Miracles and the Law of Attraction
Written on June 9, 2008 by Tom Stine
Leo over at Zen Habits wrote a post yesterday on the Law of Attraction, basically giving it a big thumbs down. Leo took a very interesting position: a very rational, western scientific perspective on accomplishing things in life.
My first response was to smile and laugh. I mean, for a site called Zen Habits, you would think there would be a little, well, Zen in his response. But no matter. I left a longish comment for him, kind of an off-the-cuff assortment of thoughts and ideas. Here it is:
“Very cool post. Interesting, too, coming as it does on a site called ZEN Habits. No, Zen doesn’t really have much to do with the Law of Attraction, so let’s not get sidetracked there. But let’s do consider that the ultimate foundation of Zen is Buddhism, and the Buddha had some pretty wild things to say about the world, our experience of it, it’s reality, etc.
“I won’t get into the details, but suffice it to say that if you delve into any school of Eastern thought, you will find ideas that are completely at odds with our typical, rationalistic world view. The world we look upon, so convinced of its utter reality, maybe isn’t as real as we think. So much that we believe in ultimately becomes so much ‘mumbo-jumbo.’ ”
“Look at the history of science itself. It is littered with the train wrecks of once ‘unassailable’ givens, things that were so incredibly obvious that you had to be a fool to question them.
“So, can I really think something into existence? Why not. Sure, I can’t prove I can, but then again, we can’t ‘prove’ much of science. That’s why scientists are usually pretty honest by calling things ‘theories’ and ‘hypotheses.’ Very few laws in science, but even those only rest on the simple fact that they’ve always occurred every time they are repeated.
“I guess my bottom line for you, Leo, is a simple question: do you believe in magic? Do you believe in miracles? Do you think that we really have a reasonable handle on what is true and what isn’t? While I’m not fan of the LOA and its devotees, I am a fan of miracles. I’m a fan of being incredibly surprised by the mystery of life that works in some really remarkable ways.
“Lastly, let me leave you with a fantastic statement by one of the most talented writers of the 20th century, Arthur C. Clarke:
“ ‘Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.’
“Think about it. Maybe we just haven’t worked out the technology of ‘magic.’ ”
And that was the end of my comment. Leo was really getting into the comments, so he responded quite quickly:
@Tom Stine, who wrote:“I guess my bottom line for you, Leo, is a simple question: do you believe in magic? Do you believe in miracles? Do you think that we really have a reasonable handle on what is true and what isn’t?”‘
I certainly do believe in magic and miracles! It is almost impossible to be a parent, for example, and not believe in miracles. It’s hard to do a run at 5 a.m., and watch the sun turn a new day into a miracle, and not believe in magic. It’s hard to go through life, with your eyes and heart wide open, and not believe in magic and miracles.
However, I don’t think that means they are supernatural, meaning that they are outside the realm of science. I think science is just another way of looking at the same things. Is a child a miracle? Yes, I believe so … but a child can also be explained by science.
Is it a miracle when you overcome amazing odds, using the power of positive thinking, to achieve something incredible, as many people have? Absolutely! And yet, that doesn’t mean that science can’t explain it.
The problem comes, in my mind, when we take these miracles and come up with explanations for them that are totally unprovable, that have no real basis in reality, for no good reason, as is often done.
After reading Leo’s comments, I decided to post another comment in response. And I did. And guess what? Leo deleted it! I’ve never had the experience of being bounced before. How cool is that? I’m a radical fit for the delete key. I know the comment got left because a friend informed me that he read it via email (he was receiving follow-ups). Well, I saved the comment before I posted, so I have the comment in its entirety. You can judge how “evil” I was:
[Please note: after I posted this article, Leo wrote to say that he had not deleted my comment, but he couldn’t find it, either. Obviously he had a technical snafu, not surprising, given the volume of comments he gets and inevitable glitches, etc. It was quite nice of him to leave a comment below. He’s quite the stand-up guy, and I was a bit surprised that he would delete my comment in the first place. C’est la vie!]
“Leo, you made some good points. However, your reply left me thinking that you don’t really believe in miracles, the miraculous kind. You know, the person dying of cancer who does some spiritual ‘mumbo-jumbo’ for a few months and is completely healed, leaving her doctors stunned. The medical community calls it ’spontaneous remission’ but that’s a fancy word for ‘we have no idea what happened.’ That’s what the average person calls ‘a miracle.’
