You know what you want, right? If you believe in the law of attraction, you probably have a list of your intentions ready to go at the top of your head, or written down on some list somewhere.
But have you ever stopped to ask yourself, why do you want what you want?
Okay, there’s the obvious. Maybe you want more money so you can pay the bills, or for greater peace of mind. Maybe you want a relationship because you don’t want to be alone, and you want a companion to share life with. And maybe you want health because… actually that one’s pretty obvious.
But, go beyond those simplistic reasons.
No, I’m not dismissing your reasons, or calling them invalid.
But let’s explore the root of wanting.
“Why would I want to do that?” you ask.
Well, it’s simple. Have you ever considered that your wanting for this or that thing, is exactly what is keeping you trapped in a life of more and more wanting?
It was the Buddha who said that to desire is to suffer.
But, don’t worry. I’m not going to tell you you should give up your goals.
However, if you don’t understand precisely where this wanting stems from, then even if you were ever to achieve your goal, it would not provide what you wanted.
It would actually just lead to another chase for something more.
The Endless Cycle of Wanting
You have probably already experienced this in your own life.
Can you ever identify a time when you thought something to the effect of, “Once I get X, everything will be better”?
Where X is some goal: a job, a degree, a date with your crush, a car, some new gadget….
Now, sometimes, you never got that thing, and eventually, it was okay, right?
But, let’s focus on the times when you actually got that thing.
At first, it was great! You felt elation at achieving your goal, right?
How long did that elation last?
Depending on what it was, I’m guessing probably a few days, or a week or two at the most.
Then, it was back to life as normal.
Now here’s the important question: did it give you what you thought it would give you?
That is, you thought it was the answer to everything. So, was it? Did it end all suffering? Did it give you all the answers?
Or did you yearn just as much after achieving that goal as you did before?
Again, I’m not saying the goal had no value. I’ve gotten lots of things in my life that are very useful to me.
But, we tend to have this idea that once we have our desires, we’ll be complete.
And, if you honestly assess your life, has that ever been true?
I have had this countless times in my own life.
There have been many times when I wanted some course, either on self-help, some spiritual modality, or even on marketing.
And I thought this course would hold all the answers. After I finished that course, I would know everything I needed to know.
Most of time, I couldn’t afford that course. And though at first I was upset, eventually I realized that I was actually perfectly okay without it.
But, sometimes I did end up getting that course.
And, inevitably, I’d be disappointed.
I’d have a thought like, “That’s it? That was what all the hype was about?”
And again, I’d be just as okay after the fact.
But then that next self-help product or course would come along, and then the cycle started all over again.
It took me a long time to realize that I could trust my own inner guidance, which many times could give me more valuable information than any course I could take.
Is that to say I never got valuable information from one of these products? No, not at all. But, it wasn’t the answer to life, the universe, and everything, that I thought it would be.
The pattern is the same in relationships. Though, I can’t relate to this one as much, because I married my first love. 🙂
But I’ve seen it enough times to know how it works. You get into some new, magical relationship. It’s great for a while, and then you notice their quirks and idiosyncrasies.
It has a name, too: the honeymoon stage. And once that stage is over, reality hits, hard.
It turns out they’re a real person, too, with their own flaws and preferences different from yours.
So, you understand the cycle, likely from personal experience.
But, what about the law of attraction?
It promises anything we want, along with perfect happiness and joy.
But, theres a missing component that most people totally ignore. And, because they miss this component to the law of attraction, it often creates more suffering for them, and keeps them trapped in this cycle of perpetual wanting.
What’s the missing component?
Before I tell you that, let me first introduce our good friend, the ego.
The Ego: The Source of All Suffering
The ego is that part of you that wants. It thinks that something is lacking, so the basic motivation of the ego is to correct that lack, and also to protect itself from all perceived threats.
Unfortunately, it can never correct that lack, and it constantly sees threats everywhere.
It’s the ego that says, “Once I have X, I’ll be happy.”
Because, the ego believes it’s not happy yet, so, clearly it needs something more in order to be happy.
It’s the part of you that is constantly seeking. It’s seeking for greater experiences, greater wealth, better relationships, all in the pursuit of permanent happiness.
Unfortunately, as we’ve seen, outer circumstances simply cannot bring permanent happiness.
So, the ego becomes a dog chasing its own tail. It’s running in circles, trying to accomplish the impossible.
Why is this happening?
Well, you have fallen prey to a very simple illusion: the illusion of separation.
You believe yourself separate from the Universe at large.
It’s why we have the religions we do, because people believe God to be outside of themselves, and then because God is on the outside, now we must please this external deity.
But, that’s definitely a topic for another day.
However, because of this illusion of separation, the ego, which is also called the false self, or the false “I”, looks for happiness on the outside.
It makes sense. If you believe yourself to be separate, then you separate yourself from, well, yourself.
And because of this apparent division, happiness seems to be missing. It seems to be dependent on outside circumstances.
How many times have you said something to the effect of, “I’d be happy if only …”?
That’s the ego delusion.
That “if only” is the root of all your seeking.
The true Self—who you really are—says, “I am happy.”
Actually, not even this. It simply says, “I AM”. But, happiness is part and parcel of this cosmic “I AM”.
But, the ego identifies with a body, with a mind, with all sorts of different labels. And, it identifies with the thoughts and emotions that travel through awareness.
It is why it hangs on to limiting beliefs like, “I am poor.” It takes it as much more than a state of being, but actually as an identity. “I am the one who is poor.”
Or, the belief, “I am lonely.” It is not just the state of things now, but a statement of fact: “I am the one who is lonely.”
That’s why it fights so hard to preserve these beliefs, though they cause so much suffering. It builds its identity around these beliefs, so any attempt to remove them is literally a threat to the ego’s existence.
Introducing: The Self
I say “ego” as separate from your own identity, because you are not ego. You believe you are ego—in other words, you believe you are a separate self—but, you are not.
The Hindu scriptures, the Upanishads, have the saying: “Tat tvam asi”.
It means, “That thou art.”
Or, That—being the true Self, the Universe, the All That Is, Brahman—is equivalent, non-differentiated, with you.
You are literally, That, the All.
Not a part of That, but That, itself.
The Self does not know non-peace, or non-joy. It is absolutely one, so it is self-sufficient, dependent on nothing in order to be complete.
It is always present. Every time you’ve experienced happiness, it is because just for a moment, you opened up just enough that the Light of the Self was able to shine through.
Just for future reference, I capitalize most nouns associated with the Self, because of their absolute nature. The Happiness of the Self is absolute, unlike the conditional and temporary happiness of the ego.
The thing is, the Self is really what we are all searching for. We just mistaken certain outside conditions as means of the happiness we seek. But, those outside conditions can only ever be a reflection of the true Happiness of the Self.
I’ve given the analogy before of taking a picture of your dinner, and expecting that picture to satiate you. It simply won’t happen. It’s only a reflection, not the real thing.
If you want any kind of lasting happiness, then you need the real Source of Happiness.
Actually, you don’t need it at all. You are it. You have simply temporarily looked away from who you really are.
Moving Beyond All Desire
I’m going to differentiate two terms: desire and preference.
Desire is what drives the ego to look for completion. And because it is looking for it, it can never find it.
The Self does not have desire, because it does not lack anything. Desire implies lack.
And we know that in the law of attraction, whatever you feel you lack, you will continue to lack in a greater and greater way. This is truly the secret behind why the ego searches endlessly for happiness: it doesn’t feel it has happiness, and so it continues to not have happiness, in more and more obvious ways.
Those of you who have expressed to me that you feel trapped—that you feel the Universe is unfair, because it is just too hard—this is why.
You have listened to the ego. You have believed you lack something, and because of that, the law of attraction proves to you again and again that you do, in fact, lack it, at least apparently so.
In truth, you can never lack anything.
Look at your own desires. Notice how deep down, you believe that these desires will give you something that you don’t already have, emotionally.
- You desire money because you believe you lack abundance.
- You desire a relationship because you believe you lack love.
- You desire that next program or course because you believe you lack all the answers.
- You desire people to behave a certain way because you believe that your happiness is dependent on them.
- You desire the world to be a certain way because you believe your safety is dependent on these circumstances.
Desire, equivalent to want, is synonymous with lack.
If you desire it, you can’t have it, because you believe you lack it.
Please read that again:
If you desire it, you can’t have it, because you believe you lack it.
So, let’s move beyond desire.
I know that’s scary. In the law of attraction community, we talk about desire all the time. We are told we can have anything we want.
