How much skill does it take to manifest your intentions?

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by cylon

But how is that possible when everyone keeps saying "you can't sit on your couch and get rich"?

People say that because everyone around them confirms that it's true, including people like Steve Pavlina and Acting Like Godot. And people see the most financially successful people in the world, and *surprise!*, all of them did a lot of stuff! Bill Gates, the Wal-Mart family (rich from inheritance), and so on... these people (or their parents) worked a lot, or figured out a way to get people to work for them. Someone had to build Rome.

Despite ALG claiming it's possible to sit on his couch and get rich, he still goes to work for 40+ hours a week, and the property he is considered selling was probably bought with his income from working. Unless someone gave it to him as a gift, or inheritance. You would have the answer to that, ALG. I'm also curious why you, ALG, choose not to "make a living" from personal development and teaching spirituality? It seems to be one of the main things you enjoy living and talking about. Or do you like banking that much? I'm sure you've already considered this option.

If you have many great investments, or a passive income, then you could "sit on a couch and make money", but let's not be silly: this is a half-truth. I'm NOT saying anyone here is consciously lying. I'd wager ALG and some others here are the most truthful people you could hope to ever find. What I mean is the truth is that you have something working for you. It's not just "magically" appearing out of thin air, which is what I think people mean when they talk about sitting down and getting tons of money. I think they're talking about doing nothing. But for something to happen in our physical reality, something or someone has to do something. I believe the ideal for many people is to do the least amount possible for a great result, like Jesus Christ feeding thousands by "magically" multiplying the food, seemingly out of thin air.

So many people claim you don't have to do anything, but they do a lot regardless, and thus don't really prove their theory to anyone. And that's fine... we don't have to try and convince anyone if we don't want to. It comes down to the question of, "Would you believe a man who says he can turn invisible, but only if you're not looking at him?"

In conclusion, like I've said in the past, I believe Actions > Words. If someone tells me they can sit on a couch and get rich, but they work instead, then I know what they really believe. Not that there's anything wrong with work... work is a lot of fun! I'd hate to sit on a couch all day... that would really be hard work, for me.

[Lil Chris]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Ugh ... This is tough. I wasn't planning on moving so soon.

I need to meditate on this one.

Back to the couch.

With all that extra "work" your doing, you may need a more comfy couch

[cylon]

I'd say a couch with a mini-fridge right by. And those ottomans can be nice too. We're talking instant alpha state here, folks.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

People say that because everyone around them confirms that it's true, including people like Steve Pavlina and Acting Like Godot. And people see the most financially successful people in the world, and *surprise!*, all of them did a lot of stuff! Bill Gates, the Wal-Mart family (rich from inheritance), and so on... these people (or their parents) worked a lot, or figured out a way to get people to work for them. Someone had to build Rome.

Despite ALG claiming it's possible to sit on his couch and get rich, he still goes to work for 40+ hours a week, and the property he is considered selling was probably bought with his income from working. Unless someone gave it to him as a gift, or inheritance. You would have the answer to that, ALG.

See, to me, the crux of the question is NOT whether you should:

(1) take some action;
(2) take no action; or
(3) take a lot of action.

The crux of the question is whether your thoughts alone are capable of attracting into your life the relevant & significant events, people, resources, information, opportunities etc, that will either:

(a) help you significantly, towards achieving your goal; or
(b) directly, entirely by themselves, achieve your goal.

If the answer is yes (and my personal experience indicates that it is yes), then it still doesn't mean that in every case, you should necessarily

(1) take some action;
(2) take no action; or
(3) take a lot of action.

What it means is that you should stay open to the possibility that even if it appears that something is beyond your control or influence (i.e you are not actually able to "do" anything about it), it isn't really.

It's like Neil Armstrong, at eight years old, setting the intention to go to the moon. At that time, rockets didn't exist; NASA didn't exist; even fighter jets didn't exist.

