If I believe our natural resources are limited, can I also believe in abundance?
This week's question from my portal “The Neagle Code: Directions for Life” comes from Deb Kolb.
I am passionate about conserving our precious resources, which comes from a belief that the resources on our planet are finite. Everything I hear & read points in that direction. There certainly is plenty of evidence that our resources are finite.
Can you please help me to see what I cannot see about abundance? Are our natural resources really not finite?
Hi Deb and thanks for your question!
It is very interesting when you study the Universe because you begin to realize that some very basic truths run under everything. The Universe operates according to very exact Laws. We can only perceive our world to the degree that we are aware of these Laws thus the Laws never change, only our awareness of them.
We are programmed and guided through our life by our five senses; we see, hear, smell, taste and touch. In a very real way we become handicapped by these senses because it becomes difficult for us to perceive and believe beyond what our senses tell us is true or real.
Because we are so lead by our physical senses we tend to form the opinion that anything beyond the physical isn't substantial enough to be considered real or realistic. Only the physical that can be weighed and measured is what is most important to be considered when evaluating life, the resources we need to survive and thrive as a planet and species.
What we greatly tend to misunderstand is that everything is in a constant state of motion for the single purpose of life, and that nothing exists in our Universe outside that premise. This is the concept that I begin all my teachings from. Everything is for MORE LIFE.
This means that the Universe is abundant in knowledge and everything that is required for MORE LIFE to be possible. By the Law of MORE LIFE it cannot contradict itself. You cannot have two opposing truths in the Universe because they would cancel each other out and everything would cease to exist.
We have developed the belief, through time and lack of understanding of these great Laws, that we live in a limited Universe. It's difficult to perceive beyond what our senses tell us is true; however science will tell you that everything we perceive through our senses is only limited by the sense itself and not the thing we are perceiving.
If you come from a finite belief then that is what your experience of the world will be, which is very similar to a lack mindset. If you believe in lack and worry about lack, your experience will mirror that to you.
If you come from an infinite belief then that is what your experience of the world will be. This again is very similar to a belief in abundance. If you see abundance everywhere and know that you are not limited, your experience will mirror that to you in the same way and your life will be abundant.
There can't be two opposing truths.
So true – It really just comes down to either More Life is true or it’s not.
I also love this quote David shared before, which helped me start to grasp this concept:
Wallace Wattles, The Science of Getting Rich p.13:
“No man, therefore, is poor because nature is poor, or because there is not enough to go around. Nature is an inexhaustible storehouse of riches; the supply will never run short. Original Substance is alive with creative energy, and is constantly producing more forms. When the supply of building material is exhausted, more will be produced; when the soil is exhausted so that food stuffs and materials for clothing will no longer grow upon it, it will be renewed or more soil will be made. When all gold and silver has been dug from the earth, if man is still in such a stage of social development that he needs gold and silver, more will be produced from the Formless. The Formless Stuff responds to the needs of man; it will not let him be without any good thing.”
Exactly Tanisha. Wattles said it all right there. Appreciate you sharing the quote.
When I read the question, I was curious to read the answer. Thanks David for explaining this so well.
You’re welcome Lalitha.
Hi David and Deb,
To further the discussion, I also think it depends on how we define resources. In Paul Zane Pilzer’s work he talks about the alchemy of economics, and he writes that abundance changes based on the definition of resources, which is based on technology at the time. He’s written a couple of books where he explains that before we ever get to a point of running out of a resource, like gas, that we technologically come up with advances or changes to our use of the resource, therefore we have abundance throughout society even with “finite” -looking resources. We will change our use before we run out and thus either expand our years of use or what resource we use to get the same thing done. In the gas example, the catalytic converter being one example, the Alaskan pipeline being another, and defining oil resources 6 miles underground, rather than 1 mile. This is an old example, but one that stuck in my head.
Thanks for the post Jeanine. We will always have exactly what we are needing in that time. That More Life principal will not allow for anything other than that to take place. We can define resources however we choose, but it doesn’t change the fact that we will always find a way for our resources to be abundant. The Universe and its Laws confirm that.
David, what do we say to all the people who starve because of drought? how is it that they dont get what they need?
Nitsan, they starve because of a lack of awareness. They don’t know they can change their situation and therefore are bound to stay where they are. Life will always find a way if the proper awareness is utilized.
As we need, additional resources are provided. But only as we need them – not when they are frivolous. If the need for abundance is not created, abundance is not created. In other words, if I want a private jet in order to be frivolous, I will not manifest it. But if my level of impact makes a private jet necessary for me to serve, then it will manifest. I believe the author sees the private jet as frivolous because it is frivolous for her level of impact. However, if and when it becomes necessary, it will no longer be frivolous. What do you think David?
Only Deb could speak to that Dhenu, but manifestation is specifically related to each individual. In my opinion, something becomes frivolous when a person has strong feelings around an object, most likely something they would never purchase for themselves, because they are not willing to stretch to get it. In effect, they are living with a limiting belief. What many fail to realize is that ‘frivolous’ item had to be built by someone, which was hired to create the item and get compensated for it. Don’t discount (no pun intended) that when you go to buy something you really want.
David, that was a great answer!
