+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Strictly Law of One Material (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Why was Love the first thought? (/showthread.php?tid=14319)
Why was Love the first thought? - Henosis - 04-01-2017
The first thing in creation is infinity. Then infinity became aware.
Awareness led to the focus of infinity into infinite energy, or Love.
Was infinite awareness impelled by the Joy of Being?
Did the bliss/delight/joy of unity lead to an intensification/concentration of that bliss/delight/joy into a focus?
Why was Love the first thought of infinite awareness? Why did it perceive/conceive Love?
Did infinite awareness perceive unity, and Love was the closest approximation of Itself?
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - hounsic - 04-01-2017
It seems as though the natural next step of becoming aware I AM would be love and gratitude... Orgasmic explosion (big bang)
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Coordinate_Apotheosis - 04-02-2017
Remember that Love is a misnomer and only the closest human translatable word used in context.
It was much more...its properties were probably...
Sigh, in a creation of infinity there is no end or beginning, both are seamless in The Moment. The 'beginning' or initials are probably placed there by a future point, where the unknowing beginning point begins its discoveries along a learning curve already there for it. Love might not have been THE FIRST but it became the Original In The End.
Now we're just enjoying what was already here for us.
As far as human linear understanding of time goes, its closer to Future Past Present than anything else.
The Original Thought was a choice. It was probably not the first, but due to the nature of time, is irrelevant as it is now the original thought (and original doesn't imply first but does imply it was created by something).
The path of evolution is already laid out. Who could do that but the 'future'.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Plenum - 04-02-2017
I think you paraphrased this quote here:
Quote:15.21 Questioner: Well, in yesterday’s material you stated “we offer the Law of One, the solving of paradoxes.” You also mentioned earlier that the first paradox, or the first distortion I meant, was the distortion of free will. Could you tell me if there’s a sequence? Is there a first, second, third, fourth distortion of the Law of One?
Ra: I am Ra. Only up to a very short point. After this point, the many-ness of distortions are equal one to another.
The first distortion, free will, finds focus.
This is the second distortion known to you as Logos, the Creative Principle or Love. This intelligent energy thus creates a distortion known as Light. From these three distortions come many, many hierarchies of distortions, each having its own paradoxes to be synthesized, no one being more important than another.
It's interesting that Ra equates these 3 'qualities': Logos/Creative Principle/Love.
It would seem that this 'Focus' is what 'distills' the Framework in which the actual Creation can find play/expression.
Quote:13.7 Questioner: After this, what happened?
Ra: Awareness led to the focus of infinity into infinite energy. You have called this by various vibrational sound complexes, the most common to your ears being “Logos” or “Love.” The Creator is the focusing of infinity as an aware or conscious principle called by us as closely as we can create understanding/learning in your language, intelligent infinity.
13.8 Questioner: Can you state the next step?
Ra: The next step is still at this space/time nexus in your illusion achieving its progression as you may see it in your illusion.
The next step is an infinite reaction to the creative principle following the Law of One in one of its primal distortions, freedom of will. Thus many, many dimensions, infinite in number, are possible. The energy moves from the intelligent infinity due first to the outpouring of randomized creative force, this then creating patterns which in holographic style appear as the entire creation no matter which direction or energy is explored. These patterns of energy begin then to regularize their own local, shall we say, rhythms and fields of energy, thus creating dimensions and universes.
in other words - for 'Free Will' to be able to experience itself, it needs an appropriate 'sandbox' - and that sandbox has to be a condensation of 'Finity' condensed out of the Infinite.
why is this 'Love'? I would say it is the gifting to itself of the means of Experience - in the same way a mother births a child and gives it 'life'. What greater act of Love than providing the vessel/vehicle for the Creator to witness itself in materiality?
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - anagogy - 04-02-2017
(04-01-2017, 01:34 PM)Henosis Wrote: Did infinite awareness perceive unity, and Love was the closest approximation of Itself?
That is precisely it, from my perspective.
