No one gets out of this world alive
BY HARV BISHOP
New Thought is in need of a reformation, says author Mitch Horowitz, and the movement can start by remembering that no one gets out of this world alive.
An absolutist view that your thinking creates 100 percent of your reality neglects “that we live under physical limitations. Mortality alone tells us that,” Horowitz explains. “Physical laws will eventually result in our final demise. We leave these bodies. These bodies decay.”
His newest book, “One Simple Idea: How Positive Thinking Reshaped Modern Life,” has just been released in a revised and expanded paperback edition.
“I think that we all need to take a very long, serious look at the Law of Attraction,” says Horowitz, “or whatever term one wants to apply to the idea that the mind is
this overall mental super law. I think we live under many laws and forces of which
the mind is one. And that is extraordinary enough. I think New Thought has
defined itself too narrowly. It is quite possible, and I never encountered anything
that contradicts this in New Thought, that the mind can be one force among many forces.”
Too often, he explains, he encounters New Thought neophytes and adherents who feel blamed for illness and other misfortune in their lives.
“New Thought can too reflexively and too narrowly hold the individual responsible for everything that happens to that person. So there can be this doctrinal
narrowness that grows out of the commitment to a single mental super law.
Rather than seeing New Thought as presenting the individual with one possible
cause among others, there is the leap to the idea that all [experience] must come back to the mind as a root cause. I’m not sure that’s true. I think we need to take a very hard second look at that.
Blaming the Victim
“The critique of New Thought within the mainstream, as far as the mainstream pays attention to it, is that it engages in victim blaming. Now mainstream critics often have a shallow degree of context with New Thought and they leap to that conclusion too quickly, but it does not mean that they are entirely wrong. It doesn’t mean we can afford to discount their views.”
A rigid either/or view of thought as the only cause of experience can blind people to New Thought’s wisdom, Horowitz says.
“We are raised in the western world to believe that life is largely a material affair. We believe in visible cause and effect, things that are repeatable, that can be measured. The New Thought point of view stands in opposition to that. New Thought suggests that there are these undercurrents to life that we can’t necessarily see, feel, measure or place under an actuarial table but that may be even more significant than those things that we can place on an actuarial table.
“I believe that our ideas of the [human] mind are going to continually deepen and expand, not contract. I believe that because of my intimate personal experience and testimony amassed over many different generations and the ever-deepening mystery of studies into quantum physics, relativity, the placebo effect and neuroplasticity.
“We need a reformation within New Thought. We need to consider the insights amassed over the last 150 years. The time frame from mental healing to current expressions of New Thought are deeply valuable. They contain great truths. They are being validated in science and psychology and medicine, but they are incomplete and we perhaps haven’t paid attention to the possibility that the mind can be one exquisitely important force among other forces.”
Can thoughts from thousands of years ago influence our lives today? Mitch Horowitz explores questions about collective consciousness in part two of our conversation reconsidering New Thought: What works, what doesn’t, and where do we need reform. Click here for part two
You can find my print interview with Horowitz, “The Hidden History of New Thought,” in the September 2015 issue of Science of Mind: Guide for Spiritual Living on sale at Barnes & Noble mid-August.
Check out Horowitz’s website for fascinating articles and videos.
These are the same criticisms I have heard about New Thought for the last 30 years, and the idea that we blame the victim is a total fallacy. We recognize that our time on this planet will include some painful and fearful times that were not caused by an error in our thinking. We believe that our mind has the power to heal our wounds during those trying times. This is all about empowering the victim!
Hi Debra,
I (and I think Horowitz) would 100% agree with you. Yours is the enlightened New Thought view. And, like any tradition, New Thought has its fundamentalists. The world can be a scary place and people can look for easy one size fits all answers for why things happen. New Thought is not served well by this narrow view (held by some). As one example The Secret author Rhonda Bryne said that the victims of 9/11 were all vibrating at a frequency that attracted them to the tragedy. For another, a much loved, high consciousness New Thought minister who had a life-threatening illness was once asked what he was thinking to cause that illness. Everyone I have talked to about this issue (Horowitz, Roger Teel, Michael Beckwith, Kenn Gordon) soundly reject this immature view. Part of the point of these series of conversations is to put that shadow side of New Thought to rest.
