Law of attraction?

Whether you're exploring Buddhism for the first time or you're already on the path, feel free to ask questions of any kind here.

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby Paul » Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:27 pm

With crap like "the law of attraction" even a little critical thinking shows it's nonsense. How come people can starve to death? Don't they want food strongly enough? Are they sabotaging themselves by secretly wanting to starve to death?

It's a sad indictment of our modern culture that this could get any kind of traction.
This nature of mind is spontaneously present.
That spontaneity I was told is the dakini aspect.
Recognizing this should help me
Not to be stuck with fear of being sued.

-Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche
User avatar
Paul
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby futerko » Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:51 pm

I suspect that many of the posts here are seeing only the crude form which really comes under the heading "wishful thinking", rather than the useful way in which this "law" can be applied.

It really derives from the sort of "life coaching" method, using creative visualization in a way that is not dissimilar to Buddhist visualization, but the real difference is that it is used for worldly acquisition rather than to cultivate e.g. compassion or loving kindness.

To place this method in context - if you want to be a millionaire, it is clearly not enough to sit at home wishing, but the idea is that if you get into the mind-set of the millionaire and start to look and act the part then it will be easier.
An old ex-friend of mine once bought a car which was at the very limit of his budget on the basis that people would think he was more successful than if he turned up in his previous 10 year old rust bucket.

Clearly the logic of this is to make the world a far worse place, and is almost the opposite of Buddhism solely on the fact that it promotes the 8 worldly dharmas.
On the level of "technique" there are many similarities, but the "law of attraction" is uncritical in promoting personal material gain, and so is the opposite of skilful means.
we cannot get rid of God because we still believe in grammar - Nietzsche
User avatar
futerko
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:58 am

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby Nemo » Thu Oct 31, 2013 12:04 am

futerko wrote:I suspect that many of the posts here are seeing only the crude form which really comes under the heading "wishful thinking", rather than the useful way in which this "law" can be applied.

It really derives from the sort of "life coaching" method, using creative visualization in a way that is not dissimilar to Buddhist visualization, but the real difference is that it is used for worldly acquisition rather than to cultivate e.g. compassion or loving kindness.

To place this method in context - if you want to be a millionaire, it is clearly not enough to sit at home wishing, but the idea is that if you get into the mind-set of the millionaire and start to look and act the part then it will be easier.
An old ex-friend of mine once bought a car which was at the very limit of his budget on the basis that people would think he was more successful than if he turned up in his previous 10 year old rust bucket.

Clearly the logic of this is to make the world a far worse place, and is almost the opposite of Buddhism solely on the fact that it promotes the 8 worldly dharmas.
On the level of "technique" there are many similarities, but the "law of attraction" is uncritical in promoting personal material gain, and so is the opposite of skilful means.


This is a scam I call "entitlement". It works and I admit I have done it myself. Acting entitled may be powerful and gets short term results but an ethical life is a much more profound magical act.
User avatar
Nemo
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:23 am
Location: Canada

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby Alfredo » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:04 am

Like I wrote in the "Law of Vibration" thread, any time you see "Law of ____" language used for some woo thing, its origin is likely to lie in the American New Thought movement. Despite being rank nonsense, the idea made its way into evangelical Protestantism in the form of the "Prosperity Gospel" so beloved of American TV evangelists (spit!), as well as much "self-help" literature.
(no longer participating on this board)
Alfredo
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:52 am

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby takso » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:49 am

futerko wrote:I suspect that many of the posts here are seeing only the crude form which really comes under the heading "wishful thinking", rather than the useful way in which this "law" can be applied.


Fully agreed. The clear fact here is that one cause is never enough to bring about an effect. A cause must, at the same time, be an effect, and every effect must also be the cause of something else. Therefore, one has to understand well on the scenario of cause and condition as per Buddhism. The rule of thumb here is that we shall not reject something just because initially we do not understand it. By patiently learning and investigating, something that we previously did not understand can start to make sense. In other words, one has to gain the knowledge first and then apply the understanding and the experience with common sense and insight – that is wisdom.
~ Ignorance triumphs when wise men do nothing ~
User avatar
takso
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 11:08 am

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby greentara » Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:31 am

If you say coochie coo to a baby and it smiles back....well maybe thats the law of attraction.
greentara
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:03 am

