delineated series, letters, seals, trumpets and vials, will assume the same doctrinal epistemological-psychological theology which functions as the principle and guiding rationale of each of the four gospels.) The letters are each addressed to specific locales, identified by the names of cities. Not surprisingly, they also contain several references to times:
Temporal constructs similar to these are scattered throughout the work, the most famously enigmatic of which, are those either in various guises referring to 'time, times and half a time', or the literally numerical equivalents of this formula in units of years or days, (Apocalypse 11.3, 11.9, 12.6, and 12.14 kairo\n kai\ kairou\v kai\ h(/misu kairou~). These take their cue from Daniel 7.5. This formula is exactly half a heptad, and it is pronounced already in the diatonic scale(s) which we have already examined in terms of contrastive complementarity. It marks the cadences from seventh to eight  degrees, and from fourth to third degrees of the major sevenfold scale, up and down respectively. We shall have cause to investigate these later. The tri-dimensional matrix is congruent with the same expression, just as is the menorah, whose significance we have already put as part of the interpretation of the heptad, which latter remains foundational to the infrastructure of The Apocalypse. The use of the heptadic format allusively to the creation story, in itself invokes the spatiotemporal conceptual form. Thus the specific nexus between Mark  and the first of the four 'canonical' sevenfold series in The Apocalypse, the letters to the churches, further develops eschatological doctrine a propos of the will-to-believe, laying the ground for a prophetic revelation of the theology of religions. Quite apart from that however, John is also making an important claim concerning epistemology: namely that no modus cognoscendi, no expression of the intentional form knowing is value free, or ethically neutral. The seven letters say as much; they simultaneously advance the ethics of public, that is ecclesial belief, and the ethics of its conscious equivalent, knowing. Thes postulates evince the essential and indissoluble compact between the modes themselves, knowing and will-to-believe. The 'churches' are thus both sorts of phyla or cohesive units of persons, identifying with one another on the basis of these modes. The 'ekklesia' are classes of persons grouped according to the intentionality of knowing, as well as classes of persons grouped according to the will-to-believe. The writer is therefore connecting the sociology of knowing with the sociology of the will-to-believe. This substantiates his view of both modes of intentionality as inherently 'religious' if not precisely ideological. It is essential to his theology of 'world' religions, as well as to the explication of the eschatologies proper to not just the one gospel, that of Mark, but to all four. The link between time, that is space : time, and religious observance underpins this tenet.

His primary concern relates at once to information theory as the ground for the eschatology of knowing and will-to-believe. If the expression 'information' suggests the dominance of the conscious over the aconscious that comports with the superordinate member of this canonical dyad. Even so, in every one of the three cases of the numbered sevenfold series: seals, trumpets and vials, and in the first unnumbered series, the letters, both the subordinate and superordinate modes of intentionality are included within its eschatological remit. The series of letters draws upon the connection between knowing and will-to-believe, pari passu with their exposition in the gospel of Mark, as well as in other texts, and this is a major objective at the heart of the theology of acoustic semiotic forms. We shall return to the various and particular forms of the will-to-believe  as well as those of knowing, which the acoustic semiotic forms disclose, some of which we have already indicated. But there remains yet further basic definition of the theses put here regarding intentionality a propos of its final emergence in The Apocalypse.

Our reading of The Apocalypse must avail itself of any understanding of the Pneumatological feeding miracle story whose ciphers 4 and 7 single-mindedly shape it, to the same degree that the hermeneutic of the messianic series accepts as precedent the P creation narrative. The hermeneutic of both feeding miracles thus sustains the innate equilibrium posed by 'beginning and end' as special revelation. A major element in the interpretation of The Feeding Of The Four Thousand will be the doctrine of revelation vis-a-vis the theology of religions first sounded in the letters to the churches. Equally, the interpretation of that particular messianic miracle will be influenced by The Apocalypse. The 'seven loaves' therefore refers to written records of the series of seven messianic events, 
from the point of view of the same, the doctrine of the Word; and from the point of view of the latter itself, refers to the seven perceptual categories of mind: the four forms of memory and the three forms of imagination. At the same time, it accounts for these as part of the theology of semiotic forms; which is to avow that the 'miraculous' event is the process of vision. The semiotic forms in this case are thos of optic memory: the visible hues. In some measure, every one of the four gospels contains the messianic series. The 'seven baskets of remaining portions', denotes the yet more graphic accounts of four sevenfold series in The Apocalypse, and squares as referential to the optic semiotic series. This hermeneutic so brings into closest contact the gospels themselves as wholes, with this last member of the written canon, complementarily to the  reference to the 'oral Torah', and especially to the P story of creation, in The Feeding Of The Five Thousand. For the figure four in the Pneumatologial messianic miracle story is congruent with the presentation of the four clearly defined heptads in The Apocalypse, as it is with the formal structure of the 'gospel' itself. This means that the gospels and The Apocalypse are mutually interpretative, since for details concerning the forms of intentionality which identify the perspectival orientations of the four gospels have clear ramifications for the soteriological and eschatological constructs of The Apocalypse as these concern world religions. Such  a hermeneutical construct at once testifies to the integrity of scripture. It ensures the processive events described in the gospels as pivotal to both 'beginning' and 'end'. It will be necessary to re-examine these relationships in more detail, for they develop several factors associated with the doctrine of intentionality. That is, it will be necessary to advance the theology of acoustic semiotic forms in relation to the structural characteristics of the optic semiotic forms, which method we have already employed, and to which we may now return, as equipped to deal with the integration of the pentadic and heptadic structures. That said, the composite use of both semioses together is intrinsic to the theology of intentionality, just at it is representative of the compact between the phonetic and graphic forms of words themselves, and hence also to the theology of the Word.
The juxtaposition of the two linguistic modes, the phonetic and graphic, mirrored in the semioses of acoustic memory and optic memory, must serve the illumination and final hermeneutic of the two miracle stories, and simultaneously the theology of the Word. Their juxtaposition concerns at its sharpest contours, the effective difference already referred to:
'that which always is and has no becoming; and ... that which is always becoming and never is'. There is no doubt that The Feeding Of The Five Thousand reverts to the theological orientation of creation, transcendence, or 'that which is and has no becoming'. Mark's gospel, which adopts the meaning of this narrative, acoustic memory, and that of the corresponding creation rubric which announces its adjacent conceptual form, space : time, may not have anything like the strong transcendentalist overtones of the opening of the gospel of John, nothing in the New Testament does. Nonetheless it makes common cause with that same contextual outlook while remaining true to its own peculiar nature:
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (Mark 1.1, emphasis added)
Concerning the latter title, which avowedly attributes transcendent status to the person of Christ, the United Bible Societies commentary on the text has this to say:
The absence of ui(ou qeou~ in ) Q 28c al may be due to an oversight in copying, occasioned by the similarity of the endings of the nomina sacra. On the other hand, however, there was always a temptation (to which copyists often succumbed) to expand titles and quasi-titles of books. Since the combination of B D W al in support of ui(ou~ qeou~ is extremely strong, it was not thought advisable to omit the words altogether, yet because of the antiquity of the shorter reading and the possibility of scribal expansion, it was decided to enclose the words within square brackets. (A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament, Bruce M. Metzger, United Bible Societies, London, 1975, p 73).
(For one example of the argument for the 'Son of God' title see Dean B. Deppe, Markan Christology and the Omission of ui)ou~ Qeou~ in Mark 1.1, at BSW.) The more detailed discussion of evidence for and against Mark's theological orientation as transcendentalist belongs to a later point in our study, and will engage comparison of his own theological perspective with that of the gospel of Matthew. The immediate task is to understand the miracle narrative as the exposition of acoustic memory, the sufficient and necessary condition to knowing, since this latter remains the elemental conscious epistemic mode of intentionality underpinning his theological outlook. This must be undertaken not only somewhat deferentially to Pneumatological feeding narrative, but in league with the first and Christological miracle of the messianic series, just as it must incorporate as part of our 'panoptic' project, their three texts as wholes. These are texts which themselves reflect the radical hermeneutic of the narratives.)

