Loa

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by blazer1

But the action is still there. These guys are saying it takes only thought to manifest something into it's physical counter-part. Which is just foolishness.

It really depends on what you mean by "action". To give you a simple theoretical example, if you manifest for money, and then suddenly you find money on the roadside, you still have to bend down and pick it up.

If you consider bending down and picking up the money as "action", then yes, I agree that action is required.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by blazer1

If you have ambitions to be rich, then work hard.

I consider myself quite rich. Especially after the bonus I received in Feb this year.

I regard it as one of my more-successful manifestations. You see, in November 2007, I had been OFFICIALLY told, during my annual performance appraisal, to expect ZERO bonuses, as the company had done badly. I was very miserable at that time.

Nevertheless, I mentally pulled myself together, and manifested and manifested. And when February came, I received more than a quarter of a million dollars in bonuses.

[blazer1]

I can't argue anymore dude. You obviously have no ounce of rationality.

But before I sign out, it's because of you extremists who don't use common sense with these things (and religion) who create such ridicule for the observations.

[Bradshaw]

The thing is i sort of empathize with you because that's how i started. I thought that i could use IM to simply change my habits/mindset. It just so happens that i was a little more open to the possibility of thoughts actually attracting through some mysterious way the things i'm thinking/visualizing about, mainly due to past experiences.

So i experimented, and i soon realized that so many coincidences in a row just don't happen like that.

What can i say? I can only speak for myself, but it works, and has a very high success rate, from using it to be more disciplined to making a yellow umbrella appear before my eyes on a sunny day in about 5 minutes.

Wouldn't it be irrational for me to dismiss so many sucessful manifestations as "chaos" or "coincidence"? Yes, it would. It would be insane for me to do such a thing, when clearly time and time again they work. And this includes those where i take almost no action whatsoever, things just appear/fall on my lap.

[blazer1]

Originally Posted by Bradshaw

The thing is i sort of empathize with you because that's how i started. I thought that i could use IM to simply change my habits/mindset. It just so happens that i was a little more open to the possibility of thoughts actually attracting through some mysterious way the things i'm thinking/visualizing about, mainly due to past experiences.

So i experimented, and i soon realized that so many coincidences in a row just don't happen like that.

What can i say? I can only speak for myself, but it works, and has a very high success rate, from using it to be more disciplined to making a yellow umbrella appear before my eyes on a sunny day in about 5 minutes.

Wouldn't it be irrational for me to dismiss so many sucessful manifestations as "chaos" or "coincidence"? Yes, it would. It would be insane for me to do such a thing, when clearly time and time again they work. And this includes those where i take almost no action whatsoever, things just appear/fall on my lap.

so this brings me back to the post i wrote somewhere "thought then expression, or expression then thought" ... read that one.

i.e. is that yellow umbrella always in front of me, but i dont think it is, or do i think there is an umbrella in front of me, therefore it is?

[Bradshaw]

What?

Dude, i was just walking down the street and i decide to visualize seeing a yellow umbrella before i get home on this particulary sunny day. It was an experiment to test IM as i have done many times. I manifest for unusual stuff for the purpose of reinforcing my belief. The sequence of events that followed: Minute 2: Yellowshirt guy. Minute 3: Yellow backpack student Minute 5: i happen to go to a street i never go to, and my head just happens to look at a window above me: a yellow umbrella hanging.

[Acting Like Godot]

We can agree to disagree, Blazer - that's fine with me. However, it's quite clear that you are the one who's logically inconsistent.

After all, you do not seem to accept the "paranormal" or "miraculous" aspects of the LOA, yet to all the forum readers here, you have wholeheartedly endorsed and recommended "Think and Grow Rich". A book where the author writes things like this:

(From chapter 14 - "The Sixth Sense") - just a few excerpts!:

"... Some of [Nature's] laws are so incomprehensible that they produce what appear to be "miracles" .... There is a power, or a First Cause, or an Intelligence which permeates every atom of matter and embraces every unit of perceptible energy ... The author has this knowledge, because he has experimented with it and experienced it .... the spiritual forces with which the sixth sense is so closely related only mature and become usable through years of meditation .... If you have mastered each of the preceding principles you are now prepared to accept, without being sceptical, the stupendous claims made here."

