How "the law of attraction" works

page: 1
307
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+151 more 
posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I see quite a few threads on the recently popularized "law of attraction", "manifesting your wishes" and the movie "the secret" pop up on ATS.

I rarely respond to them since I am, professionally involved with the subject matter since many years and tend to get bored by "discussing the basics".

I have authored a number of books on the subject. I will not disclose those books here because I prefer to use ATS anonymously and not as an author of "law of attraction" subjects (except for this thread).

Being a author about and teacher of the subject since more than a decade, I do welcome questions about it in this thread though. My answers will not be "channelled from a higher source", but simply straight talk from an expert on the matter.

Popular Misunderstandings of the "law of attraction"

In my opinion, there is a whole lot more to know about the subject than popular movies such as "The Secret" and "What the Bleep do we know" can show without falling away from the mainstream or becoming too lengthy. Here are some of the misconceptions that spontaneously come to mind:

"You can have everything you want"
This is such a simplified, mass-marketing-like statement that it can be said to be untrue. You cannot "have everything you want" since the mere act of wanting implies a seperation from that which is wanted. Make sense? There are billions of people wanting stuff all their lives without getting it. Id put "the law of attraction" this way: You can have everything you believe you already have". I´ll explain this in later posts.

"This is a brand new thing" and "This is a new new age thing"
Nope. Its not new at all. It used to be underground or "occult science" or "secret science". Take for example the 1930s book called "Thoughtforms" by Leadbeater/Besant (Theosophists) which teaches that thoughts can densify and become physical matter. But its even older than that. As far back as the 3rd Century kabbalists were talking about "visualizing things in order to create them" (see for example interpretations of the ancient book sefer yeritzah)

"All you have to do is visualize something for it to come true"
This is another simplification which, many will experience themselves, is not entirely correct. First of all, in the metaphysical-sciences, the purpose of visualisation is not to "make something happen", but to experience something as "already happening" and to get into a certain state-of-being, a certain frequency...which then attracts certain beneficial events. What most people do, however, is use visualisation of dreams out of a state of LACK of those dreams, in other words, in order to "make them happen some day". This is contradictory to the law of attraction though. Proper visualisation is not used to "make something happen later", but to FEEL the reality of something right now, to familiarize oneself with the overall vibe of a certain reality. Also, most only visualize a two-dimensional image in front of their forehead. This is much less effective than making the visualisation a three-dimensional, tactile, all-senses, whole-body ecstatic experience. It is not the visualisation that creates anything, but the energy/emotion/excitement which acts as a magnetic signal.

"Without action, none of this works"
This I have frequently read on forums and heard from people. However, "action" is not what the law of attraction is primarily about. If it were about taking action towards your goals, then this type of magical technique would not be magical at all but no different than the normal way of achieving something. Action is alright and action works because we have been conditioned to believe that action-towards-our-desires works, but the law-of-attraction does not necessarily require action (and if it does then only inspired action upon opportunities that present themselves after one has put creation-energy into motion). The law-of-attraction states that you get what you put out, that what you experience is a match to your overall energy-vibration. Therefore, everything you like and everything you dislike creates your overall energy-output (much of the two neutralizing each other before anything is created) and will reflect in your life experience.

"You have to think positive all the time"
The denial of ones and the worlds shadow sides has nothing to do with the real metaphysics of this and much more to do with immature and cheap variations of the law of attraction. A balanced being acknowledges negative and positve. The negative is used to learn what one truly feels/believes. Negative feelings for example, are an indicator of having strayed off one´s inner path, the path one´s soul has chosen. Without these negative feelings you would be without any sort of navigation in life, without any sort of free will to choose what is right and wrong for you. Suppressing negative feelings equals suppressing the very path to the positive side of the pendulum. What you resist will persist. The expert therefore allows and utilizes the negative while shifting to the positive (sometimes using the neutral zero-point as a stepping stone to the positive).

