Unity vs Separation

[kristina]

Love is negative...pulling
Light is radiant...pushing

This seems too simple, as there are two kinds of love. Negative love, or love only of self, goes inwards. Positive love, which includes both others and the self, goes in both directions, also radiant.

I must be only seeing part of the equation.
Are there any quotes from Ra that explain this?
I'd be keen to reassess my understanding.

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.

27.14 ▶ Questioner: I will make a statement that I have extracted from the physics of Dewey Larson which may or may not be close to what we are trying to explain. Larson says that all is motion which we can take as vibration, and that vibration, which is pure vibration and is not physical in any way or in any form or in any density; that vibration, by— first product of that vibration is what we call the photon, particle of light. I was trying to make an analogy between this physical solution and the concept of love and light. Is this close to the concept of Love creating light, or not?

Ra: I am Ra. You are correct.

27.15 ▶ Questioner: Then I will expand a bit more on this concept. We have the infinite vibration of Love which can occur, I am assuming, at varying frequencies, if this has a meaning in this; I would assume that it begins at one basic frequency. Does this have any meaning? Am I making sense? Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. Each Love, as you term the prime movers, comes from one frequency, if you wish to use this term. This frequency is unity. We would perhaps liken it rather to a strength than a frequency, this strength being infinite, the finite qualities being chosen by the particular nature of this primal movement.

27.16 ▶ Questioner: Then this vibration which is, for lack of better understanding, which we would call pure motion; it is pure love; it is— it is not— there is nothing that is yet condensed, shall we say, to form any type or density of illusion. This Love then creates by this process of vibration a photon, as we call it, which is the basic particle of light. This photon then, by added vibrations and rotations, further condenses into particles of the densities, the various densities that we experience. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.

And this comes from 85:16
When it is perceived that universal love has been achieved the next balancing may or may not be wisdom. If the adept is balancing manifestations it is indeed appropriate to balance universal love and wisdom. If the balancing is of mind or spirit there are many subtleties to which the adept may give careful consideration. Love and wisdom, like love and light, are not black and white, shall we say, but faces of the same coin, if you will. Therefore, it is not, in all cases, that balancing consists of a movement from compassion to wisdom.
(Wisdom is light)
They are interchangeable one cannot be without the other. Both are reflective. Both are radiant. Light is unity, therefore it pulls things together to unite. Love is unity and therefore also pulls things together. Love sends forth, light sends forth.