February 20, 2007
On The Secret
I've been told to see The Secret at least a dozen times in the past two weeks. Is this something to do with the fact that mercury is in retrograde? I tend to listen to direction when it comes this often and by people I respect. So in the next week or so, The Secret it is.
Given that I finished reading the Power of Now for the second time not long ago and am certainly a believer in the Law of Attraction and the Power of Intention, it sounds like an extension of what some of us believe already and others have seen many consequences of.......eerie for some, others remain skeptical.
After reflecting about how often it has come up in the last week on my balcony late last night, with the Big Dipper fairly clearly laid out to my right (surprising to see its clarity given that I live in the city) and a smattering of other stars to added to my peaceful night to my left, I return to my laptop to see that Evelyn writes about it on her blog this week as well...a more cynical view?
She quotes Ken Wilber, who I am a fan of......
“Those who cannot translate adequately, with a fair amount of integrity and accuracy, fall quickly into severe neurosis or even psychosis: the world ceases to make sense—the boundaries between the self and the world are not transcended but instead begin to crumble. This is not breakthrough but breakdown; not transcendence, but disaster.”
I'm told it is a follow up to What the Bleep, which resonated with so many. Science meets the spiritual, spiritual meets science. Sort of. Kind of. The themed story in the middle of it all didn't fit or perhaps it just didn't flow. More after viewing eyes and ears have seen and heard.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference On The Secret:
I don't think my friends are cynical as much as seeing through bullshit. There comes a point where one comes to this gap between the end of believing, and the beginning of being. It's a tough precarious spot, but also quite normal in the process. Kind of like the cocoon stage for a butterfly. Mostly that was what I was writing about.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of 'The Secret'. Let's just say it feels like advocating that while stuffing down food ravenously, we should take the time to make a list of the items for a banquet we'd like to conjure up some day later in the future.
Meanwhile we're not attuned to the blessing of the feast right here, right now, today.
So I'm not into waiting or postponing life. Even a mug of rooibos tea and a slice of simple sourdough bread if truly attended to, can take our breath away as supper.
"The Carnival, the Revel is Now," as I quote voodoo priestess Miriam of New Orleans today. (It's Mardi Gras today.)
Since you mention 'The Power of Now' (I also love 'A New Earth' by Eckhart Tolle), those I totally wholeheartely enthusiastically recommend. And love the new 'A Thousand Names for Joy' by Bryon Katie. But in my integrity, I cannot recommend 'The Secret'. (Your mileage may vary.)
Posted by: Evelyn Rodriguez | Feb 20, 2007 7:24:05 PM
Actually it's Mercury that's in retrograde: http://aquariumage.com/vibration.html
The Secret is a basic introduction to positive thinking, mind candy for the uninitiated. It only deals with the Law of Attraction. There are many other reasons people don't get what they want, and it is totally possible to get what you want and still be insufferable. But for the struggling masses yearing to be free of creditors, chronic illness, depression, etc, odds are it will provide a ray of hope.
Posted by: EC | Feb 22, 2007 11:00:13 AM
To look at the Law of Attraction as a choice between the present and future is to miss the point. The dialectics are between internal and external reality, and positive and negative energy.
The decision is to manifest an internal reality of your choice so that it becomes an external reality. Of course this happens over time, but that is because we can't escape the temporal nature of life. Time is functional, not the crux of the choice.
In addition, the practice requires that you visualize the outcome as if it already is in place, cleverly collapsing time. The future is now.
It's also more ambitious than mere positive thinking. It is about the power of intentional energy from head and heart.
I say just try it. Don't get hung up on whether it's really backed up by science. Go to church with it, in full faith. See what your experience tells you, not your reason or intellect. Draw conclusions from what actually happens.
Posted by: Ray Lewis | Feb 28, 2007 12:21:17 AM
I'm not sure how I ended up on your blog about the secret, because I was researching 2 books that I'd had weird coincidences with - "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" and "There Are No Accidents"... do you have a connection to those books? They do deal with synchronicity, and as I have been hearing so much about The Secret, perhaps that's why I was "led" here. I haven't read or seen it yet, but have seen "What the Bleep" and read other books like that... just based on what I'm hearing about the Secret, what I'm thinking is that the beliefs and ideas in the book can work, but that maybe it is too easily misinterpreted by people who are new to metaphysical & spiritual ways of thinking... peace ~
Posted by: AuntBoo | Feb 28, 2007 8:54:50 AM
...and just to clarify, I'm not knocking the book The Secret myself... I meant that maybe that's why the critics are being so negative about it - not that I am against it myself :)
Posted by: AuntBoo | Feb 28, 2007 8:59:21 AM
I had another thought about the Law of Attraction today. For the last few days I've been practicing the techniques suggested in the film, particularly as explained by Jack Canfield. Maybe this is my assumption and it's not actually in the film, but to me it's obvious that part of the reason why it can work is that it gives you powerful motivation to MAKE it happen. Ok, the universe provides the HOW and all that. But if I visualize making $500K a year and I get excited by that, I'm going to move toward it. The magnetic attraction requires attuned energy from both the universe and the individual.
Posted by: Ray Lewis | Feb 28, 2007 11:25:30 PM