The deep vision or the underground thinking

Often, within the hundreds of mails I get every month, someone asked me why having a clear vision of what he wants, this is not progressing and nothing seems to move towards their wishes. Perhaps the Wattles science is not working? What could be happening? Why nothing seems to materialize according to our wishes?

The answer is simple. Most people, not all, believe they want something that they think consciously. The conscious mind is our conscience, so is what we reach to see ourselves. But this is only the tip of an iceberg. Our mind is much more than this, and is in “underground” on our conscience. Beneath our consciousness seems to have, according to what is described by Mr Freud hundred years ago. a mind and a sub-consciousness mind and unconscious mind.

I am not a scientist and I have no elements to judge whether Mr. Freud was right or not, but clearly knew that at least a very high percentage of our mind moves deep in places, which we did not even suspect. We see only the tip of the iceberg, the part to which we have access. And if our mind is not in line with our wishes, the fraction can hardly make conscious movements to the universe and the things that must move to fulfill our true desires. Or could be contradictory and may even be cancelled.

Under our conscience our mind thinks permanently, and send messages to other things, and the knowingly substance. But nothing stops when our conscience takes a breath, for example during sleep. Our mind is still living, working, and our spirit continues awake and sending messages to the rest of the universe.

Therefore it is important to align our spirit and appreciation, perhaps our most powerful weapon, with our conscious mind, our desires or visions of what we want to be, do, or have to live. How is this done? That is the subject of another article, but in principle the only weapon in our possession is our spirit. Learning to master it is to learn to create for us. It is learning to be god.

For now, suffice is to say that this is the mechanism by which our conscious desires can be nullified by another mind, also ours, which makes us wreck. And that is why we believe that the science does not work.

To be rich is the opposite of being poor?

This is a clear example of how the culture, the language and the concepts deceive to us. To be poor is not to be able to fulfil our basic necessities. To be rich is not the opposite, so that to fulfil ours basic necessities only transforms to us into people of middle-class, very far from being rich. The statistics that each government makes demonstrate that in each country there are many families who cover their basic necessities and at at the same time there are very few rich ones.

Why this error of concepts appears, in which what seems to be the opposed thing is not really the opposite thing?

It is produce by the facti that the poverty does not exist, in a practical sense. The wealth yes. One cannot have poverty, is something intangible, is a quality, is not an object. Nevertheless the wealth is an object, is measurable, quantifiable, it is measured in dollars or houses or cars or in… There are many forms to measure the wealth actually. The poverty is simply a quality, the one of not reaching to cover the basic necessities with feeding, house, clothes, education and others.

And what are the consequences of this fundamental difference?

Beacuase the poverty, being a quality or a condition, has much better press than the wealth. To the poor men in some countries everything is allowed, including the crime, by its own condition of poor men. The rich ones are punished in any case, considering them bad people by the only fact of being rich, persecuting them in different forms, in almost all the countries. And are crime suspicions or Mafia organized is believed like origin of its fortune.

And what other consequences exist?

They are many. There are governments that opress the masses with the pretext to defend the poor men, and other governments who tolerate crimes or foment them with the pretext of defending the freedom of people. Those that say to defend the poor men make them poorer, whereas those who say to defend the freedom, still put below all the liberties the freedom of commerce, confusing the population.

What we would have to change?

Only our mind. If a rich one made fortune with legal means and their own capacity, is worthy of admiration, emulation and respect. If a rich one made its fortune with no legal means, he is gangster like those which robs to eat. We have to make an agreement in the society in what is crime is crime, and criminals are criminals no matter if are rich or poor. Of course the poor man can have excuses in front of a judge, but it does not stop being a delinquent. When the entire world understands this law, will be more rich people and and less poor ones.

The powerful people that have used their will and desire

I read somewhere that the promoters or disseminators of the book and film The Secret, based on the Law on Attraction, are given paternity on the most famous fortunes of mankind. We are told, at least I thought well understood that Carnegie, Rockefeller and the like, have become millionaires through carrying out the secret that these groups now deveale to us.

Besides being quite presumptuous, since there is the slightest way of knowing how Rockefeller made his fortune in his intimate brain, it seems to me completely nonsensical award all these fortunes to a certain way of thinking. And if the holders of such fortunes were a secret inviolate mysteriously conveyed to them, we can hardly check.