In a sense, that’s true. But only if you have that missing component in place, which I’ll discuss below.
But, as long as you want it, you can’t have it, because it is your ego that believes it needs this thing in order to be complete.
So, let’s move beyond desires. For a moment, let’s just ponder the possibility that everything is perfect already.
Keep in mind, if you don’t feel this now, this is exactly the reason you aren’t getting the things you want.
Only when you know to the core of your being that this, right here, right now, is perfect as-is, can you hope to actually change it.
The Missing Component to the Law of Attraction
I hinted at it above, but I will clarify it much more here.
The missing component is this: are you manifesting from ego, or from the Self?
And here’s how you know: would it be okay if you didn’t get your manifestation?
Actually, not only okay, but would you love life no matter what?
If so, that’s the Self,.
But if not, then it’s your ego manifesting. And, the ego can only ever manifest lack.
It is when you manifest from the Self, out of preference, not desire, that the Universe responds instantly to your intention.
It is only when you will be complete either way, that the Universe will listen to your preference.
And so this is why I say to move beyond desire.
Move beyond the desire of the ego, because desire will only bring you more lack.
Be, instead, the Self that you are, complete already in “I AM” awareness.
Be in love with life, as it is NOW, needing nothing to be different than it is.
Then, when you have a preference, it will be done.
It reminds me of the first chapter of Genesis, when it says that God is creating the earth.
God says, “Let there be light.” And just like that, there is light.
He does not say, “I really want there to be light,” or, “I desire light.” Otherwise, no light would be forthcoming.
No, it was a declaration. It was also a preference. God would be complete no matter if there was light or not, but, it was chosen, and so it was.
This is how you should create.
- If there is doubt, then it is from ego.
- If there is want, then that is ego.
- If there is impatience, then that is ego.
Creation is a simple decision. “I choose to create $1,000 more per month. Not because I am incomplete without it, but simply because I choose it.”
Or, “I choose the perfect relationship for me. Not because I need it to be happy, but simply because I choose it.”
This is true creation, from the Self, and not from the ego.
Now, if you aren’t sure if your goal is a desire or a preference, then work on manifesting it anyway. Release the resistance to it so much that you either realize it was solely an ego desire, or you become certain it is something you choose to create.
Because, even if you release all the resistance and end up dropping it, you have that much less resistance keeping you tied to the ego. Releasing resistance can never be superfluous.
The point to take away from all this is that yes, the law of attraction is true, of course. And yes, you can have your goals.
But simply evaluate why you want what you want. If you aren’t completely okay with things as they are, then release resistance until you are.
It is what Abraham points to when they say, “Be satisfied with what is, and eager for more.” However, in my opinion, it is not emphasized nearly enough, because still most people totally ignore the first part.
I’ll be talking about these topics—enlightenment, the Self, etc—much more frequently in the future. This was a nice transition post to set the tone, so you know what I’m getting at.
Most people think that the law of attraction is completely at odds with enlightenment. But it’s not. The law of attraction is simply one of the foundational laws of the Universe.
Discovering your true Self is the real end-goal here. The more you do that, the better you’ll be at the law of attraction, because the less you’ll believe in lack. They go perfectly hand-in-hand.
How About You?
Now it’s your turn. I know this post was pretty deep today. But, I’d love to know your thoughts. Are you able to differentiate wants from preferences in your own goals? Let me know your thoughts in the comments.
The term “preference” needs some clarification in these kinds of discussions. Preference might mean two different kinds of things. Here’s an example:
1. I prefer getting rocky road at the ice cream store, but I’ll still be happy if they’re out of rocky road and I have to eat vanilla instead. I’ll just be slightly less happy than I would have been with the rocky road. Happy, just less happy.
2. I prefer getting rocky road at the ice cream store, but actually, I’ll have exactly the same amount of happiness no matter whether I get rocky road or vanilla. I expect both situations to give me equal happiness.
Now, if we mean the first kind of situation by preference, then preference turns out to just be a milder form of desire. Now we experience our world not as a mash of outcomes of happiness and suffering, but rather as a contrast of varying levels of happiness. It still matters what you wind up getting, because different outcomes result in different levels of happiness. There’s no point at which you feel sad or pained–you’re always happy, but there are things that could have happened that would have resulted in greater happiness. (I take it this is what Christians mean when they talk about varying levels of glory in heaven–everyone is happy, nobody is sorry to be there, no one is envious of other people in heaven, but some people are experiencing even higher levels of happiness in heaven than other people are.) If we mean that preferences are just signaling low versus high levels of happiness, then that fits with a lot of what Abraham says, but it also conflicts a lot with what various enlightenment gurus say about the nature of the Self.
If we mean the second kind of “preference,” then there’s almost no meaning to the issue at all. Preference just means some sort of random choice. On the second option, there’s no reason to care about rocky road at all, since you don’t expect it will make you any happier. It fits better with notions of enlightenment, but it makes the material world rather pointless. Why have two kinds of ice cream at all, if you know you’ll like either one exactly the same? Surely there’s some true and interesting difference between our earthly experiences, or Oneness wouldn’t have bothered breaking up into duality to begin with. There has to be genuine contrast among choices, or else the game doesn’t work.
Hi Lisa,
Unfortunately, language is such a poor way of communicating things. However, I think both examples pass over the central truth we are aiming at. I will see if I can explain more clearly.
The Self is pure Peace and Joy. It needs nothing to be more complete than it is.
You’re seeing things as more or less happy, and that’s a function of ego, to tend to see things as either having or lacking.
But how about this one:
No matter what, you will be perfectly at peace. No matter what, you are complete.
But hey, it would be pretty cool if you could have rocky road.
You have to differentiate between the permanence of who you are, and the temporary nature of emotions.
We are not here for random good emotions. For one who knows the Self, everything is welcome. An emotion is just a bit of energy that passes through.
So if you get rocky road, then there is definitely happiness. But the happiness is temporary, and then subsides. Which you can see from your everyday life, anyway. If you were to go get rocky road ice cream right now, it doesn’t mean you’re going to be happy for the rest of your life, obviously. It is a temporary state.
The “problem” comes in when people crave these temporary highs, because they feel incomplete in themselves.
They need that rocky road ice cream, or that promotion at work, or whatever other goal, like an addict might need a drug. It gives them a temporary high, but soon it is gone.
All that I’m saying is let’s build on a foundation of inner completeness, of absolute Peace and Well-Being.
It doesn’t mean we’re not glad to have happiness passing through. But we’re not going to be any less complete if it doesn’t.
Happiness is really a poor term, because people associate it with both temporary and permanent states. It may have been a poor word-choice to use that in this post, but most people believe they are seeking happiness.
The truth is, there is no word that can describe the reality of living in the Self day-to-day. Happiness makes it sound too cheap. Peace, while true, doesn’t communicate the extent of it. So, it can be a challenge to aptly describe this.
You said that if everything were equal, it would make the material world pointless.
I disagree. But, I’m going to divide the material world and its relation to us into two main stages:
First, when you believe you need certain things, or need to avoid others.
In that state, the material world is here primarily to trigger your resistance, so that you can release it and uncover more of the Self. It is here for your freedom.
Secondly, once you no longer have attachments or aversions to it, then it is here for, well, more or less the heck of it.
Hindus have this term called lila. It’s basically divine playfulness. It’s their answer to why the world exists. The answer is, essentially, because God felt like creating.
And that’s really how the material world relates to you once you are in this state of complete allowing. Why do you do what you do? For the fun of it.
I think that’s what Abraham points to in a lot of what they talk about, but they completely pass over the first stage. So, when people try to apply their words, they are doing so still from a state of attachment/aversion, and it really doesn’t work.
God didn’t need to create the world. God chose to, just because.
Imagine a child who plays pretend. They don’t need to, but do it for the fun of it. That’s the best correlation I can find.
Once you give up attachments/aversions, then the world is your playground. Until then, you’re bound by your own chains of apparent need.
I hope that makes sense.
I think there will still be a question, “Is it a better state of affairs when the universe is doing lila?” In other words, which is the better existence–a universe in which there is no lila, or a universe in which there is? Or are they equally good states of affairs? If they are equally good, then it turns out it’s arbitrary that the universe is like this. That’s okay, but that means it no longer works to say, “The universe is having a material aspect because lila is so awesome” since it’s equally true that the universe would be just as awesome without lila. There just winds up being no explanation for anything. Again, that’s fine if you like that perspective, but it means a lot of the reasons gurus offer for why things are the way they are don’t work.