“As for me, give me water-into-wine, levitation (the Maharishi kind), spontaneous healing, blind men seeing, all the cool stuff you read about in Yogananda and other works. That’s my kind of miracle.
“Honestly, I don’t think that ’science’ is all it’s cracked up to be. Too many people have too much ‘faith’ in science. The scientific method has its limits. How do you study a phenomenon that might be beyond the mind, such as miracles? What do you use to study it? All science has at its disposal is the human mind. Miracles, the real kind, may be beyond the capabilities of science to explain.
“None of that means that they are supernatural or outside of reality in some way. I’m just questioning the capacity of the human mind to comprehend the totality of nature, the completeness of reality.
“Whether one wants to admit it or not, science is a belief system. The belief at the core goes something like ‘if we study something long enough using the ’scientific method’ then we will understand it.’ You can’t really prove that one wrong, can you? But it may in fact be wrong.
“And this is the type of thing that drives a decent number of physicists (you know, the quantum mechanics guys) to sound more Buddhist than a Buddhist.
“Again, the LOA may be right, may be wrong. But I suspect that most people, myself included, are more turned off by the salesmen for it and the Secret than anything else. They are a bit hard to swallow. And, for most people , the LOA just seems too hokie and simplistic to be believable. And it just might be wrong. And then again….
“Just some more thoughts for you Leo. Namaste.”
I invite you all to head over to Zen Habits and check out the post. It makes for fun reading. Well, actually, the best reading is in the comments. Some really good ones are there. A whole host of people showed-up to join in. Enjoy!
on June 9th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Tom, I’m with you on this one. First of all, I use the Law of Attraction consciously and very successfully, to create highly improbable and wonderful results in my life all the time.
As for miracles - heck, I HAVE to believe. My job is “scientifically” not even possible. Why is it that I can tell someone half-way across the world all about themselves with only a name to go on … and be accurate? I love my work so much because I get to witness miracles every day, in every session. It’s the ultimate “proof” of our amazing interconnectedness.
The Law of Attraction is like gravity - believe in it or not, it just works. Might as well make the most of it by using it consciously!
Blessings,
Andrea
Andrea|Empowered Soul’s last blog post..Developing Intuition: The Mind Trap
on June 9th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
@Andrea I knew a very cool physician who lives not far from me who spent a number of years working with Carolyn Myss. He told me once that he felt that he was about 75% accurate, on his best days, at diagnosis. He would call Carolyn for a reading with difficult patients. He told me that she was around 90% accurate with her diagnoses. I suspect that if we asked him today, he would probably say that it might never be possible for science to explain how she does what she does.
My point to Leo was that there are clearly limits to the paradigm called science. I think that is obvious, at least to me it is. And to you, too.
Thanks for the comments, Andrea. Namaste.
on June 9th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Hi Tom … thoughtful analysis! Thanks for this post and for your comments on my site.
However, in my defense, I’d like to say that I didn’t delete your comment. I just did a search and even went through my spam folder and couldn’t find your second comment, so I’m not sure what happened.
It’s not my policy to delete comments if they disagree with me — only if they’re being obnoxious or abusive, or if they’re spam, and your comment was none of those, so I wouldn’t have deleted it.
You are free to re-post your comment — my guess is that there was some kind of technical glitch, although I can’t imagine what it would be.
Thanks again for your thoughts Tom!
Leo’s last blog post..7 Habits Essential for Tackling the Multitasking Virus
on June 9th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Also, while I’m here, I’ll respond to some of your second comment … you wrote:
“However, your reply left me thinking that you don’t really believe in miracles, the miraculous kind. You know, the person dying of cancer who does some spiritual ‘mumbo-jumbo’ for a few months and is completely healed, leaving her doctors stunned. The medical community calls it ’spontaneous remission’ but that’s a fancy word for ‘we have no idea what happened.’ That’s what the average person calls ‘a miracle.’”
But you’re wrong, Tom!
I totally believe in these miraculous miracles. I believe in cancer patients being completely healed while doctors are stunned — it happens all the time. I think that’s the same kind of miracle as the others I described.
Where we differ is in the explanation of the miracles … you and others might attribute them to the “mumbo jumbo” you mentioned, but I don’t think a complicated or mystical explanation is required. The simpler the explanation, the better, imo.