Care, I am not saying that coincidentally may have reason not to a great extent, because there is no way to prove it. But presuming it to sell books or movies I think excessive marketing. Of course, in addition to this statement stained with a conspiratorial component, as they suggest that all these wealthy individuals shared the same secret that was passed them all so dark and underground.

It is useless to mention that all this is impossible to prove. But that would be the lesser of two evils. The downside is that it puts them at a level of presumtion that makes intelligent people unbelieve immediately of his theories, ignoring its positive elements. In other words, well-intentioned people who are exposed to this level of exaggeration were horrified by its sharp smell of cheap marketing.
At least that’s what I think.

Acting on positive

In every one of those situations which we live, we stand with people who have a competitive vision of life. People are living trying to compete with others to secure their position at work, at society or at love. People do not hesitate to destroy their peers to earn a place in the office or in the company. People who speak badly of others, sowing doubt about its morality or simply discredited by envy.

This happens in all countries, all cultures and all activities. And this is part of a deep contradiction: Many times people make much damage to others to get a good thing for one, without thinking that an injury can never build a well. Even up to the war, the most brutal act of collective human, nobody wins, and the victors often lose more than the losers.

To think that a bad action to a coworker, speaking ill of him or destroy his reputation, can generate some good for ourselves, is to think that evil can generate a good thing. Perhaps temporarily this could happen, and we get some improvements for a while, but in the long run this will reverse in some aspect of our lives, the universe will pass the bill.

No one is alone or isolated in the universe, and the damage that we do to others is what we are doing to ourselves. Only that for our confusion, sometimes occurs positive effects misleading. If we can understand this truth so simple and naive, the world would be a place much more livable and humane.

Why helping others? (cont.)

We all have something to give. That is a truth that has no discussion. We see it every day, at every step, in all situations. Even those who do not seem.In my work I know many people, both very capable and very prepared at universities in the first world, as well as people who just finished his elementary school and develops very simple tasks. I know also people of great experience, which many years ago that makes his task, and people just start in a trade, either simple or complex. And everywhere, absolutely everywhere, I see something that they have to give. Something that others need, at every step, every moment of the day.

We work in a group, more or less reduced. In this group, as I say, there are people of every background and experience. My first job was trying to join the group, namely giving the characteristic of a group. Understanding as a set of people with a common goal, with a project together. To do so the first thing I did, of course, to establish the common goal and comment it with everyone, making them see that we had to work for all the same.

But the second thing I did was make them see each of them that everyone had something to give to others. Rather than concentrate on showing that each was necessary that the work of each was part of the essential work of the group, my conversation with each of them was to show that they had something to give to the group. That meant that the motivation to grow exponentially. So, rather than show that each one was needed for a role, I concentrated on discovering that thing everyone could give to the group beyond their work.

Their work is the counterpart of his salary, but to enforce the injunction to Wattles “give more than they receive”, they each had to give more than they receive, that is needed to be something more than their work. Making their task merely part of a machine as a gear, which in the best case I could get perfect working to fulfill the goal. And never work in perfect shape, of course. But giving more than they receive, the mechanism of the machine operates more oiled and cover all the gaps that might have on the task of each. Thus, each one grows and the group grows and grows. Extrapolating, the universe grows, more life for all.

And what each one can give? I started mentioning all the joy and good education. Those two things are an essential first base that transform the workplace in a nice place, peaceful and pleasant. A good environment becomes all more productive and efficient. In addition lime roughness, generates confidence and makes us more easy the problems always, always going to happen.

And then I continued with leniency. The forbearance is a virtue that has no press, but is essential for understanding among human beings. The indulgence is a relative of generosity, and is to be sympathetic with the mistakes of others while we give a second chance and we have no accents too strong in the failures of others. The indulgence can build relationships between humans, that the mutual understanding of the errors of each generates an extraordinary familiarity and acceptance.

There is much more to say, and to give. But these three things I talked to each of them produced a multiplied impressive effect. Each of the people realized they had much more to give than just their work 8 hours in an office. Each became aware of how important it was to him for the whole group, and that solidified and joined the group.

Things are happening at this very moment, but I can assure you that neither ten years could have achieved as a group united as I managed in a few weeks to show what each has to give, without being obliged to do so. It is magical. Make the test.

There is a need to be rich?

