THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-11-09 00:16:14

I am aware that this text I have written, will reach in its depth to few people who take the trouble to read it in its entirety. Many will only glide over the surface of its words and will probably be prejudicially pigeonholed as religious, spiritual or new age; the discursive mind, the intellect, needs to put fences and raise walls over everything that it does not understand and that it assumes may pose a threat to its convictions that it has worked so hard to build.

The words that integrate this text are not based on a merely intellectual knowledge about Love, or derived from a sappy, immature sentimentality, or the fruit of candid inexperience. Of course it has nothing to do with romantic love whose origin is a feeling of inadequacy that seeks the encounter and union with another being and that is sweetened with attributes loaded with romantic idealizations and ephemeral affective commitments that are based on socially convenient interests.

Love is not an emotion either, always kind, that evokes certain forms of behavior and mannerism in a sustained and impostured pose as if it were a theatrical representation always pretending to be happy. That is not love, that is dishonest behavior that ends up in neurotic states. You cannot place a feeling above your experience and expect it to succeed. This is a form of self-denial because you are implicitly saying that your current state is detestable. Love is not understood by rejecting yourself. Honesty demands that you start from where you are and not from where you imagine you are.

Love cannot be increased, it cannot be stimulated, you cannot manipulate it because love is neither a thought about wanting, nor a feeling about wanting, nor an emotion about loving. That is beyond the reach of the mind because love can only emanate when one becomes a vessel empty of all thinking.

THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

There is no Light but the Light of Love. There is no Love but the love of Self. Beware not to confuse this law which frames Love itself from the contemplative vision where the forms have faded in their own delusion, with the love of the senses which absorbs the attention of the other to promptly satisfy the selfish hedonism of dissatisfaction. For nothing that is empty of Love can be filled with the unlimited fullness of Love, which quenches the thirst of all mouths, unless it first realizes the ephemerality of the forms to which it is attached.

Restful and crystalline is the vision of Love because its nature knows no defects or virtues where to project the iniquities of the minds contaminated with the details of the imperfections or perfections of the forms. It is this blindness of Love that is the highest form of clear and penetrating vision, which rests yearning for Itself in all eyes and in all hearts to abandon all appearances and to remove all obstacles that stand in the way of Love's empty gaze. That is why a look devoid of Love is a defective eye busy discovering faults and reproaches that will be nothing but its own faults and reproaches. Would that you were always blinded by this Love so that you would not find faults where there is only completeness!

Love holds nothing back. Not because it is considered that this should be the characteristic of the lover towards the beloved, but because the lover is not separated from the beloved and the beloved is also the lover in the beloved.

One can choose what to love but one cannot choose Love. So do not put obstacles in the way of Love, because Love is the only thing that exists in your lives. If you withhold a single drop of this sap, it will become a poison that will reach every branch and leaf of the tree of Life and dry up to become part of the blackened swamps of suffering.

Nothing is excluded from Love. Love is the only thing that exists and knows nothing that can be discriminated. That is why Love is an ocean where there are no boundaries to delimit it, because whoever seeks corners to retain it, trying to graduate and measure limits, it disappears leaving behind the bitterness of hatred and resentment that has remained stagnant in the hearts. That is why loving does not consist in ceasing to hate but in ceasing to seek limits to Love.

To love is not a virtue. To love is a necessity more necessary than water, air or bread that nourishes. Without Love, mountains and planets would fly apart and even the smallest of atoms would disintegrate. There is no universe that you can imagine that is not held in the integrating lap of Love.

Love is not the exaltation of feelings, for all that is excited is distorted in the mind by being interpreted into some special category of love. Yet Love is a haven of stillness that calms the thought, but in the heart, roars the sea of fearlessness that transcends all barriers.

charcotranquilo

Vega · 2021-11-09 21:54:29

Is there a difference between Love and Source?

Or is Love an attribute of Source?

Another word I like is Awareness. Is Awareness Source? Or is Awareness an attribute of Source?

And if Awareness is Source then is Self-Awareness a "child" of Source? Is a "child" of Source "born" every time an unconscious being becomes Self-Aware?
I guess that means that everytime Source becomes aware of itself it fragments and now we have a fractal of Source, a "child" of Source.

And I also prefer using Unconditional Love because the word Unconditional makes it very clear that Love loves absolutely everything everywhere always and forever. There is no form that Love doesn't love. There is nothing you can imagine or think of or see that Love doesn't love. There is no emotion, thought, object, situation, etc that Love doesn't love unconditionally and will always love eternally.