Mark may seem unencumbered by such subtleties
as preoccupy either John or Luke, with their louder Christological deliberations, since the clearer outlines of the most transcendental of the three immanent events, acoustic memory, pervades his thinking to an exceptional extent. A very similar stance is that which will be adopted Matthew. The salient fact is this: the narrative The Feeding Of The Five Thousand refers symbolically to the P creation story, and specifically to the conceptual forms space and space : time, the subjects of Day 2 and Day 5 respectively, as to somewhat of a precedent. It therefore emphasizes the conceptual polarity of consciousness. If we allege that the transcendent 'heaven' is a primary topic of that story, and that the 'heavenly' is a property of sorts of the  conceptual polarity as a whole, with which that particular cycle is concerned, the hermeneutic of the miracle story will involve the existence of any such realm, 'heaven' or the 'kingdom of heaven', as essentially linked with knowing and the will-to-believe. That realm is the realm of the being qua being of entities, in which their selfhood, or identity, reigns as sovereign over any interdependence, any togetherness they may exhibit within the realm of the immanent, the worldly. For the latter does its best to compromise their singularity self-existence, their identity.

We are thus drawing upon the certain conceptual being of those things which are the subjects of the P narrative. But this does not isolate them from the perceptual categories as totally as we might expect. The relation of the six conceptual forms to their perceptual parallels, already affirmed by the calculated isomorphism of the texts, was plainly stated by the numerical identity between 'loaves' and 'thousands', as signifying perceptual entities and conceptual entities pari passu with the dichotomous relation objects-subjects. We are taking the former, 'five loaves' as referent to the perceptual categories which are listed in Mark's five messianic events, noting that this does by no means proscribe haptic memory, even given the absence of the story of The Transformation Of Water Into Wine in his gospel. We are taking the latter, 'five thousand', as referent to the parallel conceptual forms, including therefore of course, the conceptual form of unity, soma, or mind : body. (As already noted, the same analogous relation between conceptual and perceptual forms is given in the story of The Transformation Of Water Into Wine, under the two elements water and wine respectively. Just as importantly however, this narrative is complemented by the story of Transfiguration, which defers to the Day 1 rubric, denoting logos or mind. Hence conceptuality is linked with Thanatos just as perceptual consciousnesses are with Eros.) The postulate of  'universals', 'transcendent entities', 'eternal objects', 'heavenly' or 'ideal' subjects/objects, or indeed whatever else we choose to call them, such as we shall make, must therefore accentuate the conceptual polarity of consciousness rather than the perceptual polarity of consciousness.

The hermeneutical arguments which have occupied us thus far may be summed up as follows:
  • the three immanent messianic miracle stories refer self-reflexively, and so, in terms of logos Christology, to the three textual centres, Genesis 1.1-2.4a, messianic series, and The Apocalypse;
  • they correlate these same three texts analogously to their denotation of the interrelated three modes of sense-percipience, acoustic : haptic : optic, according to the arithmetical progression of the duplicated figures in each, 5-5:6-6:7-7, figures which refer to the theology of semiotic forms;
  • thus the messianic events must be taken in relation to the stories of creation (Genesis 1.1-2.4a), and to The Apocalypse, as a result of which, the Christological hexads are essential to extrapolating from the acoustic semiosis to that of the optic;


Two examples have already been presented of both kinds of intentional processes, perceptual and conceptual. These reveal both audially and visually what we mean by the four conscious modes which irrevocably shape the four gospels. The intentionalities of desire and knowing, given in the example of C major, are audible as the transition from the 7th to 8th degrees of the scale. The intentionalities of will and belief are audible as the transition from the 4th to 3rd degrees of the Cb major scale. These occur in opposing directions as to pitch, the (conscious) perceptual processes being heard as movement up the scale, and the (conscious) perceptual processes are heard as moving down the scale. Even so, they are the same in that they are conscious rather than aconscious processes, and this is depicted by the semeioptika which in both cases are identical; in the first instance the two categories are indicated by the colour red, in the second, by the colour yellow.

An alternative cadence occurs in each scale, which completes the pattern, since both cadences are present in both scales. However, the cadence 4 to 3 in C major, and the cadence 7 to 8 in Cb major are not represented by one and the same semioptikon. This signals the fact that the two categories involved in both cases are not analogous to one another. All cadences occur as intervals of a semitone. We refer to these points or moments of cadence as the 'seams' or 'nodes' of the two subsets of radicals, conceptual and perceptual which comprise every expression and depiction of an intentional process. Every intentional process consists of both sorts of radical: conceptual and perceptual, given in the ratio of 3 : 4. The first three degrees of the scale contain the tonic or first degree of the scale, also known as the eighth degree or octave, as well as the third degree. Since the resolutions or cadences occur at just these moments, it is this group of three semeia which express and depict the intentional process. Both resolutions in both kinds of scale, occur in favour of the same sort of radical. That is, both the tonic (eighth) and third belong to the same subgroup, which is either perceptual  or conceptual. The two cadences resolving at the first and third degree in virtue of either a perceptual or a conceptual form,mean their  kind of intentional mode. Hence these resolutions at these seams between the subgroups are of either sort.

The analogous categories determine the conformation of the aconscious modes of intentionality to their conscious dyads, according to the canonical status of the intentional mode proper to each. The dyadic, that is analogical relation of perceptual to conceptual counterpart, the fundamental proposition of the isomorphism between the P creation narrative and messianic series, determines the aconscious, that is non-normative forms of intentionality in keeping with their conscious parallels, given that each categoreal form occasions a canonical instance of a specific forms of intentionality. Thus since what haptic imagination is to mind, desire-to-know is to belief; and will-to-believe is to knowing as is the conceptual form space : time to acoustic memory. We can extrapolate from this to the two examples cited. In the perceptual modes of intentionality, as noted the cadence 7-8 means both intentional processes, desire and knowing, whereas the cadence 4-3 means both intentional processes, knowledge-of-will and desire-to-know. So too, in the conceptual modes, as noted the cadence 4-3 means both will and belief, whereas the 7-8 cadences means both belief-in-desire and will-to-believe. Because these aconscious intentional modes appear to be derivative of their conscious parallels, that is, because the aconscious radicals are said to be of either sort, virtually transcendent in the case of imagination, and virtually immanent in the case of forms of unity, we speak of the aconscious modes of intentionality as pseudo-conceptual for knowledge-of-will and desire-to-know, and pseudo-perceptual for belief-in-desire and will-to-believe.

Thus transcendental of virtually transcendental modes of intentionality, which is say, conceptual and pseudo-conceptual modes, are always expressed by cadences which resolve in the direction of pitch downwards, and in their canonical instances, are always represented by optika which belong to the solar end of the spectrum: red, orange, yellow. These are the conceptual modes will and belief, and the pseudo-conceptual modes knowledge-of-will and desire-to-know. Just so, the immanent or perceptual forms of intentionality, desire and knowing, and the modes described as virtually immanent, or pseudo-conceptual, belief-in-desire and will-to-believe are always expressed by cadences whose resolution occurs upwards in pitch, and whose canonical instances are always designated by chromatic values belonging to the blue end of the spectrum.

