The REAL dark side of The Law of Attraction

[CrystalSong]

Originally Posted by AllenD

HI CrystalSong

As for mind power and intention manifestation…I have trained years ago in Remote Viewing the same principle you describe with the dice was playing a major role in successfully remote viewing, in order to remote view something I will ask for it and then blank out my mind, pretend I am rock and then when I am falling into unawareness suddenly information will appear into my mind.

This helped me learn a lot on the mechanic of reality manifestation.


Thank you for the video link I will check it out!!

Oh yeah, you know exactly the state I'm talking about AllenD, it's the same place we have to be as Remote Viewers! Nice to be talking the same language with someone

I was actually led to Remote Viewing first before Manifesting was introduced to me. I found on-line targets and so was able to compare my sketches against the photo's and really calculate percentages and begin to understand at what point the egoaic mind began to do overlays of information. It usually happened in just over a second, but at the height of my abilities, working it daily I was able to get accurate information for 3 seconds before the brain started filling in missing details.
It was invaluable as a tool to understand the mechanisms of the human brain and for learning the absolute necessity of stopping it.

It would be useful for me to keep practicing all these skill sets as I seem to be slipping a bit.
Tonight I'm playing a dice game with another friend who can also manifest his dice. So all things being equal the Annie had to be Upped.
As a result about every 6th roll I'm not getting my manifestation. That's because he's tweaking with my dice. So now not only do I have to get to that place instantly but partition out part of awareness to creating an energy shield construct to stop his incoming manifestation on MY dice!
Fun Fun

I'll sit with 'manifesting emotional states' and see if that seems like something I want to explore. You having said it is indeed possible intrigues me as I had assumes it wasn't outside of the standard ways we all use to change our mood from one state to another.

[athribiristan]

Originally Posted by dreamextremes

Nice thread. I agree that the LOA is likely "misused" or misinterpreted at times, but I think it is hard to evualuate who is misusing it and for what. For example, if someone uses it for material gain, there is no way to determine that this is the "wrong" way for them to utilize it. In some instances, material gain may be exactly what is best for that person and their spiritual journey, whether they are consciously aware of it or not.

There is no misuse of the LoA. Everyone is where they are in their journey, experiencing what they need to experience. Those who manifest lack, pain, suffering, or whatever state we perceive to be 'wrong' are in need of the experience for whatever reasons.

This is just one example. I guess I'm basically saying that the only person who knows exactly what you need is yourself. Perhaps in gaining material wealth, in one's current disposition and incarnation, perhaps this is the best way currently to get to where you need to go on a spiritual level. Perhaps without material gain, a person may be more likely to go down the wrong path or make grave mistakes, for example, which will hinder them spiritually, etc.

Of course, this is not always the case, and I think we can all agree that many people refuse to acknowledge the wealth they already have, and the
opportunities they may refuse to take. (Wealth meaning material or otherwise.)

Amen

Ultimately we will all strive to for freedom from the ego, but obviously not all of us will get to that point in this lifetime. Therefore, it is hard to say that everyone should use the LOA in that manner, because not all of us are ready to let go of the ego and live for others on that level. It would be like asking a toddler to get a full time job, when the best thing for the toddler is actually to simply play and enjoy themselves because this is what will put them in the best position to grow into the best person they can be.

My victory was not in suppressing or separating or overcoming the Ego, but in recognizing it as a fundamental part of the human experience. We are all part of a universal consciousness yes, but the point of being here as a human is to experience separateness, hence the Ego. As with all things, the Ego is a tool. It is not something on which to pass Judgement, or to shy away from.

[athribiristan]

Originally Posted by VinceField

Right. I try to avoid using the word "wrong" in cases like this, as it seems to imply a moral judgement. Rather, I prefer the term "skillful." The skillful use of one's ability to create and shape their life is, by Buddhist definition, any way which brings about more wholesome and pure states of mind and lessens the defilements of the mind (attachment, aversion, delusion, etc).

Seems to imply a moral judgement.