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby Qing Tian » Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:12 am

:smile:


What :shrug:
“Not till your thoughts cease all their branching here and there, not till you abandon all thoughts of seeking for something, not till your mind is motionless as wood or stone, will you be on the right road to the Gate.”
User avatar
Qing Tian
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 12:18 pm

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby manas » Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:35 am

My understanding of this latest New Age notion is that we are all supposedly sending out a 'signal' to the 'universe' that in real time 'creates' our current reality. Literally. Obviously this signal is not completely under our conscious control, otherwise terrible things would not be happening to people who do not consciously wish for such things, such as getting maimed, raped, etc. But I suspect their argument is that, deep down, on a subconscious level, that those people have some 'core belief' or whatever that they are deserving of this happening to them, and so it does. An interesting theory, but as has been pointed out, in dire want of evidence. Furthermore, I don't think that 'the Universe' would merely take into account the intention a person has for themselves (as in, 'i want this') but would also surely take into account the intention that person has for their fellow beings, and what they actually do for their fellow human beings. I don't think a person broadcasting the signal 'I am wealthy and abundant in all that I do' is going to given great wealth, no matter how deeply they believe this, if in their day to day actions, they literally deprive others of the same, ie their wealth (such as greedy hedge-fund investors and the like). The law of kamma makes much more rational sense - you reap what you sow. Simple. Wealth acquired via honest hard work, or via generousity in the past, is one thing, but if acquired by stepping on and depriving others, it could only lead to future suffering. No matter how 'positively' one thinks, actions speak louder than words, and can often reveal an underlying motivation, either based on good or on evil, which will surely bear fruit accordingly.

:namaste:
manas
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 6:07 am

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby futerko » Thu Oct 31, 2013 4:03 am

manas wrote:My understanding of this latest New Age notion is that we are all supposedly sending out a 'signal' to the 'universe' that in real time 'creates' our current reality. Literally. Obviously this signal is not completely under our conscious control, otherwise terrible things would not be happening to people who do not consciously wish for such things, such as getting maimed, raped, etc. But I suspect their argument is that, deep down, on a subconscious level, that those people have some 'core belief' or whatever that they are deserving of this happening to them, and so it does. An interesting theory, but as has been pointed out, in dire want of evidence. Furthermore, I don't think that 'the Universe' would merely take into account the intention a person has for themselves (as in, 'i want this') but would also surely take into account the intention that person has for their fellow beings, and what they actually do for their fellow human beings. I don't think a person broadcasting the signal 'I am wealthy and abundant in all that I do' is going to given great wealth, no matter how deeply they believe this, if in their day to day actions, they literally deprive others of the same, ie their wealth (such as greedy hedge-fund investors and the like). The law of kamma makes much more rational sense - you reap what you sow. Simple. Wealth acquired via honest hard work, or via generousity in the past, is one thing, but if acquired by stepping on and depriving others, it could only lead to future suffering. No matter how 'positively' one thinks, actions speak louder than words, and can often reveal an underlying motivation, either based on good or on evil, which will surely bear fruit accordingly.

:namaste:


Well, there is the idea we have of what the subconscious really is. The Freudian idea, somewhat in common with the new-agey one is about some kind of ethereal energy - the "unthought" for want of a better term, but this has been reinterpreted in terms of language, which leads to a theory very much like the Buddhist ideas of interconnectedness, conceptuality, and karma as mental action.

Although you say that "actions speak louder than words" in fact we are governed by language (animals can perform actions, but humans have the capacity to conceptualize and verbalize), and the unconscious becomes viewed as a result of that which is excluded by performing a conceptual/verbal action or making a judgement - drawing a line around something and isolating it from the interconnected "whole".

So, for example, the use of visualization in something like sports psychology is more about working with our internal dialogue than about broadcasting any signal on a "woo-woo" level.
we cannot get rid of God because we still believe in grammar - Nietzsche
User avatar
futerko
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:58 am

Re: Law of attraction?

Postby greentara » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:16 pm

qing Tian, Law of attraction. What is it? The question is how can you know or be sure what it is? As I have no idea what the answer is. I say whats life without whimsy.
greentara
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:03 am

Previous

Return to Exploring Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

>