law of attraction and infertility

[Laurenaus]

Hi everyone,
strange topic but I just spoke to a couple who had no doubt in their minds (they say they had no doubt and listed off the reasons why) that IVF would work for them yet they ended up with a negative result and were shocked by this. Why wouldn't loa work in this case?

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by Laurenaus

Hi everyone,
strange topic but I just spoke to a couple who had no doubt in their minds (they say they had no doubt and listed off the reasons why) that IVF would work for them yet they ended up with a negative result and were shocked by this. Why wouldn't loa work in this case?

Maybe it was an pre-incarnative lesson/experience that was programmed into their lives for some higher purpose.

Maybe they actually did have doubt and don't want to admit it. Oftentimes, when people feel the need to justify something by spouting off a bunch of reasons WHY something SHOULD be a certain way it is because they are actually insecure about it, and they try to combat this insecurity by justifying it with logic. Not necessarily the case, but possible.

It's impossible for us to know the true content of their minds without being them.

All I know is I have seen faith/thought/intent work for me in various circumstances, so It would be hard for me to say that the mechanism of manifestation was at fault. I believe intention manifestation is real in other-words. It would be like saying gravity broke for somebody in Venezuela. I've never seen it happen before, personally.

The mind is a very mercurial thing, and I'd wager no one in this world has completely mastered it. Therefore, we will not have 100% success rate. Practice makes it stronger though.

[wido1982]

Just telling everything you believe in something doesn't make it so. I can imagine the fear of not having a baby could let negative thoughts slip in between your positive thoughts.
And just because they didn't get pregnant now from ivf, doesn't mean they won't in the future.
There's still hope

[TonyToneTone]

Maybe they have subconscious negative concepts that need to be addressed?

[Jim Freeman]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

...
All I know is I have seen faith/thought/intent work for me in various circumstances, so It would be hard for me to say that the mechanism of manifestation was at fault. I believe intention manifestation is real in other-words. It would be like saying gravity broke for somebody in Venezuela. I've never seen it happen before, personally.

Anagogy: This question indeed takes us to the next level.

I believe you and ALG are two authorities in this field, so I'd like to discuss this point with you--and I can by the way argue on both sides: what is the limit, if there is any? I've been considering this question for so long and so far I haven't yet reached any satisfactory answers.

According to prominent thinkers of the past, e.g. Judge Thomas Trowad and Dr. Paul Brunton, the ones history regards as real thinkers and true philosophers, not Dream Dealers and New Age Monkeys, there is a limit. For example, in Troward's view, you may go as far as you please with your creation or manifestation so long as it doesn't affect the "species" as a whole. When it comes to the species, it's out of any individual's control and it's solely the Universal Mind's business.

To Brunton, still for example, all is mental, but the original design and scheme of reality is put and is sustained by the Universal Mind. An individual's creation, therefore, is necessarily dependent on and secondary to the Universal Minds'.

More recent thinkers somehow agree with this vision and now speak of Means of Manifestation. Means of manifestation, they argue, must be there in order for any manifestation to occur. For example, you can't intend and visualize yourself flying then expect this to manifest, simply because humans don't fly. There is no means of manifestation whatsoever. Similarly, you can't get a new job if you don't at least apply for one or call and follow with your agent. You can't be healthy if you don't at least pay attention to your diet. You can't have a child, which is the question of this thread, unless a sperm from the father fertilizes an ovum from the mother. These now, the sperm and ovum, are the means of manifestation. If either is not there a child will never come no matter what the parents do, or for how long they intend or visualize or even pray.

On the other hand, more recent views admit absolutely no limits, especially with the relatively new notion of the individual being himself that Universal Mind, or God; just stuck as a separate, limited individual in some sort of matrix or dream. Reality, therefore, is fully subjective. What you believe your reality is, including the means of manifestations, will be your reality.

The latter view, obviously, is revolutionary to say the least. Now if you want to be healthy, it doesn't matter what you eat or do. All that matters is what you think. Therefore, by merely thinking, you may rearrange your world, i.e. your beliefs, as to have a new one in which, for example, Big Mac is good for your health, and Marlboro cigarettes are rather beneficial for your heart.

Now, what do you think? If you believe in the former view, doesn't this imply that we're indeed back to square one? Doesn't this mean that God is anyway the master of it all and that the individual is still anyway subject to some unknown plan commonly known as fate or destiny?

If you believe in the latter, doesn't this imply that humans can also fly, change their physique, get wealth out of thin air, even without any action if they believe so, and have babies even if the sperm or the ovum, or both, is missing?

* * *

[Laurenaus]

bump

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by Jim Freeman

Anagogy: This question indeed takes us to the next level.

I believe you and ALG are two authorities in this field, so I'd like to discuss this point with you--and I can by the way argue on both sides: what is the limit, if there is any? I've been considering this question for so long and so far I haven't yet reached any satisfactory answers.

Thank you for the vote of confidence. I don't necessarily consider myself to be an authority on the topic, but metaphysics is a passionate interest of mine, so I'm happy to share my thoughts on the subject with you (with the caveat that I'm still on the learning path myself).

