07-11-2013, 06:01 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-11-2013, 01:00 PM by Adonai One.)
I tried to subtly hint at this in the archetypes board but I've decided to open it up wide open:
Love is an illusion. Even as Ra has said, it is a distortion. It is a creation within illusory experiences.
This shouldn't even be controversial but I know many of you will question this. Love is something sacred to you. It gives you something to aspire to. And the irony is that is its very spirit and purpose. It is the moonlight in the darkness.
I digress, why is love a distortion you ask? Because it already exists as the defacto state within infinity. The unity of love is inherent. Love only needs to be defined as a concept when it is shaded by darkness and disunity in an existence such as ours. Within infinity, it needs no name. Love does not to be defined for it is not strived for. It simply is.
So when one loves all things, truly so, love as a concept becomes extraneous. A concept needs duality in order to exist, at least here, thus love is only made definable by disunity.
This is like a yin and yang type of thing. Anyways, just food for thought that we can discuss.
References:
Love is an illusion. Even as Ra has said, it is a distortion. It is a creation within illusory experiences.
This shouldn't even be controversial but I know many of you will question this. Love is something sacred to you. It gives you something to aspire to. And the irony is that is its very spirit and purpose. It is the moonlight in the darkness.
I digress, why is love a distortion you ask? Because it already exists as the defacto state within infinity. The unity of love is inherent. Love only needs to be defined as a concept when it is shaded by darkness and disunity in an existence such as ours. Within infinity, it needs no name. Love does not to be defined for it is not strived for. It simply is.
So when one loves all things, truly so, love as a concept becomes extraneous. A concept needs duality in order to exist, at least here, thus love is only made definable by disunity.
This is like a yin and yang type of thing. Anyways, just food for thought that we can discuss.
References:
Quote:1.1 Questioner: Do you have a specific purpose, and if so, could you tell us something of what your purpose is?
Ra: I am Ra. We communicate now. We, too, have our place. We are not those of the Love or of the Light. We are those who are of the Law of One. In our vibration the polarities are harmonized, the complexities are simplified, and the paradoxes have their solution. We are one. That is our nature and our purpose.
...
Quote:27.13 Questioner: Is Love— is there a manifestation of love that we could call vibration?
Ra: I am Ra. Again we reach semantic difficulties. The vibration or density of love or understanding is not a term used in the same sense as the second distortion, Love; the distortion Love being the great activator and primal co-Creator of various creations using intelligent infinity; the vibration love being that density in which those who have learned to do an activity called “loving” without significant distortion, then seek the ways of light or wisdom. Thus in vibratory sense love comes into light in the sense of the activity of unity in its free will. Love uses light and has the power to direct light in its distortions. Thus vibratory complexes recapitulate in reverse the creation in its unity, thus showing the rhythm or flow of the great heartbeat, if you will use this analogy.