It is possible that a person may learn a lesson that their soul requires by acquiring material wealth and then perhaps using that wealth in good ways, such as to selflessly help others, or create the optimal conditions and environment for spiritual practice. Or perhaps the lesson comes from their unskillful use of the wealth and the harm it causes. Or perhaps the only lesson our souls require is whatever lesson leads to the purification of the mind, in which case doing things that lead in the opposite direction of this are likely unnecessary hinderances to spiritual development.

There are those who know what they need, and those who think they know what they need but are wrong. Many people operate from a place of ego, attachment, aversion, delusion, and other unwholesome states of mind, and coming from unskillful states of mind like these, a person is likely to have a distorted perspective regarding what is the best for them. They are likely to be swayed by the ego's desires for sensual pleasure rather than spiritual growth. Most people I know fall into this category to some extent.

Not wrong, just elsehwere on the path.

[VinceField]

A bit petty, but...

I am using the terms "wholesome" and "pure" states of mind based on the Buddhist definition, which has little to do with right/wrong or good/bad, but rather are states of mind free from attachment, aversion, and delusion. There is no passing a value judgement inherent in these definitions, but simply seeing what is present and what is not present. If there are no defilements present, that is a wholesome and pure mind state by definition.

My point is that it's not about classifying something into a subjective and biased definition "good/bad" or "right/wrong," it's about understanding what actions lead to the purity of mind through the elimination of the mind's defilements and the cultivation of harmless and liberating states of mind. So in this case you're not doing something simply because you think it's "right" or your not doing something simply because you think it's "wrong," you're doing something because you understand that its results bring about liberation from suffering. To one person this may be "right" or "good," but another person may have a totally different idea of what is right or good, and therefore these are not wise factors to based one's decisions on, as person corrupted by overwhelmingly unwholesome mental states may have a very distorted idea of what is right and good. One must look beyond the label and see what is really happening.

[CrystalSong]

Buddhist's basic operational premise is that Life is Suffering. Which really puts one in a mental place of always having to try to escape from suffering, a religion of escaping suffering.

Christians have a similar negative out look on the state of being in a human body - they believe we are born into sin and can only be saved from that sin through what ever their particular denominations recipee is for it.

Both are pretty much damning humanity from the get-go with this dire out look on our existence here. Basically both view points put the human experience as less than desirable and something to be 'recovered' from. It's like starting life in the Penalty box.

The Dali Llama said "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."

What if we aren't born under some cosmically imposed penalty system, but are born in perfection and it is how we use our minds and bodies from the starting line forward that determines what our experience is? What if there is nothing to recover from or be saved from but only an experience to build?

It is entirely possible that our basic premise of the human state totally affects what we attract to us. This thread is about the Law of Attraction and I believe it is totally possible to create a Buddhist, Christian, Jehovah Witness, Hindus or any other religions view point which will seem utterly justified and experientially true once one is inside it and practicing it. BUT it will only be the perceived reality by those people inside that religion sharing those view points. It will not be true for people outside that religion not experiencing it's belief systems, dogma, doctrine and scriptural interpretations.

[VinceField]

Originally Posted by CrystalSong

Buddhist's basic operational premise is that Life is Suffering. Which really puts one in a mental place of always having to try to escape from suffering, a religion of escaping suffering.

This is a bit of a misconception that many Buddhist scholars, monks, and teachers would disagree with based on evidence from the Suttas. The idea is not that life IS suffering, but rather, the idea is that suffering exists. The four noble truths:

1. There is suffering
2. Suffering has an origin
3. Suffering can cease
4. There is a path to end suffering

Believing that life IS suffering is contradictory to the Buddhist path, as it implies that one can never escape suffering while alive.

This is not a negative outlook. It is realistic and comes from clear view and insight into the inner workings of the mind. It is clear you have a flawed understanding of Buddhist teachings, and you are entitled to express your opinions, but on behalf of truth someone may have to come in and clean up your mess afterwards.

The Dali Llama said "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."

Doesn't sound very negative to me.