It is now possible and necessary to discriminate between conative and cognitive intentional processes. Many philosophical psychologies highlight the former at the expense of the latter, and do so necessarily not without considerable assistance from rhetoric itself. In the western tradition, the notion begins as early as Plato, but that is not to say that he champions Eros exclusively. Certainly it occurs in earnest in Spinoza with his emphasis on conatus; in Hume, cited in epigrammatic fashion with a shibboleth
which Luke himself might well enough seem to endorse, "Reason is the slave of the passions", (emphasis added); in Nietzsche's Dionysian themes, and the subtext of many of his exhortations, where it resonates with something akin to hysteria; in Freud of course, there, completely divorced from even a rudimentary epistemology, it lacks any illumination of what is literally its countervailing nemesis, Thanatos; in much of the pious atheism of modernist existentialism; and of course in the militant opposition directed at a variety of religious traditions stemming from post-modernism. I do not intend to deprecate the conative, not merely because we have already witnessed how readily it is acknowledged in the gospel of Luke, but also because will itself, is by definition part of the same conatus, and in some respects, will is antipathetic to desire, the latter being so often, indeed almost uniformly, taken for its chief spokesperson. Rather, I shall contend that in their treatment of what I am defining as conative and cognitive, Markan and biblical metaphysics appear by contrast to present more in the way of equilibrium,  an argument to which we will return. Every gospel is shaped by conative as well as by cognitive forces.
A caveat is due at this point: there are in all three different permutations of the minor scale, and only one of these corresponds directly to the major. That is, only one, the natural minor, rather than the harmonic or melodic minors, utilises exactly the same tones as its relative major, in exactly the same order, although it begins, and so ends, on a different tone from that of the major tonic. This tonic or first degree of the minor relative to its major, is always three semitones below the tonic of the major. The variation in order means, that the two cadences which we have been discussing now occur at different moments: the 7-8 becomes 2-3, and the 4-3 becomes 6-5. This first, of what will be a series of axioms serving the exposition of the theology of semiotic forms, is much more than an abstraction.  I am proposing that the same elemental structures of consciousness, divisible at the first-level taxonomy into conceptual and perceptual radicals, and furthermore, divided once more on the basis of the same categoreal analogy as to virtual transcendence and virtual immanence which reflect their normative equivalents in the aconscious, constitute the substance of two basically opposed but related modes of consciousness, and that the best, and indeed the only way that this relation can be grasped is in terms of the acoustic semiotic forms. Thus what applies to the nexus between desire and knowing, applies also to the same relation between will and belief. We have two necessary examples at our disposal. The first is that of the C major scale, whose relative natural minor is A minor. The two conscious modes of intentionality which these scales express are those of knowing and desire respectively. Both involve a transition between the conceptual form space and is perceptual analogue, acoustic imagination. This transition is revealed in the story of The Transformation Of Water Into Wine, a story which unstintingly resumes the presentation of the same two basic aspects of mind first divulged in the J creation narrative, and which is the first of any text in the gospels to deliver the Christological background which is inseparable from the doctrine of mind. These passages are worth repeating in brief here:
But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1.12, 13.)

Nathanael said to him, "How do you know me?" Jesus answered him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the tree, I saw you." Nathanael answered him, "Rabbi,you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!" Jesus answered him, "Because I said to you, I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You shall see greater things than these." And he said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man." (John 1.48-51)

And Jesus said to her "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come." (John 2.4)
I have included the first quote since it links the intentionality of desire with that of belief, these being both the conscious Christological modes. We see the compound mode, belief-in-desire, operative in Lukan theology, which we have already addressed. I have included the last, because a vital connection exists between the two basic sorts of transitions, as these are manifest in the two Christological miracles. These transmutations involve either conceptual and pseudo-conceptual or perceptual and pseudo-perceptual modes of intentionality, as have been just outlined. Hence we refer to them as 'transformative' and 'transfigurative' respectively. This division re-orders the original first-level taxonomy. It groups together the radicals of actual immanence and virtual immanence on the one hand, and the radicals of actual and virtual transcendence on the other as these are responsible for the canonical instances of the modes of intentionality. Furthermore, the distinction extends to the sacramental theologies of Eucharist and baptism respectively. It is here once more, that we revert to the Eucharist : Sabbath construal, reinforcing the fullest integration of the two taxonomies.

The 'transformative' intentional processes are always expressed as cadences resolving upwards either in favour of true perceptual intentional modes, occasioned by the forms of memory: 7-8 for knowing and 2-3 for desire; or the virtually perceptual intentional modes, occasioned by the forms unity: 7-8 for the will-to-believe, and 2-3 for belief-in-desire. 'Transfigurative' intentional processes are always expressed as cadences which resolve down the scales, in favour of pure conceptual modes, occasioned by pure conceptual forms: 4-3 for belief, and 6-5 for will, or a virtually conceptual intentional mode, occasioned by the forms of imagination: 4-3 for desire-to-know, and 6-5 for knowledge-of-will. This supports what is already apparent in the mandala depicting the evangelical canonical instances of the four modes of intentionality, conscious and aconscious. So it re-inforces what has been put regarding for example the similarity between desire and belief-in-desire in the case of Luke, and what we shall argue here for the gospel of Mark; the similitude of conscious knowing to aconscious will-to-believe. It is necessary to point out here that the directions referred to as descent and ascent vis-a-vis the scales are the direct opposite of those shared by the New Testament texts which evince these same fundamental aspects of consciousness. The theologies of incarnation and perceptual consciousness which are expounded in the stories of the feeding miracles, the second half of the P narrative, and Eucharist are configured as cadential resolutions upwards in terms of pitch; the theologies of ascension and conceptual consciousness given in the first half of the P creation story, the transcendent messianic miracles, and stories of the resurrection-ascension are just as consistent with the cadences expressed in transition down the scale. The squares with the previous exposition of the first and second level polarisations of categoreal forms congruently with the polarity expressed in pitch.

The most important structural difference between the major and relative minor concerns the phenomenon of harmony. There is, significantly, only one real change between the three tones which compose the major triad, and the three which form the minor triad. So that, both these triads include the same interval, the same two tones; but the third tone with which they combine differs. (It is important to actually hear this difference between major and minor, which you  can do here.) In both the conscious and the aconscious the conative is instrumental to the cognitive. This is a truer formulation of the contentions indicated above, regarding the primacy of the conatus. Its temporal nature alone distinguishes it. This everywhere circumscribes the distal  in opposition to the proximal of the past in the case of perceptual and pseudo-perceptual intentionality, and the future in the case of conceptual and pseudo-conceptual intentionality. Thus when John writes of 'the beginning', and writes of the logos rather than Transcendence ("The Father"), since what follows in the text  are the Christological narratives culminating in the messianic miracle, we are to understand this temporal reference in direct opposition to that of the P narrative. The theology of creation since it is a theology of The Transcendent, is a psychologia christiana of will, and so concerns the future of the world. The gospel of John however begins with a Christological hymn, which as psychologia christiana, concerns desire, and the past. Given the essential and necessary reciprocity of the two textual cycles, one may extend these remotest futures and pasts to their furthermost recesses, and to dual infinities, and even speculate on their co-incidence in God.

This leaves us in need of incorporating the Holy Spirit in any such framework. And effectively we have indicated


The relation between pentad and heptad is suggested by their conspicuous repetition in the miracle narratives, and this their hermeneutic must corroborate. We are thus taking
the 'five loaves' primarily as referring to the incidence of dual pentads within the acoustic semiotic series, in correlation with the dual sevenfold series as argued. Secondarily, there is a reference to the messianic series in a purposively incomplete, that is, primordial and therefore non-teleological form, in a form accentuating the phenomenon of orality. The fiveof ' five loaves', denotes the perceptual radicals themselves recounted in Mark's own five miracle narratives and the recapitulation of the Transcendental and Pneumatological events. In just this way it connote the 'oral Torah', which  will be signified by the pentads in the acoustic semiosis. The five now of 'thousands of persons', or 'subjects', namely denotes their parallel, that is, analogous conceptual, subjective forms outlined in the creation story. Therefore the complementary procedure will occur consistently, in the hermeneutic of the repeated heptad in the Pneumatological feeding miracle story. This it does with regard to both a specific semiosis, the Pneumatological one of optic memory/imagination, and with regard to the text itself. The twofold extensiveness of these two feeding miracles is complementary, since without the second feeding miracle story, the creation remains unaccounted for teleologically, void of eschatological import, and the beginning remains nothing other than just that.

But there are not seven, rather only six conceptual categories. In addition to this,  complementarity involves some degree of contrast, such as will affirm the essential difference between the audible and the visible. Just as surely, the acoustic semiosis and the optic semioses differ, even if we remark certain morphological structures common to each. The '7' of 'seven loaves'  and 'seven baskets of left over portions' denotes both the optic semiosis, and the text itself, the now inscribed seven messianic events, including not just the Eucharist, which we may argue is missing from John, but that episode which is  remarkably akin to it, Transformation Of Water Into Wine, missing from the synoptic gospels. These connect with the final dispensation of The Apocalypse, whose four conspicuous sevenfold series  reverberate with the messianic series and so, with each of the gospels.
This brings into closest connection the soteriology of the intentional modes specific to each gospel, and each of the four sevenfold series in the final member of the canon. It is the hermeneutical key which can begin to unlock The ApocalypseHence The Feeding Of The Four Thousand, the Pneumatological feeding miracle is unintelligible without The Apocalypse and vice versa. These are mutually inclusive texts whose reciprocity acts complementarily to the relation subtended by The Feeding Of The Five Thousand and the P creation narrative.

