To some extent it is true that love follows upon free will as a possible activity of those who embody free will in relation to one another, and one could say, in a larger sense, in relation to the creation as whole. In this sense it would seem then that a proper consideration of the nature of loving would require a fuller consideration of what it means to have free will. That is a story in itself, my friends, but it is useful to note [that], were it not for free will, were it not for the possibility that in creating an infinite number of, shall we say, sparks, or holograms of the creator—each of which can experience itself differently—the creator itself would have no possibility of knowing itself in any way that it did not already have prior to the event of the creation. And so there is contained in the concept of free will a potential that, strangely enough, registers as a not being of the creator to the creator. That already suggests the need of a return to the creator, by the creator, so that the creator may reap the harvest of the creation that has been undertaken so that the creator may know itself.
Q’uo, on September 4, 2016,
channeled by L/L Research