Hi there. I have been a licensed Religious Science Practitioner since 1991, and have taught various classes in Science of Mind ever since. The term I (and many others) use for the kind of fundamentalist thinking as described above is RSBS! And the biggest reason I have refused to even watch the movie, “The Secret”. The Law of Attraction is only ONE of the laws that founder, Ernest Holmes talks about in his teachings. He also clearly stated that we need to be “Open at the Top”, but not, as my teacher, Doris Jones said many times, “Splitting apart at the seams”.
She also taught us that no one, absolutely NO ONE can EVER know another’s consciousness! Never. We can barely come to understand our own. Life is filled with Life, ever expanding, moving, changing it its appearance although always the same at its center.
We need to teach all of this at our centers, in our classes, in our writings. We need to absolutely remove ourselves from what can be called, “New Though Sin and Guilt”. We have absolutely no right to ever ask anyone an ignorant question like, “What did you do to attract that??”, or “Why did your consciousness bring THAT about in your life?”. These are questions that we can surely ask ourselves in order to deepen our understanding of our own life process, but even then this type of questioning usually does not produce any useful new information. What we can and should ask are questions like, “Is there any gift that we can see in all of this?”, or “Is there something here to explore, discover, learn for myself?”, or “Where is the presence and power of Love in this situation?”
If a question empowers, it’s appropriate. If a question belittles, or causes more fear, resentment, guilt, or shame, it’s not. At least it’s not appropriate in the realm of New Thought teaching and coaching.
This is all written spur of the moment and stream of thinking.. so I apologize for lack of clarity, or inconsistencies or confusion. But there ya are! Love to you and us all! Bob Bercaw, RScP, Awakened Heart Spiritual Center, Wilmington, DE
Hi Bob,
I see you posted this to the original page for this article. It is beautifully stated so I’m re-posting it here on the newer version of the article https://www.harvbishop.com/?p=794
Best,
Harv
I have struggled with understanding the Law of Attraction and how it works in with the soul contracts that Caroline Myss talks about. If part of my soul contract is to learn to be more comfortable with uncertainty, then does it matter how much I use the Law of Attraction to try to create a reality without all those uncertainties? Can one override the other? Deep questions, indeed.
Indeed. We’ll continue to ask deep questions like those on this blog.
Interesting thoughts. Thanks.
Thanks so much Kathleen. Much appreciated. We’ll have additional posts on Mitch’s in-depth exploration of New Thought over the next few weeks and other topics as well.
We are living in the midst of an exciting New Time Reformation where New Thought becomes an Epiphany of New Revelation. No Earth being gets out of this “world” “alive”, so to speak, for we live, move & have our being throughout the Universe as individualizations at a point in time & space on this Earth as Energy. We connect to this Energy not only through The Mind, but also through connecting with our five senses & connecting to other life on Earth. Enjoy the fruits of the Spirit & don’t sweat the small stuff!
My premise has been that there is no attraction as we think of in a human way. There is the law of detatchement( it is not my place to put my ego attachments to any experience , person or thing on this planet) the law of relativity ( scientifically, there must be positive and negative, action and reaction, cause and effect…again, there is no emotional attachment to this) Our ego perception of what we should be attracting is the issue. Being devoid of ego brings insight to the experience. Bringing your finite consciousness closer to the infinite consciousness,allows you to steer your thoughts in the direction of the experiences that provide more enlightenment. But, what do I know? I’m just starting to learn( the premise for my human experience) and it is also, only my perception.
You should be able to change your environment, when you change your thoughts, which move through your DNA, which is the same DNA of everything only in different frequencies…again, just my humble perception. That to me would be the law of attraction….becoming aligned with the universe, no ego involved….which is the hardest part for me.
I am in my 50’s now, and being a person who as a child was raised in a New Thought movement church – to which I still go regularly – it was very hard to realize I was alone in my suffering, when tragedy struck my life. When I looked for support, people asked me what did I do to create these circumstances. When I asked for spiritual guidance from the church’s counselor, or spiritual coaches, the response was very much the same. I felt embarrassed for having a problem and for feeling sadness. The support and compassion I needed to be able to heal, came from relatives who are from conventional Christian faith, and from my doctor who is far from spiritual.
