Thoughts and the “Point of Attraction”

What is a “point of attraction”, as described by Abraham-Hicks? How is such a point “created”? And how does it relate to our thoughts and thinking?

In this blog post I am going to talk about the concept of “point of attraction” and the term “thought”. The idea here is to try to explain what the “point of attraction” really is, and what it has to do with a “thought”.

This explanation, however, has not been entirely easy to construct, since the books provided by Abraham-Hicks seem, at first sight at least, to have inconsistent definitions of what actually entails a “point of attraction”.

Another point related to that is that they are mentioning “point of attraction” many, many times in each book. So, for example, in The Law of Attraction “point of attraction” appears in at least 14 passages, and in Money, and the Law of Attraction it is found in at least 28 passages.

Still another point that makes it not entirely easy to find all “point of attraction” passages in their six books is the fact that only The Law of Attraction and Money, and the Law of Attraction have a general index in the back of the book. The other four volumes have no indexes at all.

Nevertheless, I was still able, with the help of my many muses, to find 38 passages in Ask and It Is Given that are talking about the idea of “point of attraction”. Thus, we have a total of 80 potential passages that we can look at (but we will, of course, only look at a few of those, here in this particular blog post).

In the following we will therefore devote considerable time and space to properly analyze different quotes and passages from Abraham-Hicks’s books, so that we can produce a more “unified” account (or “consistent” definition) of the term “point of attraction”.

Why Care About Point of Attraction?

But why should care about the whole idea of “point of attraction”, in the first place?

Well, the phrase “point of attraction” is very important for any student of the Law of Attraction. For it is one of the most fundamental concepts of the Law of Attraction (in Abraham-Hicks’s account of it).

So if we don’t understand what “point of attraction” refers to, or what it purportedly is responsible for, or how we practically should go about using it, we will never be “master” deliberate creators.

That means, basically, that without understanding (and then applying) the basic idea of “point of attraction” we will never be manifesters of anything else than “mediocrity” (i.e. our current “what-is”, what we experience already, here and now).

Therefore, if we really are serious about succeeding with the Law of Attraction, we should be equally serious about the concept of “point of attraction”.

By knowing more about the idea of “point of attraction” we can become better deliberate creators, and thereby be able to “steer” both our minds and our manifested surroundings into more and more positive directions.

It is also important to note here that “point of attraction” is a concept that also works for non-students of Law of Attraction as well. But those people seldom understand that it is there, and therefore seldom practice any deliberate “steering” of their minds.

And because of that, they are mostly are stuck in their current vibrational range. So they are “creating by default”, by using their non-managed “point of attraction”. So they are the typical examples of “manifesters of mediocrity”.

Your Thoughts Create a Vibration

There are many passages in Abraham-Hicks books where the idea of “point of attraction” is primarily associated with the word “thought” or “thoughts”.

So in Ask and It Is Given they say (p. 51):

Yet another “thought” passage is this (in Ask and It Is Given, p. 110):

So here we can stop for a while and contemplate what they have said. The idea that they are putting forth seems to be that “thoughts” are somehow ‘identical to’, or ‘equal to’, the “point of attraction”.

The underlying concept is probably that thoughts somehow lead to (i.e. create, or produce) the “point of attraction.

Thus, if we have a certain thought, that thought will create a certain (presumably unique) “point of attraction”. And if we have another thought, that thought will create another (also presumably unique) “point of attraction”.

This way of thinking seems to correspond well with a passage in Ask and It Is Given, where they say (p. 68; my explanation within square brackets):

So the idea seems simple enough, then: your thoughts create a vibration within you. And that vibration is your “point of attraction”.

Old Thoughts and New Thoughts

Another interesting passage is this (Ask and It Is Given, p. 173):

So at this stage we can make two observations. The first observation is that if an “old thought” is not “activated”, or if a “new thought” is not currently in your mind, it does not count towards your current “point of attraction”.

It is important here to really stress that there are two types of thoughts mentioned here. The “new thought” about what happened yesterday is fresh and is not yet a “belief”. (Remember: “beliefs” are just thoughts that we keep on thinking, as Abraham-Hicks so often says).

