It's the future, Jim, but not as we know it...

There's more to tomorrow than robots, flying cars, and a faster internet.
22C+ is all about Deep Futures, futures that matter. Welcome to futures fantastic, unexpected, profound, but most of all deeply meaningful...

Saturday, June 19, 2010

The Law of Attraction (2)


Marcus T Anthony's new web site and blog can be found at
BTW, I wrote my most recent take on the law of attraction in an ebook called "A More Attractive Law of Attraction", which covers some of the ideas written here, but in much more detail. Marcus

What do I really know about the law of attraction? The answer is not as much as I would like, to tell you the truth. Many of the apparently metaphysical things I write about on 22c+ are written with good authority, and with little self doubt. For example, all the stuff about energy projection, telepathic perception, sensing the future, spiritual guidance and even life after death, are written from repeated first hand experience. They are everyday occurrences for me, and I have no problem writing about them; no more than I’d have an issue discussing, say, how to write a resume (which I’ve done many times). The only issue for you, then, as the blog reader, is to sense whether I am communicating valuable information, or whether I am mistaken, deluded, or maybe even insane. I’ll leave that up to you to decide.

The law of attraction is a different matter, as it is an abstract concept, and understanding if -or how - it works is difficult. I want to make clear that my comments about the law of attraction are thus conditional. My understanding may change in the future. The insights that you see here on this page emerge from my direct experience (successes and failures), and also from reading my energy of the degree of truth of any given statement. I read the energy by getting an intuitive feeling for the truth of a statement, and also by double checking its voracity using the Quick Check, which I outlined in Sage of Synchronicity. Clearly, once we get into discussions about consciousness and manifestation, we cannot rely on science, as to my knowledge there have been no scientific experiments to test the law of attraction (there is, however controversial indirect evidence, such as tests for telekinesis, or mind over matter).

Given these considerations, here are a few more distinctions about the law of attraction which I think are crucial, but which I didn’t cover yesterday.

Firstly, the idea that we attract what we are, not what we want, does not mean that we cannot attract what we want. Logically, when what we want overlaps with who we are at a deeper level, then such attraction or manifestation is possible. 

Conversely, if something we desire does not resonate with our Spirit, it is not likely that holding it with conscious intention will make it happen. I recently wrote about my attempt to gain an academic post at a top Asian university, even though I felt it was not right. I decided to use the law of attraction anyway, rather stubbornly. I did get invited the university for four days, all expenses paid, so it seemed at a logical level that my chances were good. I imagined myself being in that position, going to work, being there just as if it was already happening, then releasing the vision to God, just as the law of attraction gurus suggest. As mentioned, I didn’t get the position. What I did do, however, was create a lot of suffering for myself, as I had become deeply attached to the idea of working there. An expectation had built up within me, and a great sense of disappoint thus followed when I didn’t get what I wanted.

It does concern me that this idea – that some goals do not resonate with the spirit – is rarely brought forward in discussions on the law of attraction. This failure leads me to suspect that many such discussions are an attempt to sell the idea to a gullible public that wants to believe it, rather than to disseminate accurate information.

Another distinction is the idea of consciousness fields, and especially levels of consciousness. Consciousness does evolve, and as this evolution occurs, the propensity for unconditional love increases. People who reduce or eliminate the dramas of the ego are less likely to attract the troublesome dramas of those at lower levels of consciousness. Psychologically immature individuals tend to react emotionally to the slings and arrows of life’s misfortunes, increasing the tendency for conflict and suffering.

Karma is a fact of human existence, and this is crucial in understanding the law of attraction. Karma is the universe’s self-correction mechanism. It is not designed to punish, but to help you evolve. There may be a requirement for you to experience events which are helpful for your evolution, but which you typically would not consciously desire.

Recently I attended a New Age fair in Hong Kong. During the previous fair I did quite well, and a lot of people sought my spiritual guidance. I also sold quite a few copies of Sage of Synchronicity. So this time around, I got a bigger table, paying more money, of course. 

On the morning of the fair, I awoke, and as I felt the energy of the day ahead, I got that same feeling of hopelessness that I got when I attended the previously mentioned interview. It just felt like there was no energy there. I put this out of my mind, as it was illogical. I was a spiritual counselor attending a New Age fair that had been successful for me previously. 

