Nectar for Your Soul

Our thoughts are concrete and form reality around us in agreement with the Law of Attraction, according to which “like attracts like.” All that remains is to think positively and all aspects of your life – family, finances, love, health, and others – will change in the most magical of ways.

In support of this idea Rhonda Byrne conducted interviews with many dozens of people who she considered “gurus” and “experts”.

Any popular work, be it a book or film, which creates a wide resonance throughout society inevitably divides viewers or readers into two camps: ecstatic supporters and fierce opponents. Since the theme of Rhonda Byrne’s film and book is so closely intertwined with the contents of our book, we will allocate a bit of time to this work.

Before all else, we’ll immediately define our position: we fully share the fundamental idea of The Secret and consider Rhonda Byrne’s film and book absolutely correct and extremely beneficial. But we can simultaneously establish the sad fact that these works turned out to have little effect. This is explicitly proven by the surveys we conducted among thousands of students of our School, among whom The Secret was as popular as it was throughout the world. Among our students there were no opponents of The Secret; all those polled about it gave favorable responses. But to the question how did The Secret influence their lives, an absolute majority responded “no influence whatsoever.” Naturally, we weren’t satisfied with such a response and began to dig for the reason – we were already working on our book at that time and were concerned about its future effectiveness. Here is what we found:

Practically none of the respondents worked with the book The Secret. They read it, approved and placed it on the shelf. People didn’t underline phrases in the book, didn’t write them down on note cards, didn’t reread it a second time; in general, they did nothing to ensure that the ideas laid out in the book penetrated their subconscious and became part of their worldviews. And ideas that haven’t seeped into the subconscious don’t work! Only having reached the subconscious will ideas begin to create, to call up automatic reactions associated with them, as in the surrounding world (by attracting and forming events) so in an individual organism (by healing, change in figure, etc).

The second reason for the low effectiveness of The Secret lies in the fact that the majority of readers (noting that we are speaking here only of our students) didn’t unconditionally believe in the Law of Attraction and the concrete nature of thought. These ideas contradicted their previously formed material worldview and Rhonda Byrne’s proofs didn’t strike them as convincing. One system of views can only take the place of another (particularly a contradictory other) under the influence of extremely strong arguments; the new system needs to dislodge the old, to defeat it through strength of proof. But such proofs were only seldom revealed in Rhonda Byrne’s book. Regarding The Secret’s “gurus” and “experts,” people said: “These are not experts, but simply propagators of positive thinking, like Rhonda Byrne herself, and nothing more.” In reality, among those the author included as experts there were primarily psychologists, motivational and personal development trainers and “experts on achieving success”. They presented correct ideas, but didn’t reinforce them with scientific facts, proofs and experiences. A few short scientific references couldn’t influence the unconvincing situation as a whole. Meanwhile, namely scientific proofs for the materiality of thought and the Law of Attraction already sufficiently exist, and we will turn to them several times in the pages of this book.

The Secret’s weak scientific base gave an avenue for opponents to fall upon it with a hail of criticism, which extended even to rude accusations. “outlandish psychology,” “thoroughly false occult story,” “masterful phrase-mongering,” “closely tied to witchcraft and pagan movements,” “devoid of anything scientific,” “an insatiable vampire, sucking all blood from its victims” – this is far from a full list of the epithets awarded to The Secret and its author by Jean-Charles Condo and Natacha Condo-Dinucci in their book Enquête sur Le Secret. Their critical arguments are very characteristic of all skeptics, and as such we will turn to them time and time again in order to help our readers look into definitively complicated questions. As an example let’s examine just one of the many assertions of Enquête sur Le Secret’s authors:

“All modern scientific thought points to the fact that the Law of Attraction is nothing more than an imagination game. Despite The Secret’s assertions, thoughts are not magnetic waves that permeate the universe, and also, not one scientific experiment worthy of being called such has shown that mental processes can exercise direct influence on the surrounding world or the course of events” [16].

First of all, in terms of “all modern scientific thought,” research in the area of quantum physics refutes the claims of Enquête sur Le Secret’s authors and provides evidence in Rhonda Byrne’s favor. Enquête sur Le Secret itself once again affirms our thesis about the wide spread of ignorance and skeptical worldviews.

We suggest that you acquaint yourself with legitimately scientific concepts, look what conclusions modern science came to regarding the energies of the conscious and psychological strength.