I agree with you that terms like happiness can get confusing. Some gurus like to talk about a state beyond happiness, but they still describe it as some kind of positive state. Call it peace, call it joy, call it bliss, call it whatever, but it’s still supposed to be some sort of pleasant or otherwise positive state. (If it’s not positive in at least some respect, I’m not sure why anyone would care about it!) So the question still arises: Is it better to be in the positive enlightened state (call it what you will) or not? Or is it equally good, in all respects, to be enlightened or unenlightened? (Really, according to the gurus, you can’t help but be enlightened since all is one, so we should probably say “knowingly enlightened” or “enlightened with full awareness” instead of just “enlightened.”) If we say, “It’s better in some way to be knowingly enlightened than not,” then there is separation and duality again and a preference that will increase (I won’t say happiness, since that connotes a passing emotion to some people) a positive state of being if satisfied, but will not increase it as much if unsatisfied. (In other words, option 1 in my previous post.) If we say, “It’s not better in any way to be knowingly enlightened than not; they’re equally good states entirely,” (option 2), then there is no point to working towards that–you won’t experience anything more positive than what you’ve already got.
Hi Lisa,
Your comment mainly stems from this misunderstanding: that enlightenment is a state.
Enlightenment is not a state. As you accurately pointed out, if it were a state, then there would be duality: the enlightened state, and the non-enlightened state.
No one becomes enlightened. There’s a story of a one who realizes the Self, but of course, on the absolute level, that never happens.
The issue is when we confuse levels. Is enlightenment preferable to non-enlightenment? You have to ask, to whom do you ask this question?
Because, the ego is never enlightened. The ego is the false “I”. And the only other aspect is pure awareness, which is the Self, which is always enlightened.
The Buddhists have the concept of the gateless gate. A person walks up to the gate, but no person can walk through it. That’s very much like how it is.
And yet I will tell you this: all life leads to enlightenment, on the relative level at least. All souls crave freedom. Freedom is synonymous with enlightenment, because as long as we are subject to ego, then there is bondage, not freedom.
Yes, they point it out as some sort of positive state. And again, language is so dualistic that it is really impossible to describe in any other way.
But I would not say it is a positive state. If there is a positive state, then there can be a negative state.
But enlightenment, or Ultimate Reality, is that which has no opposite.
But, mind will never get this, because mind is built on duality. If I say enlightenment is that which is free, then mind can conceptualize that which is not free.
But I will say, that even when the story of non-freedom / bondage is here, it is only in the larger context of freedom that it arises.
It’s like the actor who plays a role where he is imprisoned. Is he really imprisoned? No, of course not. It’s all a play.
But if he were to for some reason believe in his role, then he would think he was imprisoned. But it was never true. It was only a play.
You are the dreamer. You believe you are a character in the dream. If the character realizes it’s a dream, it’s still a character—not really real. It’s all a story inside the dream. Whether the character realizes it’s a dream, or remains trapped by the illusion, it’s all just a story. It is still a dream either way, and the dreamer is always free.
So, all I’m trying to tell you is that your mind is asking these questions. And, as long as it is asking these questions, you will never get the answers.
Is a universe with lila better than a universe without lila? To answer that question, we would require the dualistic, and therefore egoistic, concepts of “better” and “worse”. It’s just how it is, or at least how it appears to be, since even the story of lila, is just a story.
Enlightenment is actually very anticlimactic. Read any awakened teacher’s story of their awakening and you will see the same thing. Just one moment, the world is one way, and the next, everything changes, but in the subtlest of ways.
Enlightenment is not bliss. Enlightenment is not joy. Because, those are emotions that can come and go. There is certainly bliss and joy for, perhaps, the first several weeks “after” enlightenment (as though time had any meaning here).
But then, there is a grounding back to earth, but now from a totally different vantage point. Instead of being the character, one is now the play itself. One’s own body is no more personal than the body of a total stranger. One has become the All, and now only keeps up the character role because that’s what’s here right now.
Again, it’s impossible to explain. It’s beyond all concepts of positive or negative emotions. The above is the best I can do at the moment.
However, I will say that manifestation becomes extremely effortless post-awakening. Because, one is whole and complete either way. There is no more fear of lack, and no more craving for more.
I guess we must just be talking about two different things. What I meant by enlightenment was sort of a peak experience involving oneness, one that is possible (although rare) to maintain through everyday life. I’ve had occasional experiences like that, but they always felt really good. It was a feeling hard to describe with ordinary words, but it was definitely a good feeling to me. If what is meant by enlightenment here is so beyond concepts that it’s incorrect to say that you feel good during it, then I’m not really interested in pursuing that kind of enlightenment. It may be a very interesting form of enlightenment for some people, but I like the kind that feels great! 🙂 I guess we were just talking about two different things. Maybe we should call mine “lesser enlightenment” or “oneness that feels good” or something. 🙂
Hi Lisa,
I wouldn’t call it lesser enlightenment, but more of a glimpse. I have had glimpses all my life, so I know how it feels very well.
I’m not saying it doesn’t feel good, just that good stops having any kind of meaning.
Most people think enlightenment is a state, like you do. They think it’s something to strive to carry with them, but must be worked towards.
In reality, it just is. Once you’re there, you’re there, and you realize you never weren’t there.
The difference is this: a state can be lost. You had a glimpse, and then the glimpse was over. But, the thing itself… it is eternal.
It’s sort of like this: imagine a candle. It is fire, but a very small demonstration of fire. And then imagine that candle is merged into the Sun. The candle can go out, but the Sun never will (well, eventually, but that’s beyond the analogy 🙂 ).
If you’ve lit that candle, it’s awesome. But the candle can go out. Once you are merged with the Sun, there can be no concept of losing it.
Really, every good feeling is a glimpse of enlightenment, just heavily filtered through ego, and projected outward, so that people think it came from some external phenomenon.
It’s all just degrees of the same thing. 🙂
And I get about not wanting enlightenment yet. There’s a teacher, can’t remember who off the top of my head, who said that if the ego knew what enlightenment really is, it would run far away from it. Because, enlightenment means the death of ego.
That’s another great thing about the world. We have the chance to chase happiness on the outside, until we realize it’s not there. It can go on for lifetimes like this.
Honestly, for you I’d recommend taking the path of pursuing goals. You’ll still come to the same conclusion, because you can’t achieve those goals until you no longer need them to be happy. Once you drop the need for the goal, the goal will come.
All paths lead to the same place. 🙂
This is a monster post! Thank you for taking on this topic and clarifying things. It is to be continued…
“You have simply temporarily looked away from who you really are”- this is what happens to us. It is not that we turn our back on the Creator, it is that we turn away from who we really are. But how are we to know this when so many labels are placed upon us throughout our life- even by our own parents? Our true parent is God and this for me is very soothing. It makes it easier to deal with the ones I have here now, as I was not dealt such a great set, but I chose it. In another dimension, they are probably not even my parents, after all.
So, God was being playful and felt like it. It makes sense, but for this very reason, we should not take things too seriously. The problem with this thinking is that people think you are nuts and you lose friends if you do not think like them I guess all the more reason to make room for new friends, right?
I also remember why I chose B instead of A path. To be playful. When I made that decision, I was playing. I knew things would work out one way or another and I knew the Universe would have my back. In the difficulty of B, however, I regretted not going for A and that led me to misery. I was far, far away from my true self and I went to dark and bad places that led to anxiety and bad things. This is how you can drive yourself crazy. At least with these reminders, I am closer to being on track.
What you wrote in the comment above to answer Lisa’s question is worth going over and another post! 🙂
Hi A.,
Thanks so much for your comment.
Yes, that is true. Egos beget more egos, one could say.
But, the good news is that nothing is wrong with this. Life is always pointing to freedom. Every time you suffer, you realize a bit more that happiness is not found in the world. Eventually, you turn within and see for yourself.
Yeah, you have it. The greatest realization once awakening to the Self is that the Universe is a big joke. It doesn’t take itself seriously, so why should you?
And yeah, people might not be on board with that, because they are listening to their own egos, who take life super seriously. But, that is okay. You will find new people, as you said.
You are always on track. You have always been on track.
So you chose path B in the attitude of lila (playfulness). That’s great, and usually the indication that you’ve chosen the “proper” path, if such a thing exists.
But now you got sucked in by ego stories. “Am I taking the right path? Should I have made a different choice?” The ego will spin around and around in these endless stories if you let it.
What do you have? The present moment. Right here, right now, is there a problem?
