It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How "the law of attraction" works

page: 48
324
<< 45  46  47    49  50  51 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:43 AM
link   
I really dig this idea. Have so in a long time. Ever since I was a kid I knew this for some reason.
No one ever told me but I always felt a FILTER, if I can call that, in me..it was almost like everything in the universe or the mighty power was filtering through me and as long as I remained aware of its beauty...things worked out fine. I would think about doing things or having things or meeting interesting people.. that would lead into how it would happen, and finally the shape and form it would take right before it happened. The feeling I would have before and after.
Soon I realized that it was true. Did not give it much thought.

HOWEVEr,
I do have to ask the following question because it does bother me

It is about knowing that you will be taken care of, working hard to make it happen for yourself, and then reaping the rewards of your hard work and positive outlook.


THis only works for a small portion of the population. What I mean is that those people who live in a situation that is F-ed up.. Iraq, Africa, etc...
they are not able to get to this point.

See what I mean. Or is it that the people who commit the destruction in those parts of the world are actually more powerful in their abilities to achieve their destructive goal by focusing more and being more aware of their powers and so on.

you guys understand me.
its easy to tell someone who has a job, comes home everynight and so on, easy to tell him/her to focus on the raise or promotion.
But what about the people...u see where I am getting at




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Illahee
 



Maybe the work on a consciousness-level has already been done and its time for a pause. Thats my current feeling to. We can re-ignite the field again at a later date.



[edit on 22-8-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by MrJelly
 


Most people will disagree with me but I think the best thing that can be done to evil is to withdraw participation in their game (participation gives them energy) and to do the best you can in your immediate surroundings. If enough people do this, there will be no more enemy, because we´re not playing along in the game.

However, this is only my opinion and other LOA-practitioners will have differing views.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Illahee
 


Hi Illahhe,

You're right, this thread could go on for years and rightfully so. It's tremendously insightful.


Cheers



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MrJelly
 


In my opinion, the Law of Attraction works the same for every single person in the world. It is a Law, after all.

Basically, people in say Iraq see destruction, dwell on it, worry about it, and those thoughts and worries beget more destruction. People starving in Africa see death and hunger, worry that there will not be enough food and consequently there is not.

The people who live in these terrible situations have 99.9% most likely never even heard of LoA or positive thinking. And if they have it just seems silly in the midst of such a serious problem I would guess.

Also, the problems in places like these perpetuate themselves because people will not take responsibility for their own lives. Instead of allowing themselves to be subjugated, they need to stand up and fight for their rights. Instead of just subsisting on UN aid they need to grow their own food and make their own livelihood. Each person can only change his or her own future; they can't wait for the US or the UN to make it happen for them.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illahee

My opinion is to set a date everyone can focus on and begin again at that time? Will the manipulation derail the original direction of the work? So many possibilities to consider.

Open to interpretations and suggestions.


Why not just direct everyone to start immediately? I don't think it will derail the original progress that has been made. It only seems natural to me that without a driving force behind the project it stalled, so I'm sure it will progress once everyone is behind it again.



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 12:24 AM
link   
The etymology of the word pray from Proto Indo European and other old languages is: "to ask, request, entreat". I find this very interesting considering to me it shows how religion has changed and led people astray from the true meaning. What most people are taught about religion and the omnipotent God who will allow you into the pearly gates, again is a misconception from the true meaning.

I believe it's about asking the universe for what you want or need and getting it through repeated actions. Not about being rewarded when you die. I truly believe all the suffering, Job, was added by sadistic leaders to make the masses their cattle.

I just think it interesting how things I was taught as fact seem so insane to me as I have aged. No wonder there are so many alcoholics and miserable Christians/other religions. They are waiting to die for the good life, believing they have to be martyrs to get into heaven.

Another interesting etymology is the word God: "to call, invoke" Makes me think. How bout you?
Praying/asking or begging for what you need to God/call or invoke it within you. Very interesting indeed.



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by geishagirl97
The etymology of the word pray from Proto Indo European and other old languages is: "to ask, request, entreat".


Although, this could be interpreted as "question" rather than "ask for things."