And when it comes to Love is not an emotion, could we say that Love and emotions have the same relationship as white light and all the other colors? When you put it through a prism you get all the other colors. So if you put Love "through a prism" you get all the other emotions?

And the opposite of the vibration of love is the vibration of fear. So is fear also not an emotion? Is black a color or lack of color, lack of light? Is white a color?
But Love has no opposite so is there a duality-love that has an opposite of duality-fear and is that duality-love different than Unconditional Love?

And since Love is everywhere then the only way you can create lack of love which that feels like fear, is by covering that Love with a veil. So is the veil of forgetfulness the source of fear?

And also it's interesting to me that the relationship between Love and all forms with boundaries is kinda like the relationship between space and objects in space. And just like all objects are in space, we could say that all forms are in Love. And also just like space is also inside the objects we could say that Love is also inside all forms with boundaries. We could say that Love is all around every thought, emotion or physical object and also Love is inside every thought, emotion or physical object.

Love is everywhere, inside everything especially inside ourself and all around ourself. It is just hidden behind veils. And why would Love hide itself from us? Because it loves us so much that it hides itself from us to allow us the "children" of Source to play divine "games" of fear and darkness inside divine/natural and artificial matrixes. So don't think about this too much cause it will ruin your fear and darkness games lol

So yeah Love is cool, Love is super, I love Love, Love is my favorite.

Thanks for this post. I always love talking about Love.

Last edited by Vega (2021-11-09 22:06:53)

Vega · 2021-11-10 01:22:16

A very relevant transcript to this discussion.

Emotions: What Are They? (Yazhi Swaruu - Pleiades - Extraterrestrial Communication)

(bold emphasis mine)

When you are at the Source, you are aligned with the whole. And when you are or have the illusion of being someone else, someone, a person in a low density, (in all but it is expressed more clearly in low densities), you create two points of attention. The Source, the whole, and the person. With an illusion of separation (You can never be separated because you are one and the same, person as the original Source. One does not go to the Source after dying. Only the illusion of separation is over.)
So you have the Source, the whole << <----> >> Person: 2 points of attention. This in the perception of a soul-person.
A positive emotion of love, integration, happiness is an indicator that the person is integrating that which causes that emotion. Integrating as in love. Movement towards the Source, re-unification with the Source, the disolution of the illusion of separation. That´s why it is a positive feeling. High frequency ---> because it moves or makes the soul - person feel like integrating with the Source.
But if you have a negative emotion the opposite happens, you feel a separation from the Source. That´s why it hurts to leave behind a relationship or feel a rejection. Because you want that something that symbolizes more of the Source for that soul, for your soul, but that which you love so much rejects you, and it is as if the Source itself rejects you creating a strong emotion of disintegration, de-unification and alienation with the Source.

So knowing that a positive emotion is a guide towards integration and a negative towards what we do not want ... We must always keep in mind that it depends on the lens or the point of view with which we look at the problem, thing or situation that provokes it.
So something negative, if we start to observe it, becomes something positive by changing our perception about it and with this our interpretation and this leads to a change in the emotional reaction we have towards that. It is here where we can understand that we can apply logic to analyze emotional situations.
Every time we have a negative emotional reaction (it can also be positive) we can stop to wonder why exactly we feel bad about that particular situation. So we can put to use our logical mind in the situation, not discrediting the emotion but understanding it. Knowing that this emotion is only caused by the concepts that we have associated with it. Our interpretation of reality.
¨There is nothing either good or bad. Thinking makes it so¨
William Shakespeare (Hamlet)

You cannot be a non-emotional being without having a separation from the Source, no matter how logical you are. That component will always be missing. Logic helps you get closer to the Source. Using it to discard what is not convenient. But you will only get to a certain level before encountering a big impasse, making Source and integration unattainable without that missing component that only emotions give you. And its primary engine: Love.
And this is precisely what happens to "positive" but excessively logical races, such as the Andromedan and the Arcturian. They have reached that impasse which makes it impossible for them to understand humans. And what causes that impasse ?: They are only trying to guide from Logic. They cannot understand because for thousands of generations the Emotional has been suppressed in favor of the Logical. And they don't understand why humans make irrational decisions. And it is only because their framework of proceeding obeys other rules, not logic.
For example, having to sell one of two things and even though it is logical to sell one and not the other, a human chooses to sell what is not convenient to him, just because he has an emotional attachment to the other. Andromedans are a very incorrect race to be mentors to humanity. This task corresponds to other ones, more adapted for this work, such as Taygetean, Engan or Solatian.