I was thinking of what a visitor wrote of this blog, who indicated that indeed the true wealth was in the sentiments, the good things in relation enter people, not the money. He said that more or less verbatim…. I think the greatest asset that a person can get in his life is empathy, trust, love, friendship, patience, understanding, all that is the real human wealth. However much money you have not you will be happier, on the contrary, that you can do the most unhappy man of the earth. Greetings….

Meanwhile another blog visitor replied, very shortly, what would happen if a family member requires urgent surgical operation that cost $ 40,000 and would not… It goes without saying that the violent situation, and given that things are real that occur every day, there is no need to exaggerate the point. We have all seen instances of the sort.

Of course fine words are very poetic and very pleasant to hear, but faced with the reality of our world today, it is impossible not to see the need to have money, to dispose of assets. Anyone can put themselves in the place of people who are not served with the technology that would be necessary to save their lives, simply because they do not have money or property to transform into money.

It is at this point where all romanticismos disappear and one despairs, even reneging on its luck and god, it is impossible and frustration that this generates.

So we need to be rich, have a lot of money, so that money is not just a problem in our lives. SIf we have enough and more than enough, then the poem may actually be a poem, dreams can be dreams, because nothing is going to be stained the color of the need. There actually may be actually the words of this person that the greatest wealth are feeling. Cuando tienes el dinero resuelto claro. When you have the money solved, of course.

The Fear

Passed days I wrote a post about the fear, and I promised another about how to removing it. I took a long time in writing this, since I find the topic of the fear central in the form of living of the humans. I should find a certain method to escape from. That would be the biggest revolution since Wallace Wattles wrote its famous The Science of Getting Rich.
Not I believe to have achieved it, but yes I can share a series of thoughts in this respect and meditate like to progress in the matter. Much has meditated on the matter and about how should be this method. Here my ideas.
When it was a litlle boy and lived with my parents, it took me a lot of time concile the dream at nights. I don’t know if it was because had a lot of energy or for what, but it passed long while put to bed without being able to fall asleep. I would have six or seven years and we lived in a house with two rooms, in one my mother and my father and in the other me, alone and without being able to fall asleep.
We all know that at night the senses become deep and sensitive. This way, I in my vigil, believed to listen noises from the kitchen or from the backyard. And always invariably thought that it was a thief that entered to the house. I was never imagined a cat or a bird, it was always a thief. Then, from my bed I used to call to my father and asked him if he had listened that noise. And my father screamed me from his bed: it is “a cat!” or it is “the wind!”. I didn’t believe his answer and continued thinking that it was a thief, death of fear in my bed.
This history repeated night after night. Me scared to death in my bed thinking of a thief that soon would threaten us with a gun and my father looking for every day a different excuse that could be convincing.
Until one day, already tired of this sequence and not being able to sleep, after my question my father got up of his bed, he came to my room and sat down on my bed with all the patience and kindness of which was capable, and he told me very affectionately: Do you “believe that if it was a thief you would listen to it to make the most minimum noise?” 
The argument was so simple and logical that left me silenced in a beginning, stops then to make me feel so calm that never more I listened noises at night again although it consisted me to fall asleep. The argument that if a thief is really a professional one and he makes his work well, nobody would notice until it was not too late, sounded me so rational and logical that dissipated all my fears. My father didn’t say that thieves will never enter in my house, but rather I would not listen to them until he had them ahead. For my six year-old mind this was pure logic, brutal and solid as a rock.
The moral is: how we dissipate the fear? with pure, brutal and solid logic as a rock. The reality indicates us that the only thing that we create we create with the thought. If then we turn it an object with our hands it is another thing, but it was already created. It is more, the human thought is the totally original only thing in the universe. You can imagine a dog with two lines or with five paws, or sew that they don’t exist. Or a form that nobody never creates. Or designs that never been saw before.
And the reality indicates us that we are creative when we impregnate the thought in the amorphous substance. If we have a creation power, we cannot be afraid, since all that we want will be given us. The power of the creation has already been demonstrated thoroughly in the book of Wattles and in this blog, as when we mention David of Michelangelo in another post. And that creation power exercised in absolute harmony with the nature, with the everything, with god, by means of the gratitude for the things that we obtain and we will obtain, it is the one that returns us unique in the Universe.

Wattles revisited

As always I can, I make a re-reading of the book of the Science of Becoming Rich of our good friend and beneficent Wallace Wattles. This time was for some days of uncertainty to have happened, of doubt and of confusion in what concerns to my work and the different activities that I carry out to make money. It was, as always, to return to the source to charge the batteries.