Like I said, you can never go wrong. Life is always pointing to freedom. The only reason for the experiences you have right now is to point ever closer to your own freedom. So don’t take the ego stories too seriously.
I agree. Even as I wrote this post, I knew it wasn’t nearly enough, but figured 2,700 words were probably plenty. 😮
What should the post focus on? Maybe, “What Is Happiness, Really?” Or, “The Purpose of the Material World”.
I’d like to hear your take on “The Purpose of the Material World.” The material world gets a terrible rap in enlightenment circles sometimes–it’s described as a boot camp, or a mistake, or a school–something we incarnate into just to see how fast we can get out of it again! haha To me, Oneness wouldn’t use the material world as a way to solve a problem. In my opinion, the material world must have intrinsic value in itself. It’s there because it’s fun.
Maybe in the post, you could explain your statement, “The material world is here primarily to trigger your resistance, so that you can release it and uncover more of the Self.” At first glance, it sounds like that means the Self was sitting around in nonphysical, saying, “Good grief, I’ve got so much resistance! How can I get rid of this stuff? Oh, I know, I’ll make a material world and get rid of it there.” But I’m not sure this is really your perspective. I think maybe you meant what Abraham seems to say (they aren’t totally clear), that the material world provides us with more contrast than just having a nonphysical world. And more contrast means more expansion. (Maybe expansion is what you meant by “uncovering more of the Self,” although it might be just as fair to call it creating more of the Self as uncovering it.) We usually wind up creating some resistance when we encounter contrast–at least at first–but we learn to let go more and more and perhaps someday we enjoy all the contrast without resisting what we don’t prefer. On this view, a world with more contrast and expansion is better than a world with few choices. The material world gives us more contrast and expansion, so that’s why it exists. The purpose of existence is the joy of expansion, although saying that makes it sound more formal than it really is. Really it’s more like, the universe loves expanding more and more and creating more and more, just because that’s fun to it. Like you said, it’s like a pretend game happy children are playing or a song they’re singing–they’re not trying to get happiness, exactly; rather, the game or song is the natural expression of the happiness they’re feeling.
All of this is such a tough topic to handle! It’s interesting to try and unite ideas about LOA with ideas about enlightenment, but it’s been tricky in the past, which is why so few attempt it. But I think more and more of us are willing and able to think deeply about it all, and perhaps we are more psychologically and spiritually ready for the answers than we have been in the past. Thank you for being open to discussion, Brandon and “A”!
Hey Lisa,
Very interesting points.
I will say right off the bat that I disagree significantly with several things Abraham says. I agree with parts, and disagree with parts. So some of what I say you may be able to reconcile with their teachings, but much of it you will not be able to.
Channeling is an odd thing, and it’s not really in the scope of this post, but it is very easy to let one’s own biases and beliefs get in the way. For instance, “Abraham” says that the subconscious doesn’t exist, or at least doesn’t matter. But, that’s categorically untrue, and so a lot of confusion has resulted. My guess is that Esther really doesn’t know much about the subconscious, and her own biases show through when people ask about the subconscious mind. That’s just one example, but just to say that channeled work should always be taken with a grain of salt for that reason.
Just like with enlightened teachers. I used to think that this meant they were infallible. But, they clearly aren’t. There are countless contradictions among awakened teachers. Some say enlightenment can be attained through practice, and others say it is only through the grace of God (I hate that expression, but it’s the one a lot of them use). Really the truth is somewhere in the middle, or actually a both/and that the mind can’t really reconcile.
Anyway, now to your questions. I’ll expound on it briefly (ha, I’m never brief 😛 ), and then more so in a future post.
You say Oneness wouldn’t use the material world to solve a problem. That’s correct, because Oneness sees no problems.
Oneness isn’t trying to solve anything, because there are no problems on the absolute level.
It’s better if you see the whole thing as a game. Something like, “Oh, wouldn’t it be fun if I separated myself into all these apparent beings, and then pretended to find my way back to myself?”
But intrinsic value in itself? No, I don’t think. Though it depends what you mean by intrinsic value.
I’d go back to the two stages I discussed before:
The Universe dreamt up this material world as a way to remind itself of itself, over and over again. It knew that as apparently individual beings, those beings would look for happiness on the outside. And every time they did that, the material world would disappoint, because happiness cannot be found there.
So, eventually they would look within, and discover they are the Universe already.
So it acts as a reminder. It’s sort of like how Abraham says that your resistance will always get bigger the more you ignore it.
Then, there’s the second stage, where it’s the playground for whatever you want to create. You are now the lucid dreamer, and can do whatever you want. Lester Levenson, after his awakening, decided to prove materialism wasn’t a bad thing, and so became a millionaire within 6 months.
Then, he left it all behind. 😛 Just to show how hootless you have to be. You can just as easily leave it all behind as you can keep it. It mattered not at all to him.
See, this is another point where I disagree with Abraham. They say there is always contrast. But to the enlightened individual (talk about a contradiction in terms, lol), there is no contrast. They simply decide, and it is so. It’s raw creation from the Source.
But for those who aren’t totally awakened, when they decide to create something, the Universe brings up their resistance that is blocking the way. That’s why I recommended pursuing goals either way, because the pursuit of that goal will dredge up all the resistance that is in the way of that goal, and which is also in the way of the Light of the Self shining through.
No, I did not mean expansion. The Universe does not expand. The dream might expand, but the Universe is whole and complete as it is. It is absolutely changeless.
So material is not here for expansion. It’s either here to challenge you, so you can come closer to freedom, or then to take whatever shape you want it to.
The reason this universe works so well is because it was set up so that the material would always reflect the state of the mind. If there is chaos, then the world will be chaotic. If there is peace, then it will be peaceful. That’s why it can challenge you, because it is always reflecting your resistance back to you. And, once your resistance is gone, then it will reflect the creation you have formed in your mind.
The mind is a creation tool, once properly used.
I do agree that too many enlightenment teachers condemn the material. I think it is because most of their students are chasing the material so much that they are blind to anything else. But, it’s really just a tool. I see it as our friend, constantly pushing us to the next level.
Again, sorry for the long comment, but I will expand upon this in a post next week.
It is really interesting reading what you write, Brandon. That money example with Lester is also fascinating. Do you think that you personally could reach that state of Lester’s enlightenment in 3 months or less, like he did? You have a lot of knowledge and experiences, so I am wondering whether you think it would be easy for you. Also, is it something you would opt for, or would you rather take a slower route, and for what reasons?
What do you think about people in general, I mean those who are familiar with LOA and believe it? Do you think we could do the same as Lester or not? Also, do you think that that would be good and even possible? I am asking because I really want to know your opinion on this, and also if this is possible, then maybe all of us could drop the resistance way faster than we have ever thought was possible.
Hey Z,
Thanks for your comment. 🙂
I will say this: I think there are two stages of the enlightenment process:
Stage 1 is where you have the actual seeing through of the illusion of separateness. This stage is final and can never completely go away, though one can still get lost in certain ego stories temporarily. But, once that door is opened, it remains opened.
Stage 2 is where you then work through the ego’s stories. In Hinduism they call this your vāsanās, or habitual tendencies.
Byron Katie, after her awakening, took a year to work through all of her resistance.
Lester Levenson, it’s a bit unclear, but I believe he was enlightened soon after he started his search, and then was able to fully liberate himself at the end of those three months. Even after that, though, he said that ego stories would sometimes come to the surface, but they were trivial to dispel.
So with that said, I’ve gone through three distinctive awakenings, each helping me to understand that Beingness, or the Self, better.
The first was when I was 13. It was a pretty minor one, and was more a glimpse than anything. But, it opened my eyes to what was possible.
The second was when I was 22. It was a full-fledged awakening this time, and stuck with me for about 2 or 3 months. However, I had some beliefs that got in the way, such as that it was bad to feel negative emotions, and so I got wrapped back up in ego stories for a while longer.
Then when I was 25, I had my last awakening. This one was the most major of them all, and is really a story for another post. But, that remains with me to this day.
I have not worked through all resistance, though. It’s much easier for me to do so, because I can see through it pretty quickly. But, it’s still a process.
I will say that my manifesting ability really grew after the final awakening. The reason was that I just didn’t care anymore. I didn’t even really know I was manifesting at the time, but it just happened.
So, to answer your question, can it be done in three months? Yes, if you’re very dedicated to it. He did this day in and day out. If he wasn’t sleeping, he was releasing.
