Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela  Actually, the word 'intention' rarely shows up in this book at all! They use desire, focus, attention... but not intention, in describing how to manifest your desires. That word must come from some other source -- like The Secret, maybe? Totally different.
There's no ambiguity that I can see at all in this book. There's nothing that says having a desire means it will be fulfilled immediately! It does say: you can intentionally manifest your desires by aligning the vibration of your desires with that of your beliefs. Allow, and let go of resistance.
And your question of morality is another issue entirely; that has nothing to do with if or how or why the law of attraction works. It's like saying: "It's impossible to grow a baby in a test tube, because it's wrong!" |
You say, "the word 'intention' rarely shows up in this book at all".
That's part of the point I'm trying to make. Hicks sometimes uses the word desire away from its usual definition, sometimes to mean asking and sometimes to mean intention. I am saying that having a desire does not make it happen. having a clear intention does.
You say, "There's no ambiguity that I can see at all in this book.".
Page 47:
"Desires (or asking) are the natural by-product of your exposure to this environment".
As I said, I don't think a desire is the same as asking.
I find the following problematic:
Page 66:
"When you really, really want something and you are thinking about your desire and feeling pleasure from the thought, your thought vibration is now in alignment with your desire - and the current from your Source is flowing through you toward your intended desire with no restriction or resistance".
There are at least two problems with this:
1) What if you have a strong sexual desire for someone and feeling pleasure from the thought? WIll it always be fulfilled? I don't think so.
2) This seems to contradict the moral proviso which Hicks puts later in the book about the desire needing to be good and not causing harm to anyone for it to be fulfilled. If it is not good and wholesome, then it will not align with source energy.
You say, "There's nothing that says having a desire means it will be fulfilled immediately! ". OK, maybe not immediately. But -
Page 22:
"You will come to know that all things you desire can come easily and swiftly into your experience".
I raised the morality issue because, at the beginning of the book, Hicks says all desires are granted, regardless. It doesn't matter if they are considered good or bad. Someone reading that may think, "OK, then, I want a million dollars. I think I'll go and hold up a bank".
Page 9:
"We want you to remember that there is nothing you cannot do, be or have."
Page 22:
"You will come to know that all things you desire can come easily and swiftly into your experience".
Page 86:
"All desires are answered; all requests are granted".
It is only later in the book that Hicks describes Source as being a force for good, and if we are aligned with it, we would do nothing to harm anyone.
Page 105:
"It is our absolute promise to you that no one connected to Source Energy would ever cause harm to another".
One of the main points I was trying to make is that there is a lot of talk in the book about aligning with your desire. But what is the vibrational level of a desire? And, if the desire is not in alignment with Source, then surely, it is an unworthy desire.
What we think may be resistance to a desire, may not be. It may be because the desire is 'wrong', i.e. out of alignment with Source. I think this should have been stated more clearly at the beginning of the book.