How "the law of attraction" works

Double post removed.




[edit on 2-5-2008 by Vanitas]

(I am sorry if this appears twice - or even more times - but for some reason the reply doesn't appear after I submit it.)

Logic is not problematic either, in itself, as long as you realize its limits. (ie; a logical statement is not necessarily a TRUE statement. Logic is a form only, a set of rules, and something being "logical" just means that the form is followed properly) I dont see how one can criticize a form.

That is EXACTLY what I meant.
(And the sheer fact that I have to explicitly reaffirm this goes to prove that I shouldn't be writing when I a can't express myself all that coherently.

)

Of course a form cannot be criticised (except from a subjective perspective of personal "taste"). And therein actually lies the danger, if you ask me: if it beautifully, i.e. coherently, constructed and "works" within its own self-referential frame, very few people, except for those who are really relentless in their quest (and it IS a strenuous quest) will be inclined to question it.

But does it hold a truth, THE truth...?
In the case we're discussing here, the answer would be: evidently not.
In my opinion, the Tomist version is too far removed from the original Christian teachings to allow even a single genuine glimpse of the original message (except for its creator, Thomas Aquinas, I assume).


(And still I keep talking...!

)



P.S. I apologise if I omitted the reference to any relevant previously posted material. I hadn't read all of the previous pages before writing this.




[edit on 2-5-2008 by Vanitas]

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Hmmmm....each person attracts precisely the versions and information that match his/her current level of understanding and energy-radiation. So, in this sense and imo, its already taken care of. And as you are calling out for certain types of information...you receive.

Someone had to articulate those "versions," so how would this be any different? Perhaps, using a variation of this argument, there would be no urge to create a clearer version unless some demand already existed?

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Do you realize that you wouldnt understand, recognize or apply a single word of information that does not match your level of consciousness?

Or that being able to read/grasp something means you already had it in you to start with?

Of course I do. A question for the master questioner;

Does the fact that YOU, personally, "already have it (whatever "it" represents to you) in you" mean you no longer read further on the subject to understand more clearly? It seems to me you mention things you are reading quite often. So simply, "having it in you" does not mean that a clear or clearer explanation adds nothing to your understanding or experience.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Yes. But that "teacher" will only show up when they are ready. And if you´re in a low state, you will attract a teacher who performs poorly. Ive seen this so many times, its amazing.

Not necessarily. Some people never find another live human teacher. (in the formal sense) Some people muddle through on their own, or with the help of what was written by great teachers in the past. There are times/places where the student surpasses naturally all "teachers" in their time/place. (Think of the Buddha, or Jesus)

Besides, your argument seems to be saying, "well it is pointless to write a clearer example, because people only draw what they can understand."

Arent you an author? Why didnt you use that same line of reasoning before publishing? "Well there is no point writing my version, because people can understand what they are ready to understand?"

Originally posted by Skyfloating
In law-of-attraction context, this thread is invisible to most. And I dont mean that metaphorically. I believe that certain beliefs filter out certain realities to an extent that they become invisible.

Oh how well I know that. Or parts of this thread are visible, (the parts that support what they already believe) and other parts invisible, (those that contradict it.) But again, this being the case, what harm could be done? Only those who can use it will find it. And? Why is that problematic?

Every Being is only responsible for their actions. Not how they are received. In my mind, this argument is "only do the work if the end result is _____ and in _____ time frame." You often in this thread have said that the law is do the work for the sake of the work itself, not the money. (or other end result) How would this be different?

Originally posted by Vanitas

Of course a form cannot be criticised (except from a subjective perspective of personal "taste"). And therein actually lies the danger, if you ask me: if it beautifully, i.e. coherently, constructed and "works" within its own self-referential frame, very few people, except for those who are really relentless in their quest (and it IS a strenuous quest) will be inclined to question it.

I agree. But the danger here is "belief" not the form. If people were not so keyed up to "just believe" more would question.

Plato was scathing in his criticism of Sophists and sophistry. (The art of using logic and rationalization to make UN-truth appear true) And, though he never explicitly states it, (he doesnt want you to just believe him either) his whole style of writing is an exercise in showing you how to use your mind to discern the truth for yourself. And a warning that you must question everything. (His Socrates is always stirring up trouble by proving the experts dont know the first fookin thing about what they claim expertise in)

Modern "philosophers" and lay people alike criticize Plato for never telling the reader what he believed the "truth" to be. They utterly overlook the amazing thing he WAS saying, "look for yourself, question, use your mind, and the tools of the mind, find it within you."