I think that for anyone, a year or two is plenty of time, if they have a good teacher. On their own, there are many pitfalls. I think I would have made a lot more progress, sooner, had I had a teacher, but the Universe didn’t seem to want me to have one for some reason.
As to how, mindfulness is the most direct way. I recommend applying mindfulness in every waking moment if possible, to stop taking your thoughts personally. The issue with resistance is that you believe your thoughts. Through mindfulness, you can see it is just a thought, and just passing through.
I also recommend pursuing particular goals, because these will dredge up your resistance much faster. Also go back through your past and dig up memories that are painful, and release the emotional charge on those.
Also regularly meditate on this question: “Who am I?” See if you can find the “I”. You’ll find it is just a thought, like all the others. Once that is seen through, it is near impossible to become lost again.
Brandon, how can we go back to the past and release our emotional resistance to those? What do you suggest? A good cry? How about if those thought come back? use mindfulness and do not take them seriously? A post on this would be great!
I would also like to add that following the four agreements helps a lot. People think they are too simple, which is the beauty of it all. Life really is simple. I have given that book to friends and they just did not get it. I will need to look into the Sedona Method.
When you had your awakenings, did you feel that you were not here? Like you were just visiting or something? I cannot put this into words exactly. This is the best way I can describe it. Just wondering of the “signs and symptoms” so to say are similar with awakening.
Well, if crying comes up, that’s up to you. But that’s more expression than releasing.
It’s more just being mindful of whatever comes up. Acknowledging it is there, giving it permission to be there, without judgment.
I’ll definitely write a post on it. But in essence, my three favorite methods are:
First, mindfulness, if you are able to do so.
Second, The Sedona Method®, which is very similar to mindfulness, with some differences.
Third, The Work of Byron Katie, which is a method of questioning your own beliefs.
Anything that helps you to allow your thoughts fully, while not taking them personally, is perfect.
I wouldn’t say it feels like I’m just visiting, because that would require an “I” to be visiting. It’s more like the whole world is happening within me. It’s this wide open expansive awareness that just is, without judgment.
“So you chose path B in the attitude of lila (playfulness). That’s great, and usually the indication that you’ve chosen the “proper” path, if such a thing exists”. Thank you for this. It clarifies a lot. I was in the vortex, so to speak when I made that decision and have since been outside, to use the Abe term, for lack of a better way to say it. You had used another term in a webinar, but it does not come to me at the moment. Of course, all this stuff is felt, but I am trying my best to explain in words.
Well, you know, in this world, we have a path and follow it as a straight line and yada-yada-yada. Straying from it, being playful and all that are frowned upon, at least in my experience. Which is weird because people sure do spend a lot of money on entertainment, and they skimp on other things, so they are seeking.
It will most likely be a series of posts, I would say. I think you should write posts focusing on both those titles. They will pretty much express the same thing, but for us, it will keep clarifying this thing and we need to repeat it anyway in our further deprogramming.
Yes, that is true. But the traditional way is almost never the best way. 🙂
I’ve always been somewhat of a rebel, so it doesn’t bother me much. I was bullied in school for my open display of whatever religion I was studying at the time—largely Wicca/Paganism. So, I quickly learned not to care what other people thought, and that they really had no idea what was best for me.
I’d look at whether you are wanting approval from others. That’s one of the four major wants from The Sedona Method®, and I find them to be helpful for looking at general themes in our life.
Thanks for your suggestions about the posts. I will do that. I know it’s such a different way of thinking. I had my own experience with this, which I’ll discuss in another post.
The term “preference” needs some clarification in these kinds of discussions. Preference might mean two different kinds of things. Here’s an example:
1. I prefer getting rocky road at the ice cream store, but I’ll still be happy if they’re out of rocky road and I have to eat vanilla instead. I’ll just be slightly less happy than I would have been with the rocky road. Happy, just less happy.
2. I prefer getting rocky road at the ice cream store, but actually, I’ll have exactly the same amount of happiness no matter whether I get rocky road or vanilla. I expect both situations to give me equal happiness.
Now, if we mean the first kind of situation by preference, then preference turns out to just be a milder form of desire. Now we experience our world not as a mash of outcomes of happiness and suffering, but rather as a contrast of varying levels of happiness. It still matters what you wind up getting, because different outcomes result in different levels of happiness. There’s no point at which you feel sad or pained–you’re always happy, but there are things that could have happened that would have resulted in greater happiness. (I take it this is what Christians mean when they talk about varying levels of glory in heaven–everyone is happy, nobody is sorry to be there, no one is envious of other people in heaven, but some people are experiencing even higher levels of happiness in heaven than other people are.) If we mean that preferences are just signaling low versus high levels of happiness, then that fits with a lot of what Abraham says, but it also conflicts a lot with what various enlightenment gurus say about the nature of the Self.
If we mean the second kind of “preference,” then there’s almost no meaning to the issue at all. Preference just means some sort of random choice. On the second option, there’s no reason to care about rocky road at all, since you don’t expect it will make you any happier. It fits better with notions of enlightenment, but it makes the material world rather pointless. Why have two kinds of ice cream at all, if you know you’ll like either one exactly the same? Surely there’s some true and interesting difference between our earthly experiences, or Oneness wouldn’t have bothered breaking up into duality to begin with. There has to be genuine contrast among choices, or else the game doesn’t work.
Hi Lisa,
Unfortunately, language is such a poor way of communicating things. However, I think both examples pass over the central truth we are aiming at. I will see if I can explain more clearly.
The Self is pure Peace and Joy. It needs nothing to be more complete than it is.
You’re seeing things as more or less happy, and that’s a function of ego, to tend to see things as either having or lacking.
But how about this one:
No matter what, you will be perfectly at peace. No matter what, you are complete.
But hey, it would be pretty cool if you could have rocky road.
You have to differentiate between the permanence of who you are, and the temporary nature of emotions.
We are not here for random good emotions. For one who knows the Self, everything is welcome. An emotion is just a bit of energy that passes through.
So if you get rocky road, then there is definitely happiness. But the happiness is temporary, and then subsides. Which you can see from your everyday life, anyway. If you were to go get rocky road ice cream right now, it doesn’t mean you’re going to be happy for the rest of your life, obviously. It is a temporary state.
The “problem” comes in when people crave these temporary highs, because they feel incomplete in themselves.
They need that rocky road ice cream, or that promotion at work, or whatever other goal, like an addict might need a drug. It gives them a temporary high, but soon it is gone.
All that I’m saying is let’s build on a foundation of inner completeness, of absolute Peace and Well-Being.
It doesn’t mean we’re not glad to have happiness passing through. But we’re not going to be any less complete if it doesn’t.
Happiness is really a poor term, because people associate it with both temporary and permanent states. It may have been a poor word-choice to use that in this post, but most people believe they are seeking happiness.
The truth is, there is no word that can describe the reality of living in the Self day-to-day. Happiness makes it sound too cheap. Peace, while true, doesn’t communicate the extent of it. So, it can be a challenge to aptly describe this.
You said that if everything were equal, it would make the material world pointless.
I disagree. But, I’m going to divide the material world and its relation to us into two main stages:
First, when you believe you need certain things, or need to avoid others.
In that state, the material world is here primarily to trigger your resistance, so that you can release it and uncover more of the Self. It is here for your freedom.
Secondly, once you no longer have attachments or aversions to it, then it is here for, well, more or less the heck of it.
Hindus have this term called lila. It’s basically divine playfulness. It’s their answer to why the world exists. The answer is, essentially, because God felt like creating.
And that’s really how the material world relates to you once you are in this state of complete allowing. Why do you do what you do? For the fun of it.
I think that’s what Abraham points to in a lot of what they talk about, but they completely pass over the first stage. So, when people try to apply their words, they are doing so still from a state of attachment/aversion, and it really doesn’t work.
God didn’t need to create the world. God chose to, just because.
Imagine a child who plays pretend. They don’t need to, but do it for the fun of it. That’s the best correlation I can find.
Once you give up attachments/aversions, then the world is your playground. Until then, you’re bound by your own chains of apparent need.
I hope that makes sense.
I think there will still be a question, “Is it a better state of affairs when the universe is doing lila?” In other words, which is the better existence–a universe in which there is no lila, or a universe in which there is? Or are they equally good states of affairs? If they are equally good, then it turns out it’s arbitrary that the universe is like this. That’s okay, but that means it no longer works to say, “The universe is having a material aspect because lila is so awesome” since it’s equally true that the universe would be just as awesome without lila. There just winds up being no explanation for anything. Again, that’s fine if you like that perspective, but it means a lot of the reasons gurus offer for why things are the way they are don’t work.