Thanks so much for sharing that important recollection — and thanks to Harv for sponsoring this discussion. Others have echoed your experience — including a woman on Twitter who wrote to me just this afternoon. Harv is, of course, very right that New Thought’s most sensitive voices would never engage in a narrowly conceived expression of the Law of Attraction. But it does persist. As much as I admire Rhonda Byrne’s ability to have made The Secret into the most popular expression of New Thought in our generation, that work does reinforce aspects of the Law of Attraction as a overarching mental “super law.” In the generations since New Thought’s founding, we have experienced so many new perspectives on life, from quantum theory to laboratory-validated ESP. Those of us dedicated to New Thought should be heartened to find that science is, in a sense, catching up with what our founding visionaries knew. But New Thought must grow too — we must be willing to accommodate a spiritual outlook that allows for many dynamic forces (including physicality and accident) crisscrossing throughout life, while at the same time refining and continually experimenting with the reality that thoughts, too, are causative. I’m very heartened by this discussion — and I wish you every good thing in your search. -Mitch
This was a very interesting article. I do believe everything that happens to a person is because something in their ‘energy field’ or whatever you want to call it, made them a match to it. And people take that to mean it is ‘their fault.’ or ‘brought it on themselves.’ I don’t think that is what is being implied. It just one theory of explaining why we experience what we do, and to me personally, it makes a lot of sense, in terms of the reality of an individual and what we experience as humanity on a whole, on a mass level.
For example, if someone had a lot of childhood experiences that made them feel the world is unsafe and unpredictable, that belief could be mirrored back in a variety of ways, such as being the victim of a crime when they are older. Yes, they ‘attracted’ it because of this belief that may be strong, but no, it isn’t their ‘fault.’ I think realizing something like this can be quite empowering because it makes us feel like we have more control over our experience and we aren’t completely at the mercy of outside influences. I think the world attract can have a strong ‘charge’ to it.
I actually focus on law of attraction on my blog and coaching practice, and one thing I do stress to people is that we may not be able to create some ‘perfect’ vibration where we never ever experience anything negative again. I have negative manifestations and I always look for the lessons and what this experience was mirroring back to me so I can work on shifting the beliefs and feelings that may have led to it.
I certainly don’t have all the answers, and I don’t purport to. I just teach what I know based on my own experience, and in my own experience, being more conscious of my thoughts, feelings and beliefs, and directing my focus on what is wanted, rather than unwanted, created amazing changes in my life I never would have thought possible.
I don’t know if we can ever get the ‘full picture’ or totally understand all that is happening while in ‘human form.’ I am getting more comfortable with the ‘mystery’ of it all.
This is such an important conversation. Thank you for putting it out here. There are indeed “Fundamentalists” (they call themselves “purists”) in New Thought who are not serving the best interests of New Thought and are in many ways driving people away from organizations who have the potential to do a lot of good in the world through the wisdom of New Thought. Our family lost my 2-year old granddaughter who died suddenly and unexpectedly in her sleep. The “explanation” (which I entertained for a short time as plausible) was that her parents’ (my daughter and her husband) consciousness allowed this to happen. This was followed by the explanation that everyone essentially commits suicide – we all choose when to leave. This really wasn’t an acceptable explanation for the death of an otherwise healthy baby (medical explanation: SUDC). We were (and still are in many ways) in deep, deep pain at this loss and now that I have almost 3 years between that awful phone call and today I can tell you that this kind of New Thought “doctrine” is wrong, off-base and detrimental to the expansion of all the GOOD that is New Thought. Some of the “purists” are still out there as ministers and practitioners; still teaching these erroneous (my opinion) perspectives. Even Emerson, who initially believed (and wrote) that the slaves could free themselves if they would just embrace the consciousness of freedom (“That the slave who caught the strain, Should throb until he snapped his chain”) shifted his stance to one that saw that the complexities of life often confound simplistic solutions. New Thought has a lot to offer the world, but we won’t get very far if we continue to allow the proliferation of the kind of fundamentalism that my family experienced. Again, thank you for speaking up!
