Thank you for the explanation mudra. Over the years I've ponder on this topic of names for things. Is something more appreciated if it has a name? Named, is there a larger understanding of what it is? Is there a sense of deeper comprehension and expansion of awareness? Or is one at an advantage when fully immersed in the experience of "what is" as it pertains to nature and one's environment? Is it better to be in a state of awesome wonder as compared to intellectualizing what one is experiencing? Would the intellectual process in and of itself create a sense of objectification (separation) as compared to pure experience? When one listens to music is it analyzed or experience via the senses - or is it both?
Interesting questions indeed Carol.
Thank you for bringing those up.
I remember times in the garden as a small child and a deep
connection to flowers. The need to name them was'nt part of
the experience only presence was.
Love allows us to recognise life in everything.
While the mind allows us to recognise form everywhere.
Life is one continuum that pervades everything hence
the sense of no separation as Love sees this.
Forms are disctint from one another for practical purposes
hence the mind is a separator medium.
Have you ever noticed in the state of compete presence the sensation of distance
between you and someone or something is zeroing wile the perception of spaciousness is expanding.
You are being the universe. You are dreaming the world that is the object of your perception.
While when considering the distance between you and someone or something the perception of spaciousness is shrinking.
You are within the universe.
The universe dreams you.
Love is space.
The mind is distance and distance is time.
We are presence containing within herself a level of densification, an assemblage point playing the role of interface between spaciousness of presence and the expression of awareness and consciousness in time space.
Love from me