I agree with you that terms like happiness can get confusing. Some gurus like to talk about a state beyond happiness, but they still describe it as some kind of positive state. Call it peace, call it joy, call it bliss, call it whatever, but it’s still supposed to be some sort of pleasant or otherwise positive state. (If it’s not positive in at least some respect, I’m not sure why anyone would care about it!) So the question still arises: Is it better to be in the positive enlightened state (call it what you will) or not? Or is it equally good, in all respects, to be enlightened or unenlightened? (Really, according to the gurus, you can’t help but be enlightened since all is one, so we should probably say “knowingly enlightened” or “enlightened with full awareness” instead of just “enlightened.”) If we say, “It’s better in some way to be knowingly enlightened than not,” then there is separation and duality again and a preference that will increase (I won’t say happiness, since that connotes a passing emotion to some people) a positive state of being if satisfied, but will not increase it as much if unsatisfied. (In other words, option 1 in my previous post.) If we say, “It’s not better in any way to be knowingly enlightened than not; they’re equally good states entirely,” (option 2), then there is no point to working towards that–you won’t experience anything more positive than what you’ve already got.
Hi Lisa,
Your comment mainly stems from this misunderstanding: that enlightenment is a state.
Enlightenment is not a state. As you accurately pointed out, if it were a state, then there would be duality: the enlightened state, and the non-enlightened state.
No one becomes enlightened. There’s a story of a one who realizes the Self, but of course, on the absolute level, that never happens.
The issue is when we confuse levels. Is enlightenment preferable to non-enlightenment? You have to ask, to whom do you ask this question?
Because, the ego is never enlightened. The ego is the false “I”. And the only other aspect is pure awareness, which is the Self, which is always enlightened.
The Buddhists have the concept of the gateless gate. A person walks up to the gate, but no person can walk through it. That’s very much like how it is.
And yet I will tell you this: all life leads to enlightenment, on the relative level at least. All souls crave freedom. Freedom is synonymous with enlightenment, because as long as we are subject to ego, then there is bondage, not freedom.
Yes, they point it out as some sort of positive state. And again, language is so dualistic that it is really impossible to describe in any other way.
But I would not say it is a positive state. If there is a positive state, then there can be a negative state.
But enlightenment, or Ultimate Reality, is that which has no opposite.
But, mind will never get this, because mind is built on duality. If I say enlightenment is that which is free, then mind can conceptualize that which is not free.
But I will say, that even when the story of non-freedom / bondage is here, it is only in the larger context of freedom that it arises.
It’s like the actor who plays a role where he is imprisoned. Is he really imprisoned? No, of course not. It’s all a play.
But if he were to for some reason believe in his role, then he would think he was imprisoned. But it was never true. It was only a play.
You are the dreamer. You believe you are a character in the dream. If the character realizes it’s a dream, it’s still a character—not really real. It’s all a story inside the dream. Whether the character realizes it’s a dream, or remains trapped by the illusion, it’s all just a story. It is still a dream either way, and the dreamer is always free.
So, all I’m trying to tell you is that your mind is asking these questions. And, as long as it is asking these questions, you will never get the answers.
Is a universe with lila better than a universe without lila? To answer that question, we would require the dualistic, and therefore egoistic, concepts of “better” and “worse”. It’s just how it is, or at least how it appears to be, since even the story of lila, is just a story.
Enlightenment is actually very anticlimactic. Read any awakened teacher’s story of their awakening and you will see the same thing. Just one moment, the world is one way, and the next, everything changes, but in the subtlest of ways.
Enlightenment is not bliss. Enlightenment is not joy. Because, those are emotions that can come and go. There is certainly bliss and joy for, perhaps, the first several weeks “after” enlightenment (as though time had any meaning here).
But then, there is a grounding back to earth, but now from a totally different vantage point. Instead of being the character, one is now the play itself. One’s own body is no more personal than the body of a total stranger. One has become the All, and now only keeps up the character role because that’s what’s here right now.
Again, it’s impossible to explain. It’s beyond all concepts of positive or negative emotions. The above is the best I can do at the moment.
However, I will say that manifestation becomes extremely effortless post-awakening. Because, one is whole and complete either way. There is no more fear of lack, and no more craving for more.
I guess we must just be talking about two different things. What I meant by enlightenment was sort of a peak experience involving oneness, one that is possible (although rare) to maintain through everyday life. I’ve had occasional experiences like that, but they always felt really good. It was a feeling hard to describe with ordinary words, but it was definitely a good feeling to me. If what is meant by enlightenment here is so beyond concepts that it’s incorrect to say that you feel good during it, then I’m not really interested in pursuing that kind of enlightenment. It may be a very interesting form of enlightenment for some people, but I like the kind that feels great! 🙂 I guess we were just talking about two different things. Maybe we should call mine “lesser enlightenment” or “oneness that feels good” or something. 🙂
Hi Lisa,
I wouldn’t call it lesser enlightenment, but more of a glimpse. I have had glimpses all my life, so I know how it feels very well.
I’m not saying it doesn’t feel good, just that good stops having any kind of meaning.
Most people think enlightenment is a state, like you do. They think it’s something to strive to carry with them, but must be worked towards.
In reality, it just is. Once you’re there, you’re there, and you realize you never weren’t there.
The difference is this: a state can be lost. You had a glimpse, and then the glimpse was over. But, the thing itself… it is eternal.
It’s sort of like this: imagine a candle. It is fire, but a very small demonstration of fire. And then imagine that candle is merged into the Sun. The candle can go out, but the Sun never will (well, eventually, but that’s beyond the analogy 🙂 ).
If you’ve lit that candle, it’s awesome. But the candle can go out. Once you are merged with the Sun, there can be no concept of losing it.
Really, every good feeling is a glimpse of enlightenment, just heavily filtered through ego, and projected outward, so that people think it came from some external phenomenon.
It’s all just degrees of the same thing. 🙂
And I get about not wanting enlightenment yet. There’s a teacher, can’t remember who off the top of my head, who said that if the ego knew what enlightenment really is, it would run far away from it. Because, enlightenment means the death of ego.
That’s another great thing about the world. We have the chance to chase happiness on the outside, until we realize it’s not there. It can go on for lifetimes like this.
Honestly, for you I’d recommend taking the path of pursuing goals. You’ll still come to the same conclusion, because you can’t achieve those goals until you no longer need them to be happy. Once you drop the need for the goal, the goal will come.
All paths lead to the same place. 🙂
This is a monster post! Thank you for taking on this topic and clarifying things. It is to be continued…
“You have simply temporarily looked away from who you really are”- this is what happens to us. It is not that we turn our back on the Creator, it is that we turn away from who we really are. But how are we to know this when so many labels are placed upon us throughout our life- even by our own parents? Our true parent is God and this for me is very soothing. It makes it easier to deal with the ones I have here now, as I was not dealt such a great set, but I chose it. In another dimension, they are probably not even my parents, after all.
So, God was being playful and felt like it. It makes sense, but for this very reason, we should not take things too seriously. The problem with this thinking is that people think you are nuts and you lose friends if you do not think like them I guess all the more reason to make room for new friends, right?
I also remember why I chose B instead of A path. To be playful. When I made that decision, I was playing. I knew things would work out one way or another and I knew the Universe would have my back. In the difficulty of B, however, I regretted not going for A and that led me to misery. I was far, far away from my true self and I went to dark and bad places that led to anxiety and bad things. This is how you can drive yourself crazy. At least with these reminders, I am closer to being on track.
What you wrote in the comment above to answer Lisa’s question is worth going over and another post! 🙂
Hi A.,
Thanks so much for your comment.
Yes, that is true. Egos beget more egos, one could say.
But, the good news is that nothing is wrong with this. Life is always pointing to freedom. Every time you suffer, you realize a bit more that happiness is not found in the world. Eventually, you turn within and see for yourself.
Yeah, you have it. The greatest realization once awakening to the Self is that the Universe is a big joke. It doesn’t take itself seriously, so why should you?
And yeah, people might not be on board with that, because they are listening to their own egos, who take life super seriously. But, that is okay. You will find new people, as you said.
You are always on track. You have always been on track.
So you chose path B in the attitude of lila (playfulness). That’s great, and usually the indication that you’ve chosen the “proper” path, if such a thing exists.
But now you got sucked in by ego stories. “Am I taking the right path? Should I have made a different choice?” The ego will spin around and around in these endless stories if you let it.
What do you have? The present moment. Right here, right now, is there a problem?