The situation is this: you have infinity, which is absolutely undistorted intelligent unity. Flawless oneness. A still and pristine pond.
Every movement 'away' from 'that' equals a kind of primal 'distortion'. The source of all distortions is the limitation of the viewpoint, which is fundamentally augmented by the warping of perception (choosing to perceive 'that which is' incorrectly to some extent).
Essentially, what we call 'love' is the symbolic equivalent to the scent radiating from a delicious baked pie. Perhaps you are no longer directly partaking of that sublime pie, but you are perceiving the delicious aroma emanating from it. The smell is somewhat removed from the reality of directly tasting the pie, but it reflects it to a large extent.
Is it obvious I am hungry?
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - loostudent - 04-02-2017
(04-01-2017, 01:34 PM)Henosis Wrote: Did infinite awareness perceive unity, and Love was the closest approximation of Itself?This could be it. One is unity. Love is unity, extending to many as one. Perfect image of One.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - native - 04-02-2017
Ra's definition of love from 27.12 and 27.13.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Henosis - 04-03-2017
(04-02-2017, 10:27 AM)anagogy Wrote:(04-01-2017, 01:34 PM)Henosis Wrote: Did infinite awareness perceive unity, and Love was the closest approximation of Itself?
That is precisely it, from my perspective.
The situation is this: you have infinity, which is absolutely undistorted intelligent unity. Flawless oneness. A still and pristine pond.
Every movement 'away' from 'that' equals a kind of primal 'distortion'. The source of all distortions is the limitation of the viewpoint, which is fundamentally augmented by the warping of perception (choosing to perceive 'that which is' incorrectly to some extent).
Essentially, what we call 'love' is the symbolic equivalent to the scent radiating from a delicious baked pie. Perhaps you are no longer directly partaking of that sublime pie, but you are perceiving the delicious aroma emanating from it. The smell is somewhat removed from the reality of directly tasting the pie, but it reflects it to a large extent.
Is it obvious I am hungry?
Great analogy.
The limitation of the viewpoint is a great way of seeing the first distortion.
If everything is in a way nullified to the pond and a state of absolute non-duality, would you equate this nonduality with a state of nonexistence, from the perspective (or lack there of) of the pond? Or a state of absolute existence? Or a mysterious concoction of both yet neither?
Or am I just being a rabble rouser?
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - anagogy - 04-03-2017
(04-03-2017, 10:49 PM)Henosis Wrote: Great analogy.
The limitation of the viewpoint is a great way of seeing the first distortion.
If everything is in a way nullified to the pond and a state of absolute non-duality, would you equate this nonduality with a state of nonexistence, from the perspective (or lack there of) of the pond? Or a state of absolute existence? Or a mysterious concoction of both yet neither?
Or am I just being a rabble rouser?
Good question.
Ra: The dissolution into nothingness is the dissolution into unity, for there is no nothingness.
Everything is nullified except that which has no opposite, i.e. existence. And if you deeply ponder the essence of 'existence' you will come to see, with perfect clarity, its absolute congruency with this thing we call *awareness*. Awareness is the literal affirmation of existence: the very expression of I AM. When all is one, there is simply infinite awareness of awareness (I Am That I Am). It is literally metaphysical light.
The photonic energy we are aware of in our realm is the symbolic outer reflection of consciousness. The inner reality of light has always been consciousness, which also 'illuminates' as is the nature of light, but it illuminates in a metaphysical sense.
:idea:
Ra: The nature of all energy is light.
When an electron (negatively charged particle) and a positron(positively charged particle) collide does the energy cease to be? Nay, photons are born.
Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. Physicists figured out that part, but haven't yet figured out that all energy is also conscious. But don't worry, they'll come around.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - MangusKhan - 04-04-2017
(04-03-2017, 11:24 PM)anagogy Wrote:
When an electron (negatively charged particle) and a proton (positively charged particle) collide does the energy cease to be? Nay, photons are born.
Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. Physicists figured out that part, but haven't yet figured out that all energy is also conscious. But don't worry, they'll come around.
I think you're thinking of a positron but the analogy still stands. It's a good one.
We can see light as the beginning and end of all matter, and love as its metaphysical component. So of course in the beginning there could only be love, and in the end as well. I think a bit of confusion arises in some people as to what "love" really is. Clearly, when we're talking on such an epic scale as the entirety of creation, this love would not be the same as distorted human concepts of "love", though it would definitely be similar, being the pure progenitor.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - anagogy - 04-04-2017
(04-04-2017, 02:46 AM)MangusKhan Wrote: I think you're thinking of a positron but the analogy still stands. It's a good one.
Yeah, I meant positron, thanks for pointing out the error.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Henosis - 04-04-2017
(04-03-2017, 11:24 PM)anagogy Wrote:(04-03-2017, 10:49 PM)Henosis Wrote: Great analogy.
The limitation of the viewpoint is a great way of seeing the first distortion.
If everything is in a way nullified to the pond and a state of absolute non-duality, would you equate this nonduality with a state of nonexistence, from the perspective (or lack there of) of the pond? Or a state of absolute existence? Or a mysterious concoction of both yet neither?
Or am I just being a rabble rouser?
Good question.
Ra: The dissolution into nothingness is the dissolution into unity, for there is no nothingness.
Everything is nullified except that which has no opposite, i.e. existence. And if you deeply ponder the essence of 'existence' you will come to see, with perfect clarity, its absolute congruency with this thing we call *awareness*. Awareness is the literal affirmation of existence: the very expression of I AM. When all is one, there is simply infinite awareness of awareness (I Am That I Am). It is literally metaphysical light.
The photonic energy we are aware of in our realm is the symbolic outer reflection of consciousness. The inner reality of light has always been consciousness, which also 'illuminates' as is the nature of light, but it illuminates in a metaphysical sense.
:idea:
Ra: The nature of all energy is light.
When an electron (negatively charged particle) and a positron(positively charged particle) collide does the energy cease to be? Nay, photons are born.
Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. Physicists figured out that part, but haven't yet figured out that all energy is also conscious. But don't worry, they'll come around.
I would say light is almost synonymous with consciousness as well, in quite a literal sense as you mentioned. I feel as one is approaching the octave density, in the mid 7th, there is a loss of conscious objectivity. As Ra puts it, the looking backwards stops. There is only I Am. At or near its completion, there is a loss of subjectivity as well as all merges back into infinity. The light is nullified to its source in the same way the rays of the sun are nullified to its orb. That is, until the heartbeat of the Creator beats once more.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Henosis - 04-05-2017
Within Hasidic thought, the Divine Will is the outer expression of inner delight. The two essential powers of the soul are considered to be Delight and Will, with the quality of Faith reflecting the essential essence of the soul beyond its essential powers.
I am leaning toward this viewpoint, with infinite awareness being delighted by the bliss and joy of unity, and this bliss somewhat consolidating or condensing into foci or Logoi or "I"s, in some eternally mysterious fashion. Love, in this context, would be an expression of joy.
This excerpt from the Fabric of Consciousness sums this up rather well:
"The process of intensification is easily understood visually. Think of a large empty room full of mist. The mist is the Fabric of Consciousness. Now imagine the mist coalescing and thickening into a single intense spot. Imagine that at a certain point the mist gets dense enough and then imagine a single spot "lightning up" as a pinpoint of Light (i.e. a Star). The "star" that appears is the self aware Monad."
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Verum Occultum - 04-06-2017
(04-01-2017, 01:34 PM)Henosis Wrote: Did infinite awareness perceive unity, and Love was the closest approximation of Itself?