Here then we are proposing a systematic and coherently integrated understanding of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand as relating the messianic series to the creation narratives, particularly to the P story, and even more particularly still to the rubrics Day 2 and Day 5. Conversely The Feeding Of The Four Thousand relates the same series to the four sevenfold series in The Apocalypse, and to that book as a whole. Such a procedure of course effectively links together much more than merely the messianic series to the P creation narrative. It actually binds the gospel as a whole to oral as well as to written 'Torah' and more, and binds it also to The Apocalypse and beyond. That beyond encompasses very much of what is included here, in the emerging exposition of the theology of semiotic forms, especially that of the acoustic semiosis. For the two miracle stories are not merely reflective of the coherence of scripture, they are indicative of the self-reflexive nature of consciousness itself as is exposed in the phenomenon of language itself. They attribute the fractured members of both the acoustic and optic semiotic series to the textual units themselves, and so finally also to what these texts denote: the radical components of consciousness. This allows not merely theological exposition alone; it incorporates a praxis. In fact, it necessitates the latter insofar as its grasp modifies the very same consciousness itself. Any theology, like any philosophy must atthe least encourage this.

The references to baskets of fragments posits the 12 semeiacoustika and 7 semeioptika. These references just like those of the duplicated 5 and 7, in their turn demand the incorporative Christological hexad, without recourse to which we have no means of understanding the relation between the two sets of figures in the two stories about loaves and fish. Without the integrative function of the figure six, we can make no sense of the theology of semiotic forms. The dual and mediatory role of the messianic series, the fact that it reaches back to the story of arche, and forward to the story of eschaton, supports one important distinction between the two stories about loaves and fish. This distinction links the first to the Judaic tradition, and the mission to the Jews, and the second in regard to the 'Gentile' or secular world. The distinction, although it may be supported by other features in the texts, turns largely upon the different terms used for 'baskets', referring to the containers of fragmented remnants. In the first story the term used for the twelve baskets is kofi/nwn (Mark 6.42), with which Mark's own later recapitulation, kofi/nouv (Mark 8.19), is consistent. He uses the term spuri/dav of the second miracle of loaves (Mark 8.8), and again consistently, spuri/dwn in the recapitulation of that event (Mark 8.20). Matthew follows suit in his versions of both miracles and in his recapitulation, and so too does Luke's recension of the first story. Luke has no account of the second, nor any recapitulation of even the first. John's single story of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand agrees likewise  with Mark in its use of kofi/nouv (John 6.13).

This very distinction is reflected also in the three numerical ciphers of that first miracle story. More needs to be said concerning the figures 2 and 5, which recur to the paired Days of Transcendence. But certainly the figure 12 of the same story can at once be taken as a standard mathematical cipher of the Judaic tradition, just as we could read the repeated pentad as a reference to Torah. The figure 7 also plays a large an important role in the Judaic tradition, but its prominence in The Apocalypse is determinative for the interpretations of both the miracle story itself, and the four sevenfold series in The Apocalypse: letters, seals, trumpets, and vials. That is a book whose global and indeed cosmic overtones surpass the specificity of any single religious tradition. This is not to  deny that much of the work concerns the Judaic tradition. But we see from its beginning with the series of letters, which the apocalyptist addresses to the far-flung 'seven churches that are in Asia' (Apocalypse 1.4), a frame of reference more universalist than particularist, more 'Gentile' than 'Jewish'. So that once again the final member of the canon stands in starkest contrast to the P creation narrative. The Apocalypse will lend itself ultimately to a theology of world religions, a theology of global ideologies, in keeping with its own recognition of the role of the written tradition. One of its most vital purposes will be political theology, and if its hermeneutic is fraught in the extreme, this is the reason why. But additionally, its value to a theology of revelation, by which is meant the 'special revelation' which is the Judaeo-Christian scripture, is part of an more encompassing philosophical and theological brief, and this same expansive theological outlook which, in keeping with many of the book's themes, such as the references to 'every tribe and tongue and people and nation' (Apocalypse 5.9 et passim), makes just these interpretations  possible and reasonable. This squares with our hermeneutic  of the second miracle story, and cements its relation to the first.

We are simultaneously advancing a systematic theological consensus of the three sense-percipient modes prevailing as proper to each of the three texts, Genesis 1.1-2.4a, the messianic series, and The Apocalypse. T
he Transcendental mode of sentience, the acoustic, and hence orality, are native to the primordial and Transcendental quality of the story of 'beginning', whereas the Pneumatological mode of vision is indispensable to the eschatological purpose of The Apocalypse, the story of 'end'. The modi operandi of these first and last texts of the canon stand counter to one another representatively of the juxtaposition of the acoustic and optic modes of sentience. But we cannot overstate that contrast given its repeated presentation in terms of ostensible similarity, a similarity as much complementary as contrastive. Such complementary contrast, encapsulated now in the contents of the narratives, miracles of loaves and fish, and corresponding miracle at sea, and now in the Christological formulae, for example, 'beginning and end', is writ large in that of the Transcendental and Pneumatological feeding miracles themselves, where the redoubled figures 5 and 7 respectively, encode the 'heavenly' and 'earthly' realms, between whose boundaries or peripheries, consonantly with the function of the copula in the various Christological titles, as well as with that of the ratio sign in the categoreal paradigm, stands the sixfold messianic miracle series itself as processive entirety.

Both outlying Christological members of the messianic series, The Transformation Of Water Into Wine and The Transfiguration, assign haptic sentience to The Son. Thus the gospel intervenes between the absolute beginning, creation, and the absolute end, the consummation of the age. Congruently, the Christological perceptual radicals of consciousness, haptic memory and haptic imagination, are interposed between the transcendental and immanent perceptual categories. So, we have noted that the co-ordination of the three narratives, discernible immediately in their shared architectonic, allows for the possibility of The Apocalypse as oral, and indeed liturgical, just as the creation story, alone by dint of its being 'scripture', must subscribe to what is other than it, as end to beginning, inscribed Word other than oral Word. Both The Apocalypse as spoken Word, albeit of the second order, and the creation story as written Word, likewise secondarily, therefore endorse the functional import of the gospel, with its overarching series of Christological messianic events identifying haptic consciousness and the conceptual forms mind and soma and affirming the pivotal role of the same in consciousness as in language. Within the boundaries of 'heaven and earth', announced in the numerical ciphers of the miracle narratives, stands the hexad, whose meaning will devolve upon the dialectical juxtaposition of 'identity and unity'.

In light of the intermediate role of the Christological, transformational processes therefore, the contrastive relation sustained between Genesis 1.1-2.4a and The Apocalypse should not be overstated. We are everywhere reminded of this fact by the evident comparability of the contents of the narratives which delineate those categoreal forms discernible as Transcendental and Pneumatological; whether this be the two rubrics thematically grounded in the motif of water, Day 2 and Day 3, the two sea miracles, the two days of creation of moving and living creatures, Day 5 and Day 6, or the two miracles of loaves and fish. Wherever we look then, at the formal level, or at the contents of the narratives, we find these reciprocal Transcendental and Pneumatological categories, and particularly the acoustic and optic modes of sense-percipience, in closest compatibility with one another. The dodecaphonic series confirms this succinctly in that its sevenfold acoustic structures are inseparable from the fivefold. The acoustic pentad and heptad are mutually inclusive. They reformulate the categoreal paradigm, transcendence : immanence, 'the heavens and the earth'. The Feeding Of The Five Thousand emphasises the pentadic over the heptadic structure, by reason which we shall see, of the viability of transcendence and its essential relation not just to theology, but also to consciousness and to language.

The mutual integration of pentad and heptad, already evinced in the reciprocal accord of the two major forms of language itself, phonetic and graphic, must be again emphasised  because the doctrine of intentionality which the content and anatomy of the gospels reveal, finds its validation in The Apocalypse. That book's insistent presentation of the sevenfold and fourfold schemata reverts to the primary numerical semantic of the miracle story, and so identifies The Holy Spirit responsible for the provenance of optic sentience. The view maintained by the co-incidence of the texts which reverts to the co-incidence of the phenomenal modes ot sentience themselves, is that there is no visible form without an audible precedent. T
he Apocalypse functions as thus plagal or pseudomorphic in the very sense that the spoken word precedes the inscribed word, both chronologically and ontologically. Like any book, The Apocalypseis a possible audible disclosure, but the primordial character of the acoustic belongs to the theology of creation and the doctrine of transcendence. The assumed orality of The Apocalypse defers to this primordiality; it can be read as the history of the new creation. But it remains a revelation of the consummation of salvation begun in Christ which in itself is irreducibly graphic as it is teleological. Its formal recapitulation of the categoreal analogy between Days and messianic events, in its four clearly signified sevenfold series is the reason why this is so.