The great Russian scientist and director of the Science Center of Vacuum Physics, academic Gennady Shipov asserts:

“There is currently no doubt in the existence of telepathy, levitation, clairvoyance, retrocognition or of the fact that the energy of the conscious plays a specific role in physical processes” [17].

The next statement comes from a different Russian physicist and scholar, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences A. V. Moskovsky:

“We objectively came to the conclusion that the World has at its base Consciousness as a united world starting point. In light of recent discoveries, the existence of the world, like universal Consciousness, presents itself in a variety of ways as a scientific reality. The field of Consciousness gives rise to everything, and our conscious is part of it” [18].

Telekinesis, the ability to move objects using strength of will, long ago became a subject of scientific investigation. In Russia many experiments affirming the phenomenon of telekinesis have been carried out at the Moscow State Institute of Radio Engineering, Electronics and Automation under the leadership of associate member of the Academy of the Sciences Yury Gulyaev and at the Saint Petersburg State Institute of Fine Mechanics and Optics under the leadership of the institute’s rector, Professor Gennady Dulnev. All these experiments were performed according to strict scientific methodology and are the basis for director Viktor Olender’s documentary film Nine Years with Psychics (1989). In this film are established other unique phenomena: interaction with spirits of the dead, the reading of thoughts from a distance, and conversations of modern people in ancient languages. Another of Viktor Olender’s films, The Wars between Black and White Magic (1990) confirms the effect of thoughts on physical processes and received worldwide circulation and took a leading place at the 1994 Cannes Film Festival. All this director’s films can be found online at RuTube and are accessible to everyone.

We admit that it would have been difficult for the authors of Enquête sur Le Secret to acquaint themselves with the results of scientific research carried out in Russia. But when they decided to debate psychological processes and the scientific experiments associated with them, they were simply obligated to take an interest in the experiments of Western scientists. Thousands such experiments have been performed in all the developed countries of the world, and thousands of reports about them have been published in the form of whole books and of articles in authoritative scientific journals. From this ocean of scientific facts we will include just a few drops of information, which are sufficient for understanding the decisively scientific viewpoint regarding the power of human thought and the possibility of interaction without contact between biological objects.

Incredibly interesting in this regard are the experiments of the famous American scientist Marcel Vogel, who did research in the field of phosphors (crystals that emit light when heated) at IBM for 27 years. While working with liquid crystals he observed the following: depending on what thoughts he projected onto still unhardened crystals, they changed shape throughout crystallization; if he thought about a tree, the crystal took the form of a tree.

For a person not acquainted with modern science, this sounds strange, but for representatives of quantum physics, it’s natural.

An important position of quantum physics, proven through experimentation, states that even if a person simply looks at something, it changes under the influence of that person’s gaze. It is factually proven that “an act of observation is, at its core, an act of creation, and actions of the conscious have creative power.”

Professor at the University of Oregon Institute for Theoretical Physics (USA) Amit Goswami asserts that “consciousness is the ground of all being, and as a result, the Universe we observe around us.” He dedicated an entire book, titled The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Material World to proving this point [19].

In 1967, professor of psychiatry Jule Eisenbud wrote the book The World of Ted Serios: “Thoughtographic” Studies of an Extraordinary Mind. This sensational book is about the work of forty year old Ted Serios, who showed American researchers that thought can imprint images on film. Ted formed “thoughtographs” images which consciously or unconsciously appeared on the film of a Polaroid camera. In order to do this Serios looked through a small cardboard cylinder at a field lens, concentrated, slammed his hand down and awaited the result. Sometimes he had to wait for hours. At the beginning only general outlines took shape, which gradually took on features and transformed into some sort of recognizable object: a building, like the Washington Hilton, or an image of an ancient man that exactly corresponded to a copy of a Neanderthal at the Chicago History Museum.

Other’s of Serios’s psychological photographs included things like portraits of friends and prominent figures [20].

The effect of thoughts on various objects was studied by the English scholar and physicist John B. Hasted, who published the results of his scientific work in a book by the name The Metal-Benders. Research on metals, crystals and organic substances showed that psychokinetic phenomena occur as a result of a change, prompted by psychological influence, in the atomic structure of the object being tested. Such changes as change to the form (bending and stretching), hardness and volume of the object can result.

