I realize that I am a bit late to the party, but...

I am reminded in so many ways of how many things I have gotten involved in, or purchases I have made, with the promise that "it will change your life," but without so much as a hint of the necessary commitment required from me in order to receive the benefits.

Essentially it is a bait-and-switch. Potential recruits, whether they be for a religion or for a multi-level-marketing company, are told how great it will be from the start, but when it comes to the price they must be willing to pay to achieve it, well...

With respect to the Law of Attraction, I think we do a good job of describing how miraculous results can be if you sharpen your mind. What we're not always so good at is explaining the vocabulary, separating the mystical aspects from the practical application, and describing the things that a person might have to give up to get the benefits. For example, would it be fair to say that, in order to get the best benefits from the Law of Attraction, you might need to relinquish the idea that your ego is the center of the universe? Would someone unfamiliar with the LOA comprehend what this means?

Religions have these problems too; they say, "You are saved by the blood of Jesus Christ." Everyone inside the religion (hopefully) understands what these words mean, but some just say the words without really understanding their meaning, and none of them can adequately explain (to a non-believer) the meaning outside of the context of their religion. It's a bit like trying to explain the color green to someone who is colorblind.

Does the LOA have these problems? How can we become better at explaining the concepts in layman's terms, especially to someone who has been taught all their lives that hard work and discipline are the way to wealth?

asked 24 Jun '10, 16:12

Vesuvius's gravatar image


edited 24 Jun '10, 22:12

Nice question :-)

(25 Jun '10, 02:51) Eddie

It's interesting what Abraham's view is on Law of Attraction teachings becoming a religion.

I remember them saying that despite the best efforts of Jerry & Esther Hicks to prevent it, their (Abraham) teachings will eventually amount to a religion.

Though I think they implied that the leading edge crowd would have moved on anyway by then onto the next thing that replaces it.

The reason that Abraham's view is worth taking note of is because they are the ones who kicked off the current upsurge in Law of Attraction interest worldwide. Firstly, with Jerry & Esther travelling the USA for years hosting recorded public seminars with Abraham and thereby building up a massive library of Law of Attraction knowledge. And, secondly, through being the impetus for The Secret movie, even though Abraham subsequently got edited out of it because of a legal dispute.

I think whenever the mainstream embraces a philosophy then, sooner or later, the dogmas and their associated dogmatics will also emerge...I think that's probably what defines the mainstream.

It's funny but I find myself already avoiding the Abraham-following crowd, whether online or offline. I deeply appreciate the teachings themselves but I'm not really a fan of some of the Group-think I sometimes sense that is already starting to build up around them.

I guess that's one of the reasons why I'm here and not participating instead in the Abraham online groups...you find more radical and revolutionary thinkers among this particular crowd...the leading edge of the leading edge maybe :)


answered 24 Jun '10, 21:52

Stingray's gravatar image


edited 24 Jun '10, 22:07

Nice points and that's why I like this group as well :-)

(25 Jun '10, 02:58) Eddie

When we look at history we can see that regardless of teachers or messengers advising not to follow, but rather advising to inquire within and find out, certain people still follow.

While I love the actual teachings of Buddha, I have very little interest in Buddhism. I live in a predominately Buddhist country where most have been taught Buddhism as part of their conditioning. However, when discussing the actual insights of Buddha, most are clueless because they haven’t inquired into those things themselves.

The subject of labels has often been mentioned on this site. As long as we understand that the term LOA is simply a label pointing to something that's ultimately, beyond labels, we're in no danger of becoming followers.

Personally, I see the “Law of attraction” as pointing to exactly the same idea as “What you put out is what you get back” or “Thoughts become things” Understanding the thing itself is far more important and freeing than explaining or defending any label. No label is required in order to look at the mirror of our life and see which thoughts and beliefs we’ve recently been holding.

If someone feels pulled towards the idea of teaching or disseminating certain truths, ideas or concepts to others and they do it passionately because it’s their highest joy, then it will serve all concerned. Following their passion, even if they “fake it until they make it,” areas in which more understanding is necessary will surface in them and they can progress further.

As a point of interest IMHO:

Someone who’s primarily focused on self and operating from ego needs proof or needs others to prove something, not knowing it’s impossible for another to prove or convince anyone of anything.

While the zero (ego-less) state has no need other than knowing for sure what feels right and what makes sense to them. They say what they know because it feels right and it’s their highest joy in doing so. That in itself is the highest reward.


answered 25 Jun '10, 04:07

Eddie's gravatar image


Amongst all the spiritual stuff I've ever seen, I am sure that now is the exact time for the Law of Attraction to become known to bigger audience. It is very simple to comprehend but the transition to a new way of thinking is the main problem. If someone wants to teach people the secret, he should first reshape their beliefs.
Law of Attraction is unlike any religion:

  • Religions tell us what we shouldn't do (or focus upon) while the LoA tells us the opposite. If LoA were to be a religion one day, the moral system would be greater. By focusing on what we should do we would be pushing away the things that are morally bad.

  • Nowadays people are "religious" instead of religious. They go to their temple every few days and repeat rituals without any faith. This is meaningless. On the other hand, in order to really reap benefits from the LoA you must be truthfully into it. You cannot be " " in any percent.

  • It implies that you have to actually understand the concepts of LoA. Repeating formulas without any thought isn't possible because it would bring no effect. And people with no proof that this is working would be discouraged and leave. No fake "believers" anymore.


answered 24 Jun '10, 18:41

Asklepios's gravatar image


This is some food for thought, Vesuvius.

You used the analogy of phrases used within a religion, which we called "church-talk" when I was a kid. Indeed, someone who was not familiar with the things said within a religion might be very confused, even though those things were easily understood by others. Have you ever gone to a wedding or funeral of another faith and felt a little confused? I have!

A person new to LOA may come onto this website, and be confused by some of the terms, some of the stories and examples. But this is not something to be learned over-night, any more than anything else is. They will have to read, study, question, learn, think, try and put some time into it, as with all things worth knowing! They will have to form their own opinions and see what works best for him or her.

There are plenty of LOA books and courses out there; some good and some bad. But there isn't a system on instruction that is proven to work for each and every person, and showing how to get results at the same rate. The closest thing I have found to that is the Abraham-Hicks books, but it still doesn't fit the bill for all. Why? Because we are all different, and find that different methods resonate with each of us. And on top of that we all have different types of desires we wish to work towards. For that reason, I don't think LOA will ever be like an organized religion, or ever have a system of instruction that works for all.


answered 24 Jun '10, 18:51

LeeAnn%201's gravatar image

LeeAnn 1

I believe that all schools of thought e.g. psychology, science, spiritualgy, etc. have certain jargons affiliated with them. I do not think that there is anything really wrong with that. I also believe that if a person is interested he or she will make the effort to learn. I know that we need words to express ourselves with but I believe that the language of the soul is universal and if there is a vibrational match then the rest will follow automatically. I am not sure whether the law of attraction will become a religion or not but I believe that seriously enlightened people are free spririted and dont like too much confinement so even it becomes a religion it will not be a serious threat to anyone's development.


answered 24 Jun '10, 22:09

Drham's gravatar image


Click here to create a free account

If you are seeing this message then the Inward Quest system has noticed that your web browser is behaving in an unusual way and is now blocking your active participation in this site for security reasons. As a result, among other things, you may find that you are unable to answer any questions or leave any comments. Unusual browser behavior is often caused by add-ons (ad-blocking, privacy etc) that interfere with the operation of our website. If you have installed these kinds of add-ons, we suggest you disable them for this website

Related Questions