The tenet that the formal contours of intentionality, meaning consciousness in general, are intimately allied with the heptad, finds its warrant in all three textual cycles, creation, messianic series and The Apocalypse. The Christological inflection of the P creation narrative, in keeping with the logos Christology which begins the gospel of John, are the first validations of this tenet in the two canons. We identified the Christological conceptual categories, mind and mind : body, in the rubrics of Day 1 and Day 4 respectively, and the basis for a doctrine of intentionality a propos of the pentadic/heptadic structures of the three narrative cycles has already been made. With consideration of the messianic series, it became increasingly clear what we mean by intentionality. Since that series is a taxonomy of the perceptual polarity of consciousness existing analogously to the conceptual pole, the next logical step was the consideration of specific intentional modes, several of which emerged in the creation stories themselves, either explicitly or implicitly: will in the P narrative, desire, and knowing in the J narrative. We listed all four elemental and conscious forms: desire, knowing, will and belief; and their four aconscious forms desire-to-know,will-to-believe, knowledge-of-will and belief-in-desire; as well as the four compound forms which fuse and hybridize the Christological and Transcendental modes within both orders, conscious and aconscious, and which are identifiable as Pneumatological modes of intentionality.

That the sevenfold messianic series specifies as its primary point of reference in the actual world, the four perceptual modes of memory and the three perceptual modes of imagination, already urges the doctrine of intentionality. The P creation narrative taxonomises the conceptual polarity of mind, and imparts the same. These two great narrative cycles, which plot the elemental nature of consciousness, express the doctrine of intentionality. The implicit presence of the cipher 12 of the first Christological immanent messianic miracle, and its explicit mention in the second and Transcendental immanent messianic miracle advocate the same. The former clearly pronounces the intentionality of desire and the latter that of knowing.

Thus the anatomy of mind given by the description  of both conceptual and perceptual polarities in the cycles, is just that, anatomical, and organic. The heptad bears out the significance of the idea of unity for intentionality. It depicts a single, corporeal aggregation, a whole  akin to the physical body. Consciousness or intentionality is so defined as a single gestalt, in keeping with the principle of immanence, unity, and is concatenation of both sorts of components, conceptual and perceptual, susceptible of dismemberment. The analysis of consciousness into its intentional members looks to the equivocal nature of the Christological category, the psychophysical. Its members are determined as unitary, yet they are prone to identification. None of the ciphers in either story, neither the dual hexads of The Transformation of Water Into Wine, nor the corresponding dodecad of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand, and again, neither its dual pentads, nor its figure two, suggest such a fusion of conceptual and perceptual radicals which the form and content of the texts and Christological doctrine all propose. That is suggested by the figure 7 alone, and still more particularly by its division according to the ratio 3 : 4, a formal feature of all three textual cycles. For just which reason The Apocalypse remains both necessary and of immense value not merely to Christian eschatology.
Eschatology now becomes intimately bound with what we understand by consciousness, and still more specifically, intentionality.

But the clear relation between the conceptual forms and intentionality, and the perceptual forms and the same, that is, the given relation of the two analogous series, Days and messianic events, would seem to be one thing, and the relation between messianic events and the four sevenfold series of The Apocalypse another. It is not as instantly clear as it might be how The Apocalypse subserves the doctrine of intentionality already delineated in the P narrative of creation and the messianic cycle. For these assume the responsibility of postulating the rudimentary components of mind in its barest outlines. Therefore it seems difficult to understand what else The Apocalypse contributes. But the doctrinal content  of the stories of beginning and end is incomplete without The Apocalypse even if the eschatological aspect of intentionality is not as evident as one might wish. We must therefore recognise the eschatological nature of intentionality as a chief concern of The Apocalypse, and as pursuant to the logical consonance between the creation story and the messianic series. One of the main keys to the eschatology of intentionality is the formal correspondence between its four quartets and the gospels. The Apocalypse is indebted to the gospels, it is nothing less than dependent upon them. The figure 4 which numbers the 'thousands' of the Pneumatological miracle, comports with this fact, just as do the four clearly demarcated heptads, and each of their seventh members. These all appear to confirm the Sabbath-Eucharist correspondence, and as one would expect, emphasise the latter complement. These same four series themselves therefore acknowledge the same indebtedness of the structural outlines of the book. This has one important consequence. One we grasp this fact, that of the symbolic conformity between the four heptads and the four gospel, we are free to esteem the remaining portions of the work. These supply with what is of novel and genuine semantic freight for the doctrine of intentionality. In this way then, the same content would appear to embody the Pneumatological strand of the doctrine. For at the formal level, the Transcendental and Christological modes of intentionality are what occupy the P creation narrative and the gospels; and indeed the chief theological focus of The Apocalypse is The Spirit. This should direct our understanding, with the result that we should expect the books unnumbered visions and other content to supply us with information concerning the hybrid intentional forms. It is these which more than any other, point us towards the genuine theological purpose of The Apocalypse, Christian eschatology.

Passing from the texts to the theology of semiotic forms, we see that the heptadic configuration of intentionality is very clearly and logically signified in the acoustic semiosis. For a heptatonic scale,
whether it be major or minor, according to the way in which we have evenly divided the two hexatonic whole-tone scales and assigned them each to a polarity, one conceptual, the other perceptual, will combine the semeiacoustika for both. The two sevenfold scales, the sevenfold major and minor, formulate the various forms of intentionality in their fundamental varieties. There are six occasions of each. We have already listed those of the intentional mode desire. But here, as elsewhere, where we shall have to comment on the semiosis of the pentatonic scales, we are noting the essential interrelation between the two poles of consciousness. In every one of the twelve (sevenfold) major and twelve (sevenfold) minor scales, the semeiacoustika bring together, in the ratio of 3 : 4, conceptual and perceptual radicals. This concatenation occurs irrespectively of the obvious alignment between the threefold and transcendence, hence the threefold and conceptual forms; and the fourfold and immanence, hence the fourfold and perceptual forms. A sevenfold scale or chain of semeiacoustika, whether major or minor, denoting a particular instance of a particular mode of intentionality, will not be signified as necessarily consisting of three conceptual and four perceptual radicals. The congruence between the two sorts of radicals as the analogous relation of Days to messianic events, entails that the conceptual elements will also function according to the pattern more generally associated with immanence, the fourfold, and vice versa; that the perceptual elements will function according to the threefold pattern we normally associate with transcendence. So for example, the scale of C major consists of C-D-E-F-G-A-B-c: the first three semeiacoustika, (and also the eighth), designate perceptual radicals, those of the three forms of imagination, and the last four, F-G-A-B, designate the three forms of unity and the pure conceptual form, space, respectively, all four of which are taxonomically of the same sort, conceptual.

However the more important initial task here, lest we get ahead of ourselves, will be to state still more fully the interpretation of the sevenfold scales as semiological analogues of the various forms of intentionality in their several occasions. Certainly the cipher 4, is an obvious index of immanence. Whether we take its occurrence in the Pneumatological feeding miracle story as the number of thousands fed, or in the four sevenfold series in The Apocalypse, or in the fourfold form of the written gospel itself, all of which of course, we have been at pains to link, its immediate though not singular affiliation with immanence generally, and with The Holy Spirit specifically, squares well indeed with the hallmark of immanence, unity. That the gospels themselves are four in number testifies that they subscribe to the perspective of end, that they share a common purpose with The Apocalypse in terms of their eschatological rather than their primordial cast. This too sorts perfectly with the case we are making for the theology of unity, immanence, and intentional modality itself. All three synoptic gospels give quite detailed attention to eschatology; all have apocalypses in some measure. Luke in fact has two apocalyptic sections. In John we find isolated references, the first of which is the introduction to the first sign, (John 1.51).