The experiments of American biologist Cleve Backster received widespread fame in the scientific world when in 1966 he discussed the influence of the thoughts and intentions of those performing an experiment on its results. Cleve Backster experimentally established that plants absorb human thoughts and react to them.

In 2003 Cleve Backster’s book Primary Perception. Biocommunication with Plants, Living Foods, and Human Cells was printed in the United States; it is the culminating work of his almost forty years of research in the sphere of biocommunication. In the book are detailed descriptions of the many experiments that Backster performed on plants, animals and people.

To perform his experiments he used an instrument known as the “lie detector.” Connected to a plant and with the help of an automatic recording device, it recorded the plant’s reaction to external circumstances. So if an “evil” person who had broken branches and torn leaves earlier in the experiment entered the room, the plant “cried out,” inciting a turbulent spot on the recording machine. The plant immediately and unmistakably recognized the “evil” person and not only absorbed his or her thoughts, but even identified his or her character and the intention to cause harm! The plant reacted analogously to the appearance of a “good” person who had earlier watered it and spoken soothingly. In such circumstances the recording machine produced completely different oscillations, reflecting the plant’s “happiness” [21].

Undoubtedly, those readers who have plants at home or on the grounds of their homes will pick up on the truth in the results of Cleve Backster’s experiments. They know full well, without any detector, that plants which are lovingly cared for grow better than those that receive the minimal amount of attention necessary.

Once, after having discussed Cleve Backster’s experiments in lessons at our School, a letter came to us from Saint Petersburg from one of our students, Tatiana Ivanovna. Here’s what she told us:

“I have a vivid example of the materiality of thoughts.

Not long ago I bought mandarin oranges on branches with fresh leaves; they were very sweet, aromatic, and unusually tasty. I really wanted to grow a mandarin tree. I placed some wet cotton balls in a glass and placed a seed in that. I held my hand over it and requested that it grow (I had an image of the future tree in my head during this). I then put two more seeds in the cup. After several days, the seed I had willed to grow began to do so. The other two lay lifeless.

I removed the growing seed and planted it in the earth. This is where things got very interesting: I willed the other two seeds to grow (but without the images in my head). They too began to grow. I then added to the cup two new seeds that I didn’t ask anything of.

I planted the growing seeds in the ground (in environments that were in every way identical). I monitored them: the first (most wished for) seed sprouted two leaves in the third day, i.e. really fast growth. The second and third are growing very slowly (a week’s already gone by and still no leaves), and the last two lie unchanged. So there it is.

Simple as can be! It’s genius! All you need is to ask, believe and act.”

Undoubtedly many of you, dear readers, have heard of the old belief that you can determine someone’s opinion of you based on how long the flowers they give you live. If the flowers are given with love, they will live for a long time, if given with a neutral or negative attitude (given just because the situation demanded it), the flowers will quickly whither. In light of Cleve Backster’s experiments, this omen turns out to have a scientific basis: the flowers absorb and remember the thoughts of the person and react in kind. So a gifted bouquet of flowers can work as a real-life lie detector and maybe even better – mechanical instruments can still be fooled, but you can’t deceive flowers.

Backster also established that plants react if animals die nearby. For example, instruments registered a strong wave of emotion from plants if live shrimps were thrown into boiling water nearby. They reacted to the explosion of psychic energy that occurred at the moment of these sea creatures’ death.

Backster’s research was tested many times over by other scientists with the exact same results. In scientific literature there are many descriptions of experiments with snails. In one of these, performed in France, scientists took fifty snails, divided them into pairs and isolated the males from the females. They then sent all the “women” to America and the “men” remained, to be subjected to electric shocks. The result was stunning: at the exact moment that a “Parisian” received a shock, his “other half” in America twitched.

It’s also known that dogs separated from their owners are able to find them even if they are taken hundreds of miles from home. At the time of the experiments, the owners changed places of residence and the dogs returned not to the home but to the owner. This means that they caught onto and identified the waves of the owners’ minds and not the radiations of the residence. In January 1986 the newspaper Sovietskaya Rossiya reported a similar incident in America with a dog abandoned by its owner. He left New York and moved to a small town in California, almost two and a half thousand miles from his previous place of residence. The shepherd followed its owner’s trail and searched him out at the end of an eight month journey.