Still, he held the intention, and he did take some actions (eg studying aeronautical engineering and training to be a pilot), and meanwhile the universe organised itself in amazing weays, so as to take him to the moon. Took a few more decades, but he still got there eventually.

I'm also curious why you, ALG, choose not to "make a living" from personal development and teaching spirituality? It seems to be one of the main things you enjoy living and talking about.

I don't feel that I've got enough experience yet.

But yes, one day when I am more advanced, I would like to teach meditation, and actually it is my hope that I can teach it to prison convicts. I think that there must be lots of violent, troubled people in the prisons who would benefit from meditation.

[Odd synchronicity - I just realised - last week at a writer's retreat (the one I manifested for free for myself) - I met a writer who had actually conducted writing workshops for prisoners - teaching them to express themselves - a "writing for therapy" kind of thing. The writer might be able to put me in touch with the prison officers etc]

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Agent called again. Because we had not accepted immediately, the same couple has upped their offer, from $568,000 to $575,000. I think they're afraid we might sell to the other interested buyers.

Offer is at $578,000 and I think this is really it, folks. It's a "take it or leave it" from them.

[cylon]

ALG, do you enjoy your job? You seem to be pretty good at analytical, precise thought and I would figure you get plenty of chances to do that where you work.

As far as thought vs. action, I've come to the conclusion that that is a newbie dilemma. And I was a newbie, so I have had that dilemma.

No action is impossible.... one cannot literally stay on the couch. It's not hygienic, you would never experience nature, you wouldn't be able to do the things you love, all of which require action, literally moving your body, learning to walk, stuff like that.

But acknowledging that doesn't not mean that it automatically follows that your thought is not bringing the experiences to you that your action receives.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by cylon

ALG, do you enjoy your job? You seem to be pretty good at analytical, precise thought and I would figure you get plenty of chances to do that where you work.

I do enjoy my job.

A big part of my job is about drafting complex legal agreements. That would sound terribly boring to many people.

But to me, putting together each new agreement is like playing with jigsaws or crosswords. Or it's like being given a big new set of Lego bricks, out of which you are supposed to design a house (or police station, or castle, or spaceship).

I'm being paid, to play with my toys, basically.

[cylon]

So not only are you manifesting wealth, but before that you've manifested a job you love too. Seems like you're doing something right.

[Acting Like Godot]

SOLD! My wife just called to tell me. It's $580,000.

They're coming over tonight to sign the option papers. Record-breaking price, for an apartment of this size, in my neighbourhood.

Thank you, universe.

Blessings to the couple, and I will give them every piece of furniture that I don't want anymore, and which they would like to have.

[cylon]

Congratulations. That was fast.

[Acting Like Godot]

That took a total of about two weeks - from the time I sat down to manifest for a big pile of money.

Now, I will share the reason why I manifested for a big pile of money. I share it, because I think that if you see the history of events, you can glean some insights into the nature of LOA.

More than one year ago, I wrote about my wife's career situation. At that time, she could not decide whether she wanted to carry on working; or work part-time; or stop working to look after the kids; or resign from her company and work elsewhere, or what.

In the end, I manifested for her to get literally whatever she wanted, as far as her career situation was concerned.

She tendered her resignation. Her boss said, "Please stay." She said, "No, I want to look after my kids."

Her boss said, "I'm sure we can work something out. Please draft a new employment contract, put whatever you want into the contract, and let me consider it."

She drafted her own contract. The basic deal was -

(a) same salary
(b) three-day work week
(c) she could work half a day from home, for each of those three days.

The boss agreed. It was a very successful IM experiment for me.

That was more than one year ago. This was at a company which had never had any part-time or flexi workers before.

So for a year, my wife had great working arrangements, which benefited our kids immensely.

Unfortunately, very recently, that boss has decided to retire. He's still with the company for now, but a new person flew in to understudy him. The new person will formally become the CEO sometime early next year, but has already started to take over some of the CEO functions.

