The Law of Attraction and The Ego
Has the Law of Attraction been working for you?
The Law of Attraction and The Ego
By Mandy Peterson
When the Law of Attraction surfaced in a pop culture way, it brought a lot of hope to many people that we could begin to control our circumstances. Though this is true, many of us are beginning to find that this process is not as easy as simply applying affirmations. There is also more that we can consider as “thought.” Thoughts are everywhere, after all; conscious ones, unconscious ones, personal ones, collective ones, etc. Which, all these thoughts are manifesting in direct and indirect (symbolic) ways.
Many of us also have never stopped to ask ourselves “Why do my thoughts want what they want?” or “Does what I am going for can incur other less favorable side effects for myself or for the collective (if a collective is going for the same things)?” So, while we may have part of the “Secret,” there still seems something more to learn.
Part of the problem is that when people started hearing, teaching, and promoting some of these concepts of attraction and manifestation, they got twisted in order to accommodate our present lifestyles. Thus, such metaphysical concepts came to be primarily used to serve a dysfunctional world. Why did this happen? Understandably, it happened because of the ego, and because of our need to serve our base wants, needs, fears, and desires.
Men who had not fully awakened became teachers of metaphysical concepts. They taught such concepts from a state of not fully knowing their Divine Self; other than within the mental realm. Because they did not fully know their Divine Self, they were unable to teach others how to fill an inner void with anything other than aspects of the material world. If they had first understood that such a void can only be filled with self-love and Self-understanding, things would be very different.
While my intention is not to fault others for what many of us had no way to understand, most of us were taught these metaphysical concepts from a perspective that involved listening to what our egos told us was the way for such concepts to be used: to advance in the world of form (in order to try to fill an inner void through external means).
As many of us within the new-age community began to heed these concepts taught by men who were lost, we became lost ourselves. Not that we were not lost before. It is a predominant human condition for man to be lost and seeking social, physical, and other forms of survival in ways that seem to separate him from who he truly is.
It is also easier for most of us to grasp concepts if we can relate them to our current needs, lifestyles, ways of living, and desires. This was naturally easier for us to do than to listen to those who have achieved awakening and enlightenment, but who did so by making certain sacrifices of the flesh. So, the idea that we can become enlightened without having to make any sacrifices was, naturally, a welcome idea; even though it kept us enslaved and addicted—though I trust that even our enslavement and addictions do, within a bigger picture, have a purpose as part of a divine plan.
Used as a toy for our egoic whims, the metaphysical concepts beneath the Law of Attraction end up misguidedly supporting and enhancing our preoccupation with materialism, consumerism and our flesh natures. This naturally encouraged us to further enter into duality, instead of coming out of it; to focus within the mind, instead of the heart; to control, manipulate, and focus on outcomes, as opposed to trusting, accepting and cherishing the present moment. It also served to keep us in bondage to certain manifestations and corrupt institutions that have been collectively created. (By using the term ‘corrupt,’ I mean unconscious or unenlightened).
Using the Law of Attraction to enhance and support these creations, even if indirectly or unconsciously, ends up limiting us in our very use of the Law of Attraction, because we then feel we have to manifest inside of a metaphorical box, i.e. we can only manifest in ways in which we cooperate with and adhere to all of society’s wayward definitions, systems, governments, customs, and dictates. Which, the toxic fruits of this preoccupation are becoming increasingly more evident within our natural world.
There is hope, however!
If we can begin to deprogram ourselves concerning everything that we have been taught, we can return to the wisdom of our greatest masters of the past and present who have tried to teach us a better way. Unfortunately, sometimes this wisdom becomes lost or sidelined.
Does all of this mean that we should never use the Law of Attraction to manifest into the world of form? Of course not! Jesus manifested material miracles all the time! My whole point is that a state of mind I like to call miracle-mindedness can blossom when we step outside the box and begin to manifest from being centered within our Divine Self, rather than in attempting to satisfy the whims, anxieties and fear of loss or of not being enough of our egos. There is currently a backward process that is occurring in our naive approach toward manifesting miracles, which makes our path very different from the one that Jesus took. His path stemmed from true love and a feeling of wholeness, while our approach comes from feeling incomplete, lacking, and in need of filling a void within.
So, how will we know if our desire to manifest originates from an impulse within the Divine Self or something within the ego?
We will know through whether we are obsessing upon future manifestation as opposed to finding gratitude through recognizing the sacredness and abundance within the present moment. The former approach prevents us from possessing miracle-mindedness. This is because of our obsession with the material, as well as a need for control, blocks our ability to witness the abundance and miracle within the present moment. Missing this true miracle, we can never see it as present, but only as happiness and contentment to be attained at a future time or place–since our present is not good enough or miraculous enough in itself.
Furthermore, due to our egos and our lack of ability to find wholeness and completeness within the Self, most of our current manifestation programs have to be focused on creating in-between steps and realities. For example, our manifesting money, worth, successes, or other things is an in-between step we use toward manifesting something else; whether this ‘something else’ is of material gain or is a feeling of security, happiness or ease. We think “if I had more money I could buy more of this or have more of that.”
So, what can we do?