--- Read TAGR again, my friend. You haven't mastered the principles, that is all.






Hgjh--


--



Ii

[Acting Like Godot]

Ugh, sorry for the messy post. I was typing it out on my little Blackberry - the small screen is not conducive for long posts. Will tidy up the post later, when I get to a desktop.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by blazer1

But before I sign out, it's because of you extremists who don't use common sense with these things (and religion) who create such ridicule for the observations.

And by the way, I'm not religious, LOL.

[blazer1]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

We can agree to disagree, Blazer - that's fine with me. However, it's quite clear that you are the one who's logically inconsistent.

After all, you do not seem to accept the "paranormal" or "miraculous" aspects of the LOA, yet to all the forum readers here, you have wholeheartedly endorsed and recommended "Think and Grow Rich". A book where the author writes things like this:

(From chapter 14 - "The Sixth Sense") - just a few excerpts!:

"... Some of [Nature's] laws are so incomprehensible that they produce what appear to be "miracles" .... There is a power, or a First Cause, or an Intelligence which permeates every atom of matter and embraces every unit of perceptible energy ... The author has this knowledge, because he has experimented with it and experienced it .... the spiritual forces with which the sixth sense is so closely related only mature and become usable through years of meditation .... If you have mastered each of the preceding principles you are now prepared to accept, without being sceptical, the stupendous claims made here."

--- Read TAGR again, my friend. You haven't mastered the principles, that is all.






Hgjh--


--



Ii

I have mastered TAGR ... you need to understand, Napolean Hill wrote a book to cater for Christians/Catholics or whatever (anglo saxons!) ... that is why he used such language. I am sure Napolean Hill knew better.

You see, when you read a book, as well as understanding the words, you need to also consider the era, the author, and whom the author thought he was catering for. This is how you trim the fat, towards the real meaning!

[Acting Like Godot]

As I said, you did not really understand the book at all.

The word "God" is mentioned a grand total of once, in the entire book, and in rather dismissive fashion. This is in Chapter 12 - the context has got to do with foolish superstitious people and their belief in lightning as evidence of God's wrath. Napoleon uses the phrase "ignorance, superstition and false teaching". In that same chapter, the author writes (to his presumably Christian audience): "You may buy prayer books and repeat them until the day of your doom, without avail."

Rather blasphemous, don't you think, considering the era. LOL.

In that same chapter, Napoleon keeps talking about "the vibration of thought"; "thought vibration"; "a living, pulsating, vibratory energy that permeates every atom of matter". I think you will hunt in vain in the Bible to find even a vague description of God in such terms.

If however you refer to what I had posted earlier about william walker atkinson (the person influenced by the Indian holy scriptures Bhagavad Gita), you'll note that William's book is entitled ".... The Law of Vibration".

William pre-dates Napoleon, so we know who influenced who.

If you were really writing for a Christian audience, you wouldn't rely on Hindu scriptures, would you.

Note - napoleon's choice of words "pulsating, vibratory energy that permeates every atom of matter" is quite apt to describe what physicists now refer to as the "quantum field". However, the term wasn"t invented yet, in those days.

[Acting Like Godot]

Let me put it this way, Blazer.

Napoleon's book has a very clear structure. He outlines "13 steps to riches", and allocates one chapter to each step.

The 13th principle is the key. Everything in the Napoleon thesis stands or falls, in line with this final step. The first 12 steps are all there just to build the foundation for this vital 13th step. To quote Napoleon, the 13th step is "the apex of the philosophy. It can be assimilated, understood and applied ONLY by first mastering the other 12 principles".