Two points concerning the hermeneutic of the cipher 4 in the Pneumatological feeding miracle story can be entered here. There are indeed four elemental forms of consciousness or modes of intentionality, each of which is specifically proper to the soteriology of a particular gospel. Each of  these is also recapitulated in both two of the four compound modes and two of the four hybrid modes of intentionality. The reason for urging the logical import of the tetrad relates once more to the notion of the four unique point-instants in the annual cycle, analogously to which we have identified the four gospels, in keeping with the hermeneutic of the references to the 'four living creatures' in both Ezekiel and The Apocalypse. Thus time and again we encounter the ciphers of immanence, 7 and 4 in The Apocalypse, just those figures which recapitulate the essential accord in virtue of eschatological doctrine, obtaining between the gospel and The Apocalypse itself, rather than the accord between gospel and creation narrative. In effect then, the two miracles of loaves say, if they say anything, that as the latter accord is primordial and pentadic, the gospels taken as a whole, are fourfold and eschatologically consistent with The Apocalypse. The mutual inclusivity of these two miracle narratives makes it impossible to discuss any one of the three textual series, creation, messianic, and apocalyptic, independently of the others. This is also the delivery of both the P creation narrative and The Apocalypse. The full extent of the interdependence of these three narrative centres, renders the treatment of any one in isolation from the others theologically null and void

Given the subject of the Transcendental feeding miracle story, acoustic memory, what should now occupy us is to determine the meanings of its numerical references, especially in relation to the other two events of this series and to the Eucharist. The figure 'twelve baskets or fragments' is easily recognisable as the analogue to the dodecaphonic scale, just as are 'five loaves' and five thousands' read in conjunction with 'two fish'. One sees immediately in the former, Mark's own admission of the provenance of the twelve healing miracle stories, oral 'Torah'/oral tradition, and a recapitulation of the isomorphic taxonomies of beginning and end, six Days and six messianic miracles. The dual instances of the pentad in the miracle story must be accounted for, and can be so in terms of  the pentatonic scale. Even though the pentatonic is not the only fivefold form of serial order possible within the octave, it certainly fits the division of the scale into patterns of five and seven, the duplicated figures of the Transcendental and Pneumatological feeding miracle stories respectively, and fits too their ostensible oppositionality, reflected in that of the P creation narrative and The Apocalypse. The first step in our procedure looks to the central co-ordinating Christologies of the messianic series, set out in the diagrams of the keyboard above, enumerating the two sixfold whole-tone scales. For these two scales reiterate the fundamental division of the categoreal forms into conceptual and perceptual categories, articulated exclusively in the P creation and the messianic series respectively. It is necessary to fit this with the two fives of the Transcendental miracle story, and the two sevens of the Pneumatological miracle story. The equal division of the categories into their two polarities however, is not the chief business of The Feeding Of The Five Thousand nor of The Feeding Of The Four Thousand, even if both of these narratives will have to accord with its basic tenets.

The necessarily unequal division of a single pentad as to the conceptual : perceptual polarity does not proscribe understanding  the story a propos of the subject-object dichotomy. Even if the pentad divides unequally into the ratio 2 :3, just as the heptad does into that of 3 : 4, there are two pentads involved. When we remember that the pentad may consists of a majority of semeia denoting either conceptual or perceptual components, the same being true of the heptad, the incidence of two pentads enables the signification of an equal number of the two distinct kinds of components. That is to say, five conceptual radicals and five perceptual radicals can be inclusively signified in two pentatonic acoustic series since one may consist of the ratio of 2 conceptual to 3 perceptual categories, and the other conversely of 2 perceptual to 3 conceptual categories. If this is the case, then we shall see it square with the reference to 'two fish'. To understand how two such pentatonic scales relate, is also to understand the relation between the two sevenfold scales with which they each combine to establish the dodecaphonic series.



Habitually we conceive the pentatonic to be the remnants of diatonic major, or natural harmonic with which it is identical in terms of its components. The seven tones of the major scale and or its relative minor, the natural minor, when subtracted from the twelve tones, leave just five remaining tones. It would certainly occasion few problems if we could immediately identify the pentatonic scale simply with the figure five in the narrative, and the figure seven of the other feeding miracle story with the sevenfold scales, major and relative minor. But not only are there two occurrences of the 5 in the former, there are two occurrences of the 7 in the latter, yet another  difficulty exists in assigning any pentatonic scale to either quanta of the Transcendental feeding miracle story, which is because the pentatonic scales all comprise semeia denotative of both species of categories in the ratio of 2 : 3. Thus they indicate the grouping together of either two conceptual form and three perceptual forms, or that of two perceptual forms and three conceptual forms. For just like the diatonic sevenfold scales, they combine acoustika designating members of either kind, where the ordering consists of the ratio 3 : 4, and once more, of the same two sorts, signifying either three conceptual and four perceptual categories, or the reverse.

This difficulty arises if we wish to understand the essential difference between portions consumed and consumers as confirming the functional difference between conceptual radicals which are in some sense subjects, and perceptual radicals which are in some sense objects. Something of which is inferred by the words 'thousands' and loaves' respectively. In the Pneumatological feeding miracle the same hermeneutic is not immediately apparent if we limit the conceptual forms taxonomised in the P creation narrative to six. There is a fundamental difference operative here between transcendence and immanence, iterating the categoreal paradigm and the ratio 3 : 4 simultaneously. And just as the theology of creation depicts transcendence numerically in terms of two triads, the messianic miracle series adds a fourth event, that of the Eucharist, to the three feeding miracles. Due acquiescence to this is vital to any incorporative, that is syntactical hermeneutic of the two narratives. The Eucharist thus logically lists the compounded sense-percipient modes smell/taste taxonomically with the three phenomenal modes. Their description as 'phenomenal' alludes to their role in the phenomenon of language itself.

Thus the Eucharist itself integrates the three phenomenal forms of sentience as dependent upon the sense-percipient mode(s) which it signifies. No living creature of even the most rudimentary kind can survive without feeding upon some other living thing, or its produce, and the process of the evolution of the phenomenal modes bears witness to the radical nature of the Eucharistic mode(s) of sense-percipience. They do not as such make their appearance in the theology of semiotic forms by means of semeia assigned to them of any of the three orders, acoustic, haptic, or optic. In each case the sum total of semeia is 12.  But this does not proscribe the meaning of the Eucharist. The cadences which we have just discussed in relation to the major and its relative minor scales, the latter being the natural minor, indeed highlight this fact. The 7-8 cadences, equivalent to the 2-3 cadences of the natural and relative minor, designate the theology of the Eucharist. Thus they do not refer to the sense-percipient modes, smell/taste, but to the what is supplied by the narratives in the P and J accounts of creation and the feeding miracles: appetition signalling desire, and its relative intentional mode, knowing. The J creation story explicitly mentions these two normative, conscious forms of intentionality, knowing and desire. So it is here that we can enter the first of several axioms that will serve the theology of semiotic forms in the study which follows.
This obtains whether we are speaking of perceptual or conceptual consciousness; that is, whether we are discussing the relation of desire and knowing or that of will and belief. Initially at least, we will discuss the latter, since the study of the gospel of Luke has already provided us with detail to extrapolate from this axiom.
  • axiom 1: the minor scale stands in relation to the major scale analogously to the relation off conscious conative form of intentionality to conscious cognitive form of intentionality.
Any difference between minor and major is popularly referred to as one of mood, so that the former is often spoken of as sounding 'sad', or some such term, whereas the latter is supposedly reckoned as 'open', or 'bright'. Emotional valence is part of the psychology of musical expression, and a variety of opinions argue both for its interpretation. (Collier and Hubbard for example argue against it, contending that  irrespectively of the use of major or minor scales " ... whether a given sequence of notes in a musical scale is perceived as happy or sad is determined primarily by the direction of pitch motion and by pitch height; for scales in both the major and minor modes of music ascending higher-pitch sequences were rated as happier than were descending lower-pitch sequences" . Richard Parncutt on the other hand does argue for negative emotional valence of the minor scales. As interesting as these studies are, for the theology  of semiotic forms the significant and essential difference between minor and major sevenfold scales, is the analogy provided for the relation between conative and cognitive forms of intentionality.