We can begin to awaken to and to release the ego and its attachments, addictions, and anxieties. A Course in Miracles is an amazing reference for learning how to do this. While the Course says it is in “Miracles,” most of its lessons are geared towards helping us learn to release the world and its attachments; to release the need to be special; to release labels; and to recognize that most of what we strive for in the world is an illusion. So, part of this first step would be to begin to question things, such as concepts of “success” and “failure,” all the rules we obey, how we can feel enough inside, how we have been affected by social programming and media etc.
Additionally, instead of attempting to manifest more and more attachments, we could focus on manifesting within us the feeling that we are really seeking to achieve; such as a sense of security, happiness or ease that is independent of needing us to manifest money, worth, success or other things. What I have noticed is that focusing upon simply manifesting the in-between steps seems to end up ‘attracting’ an addiction to this process; and instead of manifesting from a yin state of being, we attempt to manifest from a yang state of striving and over-thinking. The pitfall to this kind of manifestation program is that our cup never becomes quite full enough; once having manifested what was wanted, it is still not enough, and there is a need to manifest something more.
All in all, manifestation can become your own individual process and journey. You can always learn through whatever you manifest whether it is “negative” or “positive” because there is always a reason for why you wanted to manifest something, or if it came from wanting to fill a place within that did not feel whole or enough. For, you are enough! We are all enough! The ego likes to trick us that we are unworthy and need more to complete ourselves, but we and everyone around us are enough just as we are!
Click HERE to Connect with your Daily Horoscope!
You will also enjoy Leaving It to the Universe and The Law of Cause and Effect
About the Author
Mandy Peterson is a psychic visionary, empath, channel and EFT Practitioner. She is the author of the book I Am the Lotus, Not the Muddy Pond: Peace Through Non-conformity and the EFT Divination & Chakra Deck. As an empathic healer and reader, Mandy works 1-to-1 with clients, helping them to achieve clarity, peace and balance. For more information, see Mandy’s website at www.mysticmandy.com.
To know wholeness is not to deny the needs and desires of the flesh or ego it is to accept that we are both flesh and spirit and honour both parts as the sum of the whole.
There was way too much male bashing and bashing of others ways that I missed the point of this article. :/ The article more or less said, “You’ve all been doing it wrong. This is how it’s done. Listen to me.” Everyone has there own way of doing things and if it works for you, then that’s all that matters. If you’re struggling with the law of attraction and ego, then perhaps this information can be helpful.
Essentially: what the previous posts (as I understand them, YMMV) are pointing towards
(finger..? Moon!) is the differences between “Theurgy” (which we can define as ‘internal clarity’ for immediate purposes, which is what I believe the Author, Mandy, is pointing towards…)
and ‘Thaumaturgy’: “the skillful manipulation of matter and materials on behalf of spirit”.
Thaumaturgy is not the same as ‘materialism’.
The perverse doctrines of ‘prosperity preaching’ and ‘name it and claim it’
(and even such different order techniques as the ‘Law of Attraction’)
can be muddled by a confused “want” vs a ‘need’,
That is to say: the demand of, and for ; ‘selfishness’: (the ‘Sitra Ahra’, technically)
As some cartoon seagulls said in some children movie i remember seeing:
‘mine? mine?? mine???
Or as George Harrison said so much better:
“All through the Day, I me mine i Me mine, I Me Mine”
This blocks the Flow like a logs at a dam,
and all that one manifests at that point is beside-the-point ‘stuff’
the OP/author makes an extremely solid point
(one I think previous commenters may be potentially misinterpreting) when saying:
““Does what I am going for can incur (sic)
other less favorable side effects for myself or for the collective …?”
“… while we may have part of the “Secret,” there still seems something more to learn.”
That “something more” is (IMHO-FWIW->YMMV) ‘compassionate service’-> bodhicitta dharma.
When the Tools are used with Knowledge, guided by Wisdom, and placed under full Understanding->
Thats when (in my experience anyway) the Cosmos re-orders itself to meet ‘genuine Need’.
Your needs get met in proportion to the degree you are Willing (not even “able: “Willing” is often sufficient!) to meet the Needs of Others and Other.
The desire to act as a Conduit of compassionate blessing opens Up
‘the Laws of Reciprocity’.
That is when mere materials manipulation (“skillful craftsmanship ({ ??????????????? })
becomes Elevated to an Art Form.
The Art Form of ‘Thaumaturgos’, or ‘miracle working’.
Sadly?
The selfish ego will sometimes (often?)
become so enamored with the Gift ( siddhi, pali, devanagari, tamil, ngödrup, “wonder-working”)
that the “intended “, that is: the -purpose- of said gift will become Lost.
It is my considered opinion that this is the reason
Guatanama Buddha eschewed such showy proof of knowledge and wisdom:
the ‘simon magus’ syndrome of Folk confusing mere ‘power’ for Truth.
Anyway, all That is IMHO->FWIW, and of course: YMMV
Where in the article did you read “male bashing”..?!!?
Perhaps because the author chose to use the generic “men”,
rather than the more generic ‘Human Beings” or ‘People’?
Do you truly believe the Author was referring only to “males”?
I didn’t get that vibe at all.
While I can’t presume to speak for the Authors intent,
I do wonder at why and how you came to that interpretation, Tyler.
Well Spoken!