Leo’s last blog post..7 Habits Essential for Tackling the Multitasking Virus
on June 10th, 2008 at 2:04 am
Tom
I believe in Miracles. I think it’s a miracle my wife has stayed with me through the thick and then of my Bipolar Disorder.(Just kidding) There are just to many things that happen that science can’t explain. The order to things in the universe is one isn’t it? Life and its origins is one that gets them every time.:)
on June 10th, 2008 at 7:47 am
I believe in miracles. I have seen them manifest in my own life, from very minor things right through great, big, huge, “how on earth did that happen” type things. I won’t go into all of them, but a sampling includes spontaneous healing of a disorder/disease that supposedly requires lifetime treatment because it never goes away, profound mental/emotional healing on a level that surprised even mental health care professionals, a very expensive trip to Australia from the United States for which I didn’t pay a single cent, really good parking places against all odds (okay, that’s one of the small ones, but still…), it just goes on.
I must say, reading this post today was extremely serendipitous for me. I was in a bit of a funk because of something someone whose opinion I trusted said about manifestation (basically, that it’s all ego-driven and selfish and I should just learn to be happy with what is and not strive for anything more). Not only have I had to change my view of that person and the value I put on his opinions, I was forced to examine why I was upset by what he said and work through it, I checked my RSS reader and read this excellent post by you, which pretty much confirmed what I already thought and was hoping to have validated.
So, hey, two birds with one stone.
on June 10th, 2008 at 8:22 am
@Leo Thank you, Leo, for your comments. I appreciate you taking the time to visit. That’s odd. I would have thought I had goofed but someone told me they saw the emailed version of the comment I left. That’s why I thought you had censored me. My apologies. I really didn’t think you had done something “evil,” but I did think it funny that my comment disappeared. Oh, well. I will edit my post to reflect all of this.
You know, in essence, I agree with you: the simpler the explanation, the better. Which is why I often resort to the simplest of all: I don’t know. Because, in the end, I don’t. That’s my beef with science, though, if I have one. Science has a mindset, a bias as it were, to make definitive statements about the world and life. And when it gets outside the journals and into the popular press, the average Joe starts to make all kinds of assumptions about life. I know what I speak: I have a degree in biology and taught high school science and math.
I think in a certain sense we agree. I don’t think that there can be anything outside of LIFE. There is only One, no matter the form. The mystical, the scientific, it is all One. And yet, I really can see that there are limits to the human mind to describe, explain, understand and catalog Life. Beyond the mind is, well, something else. A mystery. But real nonetheless.
Again, thanks for the comments, Leo. I greatly appreciate them. Namaste.
on June 10th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Hi Tom,
There are some tricky philosophical issues in here.
What we find convincing are personal experiences. What science finds convincing is their aggregation - and certain probabilities (one in twenty or one in a hundred depending on the kind of study). This can be a big problem: if I get over cancer it may well be attributed to just ‘the odds’ by science. I am unlikely to find this convincing.
I think this is a big discussion and an important and tricky one.
Personally I think I have only experienced one miraculous style miracle. I wasn’t in a lab at the time, I have no idea how it would be replicated. But this one incident is enough to personally convince that western scientific materialism doesn’t have all the answers (or eastern scientific materialism for that matter - which some varieties of zen seem to come close to).
Evan’s last blog post..When You Learn Abuse, You Live Abuse
on June 10th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I see it from both sides - I can see it from a very scientific, “Western” POV, and from a very spiritual, “Eastern” POV.
I notice the LoA works for me in various (little) ways.
I haven’t been able to attract anything large yet, but the results I’ve been getting by using the LoA have been great! I think when you decide that you’re against something like the LoA, you shut yourself off from all sorts of confirmations that it works - just like if you decided psychic phenominon doesn’t exist.
Matt @ Face Your Fork’s last blog post..Taking Inspired Action Towards Your Goals
on June 10th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Tom, I think you hit the nail on the head with your comments about the sales people for the LOA including The Secret.
I really have no idea if it works, I know some very weird stuff happens in nature, so who knows?
I swing backwards and forwards like the weak-wiled , lilly-livered flip flopper I am, but the one thing I stay constant on is the belief that people that claim to know one way or the other are either fooling themselves or trying to fool others.