I study the ancient Greek philosophies, (and all philosophy, I just enjoy the Greeks the best) and a thing I have found that is misinterpreted by moderns is the concept of "knowledge" or "gnosis." We think of knowledge as discrete bits of information that we can own, possess, or have. Plato, when talking about the highest form of knowledge, is talking about a fluid understanding that is constantly evolving. You can see it in his dialogs, this constant questioning that leads to wisdom, but not "an answer."

For me, this is what praying is meant to be. A constant dialog and questioning of the Divine. Not for "an answer," the one answer that will stop the dialog, but for the understanding that will lead one to the next question. The dialog is meant to be continual, the relationship to the Divine is meant to be eternal, not end with the gift of some "thing" or "answer."


Originally posted by geishagirl97
I believe it's about asking the universe for what you want or need and getting it through repeated actions. Not about being rewarded when you die. I truly believe all the suffering, Job, was added by sadistic leaders to make the masses their cattle.


One has to assume that they know what they want or need for that to work. I can only express the deepest gratitude that many of the things I asked for, and thought I wanted or needed were NOT given to me. In retrospect, if they had been, I would not have found happiness or contentment. Suffering is not always a "bad" if it brings you the ability to be happy. It isnt a punishment if it shows you how to find peace, and contentment wherever you happen to be, and not only in the places you think will make you happy. I would say suffering exists only within us. It isnt a set of circumstances, it is instead our reaction to our circumstances. The circumstances in which you suffer, with not having enough money to do what you want, may be heaven to some other, who would be grateful to do anything at all to simply not starve or sleep in the cold. To not have their families hacked to death by machetes. Your circumstances are not causing your suffering, your mind is. The way you view them. If you could see all that you DO have, and focused on it, rather than what you DONT have, you could be happy right where you are.


Originally posted by geishagirl97
They are waiting to die for the good life, believing they have to be martyrs to get into heaven.


I think it is pretty crazy to think that you have to suffer now to get into heaven "later" as well. But if you can see that the idea of "heaven later" makes little sense, then why does it make any more sense to believe that heaven is where you go when you win the lottery? Either heaven is right here, with you right now, or it is not. When Jesus is explaining heaven he says those that think it is somewhere else will never find it. If they think it is "there" or "in the sky" they will never enter it. He says it is "at hand" or close enough to be grasped in the moment. He also says how to enter it, like a child, with trust and with faith.

He also says that "those that have will be given more, and those who have not will have even more taken from them." Does this mean the rich are going to be rewarded and the poor made to suffer? Or could it mean that those who develop gratitude, who learn to look at the good in their lives find more and more to be grateful for. More and more Good. And that those who focus on their miseries find more and more things they can be miserable for, more and more ways in which they are suffering? Again, could the answer be in our view of the world? In law of attraction terms, could it mean that those who BELIEVE in suffering and injustice find it? And that those who believe in abundance and happiness find it instead?


Originally posted by geishagirl97
Another interesting etymology is the word God: "to call, invoke" Makes me think. How bout you?
Praying/asking or begging for what you need to God/call or invoke it within you. Very interesting indeed.


Yes but notice also that the word God is not ancient.

wahiduddin.net...


Oddly, the exact history of the word God is unknown. The word God is a relatively new European invention, which was never used in any of the ancient Judaeo-Christian scripture manuscripts that were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek or Latin.

According to the best efforts of linguists and researchers, the root of the present word God is the Sanskrit word hu which means to call upon, invoke, implore.


"God" is not the Divine's name. That is translated as "I am that I am" or "I be that I be" or;


Ehyeh is a first-person singular verb, and can be understood as God saying that God is "in the process of being", a reference that could say, based on theological interpretation, that God exists in all times.


in the process of being, NOW. I am NOW. Being NOW.

In the LOA, there is (as many here have pointed out,) a particular power in "feeling that you already have what it is that you want." Bringing it into the present, not wishing for it in the future. Perhaps this is because the present is particularly close to the Divine, and the power is in now, the present. Perhaps looking for the abundance in your life now, and seeing it, feeling it, being grateful for it, and trusting that it will always be there and that the act of seeing/feeling/believing it more fully causes its expansion is key.

Perhaps begging and wanting it in the future fails in two ways. It betrays the belief that what you have is not good, and it betrays that you believe that what you want is in the future, which you will find is always out in front of you like a carrot, never actually in your hand.