Like I said, you can never go wrong. Life is always pointing to freedom. The only reason for the experiences you have right now is to point ever closer to your own freedom. So don’t take the ego stories too seriously.
I agree. Even as I wrote this post, I knew it wasn’t nearly enough, but figured 2,700 words were probably plenty. 😮
What should the post focus on? Maybe, “What Is Happiness, Really?” Or, “The Purpose of the Material World”.
I’d like to hear your take on “The Purpose of the Material World.” The material world gets a terrible rap in enlightenment circles sometimes–it’s described as a boot camp, or a mistake, or a school–something we incarnate into just to see how fast we can get out of it again! haha To me, Oneness wouldn’t use the material world as a way to solve a problem. In my opinion, the material world must have intrinsic value in itself. It’s there because it’s fun.
Maybe in the post, you could explain your statement, “The material world is here primarily to trigger your resistance, so that you can release it and uncover more of the Self.” At first glance, it sounds like that means the Self was sitting around in nonphysical, saying, “Good grief, I’ve got so much resistance! How can I get rid of this stuff? Oh, I know, I’ll make a material world and get rid of it there.” But I’m not sure this is really your perspective. I think maybe you meant what Abraham seems to say (they aren’t totally clear), that the material world provides us with more contrast than just having a nonphysical world. And more contrast means more expansion. (Maybe expansion is what you meant by “uncovering more of the Self,” although it might be just as fair to call it creating more of the Self as uncovering it.) We usually wind up creating some resistance when we encounter contrast–at least at first–but we learn to let go more and more and perhaps someday we enjoy all the contrast without resisting what we don’t prefer. On this view, a world with more contrast and expansion is better than a world with few choices. The material world gives us more contrast and expansion, so that’s why it exists. The purpose of existence is the joy of expansion, although saying that makes it sound more formal than it really is. Really it’s more like, the universe loves expanding more and more and creating more and more, just because that’s fun to it. Like you said, it’s like a pretend game happy children are playing or a song they’re singing–they’re not trying to get happiness, exactly; rather, the game or song is the natural expression of the happiness they’re feeling.
All of this is such a tough topic to handle! It’s interesting to try and unite ideas about LOA with ideas about enlightenment, but it’s been tricky in the past, which is why so few attempt it. But I think more and more of us are willing and able to think deeply about it all, and perhaps we are more psychologically and spiritually ready for the answers than we have been in the past. Thank you for being open to discussion, Brandon and “A”!
Hey Lisa,
Very interesting points.
I will say right off the bat that I disagree significantly with several things Abraham says. I agree with parts, and disagree with parts. So some of what I say you may be able to reconcile with their teachings, but much of it you will not be able to.
Channeling is an odd thing, and it’s not really in the scope of this post, but it is very easy to let one’s own biases and beliefs get in the way. For instance, “Abraham” says that the subconscious doesn’t exist, or at least doesn’t matter. But, that’s categorically untrue, and so a lot of confusion has resulted. My guess is that Esther really doesn’t know much about the subconscious, and her own biases show through when people ask about the subconscious mind. That’s just one example, but just to say that channeled work should always be taken with a grain of salt for that reason.
Just like with enlightened teachers. I used to think that this meant they were infallible. But, they clearly aren’t. There are countless contradictions among awakened teachers. Some say enlightenment can be attained through practice, and others say it is only through the grace of God (I hate that expression, but it’s the one a lot of them use). Really the truth is somewhere in the middle, or actually a both/and that the mind can’t really reconcile.
Anyway, now to your questions. I’ll expound on it briefly (ha, I’m never brief 😛 ), and then more so in a future post.
You say Oneness wouldn’t use the material world to solve a problem. That’s correct, because Oneness sees no problems.
Oneness isn’t trying to solve anything, because there are no problems on the absolute level.
It’s better if you see the whole thing as a game. Something like, “Oh, wouldn’t it be fun if I separated myself into all these apparent beings, and then pretended to find my way back to myself?”
But intrinsic value in itself? No, I don’t think. Though it depends what you mean by intrinsic value.
I’d go back to the two stages I discussed before:
The Universe dreamt up this material world as a way to remind itself of itself, over and over again. It knew that as apparently individual beings, those beings would look for happiness on the outside. And every time they did that, the material world would disappoint, because happiness cannot be found there.
So, eventually they would look within, and discover they are the Universe already.
So it acts as a reminder. It’s sort of like how Abraham says that your resistance will always get bigger the more you ignore it.
Then, there’s the second stage, where it’s the playground for whatever you want to create. You are now the lucid dreamer, and can do whatever you want. Lester Levenson, after his awakening, decided to prove materialism wasn’t a bad thing, and so became a millionaire within 6 months.
Then, he left it all behind. 😛 Just to show how hootless you have to be. You can just as easily leave it all behind as you can keep it. It mattered not at all to him.
See, this is another point where I disagree with Abraham. They say there is always contrast. But to the enlightened individual (talk about a contradiction in terms, lol), there is no contrast. They simply decide, and it is so. It’s raw creation from the Source.
But for those who aren’t totally awakened, when they decide to create something, the Universe brings up their resistance that is blocking the way. That’s why I recommended pursuing goals either way, because the pursuit of that goal will dredge up all the resistance that is in the way of that goal, and which is also in the way of the Light of the Self shining through.
No, I did not mean expansion. The Universe does not expand. The dream might expand, but the Universe is whole and complete as it is. It is absolutely changeless.
So material is not here for expansion. It’s either here to challenge you, so you can come closer to freedom, or then to take whatever shape you want it to.
The reason this universe works so well is because it was set up so that the material would always reflect the state of the mind. If there is chaos, then the world will be chaotic. If there is peace, then it will be peaceful. That’s why it can challenge you, because it is always reflecting your resistance back to you. And, once your resistance is gone, then it will reflect the creation you have formed in your mind.
The mind is a creation tool, once properly used.
I do agree that too many enlightenment teachers condemn the material. I think it is because most of their students are chasing the material so much that they are blind to anything else. But, it’s really just a tool. I see it as our friend, constantly pushing us to the next level.
Again, sorry for the long comment, but I will expand upon this in a post next week.
It is really interesting reading what you write, Brandon. That money example with Lester is also fascinating. Do you think that you personally could reach that state of Lester’s enlightenment in 3 months or less, like he did? You have a lot of knowledge and experiences, so I am wondering whether you think it would be easy for you. Also, is it something you would opt for, or would you rather take a slower route, and for what reasons?
What do you think about people in general, I mean those who are familiar with LOA and believe it? Do you think we could do the same as Lester or not? Also, do you think that that would be good and even possible? I am asking because I really want to know your opinion on this, and also if this is possible, then maybe all of us could drop the resistance way faster than we have ever thought was possible.
Hey Z,
Thanks for your comment. 🙂
I will say this: I think there are two stages of the enlightenment process:
Stage 1 is where you have the actual seeing through of the illusion of separateness. This stage is final and can never completely go away, though one can still get lost in certain ego stories temporarily. But, once that door is opened, it remains opened.
Stage 2 is where you then work through the ego’s stories. In Hinduism they call this your vāsanās, or habitual tendencies.
Byron Katie, after her awakening, took a year to work through all of her resistance.
Lester Levenson, it’s a bit unclear, but I believe he was enlightened soon after he started his search, and then was able to fully liberate himself at the end of those three months. Even after that, though, he said that ego stories would sometimes come to the surface, but they were trivial to dispel.
So with that said, I’ve gone through three distinctive awakenings, each helping me to understand that Beingness, or the Self, better.
The first was when I was 13. It was a pretty minor one, and was more a glimpse than anything. But, it opened my eyes to what was possible.
The second was when I was 22. It was a full-fledged awakening this time, and stuck with me for about 2 or 3 months. However, I had some beliefs that got in the way, such as that it was bad to feel negative emotions, and so I got wrapped back up in ego stories for a while longer.
Then when I was 25, I had my last awakening. This one was the most major of them all, and is really a story for another post. But, that remains with me to this day.
I have not worked through all resistance, though. It’s much easier for me to do so, because I can see through it pretty quickly. But, it’s still a process.
I will say that my manifesting ability really grew after the final awakening. The reason was that I just didn’t care anymore. I didn’t even really know I was manifesting at the time, but it just happened.
So, to answer your question, can it be done in three months? Yes, if you’re very dedicated to it. He did this day in and day out. If he wasn’t sleeping, he was releasing.