And because the “new thought” is so fresh, it hasn’t “cemented itself” into our vibration yet. So if we do not think that thought right now, then it is not a part of our current “point of attraction”.

However, with “old thoughts” the situation is different. For according the quoted passage above, an “old thought” can either be “activated” or not. And only if it is “deactivated” will it not be part of your “point of attraction. But if it is “activated”, then it will be part of your “point of attraction”.

I will here, for brevity’s sake, avoid to discuss the idea about “deactivating” any “old thoughts” that we have. We might return to that topic in another post.

Vibrational Weight

Another observation we can make (from the passage above) derives from the phrase “does not have any vibrational weight in your point of attraction” (Ask and It Is Given, p. 173).

The interesting thing about this phrase is that we here presumably get a confirmation that our “point of attraction” is composed of several vibrations. For the words “vibrational weight” seem to indicate that our “point of attraction” is made up of several vibrations, each of which may have different “weights”.

So the idea is supposedly then that some vibrations (thoughts) may be stronger, while others may be weaker. And the total aggregate of all of them would then presumably produce what we understand as a “point of attraction”.

Thoughts As Conclusions

As you may already have seen in my blog post called Desires, Beliefs, and Vibrational Relativity, I am using my idea that we are always playing with several sentences (propositions, statements, thoughts) at the same time, although we may not consciously think about all of them at the same time.

In my view, some are so basic (and imprinted in our vibration) that we don’t even question them (or think about them, in a “conscious” way).

So in my interpretation of Abraham-Hicks’s idea of a “thought”, I understand it to be a network of sentences that are linked together, in virtue of their logical and topical content.

Thus, in my view, I understand a “thought” to be a conclusion of any number of networked sentences. So for example, let us look at the thought (i.e the conclusion) “I am worried about my daughter”.

This thought (conclusion) comes from other thoughts (sentences, propositions, etc.). So perhaps it might look something like this, if we would put it into propositional logic, with nine premises and one conclusion (and being very “loose” about the deduction of the conclusion):

In this scenario, then, the “the point of attraction” for the thought (sentence, proposition) “I am worried about my daughter” would be a combination of all the vibrations for the nine sentences, each of which may contribute more, or less, than the others (i.e. having different “weight”).

Note here that this thought (conclusion) is derived from nine sentences. And it doesn’t have to stop there. We may very well be thinking other thoughts (conclusions) at (approximately) the same time. And those thoughts may combine to produce yet other conclusions.

In any case, we should remember that Abraham-Hicks says that “your thoughts produce a vibration within you that equals your point of attraction” (in Ask and It Is Given, p. 68). And we note that they use the word “thoughts” (in plural), but still talk about a “point of attraction” (in singular).

So we can tentatively conclude that they are talking about several thoughts that are thought, which then together produce that single “point of attraction”. And these thoughts (whether they are “conclusions” or “premises”) then supposedly would have to be thought within a relatively short time period.

Since the commonly mentioned time limits for manifestation with the Law of Attraction is 17 seconds (or 68 seconds), these different thoughts would most probably have to be thought within one of those time windows (unless they are “old beliefs” that are somehow “activated”).

Conclusion

The most important point to remember here is that your thoughts produce your point of attraction. By learning to “steer” your thoughts into more and more positive territory, you can get more positive manifestations.

Before I end I also would like to add that there are many more questions about “point of attraction” that I did not have room for here. Here are some:

• What connection is there between “words” and “point of attraction”?
• What is the difference between “words” and “thoughts”?
• What is the relationship between “emotions” and “thoughts”?
• Do “beliefs” (or “thoughts”) contain emotional content, or emotions themselves?
• Is there one “point of attraction” per topic, or just a “total” point of attraction?

I would like to return to some of these questions in other blog posts, hopefully in the near future.

Best of luck in “tweaking” your “point of attraction”!

Chris Bocay

REFERENCES

NOTE: All links are clean (i.e. NOT affiliate links).

---