Since this axiom applies to both conceptual and perceptual forms of intentionality, it links will and belief on the one hand, and desire and knowing on the other, analogously to the relation of minor and relative major scales in all three normative, conscious instantiations. So for example in the cases already commented on a propos of the gospel of Luke, knowing and desire are inextricably linked, with the emphasis being for Luke on the former, a fact substantiated by his characteristic penchant for utilising the motif of eating. It should be stressed that the minor scale in question here is that of the natural minor, the constituents of which are the same as those of its relative major. It should be stressed also that this axiom holds for the conscious order rather than the aconscious. We shall deal with it first, since we have described it as being normative. For we have noted already that the aconscious categories in certain ways invert the structure of the conscious normative categories. Thus we can expect that aconscious desire, the desire-to-know, and aconscious knowing, the knowledge-of-will, are to be expressed as the relation major : relative minor. This is indeed the case, and it describes how these aconscious perceptual forms of intentionality behave rather more like conscious conceptual forms of intentionality. To which the obverse will occur in complementarity: the aconscious conceptual forms of intentionality behave similarly to the conscious perceptual forms of intentionality. This is why we referred to the former in their canonical instantiations as stemming from categories of virtual rather than actual transcendence, and the latter as arising from categories of virtual rather than actual immanence.

In previous mandala the position of the four conscious modes directly above the four aconscious modes illustrated this. Thus desire-to-know is somehow very similar to, and somehow beholden to belief, the two intentional modes which are the governing theological criteria of the gospel of John. The same applies to knowing and the will-to-believe, intentional modes determining the theological orientation of the gospel of Mark, just as it does to the two modes will and knowledge-of-will, which govern the particular theological
  perspective of the gospel of Matthew, and also to desire and belief-in-desire, the forms of intentionality instrumental to the theology of Luke's gospel. Here we can put a second axiom further to the first:
  • axiom 2: the (major) cadence 7-8 expresses the transformative interaction between conceptual and perceptual radicals of conscious intentional modes in virtue of the latter; and the (major) 4-3 cadence expresses the transfigurative interaction between perceptual and conceptual radicals of conscious intentional modes in virtue of the latter.
A concrete example is in order here, and we shall choose those categories already discussed in some detail in dealing with the gospel of Luke: the perceptual form haptic memory, and the conceptual form, soma, the body. Haptic memory as affirmed, is responsible for erotic desire, a metapsychological tenet plainly visible not simply in the first messianic miracle (John 2.1-11) and a particular healing miracle (Mark 3.1-6). The conceptual form soma was already adumbrated in the first creation story, pre-empting its normative analogue, haptic memory. The latter is articulated by the acoustikon A#, represented by the haptikon the hand, and signified by the optikon violet. As also put already, the parallel conceptual form, soma, is denoted by the acoustikon A, the haptikon of the gut, and the optikon violet. (Two points are worth noting here: (a) the dodecaphonic paradigm may begin at any point since it is by nature relational, and concerns identity as such. We have chosen B, that is Cb, because it relates to C as conceptual form space does to acoustic imagination semiologically, C being the point on the keyboard most approximate to its centre; (b) we are using for the moment at least, only six and not twelve, optic semeia in the interests of maintaining a constant reference to the hexadic, Christological structures innate to the theology of semiotic forms.) The acoustika are what most concern us here.

The two scales which manifest the cadences 2-3 and 7-8 at the tone A, relative to one another, are G minor and Bb (A#) major respectively. These express the transformational interaction from A to Bb (A#) in each case, the resolution being in virtue of the latter. These scales are manifests of the two intentional modes desire and knowing respectively; both are occasioned by the perceptual radical, haptic memory: erotic desire and technological rationality. The resolution from the conceptual pole to the perceptual pole, that is from soma to haptic memory, in virtue of the latter, is part of the theology of semiotic forms stemming from the Christological narrative, The Transformation Of Water Into Wine. Both of these modes are conscious, that is, normative. Their relation given in the theology of acoustic semiotic forms as the cadential resolution in virtue of haptic memory, also pertains to the role of the Eucharist within theology generally. This is a concrete example of what has been put in axiom 1. The G minor scale, with its 2-3 cadence at A-A# (Bb), expresses erotic desire; whereas, relatively to the same, the A# (Bb) major scale contains the same designated cadential transition, A-A#, except that it now occurs as the step 7-8, where expresses technological knowing. Both cadences move from a lower to a higher pitch, or upwards. In other words these two scales consist of the same elements differently arranged as to their beginnings and ends, and therefore the cadences occur at different stages. The 7-8 cadence in the major is identical to the 2-3 cadence in the relative (natural) minor. The most apparent consequential difference is that of the tonic. This means that only one of the three tones which constitute the harmonic triad is different. The G minor harmonic triad consists of  G - A# - D, and the components of the major harmonic triad Bb (notated thus instead of A# for the sake of the simplicity of the former) being A# (i.e. Bb) - D - F. The relation of a mode of knowing, here that of technological rationality and its related mode of desire, here the erotic, involve precisely the same constituent radicals of consciousness, those of the somatic and haptic memory. These sense-percipient modes of intentionality, desire and knowing, are articulated analogously in the relation of the two sevenfold scales, G minor and A# (Bb) major respectively, with the same transformative process resolving from the conceptual pole, soma, to the perceptual pole haptic memory. It is marked in the former by the 2-3 cadence, and in the latter by the 7-8 cadence. This transition is indissolubly linked with the Eucharistic theology of the gospel as of course with the eschatology disclosed in The Apocalypse.

A further example has been set out both in the mandala and musical notation reproduced above, those concerning the related scales C major and Cb major, and this in turn will lead to the resumption to the questions surrounding the single and double pentatonics referred to in the miracle story by the ciphers of Transcendence 5 and 2. The C major scale is a semiology of the conscious and aconscious perceptual modes of intentionality. In the interests of simplicity we are dealing only with the first, the two conscious perceptual modes, desire and knowing, both of which are signified as the cadential transition between the conceptual form designated by the 7th, Bb, namely space, and the perceptual form designated by the tonic (8th), acoustic imagination. The resolution from one to the other occurs in favour of the perceptual form, acoustic imagination. For this reason we may speak of desire and knowing rather than will and belief. The process it involves is akin to each such event for every one of the six perceptual radicals, and is the subject of in the first miracle story of the messianic series. Like every one of the feeding miracles, it most certainly anticipates the Eucharist.

The intentional forms, knowing and desire are germane to Christology and to soteriology. Further to that, they are of eschatological moment, as a result of the certain bonds between the gospel and The Apocalypse, not just the links forged by gospel and creation narratives. We have accounted for these connections correlatively to the links sustained by the sense-percipient forms proper to The Son and Transcendence, as well as those proper to The Son and The Holy Spirit, to the haptic vis-a-vis the acoustic, as well as the haptic vis-a-vis the optic. The processive transition then comports with the Johannine doctrine of the incarnation. All perceptual categories, and hence all perceptual modes of intentionality, can be likened to the process of 'descent' from transcendent  to immanent, and all transcendent categories and their corresponding intentional forms to that of 'ascent' in 'opposition. (The use of the terms 'ascent' and descent' here does not conform to the directedness of the cadential resolutions; in fact precisely the opposite applies: resolution towards the tonic or 8th degree from the 7th, is upwards, and resolution from the 4th to the 3rd, moves down the scale. The former denotes conscious perceptual intentional modality and the latter denotes conscious conceptual intentional modality.) This agrees with the ordering of the spatio-temporal continuum itself, where  the normative conceptual pole is aligned with the directional movement from present-future, just as the perceptual pole is aligned with the past-present. In each case the present is bordered immediately by proximal futures and proximal pasts. Hence present-past juncture of conscious knowing, is intelligible in terms of the Eucharistic cast of the normative feeding miracles. Thus the Eucharist insists on the value of the present bordered immediately by a proximal past. Such past-present merger being that of knowing.

