Creation: Creation is the great “objectification” of the Divine Subject; it is the divine manifestation par excellence. It has a beginning and an end insofar as a particular cycle is envisaged, but it is in itself a permanent divine possibility, a metaphysically necessary objectification of the divine infinity; to deny the necessity of the creation would amount to attributing arbitrariness to the Divinity . . . Creation is perfect by its very oneness and totality, it reabsorbs in its perfections all partial disequilibria. [GTUFS: StationsW, Manifestations of the Divine Principle]

Creatio ex nihilo: One must not tire of affirming it: the origin of a creature is not a material substance, it is a perfect and non-material archetype: perfect and consequently without any need of a transforming evolution; non-material and consequently having its origin in the Spirit, and not in matter. Assuredly, there is a trajectory; this starts not from an inert and unconscious substance, but proceeds from the Spirit – the matrix of all possibilities – to the earthly result, the creature; a result which sprang forth from the invisible at a cyclic moment when the physical world was still far less separate from the psychic world than in later and progressively “hardened” periods. When one speaks traditionally of creatio ex nihilo, one means thereby, on the one hand, that creatures do not derive from a pre-existing matter and, on the other hand, that the “incarnation” of possibilities cannot in any way affect the immutable Plenitude of the Principle. [GTUFS: DivineHuman, Aspects of the Theophanic Phenomenon of Consciousness]
In the expression creatio ex nihilo, the word nihil determines the meaning of the word ex: thus ex does not presuppose a substance or a container as is normally the case, it simply indicates the possibility in principle – which possibility is denied precisely by the word nihil in regard to creation – rather as the word “with” indicates a possible object even in the expression “with nothing,” which in fact means “without object.” Hence there is no point in blaming the theological formula in question for suggesting an extra-divine substance and thereby a fundamental dualism; that would amount to playing with words and taking too seriously the small fatalities of language. Obviously, creation “comes from” – that is the meaning of the word ex – an origin; not from a cosmic, hence “created” substance, but from a reality pertaining to the Creator, and in this sense – and in this sense only – it can be said that creation is situated in God. It is situated in Him in respect of ontological immanence: everything in fact “contains” on pain of being non-existent – on the one hand Being, and on the other a given Archetype or “Idea”; the divine “content” is ipso facto also the “container,” and even is so a priori, since God is Reality as such. But things are “outside God” – all sacred Scriptures attest to this – in respect of contingency, hence in respect of the concrete phenomena of the world. [GTUFS: PlayMasks, Ex Nihilo, In Deo]

Ex nihilo may mean: “out of nothing which could be external to God”; but this meaning is strictly esoteric because it presupposes the understanding of the doctrine of All-Possibility, hence that of the homogeneity of the possible. [GTUFS: EyeHeart, Theological and Metaphysical Ambiguity of the Word Ex]