Of course there is much more to say on the subject. But Ive hesitated up to now because the discussion around it mostly does not involve the deeper aspects of it. I for example do not think I have to resort to "quantum physics" in order to make my metaphysics look more scholary or accepted. This is a tactic of new age marketers. I also dont like all the sensationalist trash built around it. Thats the stuff that will attract all kinds of so called "skeptics" who will rightly point out all the nonsense. I will therefore make no claims whatsoever of science, or evidence, or proof or whatever skeptics demand. The proof for the effectivity of the law of attraction lies not in measurable laboratory experiment but in first-hand-experience (which is gained by a certain amount of practice).

More to come. Questions, Comments, positive and negative, welcome.



+25 more 
posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   
So, this is how it works, imo

For naive and childlike beginners it works just like they say it in the movie "the secret". It works like magic until the cynical, questioning, skeptical, worried mind kicks in. After the excitement and novelty has worn off, this is how it, imo, actually works:

Focus. Something is focussed on, until it becomes familiar. The familiarity with it builds trust and the attraction of "things like it", things similar to it.
Focus can be applied in many different ways. One can look at something out there in physical reality or in here, in the mind. One can write about it (writing being even stronger than thinking), speak about it, listen to others speak about it, see it, touch it, feel it, do it, immerse oneself in it (whatever it is one wants to attract). But this is all done in the sense and tense (present tense or past tense) of it already being real, solid, substantial, important, normal, appreciated (rather than needed, wanted, longed for). Basically, one focusses for while (in this manner), and then "lets go of it". "Letting go" not in the sense of loosing interest, but in the sense of no longer requesting or requiring it (afterall, you have to pretend its already real).

And thats that.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Does it work? yes. I suggest anyone that wants to try it out to learn it from the secret as an entry level thing. I learned it as formology, many years ago.

My wife and I are actively using creation or what is known as formology on a daily basis. LOA is a rip off from occult fraternaties and meant to be perfected under close moral scrutiny although it will work for anyone that wants to learn and try. Here is the problem. Most people screw up their lives chasing after the wrong things. It is either white or black magic based on the thought and reason. Jesus made use of advanced formology. It is the biblical 'use of the talents'

In several advanced accuracy tests that both my wife and myself have conducted we were astonished at the extreme levels of accuracy when the thoughts were fully formed from the beginning. If you choose to be a creator, always honor your creator with your works.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Illahee
 


That sounds good.


I hesitate to fix it to a certain label or product-name such as "formology" though (no matter how good it is). The reason being that I have visited, researched, looked into hundreds of groups, methods, seminars that all basically teach "the law of attraction" but try to link it to their specific name/label.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
You are very correct. That is a label that is commonly known, so I used it like the LOA users use LOA as a label. LOA is but one law in a nested set.

Personally I use the term Creation.

My wife is prefers to think of it as 'power chi'.

This week she got a significant promotion as of last night. She started under my instruction two weeks ago and personalized it over the last week. I am very proud of her work.

My current writing on the subject is limited to a two page condensed and very powerful version, in a work for licensed medical practitioners that has yet to be released. Probably this summer if there is time to work on it.

I would be interested in talking offline a bit. I too avoid a lot of quantum mumbo jumbo. It works and can be tested, and thats good enough for us.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
What a relief to see a thread by people who actually DO know what they are talking about!

I think this thread deserves a flag.




[edit on 12-1-2008 by Vanitas]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


thanks for this, quality post as usual. I too like studying these topics, but can't stand it when they get watered down.. then people accuse me of not believing in them, because I dont like the aforementioned watered down material.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:30 PM
link   
This is my introduction to the condensed version. It has not been edited for spelling punctuation or content so it still needs some work. From here its goes to the nuts and bolts from a medical perspective.

The Science of Creation
Our next subject, is related to the act of creation or the formation of solid objects, goals, or outcomes, conceived in thought. It is the use of the Law of Love for the purpose of creation.

It can best be described as a Fully Enveloping and FEELING Love of an impersonal nature, that is focused at a goal to be obtained, and then receiving that goal in reality, as an outcome or as a three dimensional object.