Originally posted by Vanitas
In the case we're discussing here, the answer would be: evidently not.
In my opinion, the Tomist version is too far removed from the original Christian teachings to allow even a single genuine glimpse of the original message (except for its creator, Thomas Aquinas, I assume).

Ah. We dealt with ole Tom in Medieval philosophy, but I was so enamored by the mystic philosophers of that time frame, Scotus Eriugena, Al-Ghazali, etc., that Aquinas was merely an annoyance that I had to contend with to get the grade I wanted. I will have to re-read him at some point, I suppose, to see how he has contributed to the mess more precisely.

Originally posted by Vanitas
(And still I keep talking...!

)

And I, for one, hope you continue to.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Someone had to articulate those "versions," so how would this be any different? Perhaps, using a variation of this argument, there would be no urge to create a clearer version unless some demand already existed?

Well, thats why I chose the profession I chose.

Of course I do. A question for the master questioner;

Does the fact that YOU, personally, "already have it (whatever "it" represents to you) in you" mean you no longer read further on the subject to understand more clearly? It seems to me you mention things you are reading quite often. So simply, "having it in you" does not mean that a clear or clearer explanation adds nothing to your understanding or experience.

Once in awhile I read up on the new stuff "on the market" in order to be able to relate to what people adress me with. But when I go to a bookstore privately I usually go to other sections.

Why? Law of attraction is only a MEANS. By focussing on law-of-attraction I get more law-of-attraction and not necessarily the stuff I want. If for example, I wont a car, Im not going to focus on law-of-attraction but on the car.

Besides, your argument seems to be saying, "well it is pointless to write a clearer example, because people only draw what they can understand."

No. The argument is saying there´s no point in forcing it or forcing things onto other people.

Oh how well I know that. Or parts of this thread are visible, (the parts that support what they already believe) and other parts invisible, (those that contradict it.) But again, this being the case, what harm could be done? Only those who can use it will find it. And? Why is that problematic?

I dont think its problematic.

Originally posted by Vanitas

In other words, I was literally locked out of it - until I found the key in myself, once again, and unlocked it.

Strange isnt it?

Originally posted by Skyfloating


No. The argument is saying there´s no point in forcing it or forcing things onto other people.

Ah. I didnt mean to ever imply that I would suggest using force. Or suggest anyone else use force. Simply laying out the formula in writing wouldnt mean someone HAD to read it. If it were problematic to you that it be posted here, I wouldnt.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Well, you have found that "mising link" in your recent posts. Privately I really hesitate to call this stuff "law of attraction" or even "reality creating". Post appropriatly it might be called "reality surfing surrender steering receiving"....but that sounds like crap and nobody will give a damn

More truthfully, we found it. It was clearly a collective effort, and in truth a very good example of that law in play. Alignment with the collective will, (what presented as an issue or problem) collaboration of individuals doing what they do best, without overly caring for their own will/benefit, but rather with the focus on the doing for its own sake, and with an eye to the benefit of the greater Self or the many.

I was holding back a bit on this one to see where it went. For me it is the sequence of the court, but to lead takes away the objective study which may be accepted but far from the truth. Only in such an arena as this can we explore in that manner. I have experienced this from birth so to see the court open is a validation that what I experience is real and that manipulation is taboo to others but normal for me and there is really nothing wrong, just a different perception.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Sadly, you are correct, the Law of Discernment is not as "sexy" or "appealing" as the Law of Attraction is. An interesting thought I had was triggered by Illahee introducing the Jesus/Paul issue into the mix. The law of discernment/attraction divide is at heart the same one. Is faith alone the formula? Or must good works and a recognition of a greater will and the interconnection of all people/things be recognized and submitted to?

Paul says someone already did the work for you, and all you need is faith/belief. His "law" is all about the mind and individual thinking. And in his law, heaven is in the future. You can have it someday IF.....only you believe.

Jesus said that no, you need to act, and act in such a way that honors all others and provides benefit to others, and trust that in doing so, the Divine would not leave you out or make you suffer. Jesus said the "kingdom of heaven is at hand" or right there, graspable in any moment. Now. You needed the eyes to see it, and the ears to hear it, and trust to enter into it. Discernment.

Only one who has studied can come to this conclusion. The bible as we know it are two different teachings blended into one. Its critical to study John 3 in all translations. This work will show the master never said what they claim and john was taken out of context to make paul sound right. Any talk on religion however is off the track. I do use the book and teach from the book, but it is only for convenience as the text that would be used, is almost non existent. The Book is almost always accepted.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
Wouldnt it be nice if we tried the other way for a while?