[edit on 20-8-2008 by Illusionsaregrander]



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


You get the star on that one. The concept of the ancient Greeks is the truth and explained very precisely.

Well done explanation.



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by sc2099
 


Remember I need to stay as an observer. At this point there is a time of non activity. Only by observing can we see if it is like an ocean wave and building or if it is indeed a period of non action. Observation is key to understanding the group dynamic and these lax time periods. What is learned may be of more value than the work itself if that makes sense.

I can only supply observations which will become more clear very soon and from there you can decide collectively of a resumption is even needed or if all is going as it should.

The collective mind may be more readily disturbed than the individual. This is what we want to know because there are greater and much more worthy tests to conduct than just this sort of benign venture.



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by sc2099
reply to post by MrJelly
 


Basically, people in say Iraq see destruction, dwell on it, worry about it, and those thoughts and worries beget more destruction. People starving in Africa see death and hunger, worry that there will not be enough food and consequently there is not.


Are you then saying that it is fault of their own? They should start thinking thoughts opposite to destruction & hunger and they would suddenly get well?

In this line of thought, one could say then that war in Iraq was because many americans (most of them, actually) wanted war. So the law of attraction worked and they got their war. Of course, the reason people wanted war was somewhere in deception by contemporary leaders (some of them are still in power). They painted a picture of evil country and that war is solution.. Then people - those authority respecting mostly - started to want the war and false basis. But because law is a law, no matter what you enter in it, you'll get specific return. This is bit scary actually.



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by v01i0

Originally posted by sc2099
reply to post by MrJelly
 


Basically, people in say Iraq see destruction, dwell on it, worry about it, and those thoughts and worries beget more destruction. People starving in Africa see death and hunger, worry that there will not be enough food and consequently there is not.


Are you then saying that it is fault of their own? They should start thinking thoughts opposite to destruction & hunger and they would suddenly get well?


I think fault is the wrong word to use. Think of the LoA as a set of mental footprints you leave. If you keep stepping in the same set of footprints in your mind, eventually you will step in them in life. The word fault implies that someone is to blame, which is sort of myopic. You can't blame your life circumstances on anyone. If you're in a bad situation you can either get yourself out of it or spend the rest of your days pouting.


In this line of thought, one could say then that war in Iraq was because many americans (most of them, actually) wanted war. So the law of attraction worked and they got their war.


How many people does it take to apply the Law of Attraction? One. America is a nation of millions. The war in Iraq could very well be attributable to just one person. He might not even be in government. He might not even be American.

Or it could be attributable to all the Iraqis who were oppressed by Saddam Hussein and wished for someone, anyone to get rid of him. They wanted him gone and gone he is. The war would certainly be a manifestation of that desire.



[edit on 8/23/2008 by sc2099]



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 02:27 AM
link   
So, what do those-who-read-page-48+ think about this:

What is the relationship between LoA and the deliberate use of ambiguity?

That is, wielding the 'double-edged sword'?

If you can limit the 'potential field' of possibility to not a single option (via visualization), but rather to multiple options, via different interpretations of an ambiguous communication, does that dilute or amplify the cause from which LoA postulates its 'effect'?

Should this be a separate thread?



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ian McLean
So, what do those-who-read-page-48+ think about this:

What is the relationship between LoA and the deliberate use of ambiguity?

That is, wielding the 'double-edged sword'?

If you can limit the 'potential field' of possibility to not a single option (via visualization), but rather to multiple options, via different interpretations of an ambiguous communication, does that dilute or amplify the cause from which LoA postulates its 'effect'?



Care to give a real-life example of what you mean?



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I think what he is saying is that when we leave the universe to be the decider of the "what" we need or how to bring it to us, how can we then say that the law of attraction is what brought it?

How can we ever be sure that it was a "law" that caused it, or serendipity?

If for instance we said, "I want a red car to show up in my driveway with a bow on it this Monday." And did all the exercises, wrote it down, danced naked under the moon, what ever the LoA method you thought worked, and lo and behold, on Monday there was a red car with a bow on it in your driveway, you could say, "It worked."