In Cleve Backster’s book are also described experiments regarding biocommunication between people.

Backster’s laboratory has been located in San Diego on the west coast of the United States since the ‘80s. One woman, who lived on the other coast of the US, came to visit her daughter in San Diego where she donated some white blood cells from a throat swab for experiments in Backster’s laboratory. After that the woman returned home. When Backster’s lab technicians learned that this donor’s daughter was having some slight troubles, they asked her to call her mother and relate these problems to her at the same time that the vial with the mother’s oral samples was connected to special equipment. During the daughter’s conversation with her mother the recording device noted a deviation at the exact moment when the daughter told her mother about her problems, to which the mother reacted in a worried fashion.

Backster performed similar experiments with different people of various ages. As these experiments show, the recording machine registers a deviation from the norm in the instance of mental activity in the donor which is caused by various life situations; distance was not a factor.

Cleve Backster proceeded exactly as demanded by traditional science: he performed experiments, repeating them many times under laboratory conditions, and registered the results of his experiments using mechanical instruments. And how did the scientific community react to this? Did they express admiration at the labor of a talented scientist? Did they bestow an honorary title on him? Nothing of the sort! For many long years, Cleve Backster fiercely and courageously fought with the fools of modern science, who refused to accept the discovery of biocommunication. The academic world en masse met Backster’s experiments with great skepticism and prejudice, while average people expressed their admiration for Backster’s discovery, the popularity of which rang all throughout America. Backster himself made appearances on television and radio programs, in the press, and even once gave a testimony before a commission of the US Congress. Backster everywhere staunchly defended his point of view. In the end the scientific world warmed up to these years of labor to understand biocommunication. And today nobody is surprised by discussion of the fact that in our world there exists a form of exchanging information and energy such as biocommunication.

We have so many of our own examples of biocommunication and the materiality of thoughts that just a description of them would consist of several fat tomes. But we will limit ourselves to just one story, told by one of the authors of this book.

Story of the Dagger

From 1975 to 1982 I served with departments of the naval prosecutor’s office and upon discharge from duty handed in my naval officer’s dagger. I admit that I dearly wanted to keep it in memory of my military service, but the law didn’t allow for this – the dagger was considered a deadly weapon, and average citizens were not allowed to own such things.

This story, fantastical for those who don’t know about psychic power and don’t believe in the Law of Attraction, takes place twenty years later. It begins in Moscow, where I traveled to visit a relative, Pyotr Bondar, also a retired officer, on his birthday. Among the guests were many of his comrades-in-arms, all, of course, with gifts. One of the gifts in particular attracted my attention; it was an officer’s dagger. I have to say that at this time the Soviet Union had already ceased to exist ten years ago and many of the former laws had stopped being observed. In the Moscow markets honorary decorations, medals and various military equipment was freely sold. I immediately remembered with what regret I had parted with my dagger during my youth, already so long ago, and suddenly wanted to find it again. Events were in my favor, my own birthday was in a week, and I requested a specific present – the same sort of dagger. My relative approved; I had taken away the problem of choosing a gift, which is always complex when you want to give something a person will truly appreciate rather than simply to mark an occasion.

“I’ll send it to you in a week,” Pyotr assured me. “I can’t come personally, but the dagger will surely come.”

I arrived home satisfied in Veliky Novgorod the next day, but on my birthday received from Moscow not a dagger but a telephone call with an apology.

“I was at the market yesterday, but there weren’t any sabers there,” reported Pyotr. “But you don’t need to worry, they promised me that they’ll bring one next week, so just be patient a little while.”

I felt upset; as they say, a spoon is dear when lunch is near (things are good when they come on time). Additionally, I had already gotten so used to the fact that my strongest desires were always fulfilled, that I began to think: why didn’t it materialize this time? What wasn’t done properly on my part? Maybe I didn’t desire it strongly enough? Or I allowed myself to doubt that my wish would undoubtedly come true? But I had even pounded a special decorative hook into the wall, on which to hang the dagger! In my thoughts it already hung on the wall, but the day had already given way to evening, and the dagger was not there. And if we employ sound reasoning, then we see that after the call from Moscow, the chances of receiving the desired gift weren’t just reduced, but became practically null. Only a miracle could change this situation. And that’s just what happened.