I think that for anyone, a year or two is plenty of time, if they have a good teacher. On their own, there are many pitfalls. I think I would have made a lot more progress, sooner, had I had a teacher, but the Universe didn’t seem to want me to have one for some reason.
As to how, mindfulness is the most direct way. I recommend applying mindfulness in every waking moment if possible, to stop taking your thoughts personally. The issue with resistance is that you believe your thoughts. Through mindfulness, you can see it is just a thought, and just passing through.
I also recommend pursuing particular goals, because these will dredge up your resistance much faster. Also go back through your past and dig up memories that are painful, and release the emotional charge on those.
Also regularly meditate on this question: “Who am I?” See if you can find the “I”. You’ll find it is just a thought, like all the others. Once that is seen through, it is near impossible to become lost again.
Brandon, how can we go back to the past and release our emotional resistance to those? What do you suggest? A good cry? How about if those thought come back? use mindfulness and do not take them seriously? A post on this would be great!
I would also like to add that following the four agreements helps a lot. People think they are too simple, which is the beauty of it all. Life really is simple. I have given that book to friends and they just did not get it. I will need to look into the Sedona Method.
When you had your awakenings, did you feel that you were not here? Like you were just visiting or something? I cannot put this into words exactly. This is the best way I can describe it. Just wondering of the “signs and symptoms” so to say are similar with awakening.
Well, if crying comes up, that’s up to you. But that’s more expression than releasing.
It’s more just being mindful of whatever comes up. Acknowledging it is there, giving it permission to be there, without judgment.
I’ll definitely write a post on it. But in essence, my three favorite methods are:
First, mindfulness, if you are able to do so.
Second, The Sedona Method®, which is very similar to mindfulness, with some differences.
Third, The Work of Byron Katie, which is a method of questioning your own beliefs.
Anything that helps you to allow your thoughts fully, while not taking them personally, is perfect.
I wouldn’t say it feels like I’m just visiting, because that would require an “I” to be visiting. It’s more like the whole world is happening within me. It’s this wide open expansive awareness that just is, without judgment.
Thank you again Brandon, for your explanation and suggestions. Especially your recommendation to me to pursue particular goals caught my eye. I happened to listen to Abraham today about multiple passions in life, and that we can choose 1 and focus on it in a way that feels good, and that by releasing the resistance on just one of them, the resistance on many others will be cleared too, like a logjam breaking. I have several big passions in life, but they all got suffocated by resistance, so the excitement on all of them died. It’s no wonder that almost every day my vibration is usually low, since my biggest passions are blocked. I guess I will decide on one of the passions and apply the steps that you mentioned before, to focus on the essence and release the resistance as it comes. 🙂
Sounds like a great idea. Working on goals can be a great way of releasing resistance, especially when it’s a big goal.
You just need to not take the resistance too seriously. Any thought that arises is just your mind’s best guess of what it thinks is possible. But if you let that go, you can make room for much more.
“So you chose path B in the attitude of lila (playfulness). That’s great, and usually the indication that you’ve chosen the “proper” path, if such a thing exists”. Thank you for this. It clarifies a lot. I was in the vortex, so to speak when I made that decision and have since been outside, to use the Abe term, for lack of a better way to say it. You had used another term in a webinar, but it does not come to me at the moment. Of course, all this stuff is felt, but I am trying my best to explain in words.
Well, you know, in this world, we have a path and follow it as a straight line and yada-yada-yada. Straying from it, being playful and all that are frowned upon, at least in my experience. Which is weird because people sure do spend a lot of money on entertainment, and they skimp on other things, so they are seeking.
It will most likely be a series of posts, I would say. I think you should write posts focusing on both those titles. They will pretty much express the same thing, but for us, it will keep clarifying this thing and we need to repeat it anyway in our further deprogramming.
Yes, that is true. But the traditional way is almost never the best way. 🙂
I’ve always been somewhat of a rebel, so it doesn’t bother me much. I was bullied in school for my open display of whatever religion I was studying at the time—largely Wicca/Paganism. So, I quickly learned not to care what other people thought, and that they really had no idea what was best for me.
I’d look at whether you are wanting approval from others. That’s one of the four major wants from The Sedona Method®, and I find them to be helpful for looking at general themes in our life.
Thanks for your suggestions about the posts. I will do that. I know it’s such a different way of thinking. I had my own experience with this, which I’ll discuss in another post.
Just want to say I’m enjoying these recent posts, Brandon. I’ve been without internet or phone for over a week due to a house move and it was nice to get back online and find these fascinating discussions. Though I get a touch confused about the idea that we are “All that is” rubbing up against the concept that the world was created by God being playful. I relate to that idea, as I find humour and play to be the great joys of life. But, if we are All that is, then that must include God, surely? Therefore we are the ones who are playfully creating the world, not some outside ‘God’. I must admit I haven’t got my head fully round Non-Duality. . . 😉
Thanks so much for your comments, Jon. 🙂
Yes, the word God can be quite overloaded. No, it’s not some outside force.
It’s not to say, “all of us”, either, though. Not in the way we think of it.
Non-duality means you are That—God, the Universe, the Self, the All That Is. It is all synonymous.
You are not a part of Oneness, but you are Oneness itself.
But Oneness has appeared to divide itself up into Jon, into Brandon, into Lisa, etc.
Of course, this is just an apparent division. Oneness is always one. 🙂
As Jon, you are just an ego. You have little power as the little “I”.
As the Self, though, the “I AM” awareness, you have infinite power.
The more you realize your identity with the Self, the more freedom you have, and the more power to create reality.
But that’s why I differentiated in the post between ego manifesting and Self manifesting.
When you think you need a goal, that’s the ego talking.
Once you realize your inherent freedom, just even a little bit, then you can powerfully create as the Self.
Thank you again Brandon, for your explanation and suggestions. Especially your recommendation to me to pursue particular goals caught my eye. I happened to listen to Abraham today about multiple passions in life, and that we can choose 1 and focus on it in a way that feels good, and that by releasing the resistance on just one of them, the resistance on many others will be cleared too, like a logjam breaking. I have several big passions in life, but they all got suffocated by resistance, so the excitement on all of them died. It’s no wonder that almost every day my vibration is usually low, since my biggest passions are blocked. I guess I will decide on one of the passions and apply the steps that you mentioned before, to focus on the essence and release the resistance as it comes. 🙂
Sounds like a great idea. Working on goals can be a great way of releasing resistance, especially when it’s a big goal.
You just need to not take the resistance too seriously. Any thought that arises is just your mind’s best guess of what it thinks is possible. But if you let that go, you can make room for much more.
Just want to say I’m enjoying these recent posts, Brandon. I’ve been without internet or phone for over a week due to a house move and it was nice to get back online and find these fascinating discussions. Though I get a touch confused about the idea that we are “All that is” rubbing up against the concept that the world was created by God being playful. I relate to that idea, as I find humour and play to be the great joys of life. But, if we are All that is, then that must include God, surely? Therefore we are the ones who are playfully creating the world, not some outside ‘God’. I must admit I haven’t got my head fully round Non-Duality. . . 😉
Thanks so much for your comments, Jon. 🙂
Yes, the word God can be quite overloaded. No, it’s not some outside force.
It’s not to say, “all of us”, either, though. Not in the way we think of it.
Non-duality means you are That—God, the Universe, the Self, the All That Is. It is all synonymous.
You are not a part of Oneness, but you are Oneness itself.
But Oneness has appeared to divide itself up into Jon, into Brandon, into Lisa, etc.
Of course, this is just an apparent division. Oneness is always one. 🙂
As Jon, you are just an ego. You have little power as the little “I”.
As the Self, though, the “I AM” awareness, you have infinite power.
The more you realize your identity with the Self, the more freedom you have, and the more power to create reality.
But that’s why I differentiated in the post between ego manifesting and Self manifesting.
When you think you need a goal, that’s the ego talking.
Once you realize your inherent freedom, just even a little bit, then you can powerfully create as the Self.
B.I.N.G.O.
Your words ring the same bells Alan Watts and Jiddu Krishnamurti wanted us to hear more than 60 years ago.
Well done, its certainly difficult to articulate these concepts in any manageable form.
My only issue is tying it to the law of attraction, or any law for that matter.
Are not laws just conventions of explanation and understanding created by man to hold some understanding or control over life?
If one moves beyond the pull of Ego, but gains “power” is that not just another pursuit for control?
Once again, really well done. I find it so hard to find this discussed in life, especially at this depth.
In the effortless acceptance of now, one truly IS NOT and therefore IS complete… or so I have observed.