Particularly if it was testable in a controlled way over and over again without fail.

(Scientific method)

However, if the request is highly ambiguous, and there is no specificity, couldnt ANYTHING that arrived be used as "proof" that the LoA was successful?

I think he is basically asking, "How can you know it is working unless you are requesting specific things in a specific time frame?"

or-

"How do you know that this isnt all hoohah that some wanker is making up to sell books unless you figure out a way to test it scientifically?"

I paraphrase, of course.


My answer to the question was discussed in a previous series of posts quite a while back in which I argued that what we call the "LoA" should more accurately be renamed the Law of Discernment, where the "drawing the thing to you" is less the thing, it is more the "finding your way to the thing."



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Care to give a real-life example of what you mean?



Sure -- say for example, you decide to 'attract' a vacation for yourself: a visit to an exotic locale. However, that's done in a way that's ambiguous, perhaps with regard to actual location (you just visualize sandy beaches), or context (you just visualize yourself seeing said beaches in person). That leaves open the possibilities of exactly how that might actualize: a friend may have an extra ticket for a vacation they're already planning, or you might have an emergency situation to deal with at work that would require travel: both could fit the ambiguous specifics of what you've visualized.

So, by keeping the 'discernment' ambiguous, in various aspects, does that increase the possibilities that reality might provide, and increase the power of the LoA?

Here's another example, from mass psychology: I think politicians do this all the time. They carefully craft their speeches and slogans to give rise, in the listener, to a specific positive vision, centered around their goals -- eg, think of them in power and what good things they could do. The means of communicating and encouraging that vision, in the listener, are kept deliberately ambiguous, in order to 'reach as many as possible'. This causes variety; is there a LoA effect? I've heard people say many times, after listening to such things, "Oh, you thought he meant that? I thought he was saying this."

Reality also provides amusing examples, apparently non-deliberate, of such things that make you go "well, yes we wanted that, but we didn't want that" (retroactive abasement). One of my favourites: from George Bush's 2000 campaign platform: "America must become a country that trades in freedom."



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Ian McLean
 


OK, just making sure we mean the same thing.

When I teach LOA to people, this is a common topic. And there are two techniques on this which are distinct from each other. I call them

1. Specific Focus

2. General Focus

Specific Focus requires a more intense type of concentration, a more exact definition and a bit of action and willpower as well. When applying Specific Focus it is actually ME who is doing the creating/attracting. This method also creates more doubts, roadblocks and resistances in the unpracticed mind though. "My vacation will be fine" (unspecific) creates less fields-of-resistance than "My vacation will be on Bermuda in the second week of august and there I will meet a fantastic person".

General Focus lets "the universe"/"the field" create for you. One visualizes, lets say, a beach and gets into a really good feeling about it. The Universe will then choose that which resembles the feeling and which is the closest in the field-of-possibility. This second method is actually true and original LOA (whereas the Specific Focus is not really original LOA but more a "reality creating"). General Focus has several benefits. One is that no resistance (in form of expectation, neediness, worry) is built up, as the details are left to the "higher forces". The second is that the universe as more means and abilities than the ego-self alone. The third benefit is that the soul revels in the experience of surprise and will find this more joyful.

I used to believe that specific focus is better but Ive changed my mind over time. In applying this you Trust/Surrender that those "higher forces" will deliver exactly and specifically that which is a match of your vibratory-output...and often better than you expected. Then, your only task is to visualize and let the hard work be done by "The Field".

If it can create a galaxy, it can also arrange for a nice vacation.

Life, of course, is a mix of method 1 and method 2. The Art of Living is to know which is used when. What you can do yourself and what you let-be-done.

Edit-to-add: I second everything Illusionsaregrander said in this thread.

[edit on 24-8-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by sc2099
 


In my opinion, the Law of Attraction works the same for every single person in the world. It is a Law, after all.

Basically, people in say Iraq see destruction, dwell on it, worry about it, and those thoughts and worries beget more destruction. People starving in Africa see death and hunger, worry that there will not be enough food and consequently there is not.

The people who live in these terrible situations have 99.9% most likely never even heard of LoA or positive thinking. And if they have it just seems silly in the midst of such a serious problem I would guess.


do you think that it's because they're thinking about it and worrying about it, or is it that they can't NOT think about it?