I love the positive thinking it encourages and I do heartily believe that we make our own reality, but I was hugely turned off by the dogmatic and almost evangelistic nature of The Secret and have never read anything regarding the LOA that doesn’t appear a least a tad inconsistent.
The fact is we’re in the dark ages and when we look back on 2008 in 500 years time we’ll laugh like my wife laughs at my haircut from 1985.
on June 10th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Please know that I was completely fascinated by this exchange. I wouldn’t have written about it all so eloquently but I do agree with you
I am ok with the unexplainable (well as ok as I can ever be) I believe in miracles. I do appreciate science but I don’t believe it’s the end all be all. It never occured to me that it was a belief system so that statement really made me think
JEMi | Tips for Life, Love, You’s last blog post..Visit Tivate.com for an Interview ?Bout Me!
on June 10th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
@Matt Nice to see you here! Isn’t it cool, though, that something we can’t explain too well actually works? That’s the thing, it really does seem to work. I don’t use it, in the sense that I follow the instructions as taught by The Secret, Abraham/Hicks, all those folks. But what I do is similar and it, too, just works. Thanks for the comment!
@Evan Yes, it is a bit tricky. I don’t claim to have the answers, for certain. More fun to point out the inconsistencies and difficulties! But I’m with you, Evan, scientific materialism doesn’t have all the answers. And quite possibly never will.
on June 10th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
@Tim Did you know Jack Canfield got his start selling insurance? And Joe Vitale was an Amway executive? Need I say more? I’ve had to come a long way around to get off my spiritual high horse and accept that marketing and sales and all that stuff has a lot to offer. It really does. But it doesn’t have to feel “greasy” and slick. That’s my beef. And, in the end, I don’t really care that much. More power to Jack Canfield and all the rest. I definitely agree with your dark ages comment!
@JEMi Glad your liking it! If you stop for even a moment and examine science, you see quickly that it is a belief system. Ask some hard questions about it. As you pick through it, it begins to look more and more like a philosophy than what it claims to be. I had to take a bunch of physics courses to qualify as a physics teacher, and quantum mechanics was just plain weird. The math was scary, the ideas were brain twisters, and I could tell the professors were not really comfortable with the concepts. I think it simply challenged their mechanical world views. If they thought too hard about it, they might get a little weirded out.
on June 10th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
To start seeing that science is a philosophy read about David Hume who showed (several hundred years ago) that we never observe a cause. This has mostly been ignored ever since.
Thinking about this can be seriously mind bending.
Evan’s last blog post..When You Learn Abuse, You Live Abuse
on June 11th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Hi, after seeing you at so many sites I frequent, like Albert’s and Andrea’s, I had to come subscribe.
Thank you for writing this article. I’ve been wanting to say something in defense of the Law of Attraction myself. There have been several articles that puts down the Law of Attraction saying it is “unscientific” — in a sense, it’s become a way to show their intelligence, I guess. Like it was (still is?) fashionable to put down God. . .
But there is intelligence of the mind and intelligence that goes beyond the mind, into the spirituality. The big intelligence, as some oriental philosophers called.
Akemi - Yes to Me’s last blog post..Embrace The Big Questions Worth Spending Your Life For
on June 11th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Hi Tom,
I enjoyed your blog about believing in miracles. I wanted to learn how much influence we have over the creation of miracles in our lives. So, I wrote a book about it. For my research, I interviewed lots of people who have experienced miracles. I wanted to learn about the thoughts, beliefs and attitudes they held, as well as the actions they took that allowed their miracles to unfold. I want to invite you to my site, http://www.miraclethinking.com. Carolyn Myss, who is mentioned in relation to your article is one of three NY Times bestselling authors who provided a cover endorsement for this book. Sincerely, Randy Peyser
on June 12th, 2008 at 5:17 am
I don’t know whether I believe in the Law of Attraction but I certainly don’t put as much faith in the ‘belief system’ of science that most people do. So thanks for elucidating my thoughts on science so well, Tom!
Yes, I *do* believe in science, and in thousands of years I believe that science will be able to explain most ‘weird’ things today, quite logically, and ‘matter-of-factly’ - law of attraction, being one of those things. It just can’t do that now!
on June 12th, 2008 at 11:08 am
The Secret video sure made me laugh out loud when I saw it. The people in it sure were enthusiastic about the subject matter. I wonder if there will be a sequel to that movie? I’d like to see people like Oprah and Dr. Phil talk about the secret at length. Oh wait, they already have!