CrystalSong, your post is rather off topic and inappropriate. We are discussing the law of attraction here, not having a bash on religions. I simply brought up Buddhism briefly to clarify my perspective on the "right" way to use the law of attraction. You seem to be antagonizing.

[CrystalSong]

I didn't say what Dali Llama said was negative. LOL what ever gave you that idea?!
I was pointing out that he implied that religion was unneeded when one discovers they are the source of their own happiness.

The thread is about Law of Attraction and that is exactly what I was talking about, using your previous post concerning how you as Buddhist see things. That post actually had nothing to do with LOA however, so I thought I'd bring it back on track, by pointing out how our choice in religion can in fact Attract that experience to us in life :)

Guess it hit a nerve for you.... my apologies.

[VinceField]

Originally Posted by CrystalSong

I didn't say what Dali Llama said was negative. LOL what ever gave you that idea?!

I didn't say you did. My point was that Buddhism isn't as negative as you implied. The quote from the Dali Llama is far more along the lines of Buddhist teachings than anything you have said.

I was pointing out that he implied that religion was unneeded when one discovers they are the source of their own happiness.

Ironically, this is what Buddhism is all about. It isn't about blindly following a set of rules or beliefs. It's about finding truth within oneself through first hand experience. I see Buddhism as less of a religion and more of a system of spiritual practice- practical and effective, as does anyone else with knowledge and experience in Buddhist practices.

The thread is about Law of Attraction and that is exactly what I was talking about, using your previous post concerning how you as Buddhist see things. That post actually had nothing to do with LOA however, so I thought I'd bring it back on track, by pointing out how our choice in religion can in fact Attract that experience to us in life :)

Guess it hit a nerve for you.... my apologies.

No nerve damage inflicted lol, but thanks for the apology anyway. It seemed like you went out of your way to put down Buddhism to purposefully hit a nerve. None of what you said about Buddhism was all that relevant to the conversation, nor was most if it true, as I have explained, so I simply felt the duty to reveal the disinformation for the sake of truth, as no one benefits from false information. If you wanted to be relevant, you would have directly addressed the points that I made regarding the Buddhist perspective that I expressed, rather than try to discredit them by claiming them to be based on an inferior system of beliefs, which is likely a belief grounded in little knowledge and experience of the subject.

Dalai Lama. He is neither Salvador nor a South American animal.

That said, I love what VinceField has posted about Buddhism.

[athribiristan]

Originally Posted by VinceField

A bit petty, but...

Not trying to pick on you. You're the most interesting thing on TV

I am using the terms "wholesome" and "pure" states of mind based on the Buddhist definition, which has little to do with right/wrong or good/bad, but rather are states of mind free from attachment, aversion, and delusion. There is no passing a value judgement inherent in these definitions, but simply seeing what is present and what is not present. If there are no defilements present, that is a wholesome and pure mind state by definition.

My point is that it's not about classifying something into a subjective and biased definition "good/bad" or "right/wrong," it's about understanding what actions lead to the purity of mind through the elimination of the mind's defilements and the cultivation of harmless and liberating states of mind.

But that whole idea comes from an idea of judgement. Any time you are trying to become something that you are currently not, you are judging your present state relative to the state you are trying to acheive. One is clearly preferable to the other or there would be no impetus to change state.

So in this case you're not doing something simply because you think it's "right" or your not doing something simply because you think it's "wrong," you're doing something because you understand that its results bring about liberation from suffering.

A noble cause, I myself prefer not to suffer. Fundamentally I agree with you, Buddhism was a most enlightening study. It simply seems to overlook suffering as a valid and sometimes appropriate experience. Your statement above, and Buddhism in general seem to suggest that suffering is wrong, that's my only point. You've simply changed the focus of judgment from the action to the state.

To one person this may be "right" or "good," but another person may have a totally different idea of what is right or good, and therefore these are not wise factors to based one's decisions on, as person corrupted by overwhelmingly unwholesome mental states may have a very distorted idea of what is right and good. One must look beyond the label and see what is really happening.

It is what it is as they say.