Thank you so much for this moving, tragic and deeply thoughtful account Rebecca. I also appreciate your highlighting Emerson’s move from fundamentalism to complexity.
Rebecca, I can’t thank you enough for sharing this experience here. It is so important that we in the New Thought community understand that these are not just abstract concepts or theological debates — but impact the lives of people who love New Thought but who do not feel that it has always had sufficient vision to cover all the vagaries and tragedies of existence. Sometimes the right answer is no answer — it is to bow one’s head, or fall to one’s knees, before the inexplicable. As a teacher of mine once said, “I’d prefer a deepened question to a trite answer.” We must deepen our questions continually about life, and you have greatly contributed to that process. Wishing you every good thing, Mitch
Thank you SO much for bringing this up! This is a topic I have been thinking about for a LONG time – all through my Science of Mind studies, in fact. Fortunately, our minister was very open and gave us the awareness that there may be certain soul contracts about how and when someone chooses to leave this earth plane, or the idea that we may have chosen before we entered these bodies that chronic illness would serve as our teacher in this lifetime, and of course it’s no one’s fault. Blame is always a self-protection strategy of the Shadow self (or ego, Lower Self, Survival Self), and we know that the ego can use spirituality to bolster itself just as well as any other defense mechanism.
I have taught Law of Attraction for a long time, and I’ve had friends and clients ask me, “If it’s a Law, why doesn’t it work all the time?” This is what prompted me to dig deeper into the human psyche and understand what a HUGE role emotions play in what we “vibrate”. There is very little in the Science of Mind literature about the unwanted and unfelt emotions that keep our hidden beliefs in place, and I have since moved into teaching more awareness of the Shadow and of the emotional processing necessary to unblock our energy and create a vibration in greater alignment with our desires. I believe understanding and negotiating our emotions is the next great frontier for New Thought. (New Feeling?!)
I actually teach that we will NEVER be “rid” of the Survival Self or ego – it serves a very important purpose to keep us safe as our destructible bodies navigate a potentially dangerous world. This is why no matter how much we pray and meditate and do our affirmations, we can’t help but slip into our humanity and still entertain negative thoughts. I read an article that said the latest brain science shows our brains are wired to be more negative than positive. This is the reason it’s important for us to do our spiritual practices daily, and stay vigilant to what we’re thinking and focused on. However ultimately there is no reaching the ideal goal of staying 100% in our Higher Self and in the realm of miracles. If we can stay and live from our Higher Self more than 50% of the time, we’re doing good – especially while living in a world where the Egoic Self is reinforced at every turn.
There is also the consideration that we may be focused on creating a certain outcome in our life, but we live on a planet with over 7 billion others who are also focused (knowingly or unknowingly) on creating a certain outcome in their life! It seems likely that our “vibration” will be criss-crossing with all these billions of other vibrations out there, and the outcome that manifests will be a product of everyone most directly involved. This is why we pray for “this or something better” or for “the Highest and Greatest Good for all concerned.” We are not alone in creating our reality.
Thank you again for bringing up this very important topic. I look forward to hearing more about the scientific findings and other forces operating on us and the reality we intend to create. By the way, in order to TRULY stay at the evolutionary edge of thought, we need to consider the latest generation of scientists who are poking holes in Quantum Physics theories as well! ;->
Nijole, Thank you for this thoughtful comment — you raise many important issues. Bravo for making the distinction between thoughts and emotions. Too often in New Thought and other mind-metaphysics traditions, we conflate the two. But they are very different. As a great teacher once put it, thought is like steam power; emotion is like nuclear power. One cannot be pitted against the other, and we must understand the difference between the two. Likewise, I’m glad you raised the comment from friends and clients: “If it’s a law, why doesn’t it work all the time?” A law, by definition, must be consistent. To this I would suggest considering the law of gravity. The law is consistent, but the way that we experience it radically differs depending upon whether we’re on earth, on Jupiter, or the moon, and so on. The mass of the object alters the gravitational pull. The law is consistent but the circumstances are not. That may be a helpful way of looking at the Law of Attraction — if we live under many different forces (as I think we do) then that law may have different properties at different times. You allude to this when you wisely note that in this populous world all kinds of people are seeking their needs, which may at times conflict or cause friction with our own. (And sometimes we haven’t the right perspective on our needs.) I like that you use the term “criss-crossing” when describing this phenomenon — that is the kind of outlook I think we need to keep readily in mind. The complexity of human needs and physical forces is such that lots of things may be going on at once, rather than one thing, i.e., an all-encompassing law of mental attraction. That law may well be operating — as are other lawful elements. All of the complexities you raise are exactly what our generation needs to consider. A big thanks. -Mitch
Nice analogy about the Law of Gravity working differently depending on the mass of the object – I will be using that! Thank you for that and for the kind reply!