Originally Posted by Jim Freeman

On the other hand, more recent views admit absolutely no limits, especially with the relatively new notion of the individual being himself that Universal Mind, or God; just stuck as a separate, limited individual in some sort of matrix or dream. Reality, therefore, is fully subjective. What you believe your reality is, including the means of manifestations, will be your reality.

From my perspective, reality is ultimately subjective, but there is a kind of "psuedo-objectivity" that comes into existence through a process of dissociation in the universal consciousness. We are all one, but we've entertained multiple vantage points in the same focus of consciousness, and then we became so focused on these vantage points that we began to believe we were the vantage points, rather than the infinite intelligence temporarily looking through the vantage points.

This results in an illusory fracturing of consciousness. This is why we feel like we are separate from one another. It is the artificiality of the ego that provides the illusion that there are billions of critters down on this planet with separate minds. In reality, it is still just one consciousness stream.

Originally Posted by Jim Freeman

The latter view, obviously, is revolutionary to say the least. Now if you want to be healthy, it doesn't matter what you eat or do. All that matters is what you think. Therefore, by merely thinking, you may rearrange your world, i.e. your beliefs, as to have a new one in which, for example, Big Mac is good for your health, and Marlboro cigarettes are rather beneficial for your heart.

Now, what do you think? If you believe in the former view, doesn't this imply that we're indeed back to square one? Doesn't this mean that God is anyway the master of it all and that the individual is still anyway subject to some unknown plan commonly known as fate or destiny?

I think I should start off by disclosing that I do, in fact, believe there are some limits to manifestation.

However, the limits are ones we've imposed on ourselves by adopting our present state of consciousness. In other words, it is possible to overcome these limits by learning absolute control of our mind(s). The problem is that so few people have developed real control of their minds. We are like icebergs with a small part of our consciousness (the conscious part) is sticking out of the water, while the most massive part of us resides beneath the ocean of subconsciousness, awaiting discovery.

The problem with having absolute control over reality is that everybody's reality is equally real. What makes your reality more valid than someone else's reality? Why should you be in control of someone else's experience? We all have the freedom to focus on what we will. There is no reality in existence that was not focused into being by some consciousness somewhere.

Consciousness generates reality. Your focus determines your reality. That focus will draw us toward what we are focused upon, provided we do not oppose that focus with another contradictory focus. The light can't be both on and off at the same time, in the same place, in other-words. There are logical paradoxes of duality to consider.

These logical paradoxes are the only real limits we are subject to. Logic structures are also a creation of consciousness. But its important to understand they don't change all willy nilly on us. They become deeply rooted in our consciousness and become a stability anchor for us. It becomes part of our identity structure. Identity tends to resist change as a natural function of trying to "maintain" the identity.

Earlier, when I spoke of a "pseudo-objective" reality, what I meant was that we exist in what we might term a "consensus-reality". Consensus would imply that it is agreed upon to exist. Now, this is tricky, because in our native reality, there is only ONE of us, so there would ordinarily not be any "consensus" that need be ratified. But do to our modified state of dissociated consciousness, we have seemingly independent wills of one another.

What this means is you don't create in other peoples reality, and they don't create in yours. Whenever your experience is shared by another, its because at some level of your being, your focus matched theirs. That is what a consensus reality is -- sharing the same focus. The area of reality where experience is shared is the pseudo-objective reality. This is also the area where it is most difficult to alter because it is not being created by you and you alone, it is a conglomeration of everyone's focus. Its as if everyone is casting their votes vibrationally for what will be in the so called "objective" or shared world. If your focus diverges too strongly from the collective majority consciousness occupying that focus, you will diverge from that reality to varying degrees.

But what is objectivity anyhow? What makes a bear real but a unicorn not real? Certainly there are individuals who have claimed to see such mythical creatures. Bigfoot, and other monsters, are still being seen by various observers to this day. Is what they are seeing real, or not real? What is the distinguishing factor?

[more below]

[Anagogy]

In some sense, what is real or not real is arbitrary. From my perspective, anything you could possibly imagine is "real" from an experiential standpoint. All that exists is experience. Experience is consciousness and consciousness is experience. We might even say that consciousness is the experience of consciousness. All "realities" are realities of experience. All these experiences, be they in potentiation or activation, are enfolded in the One.

It is like the template for all foci. I believe what most of the world would call "objective reality" is determined by the dominant beliefs of a given society. They are like the unconscious "glue" that holds everything together. This doesn't mean that various individuals cannot diverge from this accepted reality (as is evidenced by the high paranormal strangeness experienced by certain individuals), but the mass societal consciousness of the rest of the world will find ways of not experiencing things that do not "fit" into their concept or interpretation of reality. Their consciousness will literally repel data/evidence that does not fit with the pattern of reality they have accepted. Not just in some trivial psychological way, but literally not be able to experience the reality of it in a meaningful way.