RJ’s last blog post..Beat the Sunday Paper Addiction.
on June 12th, 2008 at 11:18 am
I found The Secret video to be quite overproduced and when I saw it I felt that it was more of a sort of promotional thing than anything else, like a teaser for a book or something (as it turns out, there is a book, and from most reports, it’s not very good).
It’s a bit like the film, Amadeus. When it came out, a lot of people got interested in classical music. Most eventually wandered off to look at other stuff, but some of us stuck around and learned more and became more educated on the topic. For us, it was a door opening and we not only walked through, we went inside, explored the place, and made ourselves at home.
I think the same is true of The Secret. Yes, it’s overproduced and poorly put together and it leaves OUT a lot of stuff, but for some people, it can be the way they learn about conscious creation and creating their own reality and taking charge of their own destiny. In that respect, I can’t say I think that it’s a bad thing…
on June 12th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Wow, guys! This is all extremely interesting. Lovely discussion here
I’m both a man of science and a man of faith. So “taking stand” is almost impossible. But you know what the beautiful thing is?
I don’t have to.
Because just like you, Tom, I don’t know.
And I love it. Not that I am “unwise”, but that life goes on.
Some questions doesn’t need answers, and even more questions doesn’t have answers.
That’s life, and I love every minute of it. I’m in for the wild ride!
Once again thanks for the lovely post(s), and as always keep up the good work.
Also some great comments here!
Namaste, and good luck. (Whatever luck is…)
Alex
Alex Kay’s last blog post..How To Die as a Happy Man - Do What You Love, and Do it Good
on June 12th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
@Akemi. Glad you joined us! I like the big mind idea. I really can’t get away from the notion that the only intelligence there is is truly INTELLIGENCE. I find it amusing that humans spend so much time trying to understand everything. I did that for decades, and it got me no where. The more I let go of this “figuring it out” stuff the happier I get. Thanks for your comments.
@Randy Thanks for the comment and the link. I’m a big fan of miracles.
on June 12th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
@Steve You may be right. Maybe science will be able to explain it all in 1000 years. I’m just too skeptical that the mind is capable of ever explaining it all. The word mystery seems to be too apropos. And then again, I could be wrong!
Glad to have your comments.
@RJ You know why Hollywood makes sequels? Ka-ching! $$$$$. And so, will there be a sequel to the Secret? Ka-ching!
@Bonni And that said, I do think there is a lot of good in the Secret. I completely agree: way too dramatic, overdone, over-hyped. But it does help a number of people and it has penetrated the psyche of lots of otherwise very asleep people. And, I dare say, at its core, it is basically correct. But don’t tell anyone I said that. I have a reputation to uphold!
Thanks for your wonderful comment!
on June 12th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
@Alex Hey, the I don’t know thing is catching on.
Funny, when we catch on to how much we don’t know (and can’t know), life just gets more fun. You are always surfing the very edge of your experience. It is more fun. Thanks.
on June 14th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
@Evan - “we never observe a cause”. Well put. We always experience and study the effect and draft theories as to the cause. And that becomes the story, the belief system.
Davidya’s last blog post..Do it, Please
on June 14th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
@Tom - quite interesting from a bloggers perspective. Good to see Leo’s feedback. Some sort of tech glitch. I thought maybe spam.
I really enjoyed the Secret film. Finally a bit more spiritual tone to popularized LoA. But I was surprised by some of the other people who saw it with me, angry at the materialistic message or confused at the concept. This in a spiritual group. Its a very easy concept to mess up with blame or superficial deserving agendas. You see as you are.
Action is indeed a key point because in doing we take concept into reality. Without action, how will it express? Someone has to do.
Another mistake people make is being isolationist. Thinking ‘I want this’ outside of the context of the larger world. Nothing happens outside that context so unless you take it into account, it won’t happen.
People also tend to carry quite a bit of “subconscious” trash around. As much as we may think good thoughts, if our deeper energy is repressed, it can thwart effort. Indeed, that deeper energy is much more powerful than superficial thought. So getting clear and getting in touch with it will make you much more effective. Just read book 3 of Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra’s if you want to know just how effective. Formulas for miracles.
When I explored LoA, I found deeper meaning in the idea of the law of Resonance, suggested by Dov Baron. Tune your energy, sync to it. Then even deeper I found the flow. Stepping into the flow, the movement of the One, Life itself.