Several new books and DVDs are out right now with their own spin on using the Spiritual Laws to ones own desires and self gain with no regard as to the consequences of those types of actions. This however is not a science to be used or abused the way that is being taught. Nature abhors a vacuum and when some is taken other rushes in. In modern language: As you sow, so shall you reap. Be warned.
I have received several positive outcomes using formology or creation, in testing and for positive uses. It is a primary weapon in the healing arts when used by the initiate. Not by someone who watched the secret on DVD and is trying to win the lotto with what has turned into a form of black magic. This second act is to live backwards or as we spell live backwards….evil. Be certain your cause is just and gives the Creator honor.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


I read your posts in another thread and understood your sentiment against cheap salesmen-talk versus metaphysics. It actually inspired me to make this thread.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I find it works well to not fixate on a single desired path, but instead basically have a vague idea of your ideal future and understand that you may or may not know exactly what is best right now. Then basically have the daydream experience where you are subconsciously immersed in your desired goals, and then sort of ‘let it go’. After that I just say to myself that such a reality would be nice to attain, but I’m not so attached to it that I will not accept a more happy/meaningful future. Then I just sort of put my trust in whatever is out there knows what my heart wants and that I will feel fulfilled one way or another.

Doesn’t work wonders, but I think it is a bit safer and allows me to avoid creating some big mistakes for myself. It takes a while to really put your trust in whatever field, energy or consciousness we are interacting with. I think it pays off in the end to say ‘I really have no idea what my path of least resistance will be, but I know is that is what I want and that I am going to experience it, even by miracle.’

Great Topic, I never liked the principles of the LOA, seems a bit greedy and small minded to me. Whatever the phenomenon is that we are experiencing, it seems to tie into the Theory of Everything. Oh, and it is easier to feel that you have already attained something when you can experience such a reality in a pseudo-form, like in a daydream. Also helps if you believe that there is a field of some sort where such a reality currently exists.

Great topic!



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Illahee
 


Well, keep on writing and soon we might see your e-book. I agree with your bold-printed text.

In my personal taste I would remove the baggage of overused or "charged" vocabulary such as "black magic & white magic" or references to jesus & co...but thats a matter of personal taste. Maybe some people really do need to be addressed with words like that.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darce
I find it works well to not fixate on a single desired path, but instead basically have a vague idea of your ideal future and understand that you may or may not know exactly what is best right now.


Two schools: The generalizers and the specifics. The generalizers will build up less resistant-energy and lead a more happy life. The specifics will achieve more specific stuff but also use a lot of energy in the process, so to speak. Both paths are valid. The first is like "trusting the will of the universe/god" and the other is like exercising ones own will. Thanks for pointing out the path of the generalizer



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Illahee
 


Well, keep on writing and soon we might see your e-book. I agree with your bold-printed text.

In my personal taste I would remove the baggage of overused or "charged" vocabulary such as "black magic & white magic" or references to jesus & co...but thats a matter of personal taste. Maybe some people really do need to be addressed with words like that.


Unfortunately it is for a very limited audience and will not do more than breaking even with printing cost. Its distribution is set for mini seminars on holistic medicine and I doubt it will even be of interest to more than a small cross section in that field, if any. (I know, why even do it? And I can't answer why myself. I felt compelled to start last year so I did.)

I have been careful to quote directly from the Bible since the rest of the topics are the extremes from the bible. The laying of hands, storing of energy, raising the dead, and several others that are not aimed at the ATS folks, or in line with the very good topic you have presented. More so because its an occult text that is easy for folks to refer to, and one is usually available vs more difficult to obtain references.


Just wanted to share the little bit that was in there on the creation subject. I don't want to derail this very important topic in any way.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Oh, limited audience is not such a bad thing. At least then you dont have to water it down.


Do share more about your method of formology (if you wish).



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Oh, limited audience is not such a bad thing. At least then you dont have to water it down.


Do share more about your method of formology (if you wish).


That's it. No watering down at all just a few well placed notes to be careful with the process. I generally refer to it as creation. I use the other name very sparingly and avoid LOA altogether.