I invite you to read this chapter again, and tell me clearly what in this chapter you can or cannot accept.

If you fundamentally cannot accept the essence of this chapter, I think you cannot honestly go around recommending TAGR to other people. That is because you fundamentally disagree with Napoleon Hill the writer.

(For those who do not have the book, the 13th step is entitled "the Sixth Sense" and in this chapter, napoleon writes extensively about his communications with non-physical entities. He writes that he has communicated with "more than 50" of them, including long-dead people like Plato; Aristotle; and Confucius.

Those familiar with more contemporary LOA texts will notice the similarities between Napoleon's experiences and those of Esther Hicks (who channels a group of spirits collectively named Abraham) and Jane Roberts (who channelled Seth) and even Steve Pavlina's wife Erin, who claims to talk regularly to her spirit guides.)

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by blazer1

I can't argue anymore dude. You obviously have no ounce of rationality.

But before I sign out, it's because of you extremists who don't use common sense with these things (and religion) who create such ridicule for the observations.

Either you chase what you want or you let it come to you.

[blazer1]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Let me put it this way, Blazer.

Napoleon's book has a very clear structure. He outlines "13 steps to riches", and allocates one chapter to each step.

The 13th principle is the key. Everything in the Napoleon thesis stands or falls, in line with this final step. The first 12 steps are all there just to build the foundation for this vital 13th step. To quote Napoleon, the 13th step is "the apex of the philosophy. It can be assimilated, understood and applied ONLY by first mastering the other 12 principles".

I invite you to read this chapter again, and tell me clearly what in this chapter you can or cannot accept.

If you fundamentally cannot accept the essence of this chapter, I think you cannot honestly go around recommending TAGR to other people. That is because you fundamentally disagree with Napoleon Hill the writer.

(For those who do not have the book, the 13th step is entitled "the Sixth Sense" and in this chapter, napoleon writes extensively about his communications with non-physical entities. He writes that he has communicated with "more than 50" of them, including long-dead people like Plato; Aristotle; and Confucius.

Those familiar with more contemporary LOA texts will notice the similarities between Napoleon's experiences and those of Esther Hicks (who channels a group of spirits collectively named Abraham) and Jane Roberts (who channelled Seth) and even Steve Pavlina's wife Erin, who claims to talk regularly to her spirit guides.)

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. There is no reason in what you are saying. It's foolish of me even trying to explain it to you.

You need to put the book in context, you need to consider like I said the audience, the writer, the era, and the purpose. Napolean very well understood how the Bible has reached so many people, Napolean is a writer, he understood different writing styles, and different ways of conveying ideas through superficial means.

To convey ideas, a good writer does not just write about the idea fact-by-fact ... the ideas are presented as illustrations. The Bible, and it's language/context is a classic example of this.

But TAGR is just a sub-topic within this thread. Real point was LOA.

Thought without action has no physical counter-part. Simple as that.

It's stupid to even think such a thing. And as I keep saying, it's because of you irrational LOA'rs it is ridiculed by others.

LOA, just like the law of Karma is very simple. But anyway, looks like I am trying to teach Evolution to Christians.

AND BTW, when he talks about the Sixth Sense ... he is dumbing it down for people.

In your day you make millions if not more decisions, all these decisions have an effect, all decisions have cause, (Buddha called this Karma, Scientists call this Chaos) ... it's the combinations, in some cases, permutations of these decisions, (cause/effect) which determines your outcome. The Ether (a word no longer used BTW) is where these vibrations (which they essentially are) take place. The Ether in todays terms is known as spacetime.

In the END ... logically, if you want something, you need to do what it takes physically/mentally/verbally to obtain it. If you want a glass of water, you get up off your a5s and pour some into a glass. If you want money, you think of ways to make money, and you do it.

Meditating under a tree, concentrating on riches will not make it happen!! haha.

[Acting Like Godot]

Sure, whatever.

Now, do you agree with the 13th step or not?