I also found that the need to act has a deeper value. What I call Engagement. Its like a deeper value of commitment, of becoming. Of really connecting with the flow of your life rather than standing as a bystander. No resistance.
Finally, Tom, I wanted to remark on your comment about there not being anything “outside of LIFE”. I laughed at that as it has, I think, a bunch of double meanings. Outside of life is the nothing that is everything, including life. And No thing is outside of life…
Davidya’s last blog post..Do it, Please
on June 15th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Great discussion!
It seems to me that one problem with LOA is that it asserts incompletion. If you are making a request that the universe provide a desire, that very desire asserts that you ‘lack’ and thus, are incomplete.
As many ’spiritual masters’ proclaim, there is NO incompletion, only deluded ego/self ‘belief’ in incompletion. Possibly, the very moment the mind desires it thereby asserts incompletion which, in fact, may be what you receive - more incompletion.
A paradox?
However, I sense that the promoters of LOA who play up the ‘gratitude’ aspect are on the right track. If my gratitude (love) comes from a ’spaciousness’ of completion, then I suspect I should only attain more abundant completion or ‘addition’ to my already complete wholeness. But the thing is, if I envision myself complete, I may NOT experience addition to my complete Being because I’m already THERE!
A friend directed me to your site Tom and as I read the posts it seems you’ve got some great thoughts going on up there.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks,
mike S
on June 16th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
@Davidya Very nice analysis. I agree with much of what you said. I think the take home message is that repeating “Ferrari” to yourself 100 times each day, and pasting a photo of one on your monitor at work is probably NOT going to put one in your driveway. We almost surely have to get deeper into our mental-emotional stream and clear some junk out. And the people in The Secret know that.
As Hale Dwoskin (Sedona Method) points out, over 1/3 of the people in the movie The Secret have learned and/or practice the Sedona Method. And I guarantee that most of them didn’t sit on their butts and “think” a new car into the driveway. Some action surely occurred. Dare I say it even looked like “hard work” at times?
When I first saw The Secret, just after it came out, I hated it. Why? Because as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, half those guys seem like used car salesmen. I had to drop some stuff of my internal stuff, to say the least.
Deeper and deeper we go, cleaning out more and more. That’s the way.
on June 16th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
@Mike S Thanks for the comments! I couldn’t agree more, the lack aspect is a bummer. There is real power in getting touch with a sense of completeness, wholeness. Not just in terms of “getting stuff” but for an overall sense of peace and wellbeing. All in all, “to those who have, more will be given” is pretty true. And not in a materialistic sense. When we feel to our core that we are complete, then we ARE complete.
Thanks very much for the comments and compliments. Namaste.
on June 16th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
@Mike
Very insightful. Coming from fullness, desire leads us to open more. Coming from lack, we amplify lack unintentionally.
The paradox is born of different perspectives. To the awake, there is no mistake, no lack, only perfection. Within the dream, this makes no sense. Lack, suffering, and evil abound. Amazing what a difference a perspective can make.
Davidya’s last blog post..The Rapture
on June 17th, 2008 at 12:12 am
I received a link to this once again today. Its relevant. Puppetji on The Secret.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXdsDxYnGkI
on June 17th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
@Davidya Puppetji rocks. I’ve watched many of his videos.
on June 19th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Too many miracles have appeared in my life for me to just casually dismiss this as coincidence. Maybe, it’s the name Law of Attraction that’s turning people away, or perhaps people are just looking to add a little controversy by opposing popular ideas.
I recommend the book “The Answer” that just came out. It takes a physiological approach at explaining Law of Attraction. I like that he doesn’t throw the word LOA around, but explains very clearly at why the results work.
Love the discussions here.
Thank you Tom.
Tina
Tina Su’s last blog post..How to Find Passion in Your Job
on June 19th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
@Tina I know what you mean. I think the bottom line probably is that a decent percentage of spiritual folks have images of what spirituality looks like in Asia: monks with begging bowls, Indian gurus in a loincloth, vows of poverty everywhere. You can really be spiritual and have MONEY! I know I had that attitude for a long time. In truth, “the divine” could careless whether you are rich or poor. It just wants you to let go. Let go of attachment to money AND poverty. Let it all go emotionally.
on June 19th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
@Tom - early on in my spiritual path, I read of the traditional yogas or paths to God. As I had a more intellectual orientation, when I read that the intellectual path was the path of the monk, I spent several months planning to become a monk. (laughs) A little later I reread this and noticed a key point about karma yogis. It is the path of perception. Ah. Pretty dominant in the west.