Obviously, some do. The best "doers" of the LoA, are actually doing more than the LoA, like yourselves. And in Skyfloating's case, I am sure that when he interacts with clients he is teaching them what he does, and not just the "law." But think how much more effective it could be if the Law were stated more accurately? How many people out there do NOT have personal access to an expert to show them, they rely entirely on what they read. How many of them are walking into the same wall, over and over again, trying harder and harder to believe it isnt there when in fact, all they ever had to do was change course and go around?

Although I get corrected constantly, I still feel the need to share further than what may be allowed. This teaching will be lost in another two or three decades. The poisoning of the environment with electrical transmissions and the media induced ADD will make people believe these things were never possible. The black magicians of course would always do all in their power to keep the masses from recognizing their true potential. Its their nature. Its about the internal being and its nature. This is where the successes become regular and guaranteed.

Sorry. can't think right.

That whole melted brie and sliced duck episode is keeping me a victim. A smiling victim though.

[edit on 3-5-2008 by Illahee]

I want to make it clear that in no way do I want to derail this thread from the direction it's going. But I wanted to pose a question before I forgot to ask it.

For all your LoA pros out there...(I'm just a greenhorn at best; I only heard of the Law of Attraction at the start of this thread) Think back to one of your favorite memories. Think back to when you had a time of continuous happiness. Summer camp. Time spent with a childhood friend. Your first love. Think about how great a time in life that was. You can't help but smile, right?

Well my question to you is, if we can revisit these most pleasant memories from the past and they can make us happy in the present via nostalgia or whatever, is it possible to use a similar process to visit "future memories" in our would-be future? I'm not sure I believe we can specifically know the future, but can we sort of imagine future-memories that may or may not come to pass but bring us happiness just the same? Haha or is this what all those mental exercises are in the first place and I'm just slow on the uptake?

p.s. Vanitas and Illusions...I am humbled by your biblical knowledge. I'm from the so-called bible belt, though I never had much of an affinity for Christianity. But for the first time I feel like I'm listening to people who actually know what the heck they're talking about.

So I will share this one last 'religious' translation and convey its teaching as this is my own interpretation as to what it means. You may never in your lifetime see this again so pay close attention. I think at page 29 its buried deep enough to keep away the mildly curious.

Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever as a god of the earth and a god of the heavens."

This rare translation makes no sense. It seems to be saying what it says but 'now lest' keeps it from making any sense at all. Notice the upper and lower case. When I first saw this it gave the chill but I realized that punctuation was very sloppily used by the translator.

Here it is again. Lest=: for fear that —often used after an expression denoting fear or apprehension


Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil now. For fear that he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever as a god of the earth and a god of the heavens."


It is most clear that the knowledge of good and evil is an introspective look rather than an acting out.

And again fully formed as a thought.

Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil now. We are apprehensive that he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever as a god of the earth and a god of the heavens."


Bone chilling compared to the modern 'best seller' version? If he looked inside he would only want the good and discard the evil. He would gain the life and powers of a god and pave the way for immortality as a god in the after life.

I'm all done there now. Moving on to a new topic as to how the law of attraction works, and how do we know it does?

reply to post by sc2099


Now we are back to my good friend Richard Bandler. Listen very close to everything that goes on in the clip. He specifically answers your question.....

I have posted the link numerous time but there are many things going on at tha very same time in this clip and very few can name or explain them all. To the outsider it looks like a simple hypnosis session.......

vidsearch.myspace.com...

if we can revisit these most pleasant memories from the past and they can make us happy in the present via nostalgia or whatever, is it possible to use a similar process to visit "future memories" in our would-be future? I'm not sure I believe we can specifically know the future, but can we sort of imagine future-memories that may or may not come to pass but bring us happiness just the same?

Others may (or may not) disagree, but personally I find this absolutely essential.
By all means, CREATE your "future" memories!
I suspect that is precisely why we have this ability of "creative imagination" in the first place.

The only thing that can stand in your way is dis-belief in the actual existence of those future memories.
It's like turning off the ignition key.
Creative imagination then turns to simple fantasy.

p.s. Vanitas and Illusions...I am humbled by your biblical knowledge. I'm from the so-called bible belt, though I never had much of an affinity for Christianity. But for the first time I feel like I'm listening to people who actually know what the heck they're talking about.