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-11-10 21:01:35

@Vega

There is no difference between Love and Source. Certainly one could establish semantic differences by stating that "love" is an attribute of "Source" meaning that "Source" is cause and love is "effect" or the quality emerging as a result of Source's capacity to integrate "all that exists" or pre-exists as ontological potential. However, the ultimate reality is that there is no such separation between Love and Source since "The Source" is what would be called the unconditioned Absolute, i.e., any idea that would attempt to bestow any emergent quality (be it love or any other attribute) upon the Source would condition it (something, moreover, impossible) and depart from that which IS, "The Source".

It must be remembered that "The Source" IS NOT AN EXPERIENCE attributable to an "I" as a limited individual identity, because that which IS UNLIMITED cannot be contained in any personal and intellectual experience, since THE SOURCE IS ABSOLUTELY IMPERSONAL AND INCOSNOSCITIVE, that is to say, NOT PROJECTIVE, NOR EXCLUDED REFERENTIAL.

Nothing to do with the limited vision of the individual and intellectual mind that needs cognitive processes that include the mechanisms of perception that carry implicit in their genesis to "know something" the duality of the opposites or what can be called contrasts. That is to say, the perceptual-cognitive mind needs contrasts that delimit the objects of knowledge and in this knowing the sensation of self-consciousness or also called "sensation of existing" is validated and referred to. This "sensation of existing" is projective, that is, it needs external objects (external references) and in this way to reflect and delimit itself distinct from what it perceives, that is, "I" and that which "is not I". But this "self-consciousness of the sensation of existing" is false, or illusory, since it is the result of a fragmented state of exclusion and not of integration or inclusion. This is what is known as the illusion of separation.

The same thing happens with the attribution of the word Consciousness to "The Source". Certainly it is a word that personally, is more accurate than the word "Source" since, this in its definition refers to an origin as a beginning, which carries the idea of time. However, as I have already explained above, this Consciousness is ABSOLUTE or what is the same OMNISCIENT, this means that there is NO state of unconsciousness in "The Source" because this would mean that ontologically it would harbor the germ of duality; any state of unconsciousness is synonymous with incompleteness, separation, fragmentation, limitation, exclusion, disintegration, and this has NO place in the Consciousness or "The Source" is therefore contradictory. "The Source" does not fragment to acquire self-consciousness this is an ontological aberration. "The Source" is already OMNISCIENT, which is transcendent to "self-consciousness". Therefore "The Source" does not need to be self-conscious because that would imply that there would be a part that would be unconscious. This type of conclusions, are attributions or extrapolations to "The Source" "humanized" derived from a state of limitation or disintegration.

Although it could be said that the opposite of Love is fear, it is only so in the sense in which we must understand this, only at the level of separation, but NOT at the level of "THE SOURCE" since fear has no place in IT. It could be said that the conflict is purely "creative" that is, "The Source" Creates (in capital letters) in its own image and likeness, what does it mean that it creates in its own image and likeness? If the Source is LOVE, its effect or result of that Love, CANNOT BE FEAR since CAUSE AND EFFECT AT THE SOURCE LEVEL ARE ONE AND THE SAME.

However, as I have already said the basic conflict is in its creator. It is only the separate or fragmented mind ("disconnected from The Source) that introduces into its perception of love a distortion which is "the idea of fear". It is not that fear exists per se, but it is because the separate mind can only "think in terms of duality", that is, by creating "the idea of love as a concept it carries implicit in its dichotomous germ the idea of fear. Not being able to reach the Understanding of LOVE, without passing through the filter of the conceptual thinking of the dual mind in the meantime, the feeling of conflict (love vs. fear) will be inevitable, since the separate mind has placed itself in a strangely illogical position: IT BELIEVES IN THE POWER OF SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST. Therefore, any attempt to resolve the basic conflict by trying to dominate fear MAKES NO SENSE. The true solution lies "in achieving mastery through Love or integration. In other words, fear is nothing, and Love is EVERYTHING. This is because every time light penetrates darkness, the darkness disappears.

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-11-10 21:03:59)

Vega · 2021-11-12 01:31:15

Thanks for your reply, it was very clear and I really enjoyed reading it.

I have had similar realizations to what you say at the end of your post by reading A Course In Miracles.

