Carmen already pointed out that Love (as in Love and Light) is not an emotion, so this post could be redundant, but I wanted to add some thoughts anyway.
When you think of love, don't think of romantic love which is definitely (at least to begin with) rooted within emotion - not that there is anything wrong with this form of love! Also, this Love is not the same as think of the love that a parent has for a child and vice-versa, which is more about unconditional acceptance, harmony and appreciation. In both these scenarios the Love (as in Love and Light) does however play its part owing to the dynamics of the relationships and exchange of energy and nurturing. A parent will send Love and Light to a child and a lover will do the same with their partner.
To find and grasp the concept of "Love" as meant in phrases like "Sending love and light", or "I greet you in the love and in the light of the one infinite creator", Think of the intent that impels creation, that unconditional force that creates and nurtures within the one.
Light to me, often appears as love made manifest at its highest order. Love and light go together as they are the "becoming" of the infinite intelligent energy of creation. So love accompanies creative intent, Light is the thing or mode of energy that becomes manifest according to intent. Infinite intelligent energy is the multi-dimensional substance that realizes/responds to the actions of love and light. This Love and Light are the two things which both convey intent and the means to create/manifest that intent out of the infinite energy of the one.
Therefore, Light is a thing more than love is, love is more of an intent, but they are both timeless and therefore hard to accurately express in 3D terms.
I hope this makes sense, it is barely making sense to me. I think I might have overstretched myself in trying to explain my idea, but lets see if this makes sense to anyone.
Here is a quote from the law of one series that seems massively relevant to me:
Quote:
(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 is pure vibration and is not physical in any way or in any form or density, and the first product of that vibration is what we call the photon or particle of light. I am 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?
Ra: I am Ra. You are correct
|
A..
[some of this post has been written intuitively - usual warning and disclaimer applies - it could all be wrong!]