I'm right with you on not getting in to teaching the differences between quantum physics and quantum mechanics, etc. I refer all of those folks to what the bleep or others. Its not worth your time really and there are good references already out there.

We were first introduced to the secret by a friend of ours. She was shocked that I already knew about it, but when I brought her some books to look at she was put off that it was in print 100 years ago and I didn't push it. I know she didn't read them and thats fine. She gave them back in ziplock bags so I think she may have been afraid to damage antiques by reading them.

Personally on the secret dvd, I think the only worthy part is Bob Proctor in the extras. He says it all in one clip and is dead on with the subjects.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illahee
We were first introduced to the secret by a friend of ours. She was shocked that I already knew about it, but when I brought her some books to look at she was put off that it was in print 100 years ago and I didn't push it. I know she didn't read them and thats fine. She gave them back in ziplock bags so I think she may have been afraid to damage antiques by reading them.

Personally on the secret dvd, I think the only worthy part is Bob Proctor in the extras. He says it all in one clip and is dead on with the subjects.



(btw) I dont mind talking in-depth in this thread. Afterall, we´ve seen enough threads on the basics.

On the one hand "the secret" inspires many people to think about what reality is and what their responsibility is. And thats a good thing.

On the other hand, it makes something sacred profane...if you know what I mean.

Sacred: special, valuable, deserving of contemplation, practice, care.

Profane: A quickie-fix for greed.

I guess the books you gave that woman didnt provide the quick fix.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   
No they were not her cup of tea now that you mention it. The focus as I am sure you know is to eliminate hate, greed, and the lesser emotions. In no way do they say you shouldn't take whatever you need. They do however bring up the what do you really need aspect.

I don't think our friend would understand me wanting to apply the principles to the healing arts, and that makes me a bit sad. For her.

Everyone has their own direction and goals though. I have never taken more money myself. I make about the same wage as 10 years ago. My wife on the other hand was underpaid by about 15% and was not using her specific skill set, so there was growth for both her and her company in a symbiotic manner. I am proud of her for her efforts and responsibility in her situation.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Good stuff, especially about the Balance.


People need to realize that this also isn't something to use just for your Selfish needs, which would then become abuse. That is where the balance actually becomes essential, and you must learn proper balance (In general) before you even attempt any of this. If not, you won't be satisfiedwith the outcome.

I also like the part where you speak of the visualization, it also coincides with my beliefs. You have to feel as if you are living it, not wanting it. As you said...
"get into a certain state-of-being, a certain frequency..." Thats illustrates it nicely.

This is something people should read and fully understand... Great thread



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illahee
No they were not her cup of tea now that you mention it. The focus as I am sure you know is to eliminate hate, greed, and the lesser emotions. In no way do they say you shouldn't take whatever you need. They do however bring up the what do you really need aspect.


While I frown on using creation for greed purposes (doesnt work though anyway...greed blocks the flow), I dont like the "dont ask for too much" crowd either. Supposing that infinity is overflowing with abundance and that we as humans deserve everything and anything that supports our liberty, peace, prosperity, happiness, there is no need for false modesty (imo).



I don't think our friend would understand me wanting to apply the principles to the healing arts, and that makes me a bit sad. For her.


Well....just like you and I will disagree on some things or you and her disagreed, or anyone and anyone else will disagree...

...I think we need to get away from the paradigm of trying to tell others what is "right" and instead appreciate the diversity. Sameness is lameness



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Hi Skyfloating. Good post.

A few years ago, I got into Sigils. As an illustrator, I was looking for some insight into what I could come up with. It did indeed work, but I didn't realise it at the time. I also combined sigil visualisation with a certain psychotropic, which gave great results, but of course leaves you wide open to abusing it if you don't know the consequences. Of course I eventually used it for ill will, and although the results initially did give me a certain smug satisfaction, the payback in the long term was far more intense. However, taking in all I have experienced, I wouldn't change a thing. Knowledge is, indeed, power.





new topics
top topics
 
307
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join