This hic et nunc, the Eucharistic present, with which proximal pasts and proximal futures both co-incide, is coterminous with the conscious forms of intentional process; knowing in the case of the perceptual polarity, belief in the case of the conceptual polarity. The two indications given in acoustic semiotics by the two cadences in each scale comprise the movement from distal to the proximal conscious perceptual pasts: 2-3 in the minor and 7-8 in the relative major, therefore express instances of desire and knowing occasioned by the same radical. The same is true of the signification of movement from distal to proximal conscious conceptual futures: the cadences in which case are 6-5 in the minor expressing will, and 4-3 in the major expressing belief, occasioned by the same conceptual radical. It is thus the cognitive or epistemic mode in each case, knowing and belief, which is temporally proximal and which borders the now. These mergers with present immediacy, and the movement from conscious distal to conscious proximal perceptual pasts, and from conscious distal to conscious proximal conceptual futures, terminate in the present. This is why and how we must include The Eucharist, indexed semiologically in the transformation of 7th-8th,
in relation to sense-percipient cognitive intentional modality, knowing, in any consideration of the theology of acoustic semiotic forms. We shall also have to include as counter to this, conceptual epistemic intentionality, belief, semiologically expressed  in the alternate cadence, 4th-3rd, the other great sacrament of the Christian tradition, baptism. I am speaking here of conscious normative intentionality. Thus knowing borders the perceptual present, a present which has nonetheless inherited a distal past, that of desire. In the same way, the conceptual present is that bordered by belief, subsequently from a distal future, that of will. The theology of the Eucharist must therefore encompass knowing as well as desire, and the theology of baptism, must likewise encompass both belief and will.

Such cognitive, or epistemic, and it must be stressed, conscious forms of intentionality, knowing and believing, remain the closest of any of their order, the normative, to the present. The reason for stressing the conscious and elemental modes of intentionality matters because of the function of cognition itself, or the epistemic in toto, that is both knowing and belief. Conscious intentionality values the cognitive over the conative by dint of the provision it makes for the unity of identities in God, or Transcendence. In the conscious mind, epistemic intentionality constructs the remotest pasts: it moves from will to belief, and from desire to knowing. In itself, conation, whether conceptual as it is for will, or perceptual as it is for desire, remains problematical even though it acts as sources for what both knowing and believing intend; understanding. This is so insofar as conative and cognitive (the epistemic), are relatively antithetical. Their relation is best and precisely uttered in the acoustic semiosis as that of the minor sevenfold scale and relative major scale. The conscious epistemic as opposed to the conscious conative, is the beginning and end of the ground for unity in Transcendence. By this we do not mean simply any unity of The Transcendent itself, but the unity of the three identities, the Transcendent, The Son and The Spirit. Within present immediacy the epistemic outcomes of both desire and knowing, which are knowing and believing respectively, are realized. Such consciously and presently, that is, actually, immediate modes of intentionality, such believing and knowing, occupy the here-now, the sanctity of the extant, durational occasion. In this they secure the unity of deity rather than the selfhood of any one identity, The Transcendent, The Son or The Spirit. This is why The Apocalypse becomes so pre-occupied with intentionality, its value to the unity of God, a theological subject first sounded in Ezekiel, the most consistently of any Pneumatology of the Hebrew Scriptures. It is because of the dependence of God upon the world of each conscious experience through which we live from start to finish. For they alone promote the unity of the same.
This sacramental and immediate world of baptism/Eucharist is the realm of believing and knowing.

Now it is incumbent on us to explain how conceptuality functions a propos of believing. We have alleged that the conceptual, that is transfigurative, relation between analogous but polar categories is given in the theology of acoustic semiotic forms as the transitional movement from a perceptual to an analogous conceptual radical. The relevant degrees of the scale here sound the 'amen' cadence, from the fourth degree of the scale to the third, in a form of intentionality indexed as conceptual. So whereas we have just cited the occasion of the transitional degrees of 7th-8th in the acoustic semiology of a C major scale, denoting that particular occasion of knowing instantiated by the category acoustic imagination, the related scale of Cb major presents the 'same',
that is complementary process, as the transition between the 4th-3rd degrees of its scale. We use the word 'same' in keeping with the fact that the optic semiology of these two actually quite different events, is identified in the same way. That is to say, that both acoustic imagination, and its polar analogue, the conceptual form space are identified by the same optikon, red, just as both the conceptual form mind, and its polar analogue haptic imagination, are likewise designated by one and the same optikon, yellow. But this is not the case for the alternative processes in each of these intentional modes.

The designation of the 4th-3rd cadence in instances of the perceptual mode knowing, involves different, even if immediately adjacently located optika. So too, does the designation of the 7th-8th cadence in instances of the conceptual mode believing.
Moreover, these same transitional or nodal moments in the intentional aconscious modes are those of desire-to-know in perceptual modality, and will-to-believe in conceptual modality. Using italics I have highlighted the essential difference involved here to avoid any confusion; the distinction turns upon non-normative categories; in other words, we are now speaking of aconscious radicals and modes of intentionality. The 4th-3rd transition in a perceptual scale in the major, sounds the aconscious equivalent of belief, namely the desire-to-know, albeit a perceptual mode of intentionality; just so, the 7th-8th in a conceptual scale sounds the aconscious equivalent of knowing, namely will-to-believe, which as noted behave like just that perceptual intentional form. This is tantamount to repeating that the desire-to-know is a mode of virtual transcendence, and the will-to-believe, one of virtual immanence. Accordingly these aconscious, non-normative processes are signified by resolutions involving different optika. Even so, they too reaffirm the temporal and vectorial character of conative-to-cognitive, that is, of remotest or distal non-presents, both pasts and futures, inherently driven towards a 'sacramental' present. Only the relation of major and minor is reversed. For if the desire-to-know is to be reckoned as functionally similar to belief, even though its conscious equivalent, the latter, circumscribes the proximal future bordering the present, then it too is expressed in terms of major tonality; and so to, the will-to-believe must behave like its conscious equivalent, knowing, then it too its semiotic expression is major and not minor tonality.

Thus these same aconscious modes, based on the radicals of virtual transcendence and virtual immanence respectively, function similarly to their conscious counterparts. Desire-to-know performs like belief, and will-to-believe performs similarly to knowing. So that both Christological forms of intentionality, the mode of belief, one of conscious actual transcendence, and the aconscious mode desire-to-know, one of virtual transcendence, are signified by the same cadence: 4-3. Conversely both Transcendental forms of intentionality, the mode knowing, one of conscious actual immanence, and the aconscious mode will-to-believe, one of virtual immanence, are signified by the cadence 7-8. Here we have yet to relate the intentionality of belief to the 'amen' (4-3) cadence in order to verify the links established between transformative intentionality, the first Christology of the messianic series, and The Eucharist. This relation of belief, and so too that of the virtually conceptual mode, desire-to-know, whose provenance is the radical of virtual transcendence, haptic imagination, must also include links to the conceptual as formally defined in the P creation narrative, and to transfigurative intentionality, and to the last of the messianic miracles, a Christology of transcendence, and finally to a sacramental counterpart of the Eucharist. The first three of these are of course perfectly rationally and explicitly accomplished by the Christological narrative itself, The Transfiguration. It reverts no less explicitly to the P narrative than the opening hymn of the gospel of John by means of its own introduction. As the reciprocity of the Days and messianic series results in the determination of normative and non-normative categories, conscious and aconscious order of mind, it is clear that this very messianic miracle defers to the Day 1 rubric. What is therefore specified in conceptual processes is thus mind itself. The sacramental theology involved here is no less plain, nor less salient. Narratives of The Transfiguration and The Baptism Of Jesus are cross referenced to one another in every synoptic gospel by means of the identifying title given to him:

And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens opened and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, "Thou are my beloved Son [or my Son, my (or the) Beloved]; with thee I am well pleased." (Mark 1.10-11)

And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is my beloved Son
[or my Son, my (or the) Beloved]; listen to him." Mark 9.7)

The same title - o( ui(ov mou o( a)gaphto/v, - occurs in Matthew's account of the baptism of Jesus, and the subsequent clause reads '"with whom I am well pleased"', to which he adds li(Matthew 3.17). The title and clause in his account of The Transfiguration are

For the kingdom of heaven is with us today. The action of the fourth phase is the love of God for the world. It is the particular providence for particular occasions. What is done in the world is transformed into a reality in heaven, and the reality in heaven passes back into the world. By reason of this reciprocal relation, the love in the world, passes into the love in heaven, and floods back again into the world. In this sense, God is the great companion - the fellow-sufferer who understands. (A.N. Whitehead, Process And Reality, Corrected Edition, p. 351, Macmillan, The Free Press, New York, 1978)

This page is still under construction: 14th December 2016.

Copyright MM Publications. All rights reserved, including international rights.