I think that intelligent infinity was (or is) so intelligent that it could absolutely choose anything it wished and the possibilities led to an infinite amount of multidimensional offshoots (of emotional realizations) in an instant. And these offshoots were known even "before" they were created. There was the instant possibility of choosing infinite motivation. The joy and motivation of creating, absolutely knowing that "This" is the only thing that exists and "I am that," being so totally itself. In other words, because there were no limitations in that state, all of the infinite possibilities (including the possibilities of what orgasm/joy/delight is in infinite intensity) was determined in less than an instant. I would agree that Love is the closest approximation of Itself. The Love that the Creator feels must be unimaginable because of the infinite intensity of expression possible in the realization of infinity.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Diana - 04-07-2017
The word "love" has pervasive and insidious human connotation. Maybe "love" in the context of infinity just means everything, including the all, the implicate universe. From there, all things may be derived.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Glow - 04-07-2017
Love might not be the exactly perfect word because energy cannot often be summed up in to one word, but I find it funny on this forum people often want to completely ignore the word they chose. They chose it for a reason, it wast a mistake.
If the meaning was closer to anything else have chosen it. They chose the same word we don't quite understand but it's what drives all creation. Wars fought, hanious acts committed, poems written, hearts broken, self sacrifice and all great and horrible things that come from it.
They could have easily chosen a phrase "like all that is/will be" if they meant that.
They chose love, a word with emotion to drive, whether it drives action or understanding it is the fuel. it's not an exact match but let's not do like the Christians and completely reinterpret things to mean what we want.
On one of my luckiest days I experienced the creator in an open hearted hug with another wanderer. A huge wirling ball joined us in a centrifuge like ball from heart chakra to well above our heads.
I had asked to experience heaven a week prior because I was awakening to the vastness beyond my Christian up bringing.
It was not clouds, nor was it an expanse of peaceful zen non emotion. There was no one, just all, like an overwhelming near orgasmic wirling of energy that contained
the highest of highs and the contrast echod but was barely noticeable because the blending created bliss. All possible emotion and their variants. I would add understanding because it was seamless the lows were not lows because there was no veil. The over riding word for that I would have to chose love because it's active.
I often said bliss but that is an experience. The energy itself was love.
I'm not saying what I experienced is exactly what Ra is talking about but it easily contained all that is but still could only leave you choosing the word love.
I don't think the word they chose was a mistake or a misnomer just incomplete because with energy translation to word is always incomplete.
RE: Why was Love the first thought? - Coordinate_Apotheosis - 04-07-2017
My understanding is like this:
Unawareness/Chaos/Darkness birthed an 'Original Thought' that Ra summed up with disclaimer as Unconditional Love being the closest vibratory complexes to describe to a human such a thing.
This original thought was the Love/Light of the Creator's having become aware.
From here the Law of One is known/owned and its primal distortions next become known, with Free Will being a fulcrum of power, Love being the intangible outspreading and reaching of the presence/essence/unity of the One Infinite.
Then Light being the tangible outspreading and reaching of the design/being/creation of the One Infinite.
From there, infinity learns more and more until eventually it coalesces back and the original thought is improvised to experience a new or different creation.
As I understand it, the Creator IS Love, the original thought was moreso in my view the becoming of awareness for the creator, its first thought was its reflection as all thoughts can be seen to be.
Why was this so?
Let me take you on a crazy spin down the rabbit hole. Of time and paradox.
In the future (which is present now) there is a quantum effect of creating the past to determine the future (its actually...proven or strongly believed that quantum mechanics showcases that the future creates the past, not the other way around).
Because in the beginning there was 'nothing' (which is still something), the future which was made by something coming from nothing itself was the cause for something emerging from nothing.
In essence, the why is because the Creator creating itself made itself to be Love by being in the future so the past would create itself leading up to that future moment.
But because the future is both the past and present, just like the past is both the future and present, and just like the present is both the past and future, every moment creates alterations in the past and future.
So right now, this very moment is specifically so it can lead to something in the future, making the past along the way, the present always changing to meet these newly created moments that always were and will be.
Don't forget to thank your spirit guides for helping you aim your future via your present thanks to a past made to fulfill a future that hadn't...hasn't...(?) Even happened yet.
Time is cool