I know that doesn't seem like much of a difference - but I don't see experiencing chaos and destruction as perpetuating chaos and destruction

rather - I see it more likely there isn't any "free space" to create positivity

in order to visualize and potentially actualize something better - you need to be able to stand free and clear of the insanity - even if only in your fantasies

being surrounded by horror may create a kind of "hope-blindness"

and, sometimes bad things happen to good people - plain and simple - it doesn't help to blame the victim

regardless of whatever abilities we may potentially have to draw good towards us or repel harm - there are things in this universe that happen - beyond any of our abilities to control - it seems a little harsh to blame any group for their shared misery on not being able to think positive



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by sc2099
 


do you think that it's because they're thinking about it and worrying about it, or is it that they can't NOT think about it0?


I believe this is the same thing. Whatever the reason may be that they do not think of anything else, the point is that they are not thinking of anything else.


I know that doesn't seem like much of a difference - but I don't see experiencing chaos and destruction as perpetuating chaos and destruction

rather - I see it more likely there isn't any "free space" to create positivity

in order to visualize and potentially actualize something better - you need to be able to stand free and clear of the insanity - even if only in your fantasies

being surrounded by horror may create a kind of "hope-blindness"


I understand what you're saying. It's hard enough to not dwell on it if you're experiencing North American hardship. I'm sure it's infinitely harder to deal with the hardships in Iraq and just stay sane, let alone not let it bring you down.

It might be impossible for someone in that situation to imagine a future without bombs and death and oppression. However, a way to a happy fantasy life would be to remember something in the past that was good. Even one single memory of happiness can serve as an oasis in a desert of misery. I believe dwelling on this feeling could bring inner peace to people even if it failed to manifest a physical end to the stress. Which is more important, inner peace or external peace?


and, sometimes bad things happen to good people - plain and simple - it doesn't help to blame the victim

regardless of whatever abilities we may potentially have to draw good towards us or repel harm - there are things in this universe that happen - beyond any of our abilities to control - it seems a little harsh to blame any group for their shared misery on not being able to think positive


Again, I'm not blaming anyone. As I already explained, blame is a concept that has no place in this discussion. The Law of Attraction has nothing to do with blame, so there is no such thing as a victim in relation to this law.

Bad things do happen to good people, but it is what people do in reaction to these circumstances which matters. The Law of Attraction is not about control. Quite the opposite, it's about letting go and going with the flow. It's about how we react to stimuli, and our reaction brings additional stimuli.

Basically happiness is a choice. If you lose something you can either be grateful for the things you still have or mourn your loss. The Law of Attraction isn't just thinking positive, it's about being positive. Consistently some of the poorest people vote themselves the happiest on earth. These are people who live on a few dollars a day - fishermen, subsistence farmers, etc. How are they happy in such dire circumstances? They choose to be. They choose not to see themselves as victims of being born into a poor society. They choose to be glad of what they have rather than upset about what they lack. Everyone can do this. This is employment of the Law of Attraction.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by sc2099
 





Also, the problems in places like these perpetuate themselves because people will not take responsibility for their own lives. Instead of allowing themselves to be subjugated, they need to stand up and fight for their rights. Instead of just subsisting on UN aid they need to grow their own food and make their own livelihood. Each person can only change his or her own future; they can't wait for the US or the UN to make it happen for them.


it may not be about blame - as you say - and yet, the impression one might take away is that people are in some way deserving of their misfortunes

politics aside, I believe in the power of attraction

I do not believe that it works in the same way one could expect a light switch to work - on/off

I also believe that like many mysterious energies, or laws - that make up our universe - there is action, reaction, interaction - and no action

it's a fascinating thread with some amazing input - and anything I add would only be redundant at this point

so, I'll only echo something that has been mentioned elsewhere in other ways - the power of attraction - or whatever you choose to call it - involves personal responsibility - but it's not as simple as being responsible for the order you place at the drive-thru window

my fear is that the belief in this law could begin to manifest in people as a belief that all our fortune or misfortune is in someway always the result of deserving behavior

we already have enough of that



new topics

top topics



 
324
<< 45  46  47    49  50  51 >>

log in

join