And every time that I return encounter a new aspect in Wattles that had not seen before. This astonishes me because it is not such a long neither so dense book as so that one always finds different things.

In this case I stopped in a page with a thought that came me suddenly to my head. It was the security that Wattles is not an author of those of self-help that seeks to give us a recipe on how thinking, what to think and that if we make it we will have all the things that we want. The books of self-help have a thing in common: they say make this and that, of certain form, and your life will change one day for the other one. Wattles is different. Not there are recipes to change our form to think, there is not anything to modify in our lives. Not there is an order of things that to complete, neither recommendations that many times are contradicted among them.

Wattles is simple, simple, deeply scientific, creative, formative, and all their recommendations settle in making the things well. Only that it is necessary to make them in certain way, in a successful way, as he says, and with the faith of getting our purpose and gratitude for that to the sustance. Read it and see.

How to use the creative mind

Wallace Wattles indicates us repeatedly that we should use the creative mind instead of the competitive mind. The competitive mind is that makes an effort to win, that wants to take most of something that already exists in its own benefit. It is the mind that suposes that the wealths in the universe are limited and that therefore I should take it for me before it could be taken by another. And if I can take what another has well, quicker I will become rich. It is almost the limited mind, the mind of the economic rules, the squizo mind.

On the other hand the creative mind is that makes an effort to create wealths where there are not exists. It is the creative thought that looks for generating instead of appropriating, to put instead of taking out, to invent instead of competing by using the invented. It is the way like the big men of the history have become big, generating what doesn’t exist instead of keeping a portion of the existent thing.

And I think of an example excessively paradigmatic, first for the current times and then because it shows the same person clearly and consecutively in the use of their two minds. It is Bill Gates example.

When he was young, Bill used their creative mind deeply. In those years the computation companies decreased to a minuscule group led by IBM that had the vanguard and most of the market. The blue giant, as they call it, possessed enormous resources dedicated to develop more and more powerful machines and that alone could be bought by gigantic companies in many thousands or millions of dollars.

But young Bill was resolved to create an empire. Anyone in their situation, and with some common sense, had been given that it could not compete against IBM. Anyone also that had their ambition and their desire of wealth and had not still been discouraged, had thought that if he really wanted to make it should look for big investors, to propose them a convincing idea in exchange for many millions, and to rush to compete against the blue giant to be about stealing them although a small part of their enormous market. Maybe in few years it could have taken a tiny percentage of the market of the big computers and he had lived happy for ever in a humble middle class condominium.

But on the other hand Bill used his creative mind and decided to dive until finding a new niche, a new market, and he found it soon: computers for common people, for the man of the street, for the home and the small office, instead of computers for the big corporations. Their genius exploded and the substance helped him to develop a gigantic market that transformed it in few years in the richest man in the world. This way, instead of fighting for a small portion of the cake of other, his creative mind impelled him to create a new cake that was almost everything of its property and filled him with thousands of millions of dollars. Not alone he won thousands of millions but rather it contributed to change the life and the work like we know them, making an enormous jump to the modern world.

But the time passed. Not exacerbated by their enormous success the so young Bill already decided that it was moment his cake to be only for him that should not allow to enter to anybody. And it began to impel monopolic practices that were worth him millions of dollars in trials and a bad reputation like greedy, disloyal and not very prone character to the innovations if these were developed by others. The antimonopoly trials of Microsoft are a classic in all the areas of the planet and the bad reputation of its company is not gratuitous, due to those not very friendly practices. If the good of Bill had maintained their trust in itself, their honesty of young and open venturesome, their vision in the face of the risks, another would be the concept of their company among the customers.

An example like this shows us that the use of the creative mind can make us grow to high limits while the use of the competitive, greedy and conservative mind, the only thing that will make is that we lose our innocence and our capacity of creating wealth.

The simplicity of Wattles writings

The simplicity with which Wallace writes it is something astonishing. Its main book, to which refers this blog, The Science of Becoming Rich is something that most of the writers would want only for its simplicity. It is a brief, small book, we would say concise, as if it had been written counting the words. It has very few metaphors, very few turns or examples, it is a Spartan book.

As a good author that knows that their words will be interpreted and many times taken out of context, Wattles doesn’t take pains in that its prose is abundant. If it will be interpreted, it is better than they have things to interpret. Making it brief and concise, there is more material to be plentiful in what is.