Here’s one to entertain. Under the premise of More Life, what if every interaction that we have with nature is an energy exchange and what if nature, by her inherent nature, had to agree to events that humans caused even before it happened? Case in point – the Gulf Oil Spill. Certain species of marine life were dying off because of the spill. Once any species in nature is introduced to something foreign, it produces antibodies and eventually a stronger immune system that is not affected in those future generations. What if these species of marine life, by design, “agreed” to an event like an oil spill to strengthen their immune systems and make them less susceptable to other events like future oil spills and changes on the planet? What if nature uses humans as a cause and by our actions, we are the effect for her to carry on?
Very interesting perspective Madeline. Thanks for sharing it here and giving us something to think about.
I’ve asked and answered this question myself many times, but it was nice to see it here. I’ll print this out since I’m sure it will come up as I teach these principles as well, and it will be handy to have this at the ready. It seems as we begin to change our mindset on lack to an understanding of abundance, frequent reminders of this concept is necessary.
They sure are Carin. I appreciate the comment.
I think there can be two opposing truths…it’s called a “paradox.”
Not with regards to the Universe Carol. Paradox is a word used to describe an argument that produces an inconsistency along the way. When entering into these situations like Deb proposed, we are speaking about the Laws we are governed by. In that sense, it is not possible to have two opposing truths.
Hi David. I’ve been having some of the same issues about this as Deb and I would love some feedback. First, I guess I’m not sure exactly what “more life” means. It goes back to the issue of thinking and feeling abundant in the context of the question of “Is this something I want to be do or have?” Is there always an end point to what everyone wants? For instance, if someone feels insecure because they only have $5 billion in the bank instead of the the $10 billion they think will make them happy, is the extra $5 billion part of “more life?” Since (I’m guessing here!) the difference in how they live and what they are able to do is probably nonexistent at that level, wouldn’t it be more about a scarcity mentality than about more life?
And then there’s the follow-up question, and I’d love to know if I am at least on the right track in understanding about how you explain the scarcity, or finite quantity of natural resources. I think you are saying that because our understanding of our resources is coming from science that is within the limitations of our five senses, we are not aware that there are further resources to meet whatever additional need arises. Possibly the resources could be different in type or nature than what we think we will need, but it’s a matter of believing that there is an abundance of resources, however they present themselves, and we are not yet capable of perceiving them. And this is all based on the Universal Law that if there is a problem or a need, there is a solution, even if we haven’t been able to see it yet.
Thanks so much for addressing Deb’s question, and mine!
Thanks for the questions Dorine. First off, the concept of more life, on it most basic of levels, means that we are always seeking to improve where we are at in our consciousness. We are always seeking, and because of that we are evolving with the idea of more life in mind, because if we are not growing in some way we are surely dying. It is a much deeper concept than this, and one to be studied, but at least it gives you a sense.
For your second question, you are accurate. We have yet to experience “what’s next” because we are currently living in an age of the resources and materials being in our awareness. As soon as we become aware of what materials we will require for life to continue existing, then we will have the knowledge to get them. Fifty years ago no one could have envisioned something called the internet, yet here we stand with that technology being a major part of our lives. The same materials were always here, its just that our awareness of it wasn’t. The same will hold true for future generations. We are bound by nothing but our own awareness. And yes, if a problem exists then the solution also exists. It is completely in line with the Laws.
I totally agree- it is so easy to become enmeshed in limiting beliefs about what is possible- even those who sometimes are pro porting to come From a place of prosperity can have lack lurking in the background- it is the constant asking for the veil of lack to be lifted – that allows prosperity In all of it’s glorious forms to be revealed- ask and you do receive- prosperity or lack the choice is yoursxx
It sure is Michele. I know which I choose…always! Thanks for the post.
If you come from a finite thinking back ground – fears of lack etc. how do you begin to change that mind set?
You have to make the decision that you are not going to be ruled by lack thoughts. When they enter, hit the ‘next’ button and move on. It can be as easy or as difficult as you make it. The big thing is that you cannot allow these lack beliefs to rule your decision making. If you do, and most do this not being conscious of it, you will not get what you want. Thanks for the post Jeanne.
You are always so wise and helpful David. Love this explanation! Thx!!
Thank you Joan. I appreciate the comment and am glad you enjoyed the explanation.
First allow me to say I love your work, and have myself had amazing results using your wealth consciousness advice…
However this is the one area where I also have a conflict. I have visited the Amazon, seen the damage and experienced the relentless drive of the oil companies to destroying what remains…This virgin rainforest is irreplacable, so whilst i believe in the abundance of nature and the Universe, I sometimes doubt the sanity of mankind…I am so open to your perspective I just felt your reply did not really tackle the question being asked.
Blessings and Love to you
Thanks for the question Kat. I doubt the sanity of mankind too then I remember that God has a plan and we are part of it. We can never totally destroy what God has created. We need to do better and were getting there. Never fear, but speak into the problem. I appreciate the post.
Thank you for the clear explanation of the principle. I hear you saying that we can trust life.
I recently read a forecast that by 2030 the majority of the world’s population will be middle class. Prosperity grows…but our conditioned thoughts are quite the opposite)? Matt Ridley writes about this process in The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves. And this expansion happens despite all the unenlightened thinking we bring to questions of resources. Imagine if each of us lived fully into these beliefs.
Imagine indeed Susan. We have to trust in life because we are all part of a plan that has been set in place. Prosperity is indeed evolving, and with higher levels of that comes greater responsibility. We are all leveling up, and that is never a bad thing.