P.S. right back at you.
The Tomist framework on which most of the Catholic church (my own general cultural background) relies, has - as all things do, I suspect - a vastly positive effect, too: if anyone is looking for the truth within the Christian doctrine, and personally I believe it would be a great waste of time and resources not to, it (the Tomist framework) will force you to read and reread - and ponder, of course - every word of the NT in order to break free - to see the light for oneself and possibly try to show it to the Tomists... ; )






[edit on 3-5-2008 by Vanitas]

Originally posted by sc2099
I want to make it clear that in no way do I want to derail this thread from the direction it's going. But I wanted to pose a question before I forgot to ask it.

For all your LoA pros out there...(I'm just a greenhorn at best; I only heard of the Law of Attraction at the start of this thread) Think back to one of your favorite memories. Think back to when you had a time of continuous happiness. Summer camp. Time spent with a childhood friend. Your first love. Think about how great a time in life that was. You can't help but smile, right?

Well my question to you is, if we can revisit these most pleasant memories from the past and they can make us happy in the present via nostalgia or whatever, is it possible to use a similar process to visit "future memories" in our would-be future? I'm not sure I believe we can specifically know the future, but can we sort of imagine future-memories that may or may not come to pass but bring us happiness just the same? Haha or is this what all those mental exercises are in the first place and I'm just slow on the uptake?

Yes you can. Now if you´re a real "pro" you can also re-create similar events to those past ones though.

In other words you can intend for your intentions to work and intend in which way and by which methods they are supposed to work. Must people dont realize that the rules-of-the-game can be created too.

If you intend/label your memories as mere memories and your fantasies as mere fantasies and your future as future, they loose a little bit of the edge, the impact they have on your current life.

If you just keep this label of "its only a memory" and "its only imagination" away and simply bask in the sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet memory as if it were still real...

...you will activate frequencies that put you onto a lifeline where you experience something similar again.

To Consciousness it doesnt make a difference if its "past" or "future" or "present".

Originally posted by Skyfloating

In other words you can intend for your intentions to work and intend in which way and by which methods they are supposed to work. Must people dont realize that the rules-of-the-game can be created too.

Gem quality right here. Read and Re read till it sinks in. Any thought that belongs to someone else becomes yours as well when you listen to it. You take on their rules in order to understand their thought.

Make all your own rules based on testing you have done yourself. If the rule doesn't follow the results work on changing the results to match the rule or find another one that fits. One you create.

The game is as big as you make it and your reach is as far as you decide it is. Never limit yourself in any way.

You make up the rules as you go along...... (Churchill?)

Star for SkyFloating.

reply to post by Terrapop


I gave the vids a shuffle. Its fine. And if it works for you, even more so. Im just not a big fan of fixed "this is the way it has to be" rules.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Thank you for this, Skyfloating.
It gives me far more hope than you can imagine.
I am once again trying to put these laws into effect.
Great thread!

Edit: I once had these 'Laws' in effect in my life, when they were called the "Faith Walk.' I can vouch that I saw things happen that would literally blow your mind.
Maybe someday I will tell you about them. Don't want to take away from Skyfloating's thread.

[edit on 5-5-2008 by sizzle]

Originally posted by sizzle


Edit: I once had these 'Laws' in effect in my life, when they were called the "Faith Walk.' I can vouch that I saw things happen that would literally blow your mind.
Maybe someday I will tell you about them. Don't want to take away from Skyfloating's thread.

Sharing is not taking away from someones thread but adding to it Share anytime you´re ready.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Thank you,
I had taken a trip on less than perfect tires. I knew better, but was trying to do a favor for a friend. She needed to see her family. She was a non-believer, but other than that, we usually got along.
The trip consisted of about 200 miles from home. We made it there fine. But on the way back, we ran into trouble. It was during Christmas holidays and everything was closed. Neither of us had any money anyway. Then we heard an awful noise. It was the unmistakable sound of air, hissing from one of the tires.

I knew that we needed to do something fast. I pulled into station after station. Not only were they all closed, but I could not find one single air pump that was in operation.
The whole time, my friend is declaring that we are going to be stranded and mugged in the worst part of this big city.

That's about when I remembered the 'Faith Walk.' I turned to her and said, "If you want to stay here and be stranded on the side of the highway, then feel free. But I am going out there and lay hands on that tire and going home."

She looked at me as if I was nuts, but I didn't let that stop me. I did what I said that I would do. The tire stopped hissing immediately and I drove the rest of the way home.

reply to post by sizzle


wow. what an inspiration to readers.

"You can sit there and complain, Im gonna turn this around". I also sometimes lay my hands on objects and talk to them (such as my computer or my car) when they act up.

reply to post by Illahee


Thanks so much for your post, Illahee. The clip you posted was very interesting. You're right, he did answer my question specifically.

Thanks to the other posters who answered my question as well.