I agree with many of the statements and observations made here, but please allow me to offer a slightly different way to look at the Law of Attraction..
It seems to me that the Law of Attraction is quite akin to the law of gravity (yes, here comes another of my analogies, sorry but I can't help it). Any two objects have an attractive force that is related to their masses divided by the square of their distances. So if only two things existed in the universe, one could easily compute how long it would take for the two to come together. But alas, there are many, many more than two things in the universe, so it is difficult to compute exactly when or even if two objects will meet, even though they are attracted. Interestingly though, the macroscopic effect of gravitation among a bunch of objects can be fairly easily determined by looking at the largest and/or the closest objects.
So applying this to the LoA is fairly straightforward. The extent to which the law works is related to the strength of the desire (or mass) and how far removed the desired item, experience, etc. is from the one desiring it (the square of the distance). Complicating this equation is the fact that more distant things are more likely to be affected by other people's desires (and quite complicated interactions can quickly occur). Those things that are most easily attracted are those that we most desire and are closest to us. So one can aid the LoA by increasing desire (mass), but much more so by changing our proximity to the goal. This is why we are told that the best way to make something we want appear in our lives is to start living as though it were already present. By doing so we are moving our lives closer to the desired state. In fact, if we do it properly, our lives become like a canvas on which there is an empty spot that then acts like a vacuum further pulling the thing desired toward us. This is exactly what I see happening in Taha's example. He "creates the space" (vacuum) in which the desired state can manifest (remember no two things can occupy the same space at the same time... so ask yourself first "where will I put this once I get it"), and this then acts as an even stronger attractor to bring it forth. Similarly, by conditioning the mind, one becomes better and better at focusing our desire on the end state, thus increasing the effective mass of our desire.
Pre-incarnative decisions could be viewed as immovable objects that are between us and our desire. No matter how great the attraction, or short the distance, it will never be able to manifest. By the same token, if something is fairly close to you but there are a number of other entities around that desire it also, you will have to have a stronger desire and/or move closer, faster than the others to get it (think winning the lottery).
Taha also mentions the effect that I would call the Law of unintended consequences (sorry Taha, couldn't resist creating another law
). These consequences could be beneficial or detrimental, but they usually occur. Thus the old adage "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it." In my experience, the detrimental effects can be minimized by expressing your desires related to the manifestation of whatever provides the "greatest good" or "greatest benefit" to all involved. But bear in mind also, that "greatest good" may include a painful but beneficial life lesson. I'm sure that Taha can share some of those as well.
Love and Light,
3D Sunset
It seems to me that the Law of Attraction is quite akin to the law of gravity (yes, here comes another of my analogies, sorry but I can't help it). Any two objects have an attractive force that is related to their masses divided by the square of their distances. So if only two things existed in the universe, one could easily compute how long it would take for the two to come together. But alas, there are many, many more than two things in the universe, so it is difficult to compute exactly when or even if two objects will meet, even though they are attracted. Interestingly though, the macroscopic effect of gravitation among a bunch of objects can be fairly easily determined by looking at the largest and/or the closest objects.
So applying this to the LoA is fairly straightforward. The extent to which the law works is related to the strength of the desire (or mass) and how far removed the desired item, experience, etc. is from the one desiring it (the square of the distance). Complicating this equation is the fact that more distant things are more likely to be affected by other people's desires (and quite complicated interactions can quickly occur). Those things that are most easily attracted are those that we most desire and are closest to us. So one can aid the LoA by increasing desire (mass), but much more so by changing our proximity to the goal. This is why we are told that the best way to make something we want appear in our lives is to start living as though it were already present. By doing so we are moving our lives closer to the desired state. In fact, if we do it properly, our lives become like a canvas on which there is an empty spot that then acts like a vacuum further pulling the thing desired toward us. This is exactly what I see happening in Taha's example. He "creates the space" (vacuum) in which the desired state can manifest (remember no two things can occupy the same space at the same time... so ask yourself first "where will I put this once I get it"), and this then acts as an even stronger attractor to bring it forth. Similarly, by conditioning the mind, one becomes better and better at focusing our desire on the end state, thus increasing the effective mass of our desire.
Pre-incarnative decisions could be viewed as immovable objects that are between us and our desire. No matter how great the attraction, or short the distance, it will never be able to manifest. By the same token, if something is fairly close to you but there are a number of other entities around that desire it also, you will have to have a stronger desire and/or move closer, faster than the others to get it (think winning the lottery).
Taha also mentions the effect that I would call the Law of unintended consequences (sorry Taha, couldn't resist creating another law
). These consequences could be beneficial or detrimental, but they usually occur. Thus the old adage "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it." In my experience, the detrimental effects can be minimized by expressing your desires related to the manifestation of whatever provides the "greatest good" or "greatest benefit" to all involved. But bear in mind also, that "greatest good" may include a painful but beneficial life lesson. I'm sure that Taha can share some of those as well.Love and Light,
3D Sunset