There is a quote I quite enjoy from a group of beings channeled through a spirit board, who call themselves the "Cassiopaeans" and it is this:

All there is is lessons. This is one infinite school. There is no other reason for anything to exist. Even inanimate matter learns it is all an "Illusion." Each individual possesses all of creation within their minds. Now, contemplate for a moment. Each soul is all powerful and can create or destroy all existence if [they] know how. You and us and all others are interconnected by our mutual possession of all there is. You may create alternative universes if you wish and dwell within. You are all a duplicate of the universe within which you dwell. Your mind represents all that exists. It is "fun" to see how much you can access.
Q: (L) It's fun for who to see how much we can access?
A: All. Challenges are fun. Where do you think the limit of your mind is?
Q: (L) Where?
A: We asked you.
Q: (L) Well, I guess there is no limit.
A: If there is no limit, then what is the difference between your own mind and everything else?
Q: (L) Well, I guess there is no difference if all is ultimately one.
A: Right. And when two things each have absolutely no limits, they are precisely the same thing.

This quote would imply that we have great power, but it is a matter of learning to use it. The more adept we get at controlling our minds, the more adept we become at controlling what we experience.

Originally Posted by Jim Freeman

If you believe in the latter, doesn't this imply that humans can also fly, change their physique, get wealth out of thin air, even without any action if they believe so, and have babies even if the sperm or the ovum, or both, is missing?

Miracles ARE possible.

However, physical reality definitely has some mechanical characteristics. The rules can be bent and sometimes broken altogether, but it's all a matter of how far you're willing to go. Are you willing to have the suicidal courage to face the fear of the death of your reality? Things can be frightening when reality changes in dramatic and powerful ways. Abraham calls them "quantum leaps" and though while admitting they are possible also warns that they can be "very uncomfortable".

Identity is built upon stability, and change seems to threaten identity. I think this is one of the main reasons why manifestation is often a gradual endeavor rather than an instantaneous affair.

In addition to the limits I discussed above, I think we may, for the purpose of certain experiences, actually program our own minds prior to incarnation in the physical to attract certain experiences for our own edification. It would be similar to how a hypnosis subject may be given a posthypnotic suggestion to act a certain way at at a certain time. We program catalyst like this into our lives for various reasons unique to ourselves. It doesn't override attraction, but rather, utilizes it to achieve certain experiential conditions.

Feel free to ask questions if I wasn't particularly clear about any of that. This is a convoluted subject.

[Jim Freeman]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

[more below]

Anagogy: I'd start only now writing back to you, but I guess I'm a bit late, so this is to only let you know how grateful I'm for taking the time to write such a generous and insightful reply. Thank you so much.

Unfortunately I agree with you. Yeah, I generally tend to the second vision that knows no limits. So I guess this would be the point I'd focus on and come back with in a few hours or so. For now just thanks again, and have a great night.

* * *

[TonyToneTone]

Originally Posted by Laurenaus

Hi everyone,
strange topic but I just spoke to a couple who had no doubt in their minds (they say they had no doubt and listed off the reasons why) that IVF would work for them yet they ended up with a negative result and were shocked by this. Why wouldn't loa work in this case?

Subconscious concepts.

Have them come up with an image of themselves with a kid(s). Spend some time visualizing and seeing that.

[Jim Freeman]

Thanks again, Anagogy.

I just read your post one more time, and the more I read the less I have to add indeed. Yes, I do agree with most of your ideas. I disagree with some, too, but I don't think you'd be interested to discuss this. So for now I'd rather comment only on the words I believe the deepest and most insightful in your post. You said:

Experience is consciousness and consciousness is experience. All "realities" are realities of experience. All these experiences, be they in potentiation or activation, are enfolded in the One.

Why I think this is the deepest and most insightful of your words is the fact that the secret of magic itself does reside in them according to some recent views. In fact, this is the very premise of visualization, by which we, supposedly, are to experience a different reality.

However, by the same token, why don't we just decide to experience a different reality and immediately live in it--still in our minds? Why the struggle? Why do we assume or theorize it would take a full control of the mind before we can finally shout, "Lazarus, come out?"

If I went tomorrow to the grave of my father and shouted at him to rise, certainly he'd not rise. I'm pretty sure of that. But this particularly is the reason he won't. Just because I'm quite sure he won't. Thus, I don't think it's a matter of mind control. I think it's a matter of knowledge and of understanding. The elderly women who practice voodoo magic in the most primitive and isolated tribes in the world have no extra control over their minds. One may even doubt about their brains compared to, say, a Harvard graduate's. Still, they make miracles. They just KNOW what to do, even though they have no idea about the actual process that makes their magic work anyway.

Consensus-reality, therefore, is one of your ideas that I don't fully resonate with. Reality is all mine--or all yours. I am but a reflection of an idea that you have in your mind.

When Lazarus died, Jesus first said, "Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep, but now I will go and wake him up." So there were indeed two realities here: Jesus' reality: Lazarus is asleep, and everyone else' reality: Lazarus is dead. Whose reality was... the reality, and to whom? Was the miracle of Lazarus, therefore, Jesus raising him from the dead, or rather Jesus having a different reality as authentic and valid in which he was only asleep?

I thus think it's all the experience, and all mental, not the control of mind--complete or incomplete. It's only the awareness of who we really are and why. Merely assuming the struggle creates struggle. Merely checking manifests doubt. Merely stating it requires mind control, it will. And merely searching like this for the secret of it all........ oops!
loool

* * *