The new person did not like the idea of part-time workers. Two weeks ago, my wife was suddenly retrenched.

------------------------------------------

Coincidentally at that time, I had just gone away for a writer's retreat (the free one that I had manifested - it normally costs $1,500 - I wrote about manifesting the retreat, back in June).

Of course my wife called me everyday, and we discussed it over the phone.

To understand her situation better, she did Tarot card readings. She would call me to tell me what cards she had drawn, and I would help to interpret.

Very decisively, the Abundance card kept appearing (we're using the Osho Zen Tarot pack). So did the Success card. Together with the other cards, I interpreted this to mean financial wealth.

My wife kept asking: "How can it mean financial wealth? I just got laid off. Or does it mean that the company will take me back, and pay me more? Or does it mean that I get a new job, which pays well? But what about the kids? It's not easy to get a part-time, flexi job."

We did further readings, and the cards continued to indicate that great financial wealth was on the way. But from where? We did not know.

---------------------------------------

There's this old issue about divination and the LOA. Do the cards predict what's fixed? Or only what's likely? Does the very process of doing a Tarot reading attract new circumstances, as you interpret the cards and generate new thoughts?

At the writer's retreat, I plonked myself on a couch () and began to meditate on the Abundance and Success cards. And I sought to intentionally to create financial wealth. Really, the extra money would come in handy, if my wife was jobless and if we really wanted her to stay at home and look after the kids.


(This is Osho's Abundance card. The chap is not on a couch but he does look comfortable)

Well, you know the story. One week later, the property agent showed up, out of the blue. The next day, he brought the interested buyer (the married couple). Last Saturday, he brought a small flock of interested buyers (including that couple again).

Yesterday, the couple offered $568K. Then $575K. Then $578K. And now $580K ....... and now we're selling our apartment. The highest price ever offered for an apartment of this size, in this constituency, in my country.

[SmartAlx]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

...Bohm notes that a circular disc, placed on a flat surface, never looks perfectly round, except when you view it directly from top-down. From ALL other angles, it appears oval, elliptical or simply like a flat line.

You did a superb job of proving my point ALG. Thank you very much. For you see the reality is that, whatever your perspective tells you, as long as you are in a 3 dimensional world (and you are) that disc IS round. You may perceive it as elliptical or as a line or even as a point but if you want to determine reality you must shed the 2 dimensional illusion and study it within the confines of the 3D reality in which the disc exists; whereupon you must conclude that it is circular in shape. If you refuse to do that, then you must accept all sorts of oddities about being in a 2D reality. And it's not like you can shift from one to another. Sure you can shift your perspective, but you can't shift into a different reality wherein that disc REALLY is elliptical.

Why then should we describe the disc as round?

Because it is.

Thus there can be many right answers, depending on the perspectives chosen.

Wrong, there are many possible answers. Only one is the right one.

However, there ARE also wrong answers, for EACH perspective chosen. That part - you're not seeing yet.

I do see it, but I understand how perspective can distort your view of reality. You apparently feel that each perspective has a truth attached to it. That's not right at all. You can only arrive at truth when you examine what you are attempting to understand through SEVERAL perspectives. It seems like you don't want to examine the disc from more than one perspective. Are you afraid that this will prove that the disc is actually circular? Or are you afraid to leave your perspective? Is it comfortable being in a 2D world?

[SmartAlx]

And I'll thank you to cease your hijack of my thread, thank you very much.

[Daffy Duck]

Thanks for your reply, ALG.

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

What it means is that you should stay open to the possibility that even if it appears that something is beyond your control or influence (i.e you are not actually able to "do" anything about it), it isn't really.

Yes definitely, I 100% agree. If history has taught us anything, it's that human beings are capable of more than we can imagine.

Originally Posted by cylon

No action is impossible.... one cannot literally stay on the couch. It's not hygienic, you would never experience nature, you wouldn't be able to do the things you love, all of which require action, literally moving your body, learning to walk, stuff like that.

