"Spiritual Correctness"

[Berilac Sandydowns]

I've just read Plenum's op for the third time since he posted it. And as often happens here, I feel like a dump truck full of butterflies have been deposited on my head and I have a difficult time catching a couple before they fly away.

Anyway. Colorful allegories aside... :p

I believe maybe the biggest Spiritually Correct stumbling block is the use of the word "Love".

It's a catch all word that is thrown about to cover a myriad of distortions.
And we all think we know what it means in whatever particular context we're working with.
I believe Ra's use of the word is especially egregious.

I'm attracted to the Ra material because it describes quite precisely how the Creation works.
Offers a very tight, scientific framework of the template of what Is.

I see the patterns of energy, vibrations, harmonics and the dance of the "photon" as completely without morality of any kind.
To use the word Love as a descriptor for anything other than a very specific vibration or harmonic leaves a lot of room for error IMHO.

I'm not saying Love doesn't exist. It obviously does. We feel it. We act because of it.
It's an important catalyst. For us. Locally.

But to think of it as a foundation of Creation is not seeing The Big Picture... BIG enough.

Why would Ra use the word Love and equate it with Logos if it wasn't foundational? By that measure the only thing 'before' it is freedom of will of awareness.

I just find it strange that you state Ra expresses a great structure of reality, and then you kind of pass off the fact that they refer to Love/Logos as one of the fundamental aspects of the Creator.

That's what disturbs me about it. That Ra can be so exacting in everything. But in this particular usage, I believe that there was a very early mix up of exact definition. And for some reason it was not corrected.
Carla was a very loving person. Perhaps so powerfully that it translated to Ra as the concept he was trying to get across.
Ra states many times that they had trouble translating exact meanings from our limited vibratory sound complexes.
Don't get me wrong.
I have the highest respect for this whole project.
I'm walking the talk in ways I never thought I'd actualize.
I just don't see the commonly accepted definition of Love as being the utmost foundation of Creation.
I'm sure it's high up there. And I'd Love to understand it's origin point.
I believe the next level under formless infinity is intelligence and light.
Surely Love comes into play somewhere in the hierarchy "beneath" that.
I accept there may be some nuance I don't understand. But it's not from not wanting to.

I didn't mean to pick on Ra anyway.
The word Love can be pretty flexible in it's meaning.
It's such a nice word.