Perhaps you’ve seen a post or hundred that echoes these sentiments: We were created to be abundant. The universe is conspiring in your favor. Prepare to be the full you. And, my favorite: Practice and all is coming.
The latter is not my favorite because I practice yoga to accumulate merit and agree with its assertion. The overused Pattabhi Jois snippet, at least how I most often see it implied, perfectly captures this notion that at some point in the near or not-that-distant future you will have everything you’ve always desired.
Until you want more, of course.
The Ganesha in the room remains: Who exactly lets you know when you’re ‘there?’
What all the above statements promise is a better future, usually tied into some program or belief system being offered by the person peddling the goods. What none of the quotes address is the present moment. In fact, they all assume you are broken, not to mention unfulfilled.
Oddly enough, many of the same motivational ‘gurus’ who guarantee a better later on are responsible for spreading the idea that you’re perfect right now as you are. How is this possible? How can one be perfect yet have a better future ahead? How does one add one to infinity?
The non-answer usually has something to do with faith, but we’re smarter than that.
For much of human history our forebears had to plan for surplus in order to make it through lean times. Piling harvested grain into silos is one such example. Another is Lent, which was put into effect at a time of year when food supplies were low and had to be rationed. If you can invent a god who tells you that fasting is holy, your starving belly suddenly seems like a worthwhile sacrifice for the greater goal: ‘going’ somewhere better in the afterlife.
Or the next life, as the East has it, which is really another way of saying that where you are now is not acceptable for the greater glory you’ve been promised.
Yet, who promised you in the first place?
I’m all for being good with the present and having a positive outlook. In fact, that too is an evolutionary mindset that helped humans understand and work with our environment, that pushed us to create beautiful and lasting things. I’m an optimistic person, but I also can’t shake the fact that not enough critical thought is going into these self-ingratiating New Age shticks being tossed around like deep revelations of cosmic order.
This current ‘You were made to be abundant!’ idea assumes that humanity evolved for hundreds of thousands of years so that we, right now, could enjoy the fruits of this endless labor, as if billions of deaths from starvation and disease were really just leading up to us having as much of anything we want whenever we want it.
What this ideology does not take into account is that nearly one billion people were undernourished in 2010. What good is talking about abundance to an audience that can’t even get by? Better put, whose greater good are we really discussing?
The other issue—clear by the cliched ‘We are the ones we’ve been waiting for’—again points to the culture of I that takes up so much Self-Help blog space, leading back to our personal glory. We lack the confidence necessary to brush aside such gibberish because we haven’t faced the idea that we’re all going to die and that this just might be it.
Why then confuse ourselves with afterlifes and rebirths and this strange notion that we were ‘created’ to be abundant? How did these odd abstractions slip into conversations about helping one another out and living for the present moment? How much time are we going to spend seeking excess when there aren’t enough resources for everyone to get by in the first place?
America built itself up during the Industrial Revolution, which triggered the idea that we’re endowed with unlimited resources and could (and should) enjoy abundance. We know better now. We’ve dried up resources quicker than any of our ancestors. Spending your time in the Cult of Abundance does nothing to address the real issues we are facing, such as a fractured political system and a society in serious jeopardy of not being able to provide public services, healthcare and aid to the elderly.
The Age of Abundance is behind us. We can blame the last few centuries of industry, or we can work to change it. First we have to stop talking about our imagined destiny and actually create the reality we hope is just going to manifest itself. We need to get real about the challenges we’re facing in an economy built on financial tricks and the plundering of other nations.
Let’s be honest about how we collectively got here and quit trying to heal a fracture with a band-aid. Then we can have a discussion about who we are as a species and where our greatness lies.
Photo: S2S
to the point.
Interesting but very pessimistic perception of what abundance means. I believe, personally, the "poor" are not necessarily the economically deprived, but those whose souls for humanity have been deprived. Those "poor" come at all socio-economic and political realms. If we can create abundance in spirit, we can create a world that is more peaceful and has a heart for humanity. I believe it is mankinds job, not some government imposed program's job, to take care of one another. We have lost touch with our caring for humanity, not just as a nation, but as a world. Yes, I give to programs that feed and clothe the hungry, yes, I help one-on-one with those in dire circumstances in life physically, mentally, and emotionally. That is how we create abundance. The more we give, the more we receive. It may not be financial, it may be the gift of more patience or more heartfelt empathy to help. Whatever is the need for your gifts, you will receive them abundantly as you give from your heart. Take another look at what the current "gurus" say with that perspective and you may be surprised at what you see. May you be blessed abundantly!
~ Susan
Hello Susan,
Thank you for your response. I would suspect that a large percentage of the nearly one billion undernourished people cited above would disagree with your definition of what poor means.
That's wonderful that you help out in those ways. I'm hoping my post wasn't read in terms of meaning economic situation only, and I apologize for not making it clearer if it was. I do cite that one study, but that is not the only metric I was using in the overall message. It was also not meant to be pessimistic but, as I stated, critical of how the term is often presented.
There are three questions I am left with in your reply.
1. What does 'abundance of spirit' mean? What is 'spirit,' and how can we quantify creating an abundance of it?
2. Where exactly does this idea of 'The more we give, the more we receive' come from, and is the point of such a statement giving or receiving?
3. How does one 'give from the heart' when we know that all human actions take place in the brain, which is where all organs communicate with?
Thanks for your replies, look forward to reading them.
d
Fantastic article, Derek. This part especially resonated for me:
"What this ideology does not take into account is that nearly one billion people were undernourished in 2010. What good is talking about abundance to an audience that can’t even get by? Better put, whose greater good are we really discussing?"
I've said this to friends who are fans of "The Secret" and other similar books so many times… Are you really going to tell a child working in a slum in Kenya that all they have to do is focus on their desires to bring in abundance? How about a homeless man with schizophrenia? Is he just not manifesting hard enough?
The idea that we can attract anything and everything we want into our lives has within it an implicit belief that we are in control of everything that happens to us in life… and thus are responsible for the good as well as the bad. According to this mentality, millionaires are rich because they're master manifesters (not because they've exploited people through panzi schemes) and poor people are poor because they're unconscious (not because of oppression, discrimination, or general adversity). Very problematic in my view. It's a nice thought to subdue our fears of helplessness, but it's not realistic or helpful in the long term.
I don't think you're being pessimistic at all. I think you provide honest, valid, and respectfully critical commentary on a movement that probably has good intentions at its roots… but is unfortunately missing the mark in many ways. Thanks for sharing this on Intent.
Susan's counterpoints were a valid response, not deserving of a bullying 'superior' dismissal. We all still have a lot to learn.
Was not a dismissal. I asked her questions. I have not heard back yet, but when I do, I'll respond. Not sure how opening up a dialogue is a dismissal.
In no way did the author bully anyone with his response especially his response to Susan. I will say that in my opinion her response was empty and made no practical sense. Its as if I responded to you Mo-bility like..
"Mo bility, You need to open your heart to the more giving and the receiving will come..and come in ways you will never be prepared for. To question is to give abundantly of one's soul and to connect to the place of where real inspiration can flourish. Questions create abundance and wealth of the spirit and when there is more of this (wealth and spirit) in the world, the planet can be saved."
Why is it that whenever someone gets real like Derek did in this essay, says honest things about the world, somehow they are considered negative or pessimistic? This is a dangerous way to react and does not create abundance but merely more illusion.