When I set up at the hall, something very strange happened. Nobody came to see me. As people walked into the hall, they walked straight passed me as if I didn’t exist, instead preferring the tarot card readers, the monks reading prayers, or the trinket stalls. In fact it was six hours before anyone sat down to seek guidance with me. Not a single person bought my book.

From the egos point of view this was an embarrassing failure. However, as the day unfolded, I tried not to judge it. That night, I had several dreams about some issues with my father, and some strong lingering guilt I had over having stolen loose change around the house from time to time. One day I grabbed some money from my father’s draw, thinking it was five dollars. Only later did I realise it was actually $50! I was terrified that I would get caught and punished, and the sense of guilt was palpable. ‘Fortunately’, my father was extremely careless with cash, and he never realised the money was missing. 

The energy of that event still lingered in my mind almost thirty years later. What I then did was allow myself to connect with that part of myself, and ‘re-parent’ it. I also connected with my father’s consciousness, and told him how sorry I was. That was not as simple as it sounds, as there was quite a bit of emotional pain and sorrow involved.

This anecdote should tell you something. Sometimes when we don’t get what we consciously want, we are getting what the soul needs. A prime attractor of the soul is healing, for the latent wounds in your soul hold you back from manifesting your highest soul purpose – your Bliss. And to heal it you have to feel it. 

So, when you see people suffering, it is not necessarily a ‘bad’ thing. From the limited perspective of the ego, you cannot see the greater purpose. If you had seen me sitting there all by my lonesome self at the New Age fair, you might have felt sorry for me. But what was happening was a gift, and pity was unnecessary.

A further important point is that as the soul evolves into higher levels of spiritual maturity, there is a surrendering to divine ‘will’. Thus whatever unfolds, the spiritually mature individual will not resist it. This is what Wayne Dyer did with his difficulties, such as his having a heart attack, getting a divorce and contracting leukemia. 

There is yet another very important distinction, and this is perhaps the most important understanding when attempting to apply the law of attraction. If you see the law of attraction as part of a greater spiritual evolution, there may be a conflict set up within your psyche. It is well known by deep explorers of the psyche that desire typically stems from the ego, as it tends to be restless and seeks to find fulfillment through external satiations. The unfolding of higher spiritual awareness occurs in conjunction with a reduction in desire. In fact, in higher states of consciousness, all desire ceases. In states of perfect presence, there is no desire – for if one is desiring, then one is projecting into an imagined future. Therefore desire dies, because the fleeting satisfaction of achieving worldly goals seems worthless when compared to the bliss of spiritual fulfillment.

Of course, if you are reading this blog, it is unlikely that you are a spiritual master currently existing in a state of bliss. You are probably a relatively normal human being, with hopes and dreams, who wants to continue to live in the world as best you can. I see no problem with that, and I myself do precisely this. So, considering that we are not enlightened masters, the focus of the law of attraction as a spiritual unfolding then becomes to learn the correct relationship with the ego, developing an awareness of what paths and goals bring you closer to your Bliss, and which serve your spirit and the greater good of all. To do this, it is important to develop a process which brings you into a more intimate relationship with your own spirit. The Field exercise, mentioned a couple of days ago on 22c+, is one such process. Meditative exercises, yoga, tai chi, inner child work and so on may all help. Ultimately, whatever awareness you develop has to be brought into everyday life, otherwise it is a simply spiritual ritual.

To be honest, my focus in life has never been on material prosperity or making money. This is one of the reasons why I cannot claim to be a master of the law of attraction. I have only ever once tried to use my spiritual perception to make money, and that was about a year ago when I transferred some money from one currency to another, and read the energy on the right timing, to get the best exchange rate. My reading was that the best timing would be about four months later, so I waited till that time, and then transferred the cash. I then read the energy on the best time to transfer the money back into the original currency.

I made a profit of about 40% of the value of the original amount of money. Compare that to the puny interest rate which that unmentionable bank was giving me for the great privilege of keeping my hard-earned cash with them. That rate, supposedly is 1%, but for some reason they have never been able to explain, the amount of money that ends up in my account is more like about 0.001% per annum. Last month when I was in at the bank I got a printed account statement from the bank teller, and noted that my interest for the month was 0.25 Hong Kong dollars, or about four American cents. I was tempted to ask “Do you mock me, Madam?” But no, I just smiled remembering how much money I’d made with my recent intuitive money transfers.