In other words, do you agree that it is possible to communicate with non-physical beings?

[jawillie]

If you don't get it, you don't get it. Why beat others up on what they believe and experience in life?

[Acting Like Godot]

LOL ...

Originally Posted by blazer1

It's stupid to even think such a thing. And as I keep saying, it's because of you irrational LOA'rs it is ridiculed by others.

Let me put it this way. You don't need to explain your perspective to me. I understand your perspective perfectly well. It is very rational and very sensible - if one subscribes to conventional notions of reality. And after all, the vast majority of the human race does.

In other words, you are telling me nothing that the mailman, or the bus driver, or my grandmother, would not have told me, if I had engaged them in such a discussion.

It is also a perspective that I subscribed to, for most of my own life. In fact, prior to 2006, if someone had said to me the things that I now say on this forum, I would have thrown a barrage of sarcastic remarks at them, much more than you have done.

Now if you are interested, I can tell you about my perspective. I have previously explained it in great detail, in previous threads such as these:

Can You Convert Me To I.m. ???

the lie of attraction

Garbage, all of it.

(But read only if you are really interested).

I really want to invite you to consider the possibility that you might be seriously, seriously wrong. Wouldn't that be a real eye-opener for you?

In this forum, where I am known only as "Acting Like Godot", I share my LOA experiences quite freely. I even discuss my communications with non-physical entities.

However in the offline world, where I have a real name, I am very discreet about it. I talk only about the LOA to my immediate family members and a few close friends.

(Like you, all of them initially believed me to be mad ... until they tried it out themselves).

Why the secrecy?

Well, consider this. In the offline world, I am an -extremely- successful professional. I work in a global financial institution, holding the rank of director, which is quite precocious considering that I'm not yet 35. I earn a huge money of money, easily making it to the top 1% of all income tax-paying citizens of my country. My clients include some of the world's largest hedge funds. I work on financial transactions from New York to London to Singapore to Hong Kong to Mumbai to Seoul.

(Footnote - my career only really took off in the past 2 years, when I started using the LOA. Things were much more humdrum before that).

Now, I am paid to be highly rational, logical and precise - and for my deep technical knowledge of some highly complex areas within the investment banking industry.

Imagine if I went around in real life, telling people that my thoughts can attract events and circumstances, and I regularly converse with non-physical entities.

They would think I am crazy! (You already do).

However, I understand very well that this "difficulty" must be common for all people who really know something about the LOA. Once again I can do no better than quote Napoleon Hill, from Chapter 14 ("The Sixth Sense"):

"This is the first time I have had the courage to mention this. Previously I have remained quiet on the subject because I knew, from my own attitude in connection with such matters, that I would be misunderstood if I described my unusual experience ..."

I can honestly say that I absolutely empathise with what Napoleon is saying above.

Do you, Blazer? Is there anything in your own understanding of TAGR which you feel you would require courage, to speak about?

And if not - if there is nothing at all - do you therefore suspect that your own understanding of TAGR may therefore be quite faulty? That there are some vital points in Napoleon's book you may be missing, points which are so apparently crazy, that it would take courage to speak openly about them?

"I have been emboldened now to reduce my experience to the printed page because I am now less concerned about what "they say" than I was in the years that have passed. One of the blessings of maturity is that it sometimes brings great courage to be truthful, regardless of what those who do not understand may think and say ..."

In that sense, I still have a couple of things to learn from Napoleon. Without an Internet pseudonym, I don't have that kind of courage yet, and frankly I don't see the point. I only wish to share a little of what I've learned, with people who are open to the message. I desire no personal credit for this, and therefore my real name is irrelevant.

It is with an Internet pseudonym, ironically, that I have "great courage to be truthful, regardless of what those who do not understand may think and say." In other words, regardless of you, Blazer.

[blazer1]

you are too needy. you need me to tell you, yes you are right godot.

be done with the foolish, and move with the wise i say.