do so; but inevitably they lapse into mortality – and die.
This seems to be a reasonably prudent formula for any aspiring creator to adopt. It safeguards the present by containing the inevitable rebellions to the span of a mortal life. It safeguards the future by allowing you the chance to share your life with a son, if you want to.
Let us take things a stage further. What mechanism would you adopt for ensuring that the consciousness of mortality killed? Well, the obvious thing to do is to decree that any hardening of the consciousness shall tend to kill; even the type of hardening which comes with professional training, and which is necessary to liberate the discipline of the mind, in the performance of that training. Why does it tend to kill? Because you decree that a hardening of the consciousness shall produce a corresponding tension in the mechanism of the body; so that unless that tension is completely relaxed from time to time, in the end some part of the body's mechanism bursts and death results. If the reader doubts my assertion that a hardening of the consciousness produces corresponding tensions in the body, I suggest he uses his eyes a bit more, or gets a better pair of glasses. Although I am expressing these ideas as the thoughts of a potential creator, I hope that the reader has grasped that I am describing with reasonable accuracy the world as it is.
The very ability to have insight into the workings of this world presupposes that one also inhabits another world, in which insight is not necessary. Normally to learn about this world you study science, or the law, to acquire a mass of knowledge that gives you a mental discipline that enables you to act and to cope. You want insight into what you are doing; but no insight into the discipline that enables you to do it, because such insight paralyses you. That insight is best left to academics. There is no science of creation, so you have to go to the creator. Here there is no insight, because as I explained in…