Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela  In the Abraham/Hicks books, desire and intention are two distinct concepts. The concepts are explained in-depth and very clearly in the books -- nothing ambiguous about either term that I can see.
And the two other concepts you bring up -- requests and morality -- two more distinct concepts. You're right, desire and request are two different things. And morality yet another. What about it? Are you implying that if you have desire, it negates morality? You say: "Often a desire is just a purely physical, selfish, impulsive thing" -- so what? An intention is often a purely physical, selfish, impulsive thing, too. Sometimes not, too. So what?  |
In 'Ask and It is Given', Hicks often uses the word desire as a synonym for request or intention. That's where the ambiguity is.
He implies that having a desire is a request which is immediatley granted or the fact of having a desire means it will be fullfilled (like an intention). I don't think either is correct. The logic in the book is sometimes fuzzy.
However, some people do get away with fulfilling some rather nasty desires, like commiting genocide!
Many people fulfill their desires for eating too much or smoking too much, but it's not doing their health much good. And, when they get ill, who pays for their treatment - we taxpayers! So there is a moral issue.
I know an intention can also be selfish or impulsive as well. What I am saying is - what gets something achieved is having a clear-cut intention to achieve it. Many teachers of PD have been saying this for years.