It took me a few such mistakes before i finally saw that the path is not black and white with tidy little steps on a grid each person follows. That its an organic, unique process for each of us. And many jump around, touching on very high states and falling and dancing and so on.
Davidya’s last blog post..Beyond no self
on June 19th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
@Davidya I agree with you, of course. However, there do seem to be a few common elements to every path. Very few, but a few. And first and foremost is “let go.” That’s the one that just seems to be there, always, always. Let go of who you think you are at the core. But let go of so much that seems to layer on top of that.
A key thing about letting go: it isn’t getting rid of. It is unclenching, relaxing, allowing, ultimately loving. The common thread. All of it with one purpose: to love well. At least, that’s how it looks to me.
on June 19th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Wow, Tom. You really are getting it. (laughs) The really fine point of it. There is fullness, and there is resistance to fullness. Nothing else.
So there is opening to fullness, and releasing resistance to opening to fullness…
Here’s a quote from Lorne last night:
“The observer, the witness is still observing the individual person. It’s still lodged in the mind, in the me, the individual person. The silence is not lodged in the person, it’s everywhere. It’s even beyond the awareness.
How to get that witness to know itself as that omnipresence that is being experienced? We stop, and we allow, and we surrender.”
Davidya’s last blog post..Beyond no self
on June 20th, 2008 at 1:42 am
Hi Tom
Thanks for replying to my thoughts.
Re your reply,
<>
I see science (or rather mathematics) explaining everything, eventually - even if only via concepts like infinity (expressed, succinctly, by a simple symbol) or complex numbers or… (I’ve forgotten most of my degree-level mathematics lol).
There is as much mystery in mathematics as spirituality. That’s why I firmly believe the world of mathematics and spirituality will coalesce later or sooner!
Steve
on June 20th, 2008 at 10:41 am
@Davidya Thank you. Your quote from Lorne is right there. Ultimately, it is a surrender game, as Adyashanti would say.
on June 20th, 2008 at 10:51 am
@Steve You know, I have a deep love for mathematics. I’m one of those strange people that kinda grooves on math. I’ve wondered at various points in my life, “why didn’t I get a PhD in math?” I never have an answer. It just doesn’t seem to be in the cards. No movement in that direction.
But I wonder. You see, at the end of the line, for both math and physics, I see a “road closed” sign. At some point, physics and math will get to a place that they can’t go beyond. The reason is that math and physics are mental constructs. They are a conceptual way to explain the totality of existence. But what I see as The All is beyond the mind, beyond its capacity to invent a system for describing The All.
See, its a funny thing: all the really awake folks, the true mystics, all report the same thing: what they are, what we are, what I am, what you are, is something beyond the mind. The mind is contained in what we are, but the totality is beyond. How can science or math ever go beyond the mind? They can’t because they are OF the mind. Make sense?
My own personal experience of the mystical seems to confirm this view. What I am is beyond the mind.
Bummer really, that math may never be able to get “there.” But then again, there are only millions (billions? trillions?) of uncharted aspects of what math and science can explore. So there is still tremendous value in them. How about artificial intelligence? Faster than light travel? Worm holes? A science fiction lover’s dream! Hmm…. My inner geek is getting excited about math and science again. I guess I’ll have to dig out a good sci fi book.
Thanks as always for your comments! Namaste.
on June 20th, 2008 at 10:59 am
@Steve - if i may remark, mathematics will never be able to explain the no-thing / spirit as it is beyond mind and math is inherently a mental construct. But math can explain everything as every-thing arises in mind as a construct. Because both math and the world are constructs of the mind, one can describe the other. Indeed, several people already have described the mathematics of mind, the geometry of consciousness.
Buckminster Fuller in Synergetics would be a good example. Its subtitle is explorations in the geometry of thinking. I wrote a paper on it back in the ’70’s myself.
When the mind grasps the underlying structure of expression, the math is obvious. What you suggest is, i think, it coalescing as common knowledge rather than some eccentric branch.