So I see no reason why Integrated Intelligence cannot be used to make money. The one issue though is that such an attempt will probably result in the ego becoming attached to the outcome.

These things are for your contemplation.



  1. Great post, Marcus. I think you're right about what happens when we don't consciously get what we want - the souls gets what it needs.

  2. I very much agree with what is written here. I have always found when I try really hard at something and feel attached to the outcome - it never is what I'd hoped. But when I concentrate on working on myself - most everything else falls into place. Letting go of the outcome is so important.

  3. Your blog posts have become one of my most enjoyable and informative reads of the day, so I appreciate all your insights. I especially like your take on "Law of Attraction." The way it was presented in "The Secret" had what I felt were kernals of truth, but the focus on materialistic desires was a major turn-off.

    In my experience, manifesting certain desires did not always result in what I thought I had wanted, but what my soul needed. I wish that the makers of "The Secret" would have mentioned this aspect more, since that "documentary" had mass exposure to the public at large (thanks in part to Oprah's big influence).

    An example of manifesting something I wanted that turned out different--but better for me--was that in the 1990s, I really wanted to be on MTV's "The Real World" series. What I got instead, was an internship experience through my university in their Washington, D.C. Seminar program. I got to live among fellow participants for a four month period, dealing with much of the same issues as the cast of "The Real World", but without the cameras present. It was exactly what my soul wanted. The universe gave me the experience I wanted, rather than just fulfilling my fantasy desire to be on a reality show. I gained close friendships and had the best four months of my life because of that experience.

  4. Good that you got what you "needed", Sansego. Sometimes we want stuff we don't really need. I didn't really need that job at that university, for example. If I'd gotten it I'd not be producing books and papers for them that are basically irrelevant to anybody except themselves. In my current job I am well paid and get plenty of free time for my writing and other work - perfect!

  5. What does science tell about the Law of Attraction? It tells that LoA doesn’t work. Do you need a proof by scientific evidence? Read this:
    But if you are a hard die believer in LoA, affected by cognitive bias, then please refuse to believe in science. For instance refuse to believe that your personal computer was built by using science knowledge, refuse to believe in Newton gravity law, refuse to believe in scientific evidence in general. Program your brain with positive thinking like a robot. Don’t accept your feelings as they are. Don’t love yourself as you are. Throw your life experience and your own judgment into the trash. Never desire to save your emotions. Thanks for reading.

  6. The great irony, anonymous, is that you have not read what I wrote. My approach is more rational than yours, which is to apply the principles practically, and to remain open to experience and evidence. Your approach seems to be to try to aggressively dictate what others think and understand.

    By the way, this is such a problematic area as far as science goes, that all you can say is that such-and-such researcher concluded so-and-so, given the following methodological or philosophical approach. The same goes for all research into connections between mind and cosmos. However, the evidence that mind is not confined to the brain is now beyond any reasonable doubt. This is not the same thing as saying the law of attraction is real. But it should lead to one to consider the possibility that there is some truth behind it.

    Research into the nature and origins of consciousness remains embryonic, regardless of those who insist on making definitive claims to the contrary.

    For the record, I am no advocate of the law of attraction as it appears in most new age literature. e.g.

  7. Hi Mr Anonymous (not sure why anonymity is required while discussing this issue, but I do digress).

    As you are well aware, there are counter arguments for all the points you make. Any rational take on many of these subject matters has to acknowledge that consciousness - and many of the specific points you raise - remain highly contentious matters. There's plenty of evidence that consciousness is non-localised. I could provide links, but I suspect that you are already aware of the players and the debates.

    I have never argued that quantum physics provides a basis for understanding non-local consciousness. I simply point out that non-locality in physics indicates that the non-locality of mind is not unique in nature. It is not "extraordinary".

    As for myself, my understanding of consciousness is mostly derived from two decades of intense first-person exploration and introspection. I have worked with many other brilliant people too, including many with very advanced cognitive capacities. They taught me a great deal about the nature of mind.

    All this taught me things that you simply cannot comprehend the full spectrum of consciousness by reading papers, reading books, debating issues, analysing data or conducting experiments. Without first-person work you will never gain the insight and experience required to understand the human mind. The way 21st century people are conditioned and trained to employ their cognitive faculties (including you) produces highly constrained and unbalanced minds largely incapable of accessing essential and fundamental cognitive functions. Unfortunately these cognitive abilities are the very mental processes that allow us to perceive and understand the non-local nature of mind.