While I am not a member of a New Thought church, I have studied it, taken a few classes and I have a very dear friend who is a Practitioner. I have come to think that where New Thought adherents get into “trouble” (so to speak) is trying to understand karma without a thorough understanding of reincarnation. I practice Buddhism, the original “Science of Mind” philosophy and it has become abundantly clear to me in studying New Thought that you can’t understand the operational mechanism of karma without a thorough understanding of reincarnation. Many people I have encountered in my 25 years of Buddhist practice began their practice for the same reason I did: it’s the only philosophy that can help one make sense of the tragedies and suffering in this world. It was a big “ah-ha” moment for me when I began to understand karma and reincarnation. Additionally, while most New Thought adherents go back as far as Emerson, I think you need to take it one giant step further back and study the book that Emerson and Thoreau both credit for their change in their perspective of life: The Bhagavad Gita, a book (a small chapter really) from the ancient Hindu text Mahabharata that became available in English thanks to the British rule over India in the 1800s. The British archeologists brought Eastern philosophies of Hinduism and Indian-based Buddhism to the Western world. When one has studied Hinduism, which was the forerunner to Buddhism, as well as Buddhist philosophy, and then reads Ernest Holmes’ Science of Mind, one understands that Holmes incorporated Buddhism in his so-called New Thought (which is really very old thought). People in the 1800s were fascinated with Eastern philosophies. Today, we’re seeing many of our quantum physicists telling us what the Buddha taught 2500 years ago — and it is very much Science of Mind. It’s all fascinating, and I would encourage New Thought adherents to take a big step back into Eastern philosophies to get a better picture of the interactions of karma and reincarnation to better understand these questions.
Clare, Thank so much you for your comment — that is extremely helpful. I write critically in my “One Simple Idea” of how some in the New Thought tradition more or less cherry pick the concept of karma from Vedic or Buddhist traditions as a means of explaining away suffering and tragedy in life. But this often amounts to using karma as a kind of “catch phrase” — an escape hatch from dealing with the complexities of tragedy rather than a fully realized expression of karma as a religious idea. You’re very right about Emerson’s veneration for the Gita — and you’ve directed me today to begin rereading that text. Wishing you all good things in your search, Mitch
The missing element is the presence of a higher power, God. Not mere human thought governs…but when that thought aligns with the divine? All good is present, and good happens in our individual lives. Good is “drawn” all g such lines.
As to the blame aspect, a very real problem for many: as you develop in this study, you learn that “world belief” (Paul would say, “the carnal mind”) is to blame. It is SEEING our innocence, that we find freedom from world belief. Look into Joel Goldsmith’s books, or Mary Baker Eddy’s for more understanding.
Hi Alexis,
Thank you for your comments. I think Mitch and I would agree with you that not just any thought creates reality and that those thoughts aligned with Divine purpose are more causative. It appears there is some confusion here that we are ourselves are arguing otherwise. We are responding to- and challenging- widely held beliefs within some New Thought circles. I can assure you that we have read and admire the works of both Goldsmith and Eddy.
My favorite quote of Mrs. Eddy’s, from her first edition of Science and Health: “The time for thinkers has come; and the time for revolutions, ecclesiastic and social, must come.” (1875)