Yes. This is obvious, right? And that was my point.

SmartAlx made the same point when he said, "I can't just sit on the couch to get rich. I have to make it happen." But then ALG responded, "I do sit on the couch and get rich. I'm sorry that it doesn't work like that for you."

Now, I know it's fun for everyone to disagree with SmartAlx all the time, but that wasn't really a totally accurate response. ALG doesn't just sit on a couch and get rich... he does much more than that. ALG takes a lot of action to align and examine his thoughts and he physically works 40+ hours a week at a job as well. Examining thoughts doesn't just happen on its own, for most of us... it requires a good degree of effort (action).

The whole conversation reminded me of The Secret's idea of "visualizing money and checks just started appearing in the mail!" Everyone rolls their eyes at that, because everyone knows there's really more to it than that.

But acknowledging that doesn't not mean that it automatically follows that your thought is not bringing the experiences to you that your action receives.

Yes, our realities come from our thoughts. I think this is hammered down in chapter 1 of every law of attraction book, heh. Not holding onto grudges is often in those books too.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by impaul99

It's so cute and it totally works. He really truly believes that SOMEHOW, magically he'll get the other sets of Lego just because he says he wants them. Not once did he ask anyone to buy it for him when I've been around. He just keeps saying "I'm getting these ones." (Setting an intention)

This is awesome. One of the best simple, real-world examples of how you can set an intention to get something and have complete and genuine faith it will come to you.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

Now, I know it's fun for everyone to disagree with SmartAlx all the time, but that wasn't really a totally accurate response. ALG doesn't just sit on a couch and get rich... he does much more than that. ALG takes a lot of action to align and examine his thoughts and he physically works 40+ hours a week at a job as well. Examining thoughts doesn't just happen on its own, for most of us... it requires a good degree of effort (action).

Daffy - if you define "action" to include thinking - then, yes I would agree with you that the LOA is all about taking action.

However, I suspect that in common parlance, most people would not regard sitting on a couch to think, or lying down with your eyes closed, as "action".

I suppose it's just a matter of definitions.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

Wrong, there are many possible answers. Only one is the right one. I do see it, but I understand how perspective can distort your view of reality. You apparently feel that each perspective has a truth attached to it. That's not right at all. You can only arrive at truth when you examine what you are attempting to understand through SEVERAL perspectives. It seems like you don't want to examine the disc from more than one perspective. Are you afraid that this will prove that the disc is actually circular? Or are you afraid to leave your perspective? Is it comfortable being in a 2D world?

LOL, you have it quite wrong.

Changing perspectives is in fact a very important LOA technique.

You should read one of those Abraham Hicks books, where Abraham systematically helps a person with a real problem, to look at his problem from 10, 12, 18 different perspectives.

I experiment with different perspectives all the time. I test them all out, and see which one works best.

[cylon]

The Vortex is an awesome Abraham book. Based on explaining common misconceptions. Jerry Hicks asks the question that the skeptic would ask, word for word, Abraham answers.

And funnily enough the answers usually all have the element of "relax, it's ok. I dare you to relax and the report the results."

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

However, I suspect that in common parlance, most people would not regard sitting on a couch to think, or lying down with your eyes closed, as "action".

I suppose it's just a matter of definitions.

True -- I think there is a distinction between "mental action" and physical action. And I think the vast majority of our things are created using a combination of the two. Jesus took physical action (went to be alone for 40 days) so he could focus on taking mental action (his prayers). Likewise, someone may take some mental action (like setting an intention to be a world champion bodybuilder) and then take years of physical action to achieve it.

I don't think anyone has ever developed a muscular body without any physical action... though maybe Jesus or Buddha could do it. However, we would agree that Buddha statues look pretty fat.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

I don't think anyone has ever developed a muscular body without any physical action

Actually there is a scientific paper which indicates that people can increase their muscular strength, simply by visualising that they do gym workouts.