I haven't read all of the A Course In Miracles, I need to find time and finish reading it. I have read The Disappearance of the Universe by Gary Renard but not all of ACIM yet. I am not a fully committed student of ACIM, because I am creating and following my own unique path back home outside the illusions, but the ACIM path for getting out of the physical universe is my backup plan, in case I find it hard finding my own way. Although after Yazhi entered the scene I knew that with the information she is sharing I will be able to figure it out on my own, but I still wanna finish reading ACIM cause I get so many insights reading it. And I also still have an attachment to physical bodies and spaceships and dragons and all that stuff and I really really wanna visit the Taygetan base in Cyndriel Aldebaran, so I wanna spend about a thousand more years in the 5D natural matrix for one last time before I exit the physical universe and all it's strong duality.

Anyway enough about (the illusion of) me and my illusory attachments to illusions lol I love these quotes from ACIM:

Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.

The course does not
aim at teaching the meaning of love, for that is beyond what
can be taught.It does aim, however, at removing the blocks to
the awareness of love's presence, which is your natural
inheritance. The opposite of love is fear, but what is all-
encompassing can have no opposite.

From the introduction page of ACIM

Introduction
This is a course in miracles. It is a required course. Only the
time you take it is voluntary. Free will does not mean that you
can establish the curriculum. It means only that you can elect
what you want to take at a given time. The course does not
aim at teaching the meaning of love, for that is beyond what
can be taught. It does aim, however, at removing the blocks to
the awareness of love's presence, which is your natural
inheritance. The opposite of love is fear, but what is all-
encompassing can have no opposite.
This course can therefore be summed up very simply in this
way:
Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.

I may continue this discussion but at a later date cause once I start pondering about these concepts it's hard to disengage I get too absorbed in thinking about them and I need to focus on some things that need my attention. I started pondering these concepts again yesterday prompted by your reply and I got "overloaded" with too many questions and answers to questions that I had before and insights and realizations, and some things that need my attention that I keep postponing got postponed again, it even disrupted my sleep, I kept getting insights and realizations in bed, I couldn't go to sleep. Although I think that probably also had something to do with the 11/11 energy spike.

Last edited by Vega (2021-11-12 01:32:41)

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-11-12 20:11:39

@vega

Yazhi, so far, has offered "metaphysical" information regarding how the illusion works in the context of his own perception reflecting "his own expansion of consciousness". However, for the moment, he has not offered any consistent and methodological information on how to get out of the illusion. Considering that he has only vaguely alluded to the so-called "shadow work" term coined by the medical psychiatrist and psychologist Carl Gustav Jung.

However Jung as well as his mentor Freud and the different schools of psychoanalysis that emerged, such as the Lacanian or the psychoanalysis of Erik From did not manage to develop a methodology that would free man from the "I-ego" because they never understood the nature of the unconscious, remaining in the most superficial part of its contents and not its depth, absent of contents and the revealing aspect of the supraconscious from where LIGHT emanates. Added to this is the fact that neither Freud, nor Jung, nor Lacan, nor Erik From, had freed themselves from the illusion, which is why they were never able to develop a true "therapy of liberation of the ego-ego".

Certainly ACIM is a very precise manual for enlightenment. Although it is stated in the book itself that it was "dictated by Jesus" to his scribe and editor Helen Schucman, regardless of the current controversy raised by the latest information of the Taygeteans in which they affirm "the false existence of Jesus" everything written in that book shows, regardless of who the author is, an exquisite writing with an underlying pedagogical structure perfectly developed in its theoretical and practical aspects and of such ontological and metaphysical finesse, that in my particular opinion, it has not yet been surpassed by any other treatise on enlightenment. This is not to say that there are other treatises that are lesser in their effectiveness as well as in their ontology or metaphysics.

ACIM wrote:

The acceptance of the Atonement by everyone is only a matter of time. This
may appear to contradict free will because of the inevitability of the final
decision, but this is not so. You can temporize and you are capable of
enormous procrastination, but you cannot depart entirely from your creator,
who set the limits on your ability to miscreate. An imprisoned will
engenders a situation which, in the extreme, becomes altogether intolerable.
Tolerance for pain may be high, but it is not without limit. Eventually
everyone begins to recognize, however dimly, that there must be a better
way. As this recognition becomes more firmly established, it becomes a
turning point. This ultimately reawakens spiritual vision, simultaneously
weakening the investment in physical sight. The alternating investment in
the two levels of perception is usually experienced as conflict, which can
become very acute. But the outcome is as certain as God.

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-11-12 20:14:23)

#1 2021-11-09 00:16:14

THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

#2 2021-11-09 21:54:29

Re: THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

#3 2021-11-10 01:22:16

Re: THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

#4 2021-11-10 21:01:35

Re: THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

#5 2021-11-12 01:31:15

Re: THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

#6 2021-11-12 20:11:39

Re: THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE

Board footer