[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by cdn2wheeler

So clearly, LoA - if it exists at all - is haphazard at best. If "the universe" is so finely tuned that LoA practitioners must do A, B and C in a certain order in a certain timeline and in a certain way and feel certain feelings while doing it, well, that hardly makes it a reliable process, does it?

I think that developing LOA ability can be compared to physical exercise.

There isn't any one way to go about it. Some people go jogging; some people play basketball; some people do pilates; some people push a lawn mower; some people climb mountains; some people lift weights.

Then within each mode of exercise, there are sub-disagreements and sub-discussions about specific methods and techniques: Are free weights better than machines? Does stretching really help runners perform better? Should swimmers train with flotation equipment?

Physical fitness also comes in different forms. A marathon runner can do things which a professional weightlifter cannot, and vice versa. A person who exercises by playing four different sports has a different kind of fitness from a person who just plays one. Some people are more genetically inclined for endurance, others for strength, others for agility etc.

So it is with LOA. When people disagree about techniques and methods, they are really like fitness enthusiasts disagreeing about the best ways to exercise and what methods and techniques are most useful. The ability to use LOA in different ways also varies among individuals, just as different individuals have different kinds of physical fitness.

You can also see the differences in style, among the LOA gurus / teachers. Abraham Hicks emphasises emotions. Shakti Gawain emphasises visualisation. Jose Silva emphasises the need to access deeper mental states. Etc.