His style is simple and direct. On all the things, simple, of a simplicity that oppresses. Nowadays the writers that approach these topics determine to fill leaves and leaves always repeating the same thing. In that way, with one concept they publish several books and they make a collection, people say this way that he is a fruitful writer. Wattles preferred to make just the opposite.

Each chapter is dedicated to a topic or a specific aspect of the Science to Become Rich. Not there are repetitions, except for the concepts that he wants to stress and that are the four or five essential concepts of the science. The chapters are brief and of a bearable and interesting writing, without big definitions neither forced passages. The reading is extremely easy, almost without realizing the book is devoured in few hours.

If the message is simple, if the ideas are simple, they can put on in some few words. Who did say that the universe should be complex in its development? One thing is that it is complex of understanding and another very different one that is complex of counting. And the universe that Wattles shows us is simple, it is simple and it doesn’t require big intelligences to be understood, or at least accepted. Like his book.

When I met the Science of Wattles

When I met the work of Wallace Wattles I was passing a good moment in the economic thing, but there was something that bothered me, a hole sensation, of not to know why I was making that was making for. The things of my work went well, and economically I could not complain, although it was not becoming rich, but a feeling that it was a hollow inside, that anything cared a lot and of not having a desire that impels me steamed up at that moment.

Casually I found in internet the book of Wallace Wattles. First read it in English and then in Spanish, that obviously clarified me a lot the vision. Immediately I felt that it was in front of something that had looked for many times without knowing it exactly.

However, I was oppressed by the enormous quality of what had and for the enormous task that waited for me. Immediately I felt that I believe firmly in what Wattles said, an instantaneous faith took possession of me. But at the same time, I felt that that faith required a very big impulse of my will so was made real.

Then I left the book to a side for a couple of months. I had the feeling that I was not enough clever, that I should gather forces, or something should happen that impelled me externally to follow the advice and postulates of the book. It was a strange sensation: on one hand knowing that I was in front of something totally certain for me, but at the same time to know that you don’t have enough force to make it like he should make it. It was as mixing the happiness that I have discovered the truth and a certain sadness of knowing that the search had finished, together with feeling weak to confront the challenges that I should confront.

Until the force appeared and everything changed. The faith put my soul in movement, the gratefulness arose suddenly and I started. I began this way to become rich with firm steps, with certainties and without fear, and with the absolute conviction that this is possible, this works, it is easier than it seems although there are moments of difficulty and weakness. Now, I see back and I think that what I wanted was happening as quick as possible, with determination and security. Now, this is only growing day by day, with the certainty that everything is possible.

Technorati tags: History of Changes | Feel Good | Wattles |

All we are equals to obtain wealth and happiness

Yesterday I stopped enough time to think about an idea that left Anselmo in a recent comment of this post. The idea expressed clearly that all the human beings are born prepared with the same tools and that these are the necessary and sufficient to achieve their happiness or to obtain what desire. Not external determining factors exist that can stop us if we apply the correct techniques. And all we have the necessary gifts and the capacity to apply them, independently of our origin. It suffices then only with knowing the appropriate mechanisms.

The happiness present in the creation.

Creating is to create with happiness. Does not exist anything that produce more happiness than the creation, pure and simple. That we listen always from artists, the purest version of the human mind that builds the universe.

And why? Because the happiness and the creation feedback themselves mutually. Creating is to generate something that does not exist, that is new, is a birth, and that produces happiness because the expectation that new things always generates in our heart, when are good things. When it is created something good, in some place of the universe, a happiness is generated that is expanded and floods us of faith in the future.

I think, then I create what I think.

Came to my mind the idea of Omar, that emphasized in a comment in this blog that “to think is the hardest work than exists”. This it taken freely of the chapter 4 of The Science of Getting Rich of Wallace D. Wattles.

Really think is a hard work. It could not be less, since is the authentic piece of the creation reserved for us, humans. and for God, or the amorphous substance, call it as you want. If the nature privileged us with the possibility to do worlds, to build cities or beautiful monuments, and each imaginable and unimaginable thing in our head, should not be an easy task. If we are the only beings of the creation that can think, should not be a simple task.

The key of the success is not the ambition, but the generosity

I like a lot this phrase of Craig Newmark, the founder and owner of Craiglist.org. Though this it is not a blog of general matters, neither of news, this called my attention the position of this guy regarding as handles its company, its ideas about winning money and its decision always of donating all the benefits of his business.