In future, one potential application of this research would be for bedridden patients. They can try to maintain their overall bodily strength through visualisation, even though some specific injury (eg a broken leg) is causing them to be unable to do actual physical exercise.

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Actually there is a scientific paper which indicates that people can increase their muscular strength, simply by visualising that they do gym workouts.

I'll have to do a Google search for that. Sounds interesting.

I can imagine it could help the muscles to a small degree. Olympic athletes frequently use visualization in their training. But I'd seriously doubt anyone could look like this with visualization alone.

[Daffy Duck]

ALG, to sum up your current beliefs, would you agree that...

1. You basically believe in the Be-Do-Have perspective, that I mention here: "the how" just won't do

2. On top of that, you believe that as one gains more and more control of their thoughts, the "Do" part of Be-Do-Have becomes easier (or less time consuming).

3. A "master" could basically skip the "Do" part, and their creation of reality is simply Be-Have, because their intentions manifest instantly.

Like Austin Powers would say, "Oh behave!"

Would you say this is accurate of your understanding of Intention Manifestations? If so, then yeah... I think we've been on the same page all along.

=================

SmartAlx, what do you think of the Be-Do-Have paradigm? I don't see it as inconsistent with Christianity, provided that what you want to Be is in accordance with God's will.

[SmartAlx]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

SmartAlx, what do you think of the Be-Do-Have paradigm? I don't see it as inconsistent with Christianity, provided that what you want to Be is in accordance with God's will.

At the risk of going off on a hijack let me answer this very briefly. I generally disagree because our emotions (BE) are almost always a response to other influences such as circumstances, events and hormones. It's difficult to truly change your emotions, although I know that we have a little bit of control over them. I do believe in "fake it till you feel it" to a certain extent, but I recognize that you are really "faking it."

[Daffy Duck]

I see. For me, I think of Being as much more than just an emotional state. It's what I'm choosing to think as well. I can "be" a nice guy even if I'm not particularly "feeling" like a nice guy at the moment. Of course, the more I just focus on "being" a nice guy, the more likely I will "feel" like a nice guy too.

[SmartAlx]

Isn't Being a nice guy "doing" nice things?

[Daffy Duck]

Not exactly, because "doing" something nice doesn't make a person nice. Sometimes someone will DO something nice even if they're BEING selfish or something else that isn't nice.

The only way to truly be nice is to... BE nice. And a person BEING nice will also DO nice things.

Does that make sense? It may seem like semantics at first but there's actually a real distinction there.

[SmartAlx]

Isn't it a case where you want to be thought of as a nice guy (if at least in your own mind) so you ACT nice?

[Daffy Duck]

If one doesn't truly think of themselves as nice, then they could try just doing a bunch of nice things and hope to convince themselves. But even on some small level, if they decide to do that, I think they're "being" nice.

But surely I don't think I need to do nice things to be nice. What if I'm locked away on a deserted island, with no one to do nice things for? I could still BE a nice person, although I have no opportunity to DO nice things.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

ALG, to sum up your current beliefs, would you agree that...

1. You basically believe in the Be-Do-Have perspective, that I mention here: "the how" just won't do

2. On top of that, you believe that as one gains more and more control of their thoughts, the "Do" part of Be-Do-Have becomes easier (or less time consuming).

3. A "master" could basically skip the "Do" part, and their creation of reality is simply Be-Have, because their intentions manifest instantly.

Yeah, I agree ... Except that the way you describe it, it sounds like the final objective sounds like it is always a "have" - that is, you have to "be" like this, and "do" like that, so that you can "have" X.

That part I don't agree .... The final objective isn't necessarily a "have", but could be a "be" or a "do".

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

That part I don't agree .... The final objective isn't necessarily a "have", but could be a "be" or a "do".

Good point! Thanks ALG.