    I was once similarly unbalanced, but over the years I worked up the courage to explore the mind at a deeper level. It has been an incredibly demanding and terrifying process. But that is the price many have to pay for doing this kind of work. The resistance from mind/ego is great. But it is possible.

    There is little or no reward from society, and the professional price for discussing the subject matter can be great. This is why so few embark upon the journey, and even fewer have the courage to stick to it.

    What about you, Mr Anonymous? Are you prepared to let go and explore the human psyche at its incredible depth? Are you willing to surrender control and surrender to forces beyond the control of mind (as you currently experience it)?


  8. Thanks for your reply.
    What you said is very impressive, but I would have been happier if you gave me any direct proofs of your statements about the non-localised nature of mind. So far I've not found any direct evidence of your statements, but findings suggest the opposite. Thus, how could I trust you? At least scientific articles are based on empirical workbench. What you said could have the same value of the words said by a shaman or a magician. Everybody can say what they want, but how can we verify the truth? If you say that you have a inner circle knowledge about this issue, then you are very lucky. Suddendly I can only trust my own humble rationality because I've not received the gift of innate knowledge yet. But as you know I can't trust people merely because of their words. Should I? Nevertheless I've had plenty of lucid dreams and out of body experiences without any proof of something outside the realm of mind. Am I guilty because I try to find answers based on scientific evidence? If you have an objective proof of your statements, then please share it with the world. Otherwise, please, do not pretend to convince people to believe in your "inner truth".

    Science looks more fancy than the speculation of many narcisistic holistic people. So far the real “magic power” of mind has been intelligence and imagination, which leaded us to the moon and made our dreams true. It seems no “quantum vibrations” connected by the “infinite intelligence” of the universe coming from our brain.

    Please, let scientists make their own commendable work. For the sake of the truth, for the evolution of our species and our culture,please, don’t mix science with mystical woo.




  9. Well there won't be a lot of listening going on while you keep fighting an imagined enemy and making judgments like "narcissistic holistic people" and "woo", and setting up unnecessary dichotomies like "science vs other". In deep states of silent presence there is a dissipation of identification of self, which is the opposite of narcissism. It also brings forward the realisation that all judgment is an act of violence, the mind's attempt to make sure its belief structures are not threatened by information and concepts which contradict it. Experience of such things is required to understand them deeply.

    The term "woo" is the most derogatory term employed by hardcore sceptics groups. I prefer to engage people who are interested in listening, because listening is the most significant aspect of deeper knowing. It is a knowing which begins with an admission that "I don't know."

    And by that I do not mean listening to me.


  10. Marcus,
    this is my last reply, and of course I'll leave you the last word.
    You will always have all my respect. I have no intentions to treat you as an enemy. I'm just trying to give my contribution for the search of the truth. I realize that your inner knowledge has been gained in about 20 years and it was an hard assignment. But you have not a way to share such knowledge objectively. After all your efforts, all that you have been able to do was writing a couple of books and stating that you have reached a inner truth that can't be shared. I should spend 20 years for hoping to understand what you mean. Of course I'm noone for blaming you, but I would have used all this time for taking at least a couple of degrees and doing scientific research. At least this way my knowledge could have been shared by everybody, objectively. Our history is already full of people who gave a message to humanity. Lots of guru all over. But it seems that, after all, people have not been able to be awakened yet. Do you think that you'll make the difference? I wish you so. However, unless you don't believe in sciences, last findings contradict what you said.

    Good luck my friend.


  11. Thanks for being polite. I have done research. I have a PHD in Policy Studies, centred on applications of intelligence theory. I have written scores of academic papers and book chapters.

    These days I prefer to teach people how to be present, and how to apply intuitive intelligence practically. Our education systems already teach people how to use the intellect - to analyse, quantify, classify, experiment and so on. But they teach nothing about the intuitive mind. I'm not against any of these cognitive modalities. I simply acknowledge their strengths and their limitations. You cannot analyse or quantify a deeper awareness of consciousness. You can only analyse and quantify the surface structures of the physical system and behaviour.

    So yes, I can teach people the processes, and I do so regularly in workshops. But what they discover from that point onwards is not in my hands.