Davidya’s last blog post..More Spoken
on June 20th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Ah, Tom, you were commenting concurrently, and agreeing
on June 20th, 2008 at 11:03 am
@Davidya I couldn’t have said it better myself.
on June 20th, 2008 at 11:06 am
@Tom - it never occurred to me to study advanced math as I was pretty borderline in high school. But later, I discovered ‘real’ math and I loved that. (laughs) Funny when i think back. A friend did get his PhD in math and we used to talk about the ideas for hours…
on June 20th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Tom:
That was a very interesting discussion that you had going on over at Zen Habits. I’m actually surprised but delighted that Leo responded to you personally.
I believe in miracles too. I believe that the universe helps us toward our destiny. God and the universe are constantly communicating with us, leaving subtle messages. It’s just a matter of being aware - raising our awareness - and determining what we are hearing or feeling (intuition) about certain situations. I believe everything happens for a reason and that every one of us has a destiny blueprint inside us, waiting to be explored and enacted on.
Great conversation - I love your writing style.
Stephen Hopson’s last blog post..End of the Week Gratitude Theme #33
on June 20th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
It’s not just maths.
All our communication involves mental constructs - narrative, diagrams. As does memory.
I don’t see why Maths can’t be as good a finger pointing at the moon, or raft, as any other construct. I hasten to add that Maths left me in high school. My brain just isn’t put together that way I think.
Evan’s last blog post..Doing Anger Well
on June 20th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
@Stephen Thanks! Glad to have your comments. I do believe, too, that there are sometimes messages for us, pointers as it were. We seem to get insight into the directions to turn.
on June 20th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
@Evan - everything we experience is a mental construct - ours or the One’s. Thus in principle everything we experience could be described with math. Math allows you to define the fundamental structure onto which energy coalesces and becomes particles and matter.
I’m not much good at algebra and flunked calculus. But conceptual stuff and geometry - space - that I can work with. Its more lateral.
Interesting you mention memory. Certain things in our experience go much deeper than others. Memory is one of them. In Sanskrit, they have a word - Smriti, memory. Within the silence there is 2 basic principles. A principle of alertness and a principle of liveliness. We could say memory causes the liveliness to move. Awareness is stirred and becomes aware of itself. Existence begins. Mind begins. The stirring is vibration or sound. And thus arises the flow or Intention, the movement of awareness within itself. The flow is sequential and thus structures Veda or knowledge. What might also be called intelligence. And what can described with math.
This by the way is long before anything like ‘universe’ or ‘individual’. But they follow the same principles. As above, so below.
That in a nutshell is the process of becoming. The foundation of all experience and being.
Davidya’s last blog post..More Spoken
on June 20th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
@Evan You are so right: there are lots of ways to point the finger at the moon. Our blogs, for instance.
But math… ah, such precision, such beauty. You know, I must confess, I love the non-American English use of MathS, plural. I can see myself at Cambridge. I believe the expression would be “Tom is reading Maths at Cambridge.” Is that correct? Any English in the crowd to help a poor American? Or is it the same in Australia?
I’m always intrigued to how many people had difficult with math. Its epidemic almost. I always enjoyed tutoring and teaching math because I found it fascinating to try to understand where someone got “lost” as it were. I would always be curious what it would take to have them find themselves again. I would often wonder, “how could they not see it?”
You know, you are making me realize how much I love teaching. I really don’t care what I’m teaching. It is fun to teach. I love teaching people about spiritual things. It is a blast for me. Sorry, I guess I’m rambling in this comment.
on June 21st, 2008 at 1:55 am
Tom, in Australia you would be “doing” or possibly “taking” maths (plural), rather than “reading”. Although, strangely, when you teach a tutorial because you’re the tutor, you “take” the tutorial, and you “have” an exam (rather than sitting one or standing one).
I share this as a former American who is now Australian and whose husband was a tutor of Computer Science at a residential college associated with a fairly impressive university. I still haven’t quite got the academic dialect differences quite right.
And just as a side note, instead of being interested in or doing “sports” you do or are interested in “sport”. Singular. No idea why.
on June 21st, 2008 at 4:15 am
Tom:
Yes, we definitely get pointers from the universe, God or the angels - however you’d like to look at it.
It’s all about being aware.
Stephen Hopson’s last blog post..End of the Week Gratitude Theme #33
on September 26th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Wow, you give excellent descriptive details
on September 26th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Thanks! I appreciate the compliment.
Trackbacks