Day had already given way to evening when there was an unexpected knock at the door. I looked into the monitor of the intercom; on the doorstep stood a whole group of men and women, among whom, to my surprise, I recognized students of our School of Business. I was amazed not by the fact that students had come without invitation to wish their teacher a happy birthday – such surprises are fully acceptable and even welcome – I was struck by the appearance of these particular students in Novgorod. They were all part of the group from the Urals branch of the School! The same Urals branch that was located in Chelyabinsk, almost 1,500 miles from Veliky Novgorod!

I opened the door and let the whole team of seven people inside. They were all employees of one company, a group of managers led by the charming twenty-five year old Natalia Barasheva. She stepped forward, shielding the embarrassed students behind herself.

“Please forgive us our brash intrusion,” she said, holding out to me a small wooden case. “We just wanted to stop by for a minute and wish you a happy birthday, and then we’ll head straight to the hotel.”

I opened the case. From its crimson, velvet holder flashed the gold of a naval dagger. And not just a common officer’s saber, like the one I’d asked after in Moscow, but a real work of art! The gilded scabbard and the blade itself were decorated with fine engravings, and the hilt wrapped in fine gold wire.

“This is a copy of an admiral’s dagger from the time of Empress Catherine the Great,” Natalia hastily began to explain, even more embarrassed as a result of my amazed expression. “We thought for a long time about what to get you, and decided you might like this. They make these in Zlatoust, an old city of bladesmiths near Chelyabinsk. They retain old designs there, according to which masters make souvenir copies…”

Of course, I wouldn’t allow my unexpected guests to stay in any hotel and we sat all night around the fireplace in interesting conversation.

That’s the extent of my unusual story of how I came to possess the dagger, but no less interesting is the second side of the story, told by Natalia herself:

“When we decided to travel to Novgorod, the question of a gift immediately came up. We all racked our brains trying to find an answer to this riddle. Finally, I remembered our famous workshop and that they produce masterfully artistic works. I travelled there and was confounded by their exhibition. There was such an abundance of uncommon beauty for my eyes to run over: various goblets, cups, swords, sabers, knives, and the like. I liked everything so much that I simply couldn’t choose; this was so beautiful, and that as well… And suddenly I heard a voice inside me, which clearly and loudly said: ‘Get this dagger.’ Listening to intuition, I chose it. Did my intuition suggest the right thing?”

I then simply reassured Natalia of the correctness of her choice and began to think myself. Comparing the dates of my trip to Moscow and Natalia’s to Zlatoust, I revealed that the idea to go to the workshop for a gift came to her the day after my visit to my relative. What happened? This was in truth no miracle, but an exchange of informational energy. My thoughtform “I want a dagger for my birthday” had already been hung in the informational field. Natalia’s thoughtform “I want to get a present for my teacher’s birthday” also found its way there. The vibrations of both thoughtforms coincided ideally and attracted one another. And so the idea first came into Natalia’s head to travel to Zlatoust, and once there she distinctively heard the word “dagger.” As a result, my wish materialized on June 4, 2002.

Strong desires are always fulfilled if you wish for them properly. We’ve already revealed one of the secrets of the proper technology for fulfillment of dreams; recall what was written a few lines above: “In my thoughts it already hung on the wall.”

The prayers of the faithful also come true. The strength of prayer is very great, but it also needs to be constructed correctly. When we delved into this question, we revealed without surprise that “ignorance reigns” here as well: none of the believers we’re acquainted with knew how one needs to pray! Psychic processes are very similar to technology; if you don’t follow the specific guidelines, the result will always be failure. In the case of prayer, failure is everywhere the absence of a result.

What did our research about this topic show? People practice two forms of sending up prayers:

The first: they find a special prayer book, choose a prayer to fit the occasion, and sit before an icon and read the text.

The second: gazing at an icon (either in church or at home) they turn to God with some sort of concrete request, formulating it arbitrarily, in their own words. They ask for healing for themselves or a loved one, provision of a desire, or deliverance from something undesirable. Having completed their prayer, they return to their usual routine and wait for God to provide (heal, emancipate, etc). When God doesn’t fulfill anything, they go again to the icon and repeat the ritual. And again they wait. After many unfruitful prayers they begin to think like so: “It means I’m not worthy enough for God to hear my prayers.”

This situation reminds one very much of that which happened to the majority of readers of Rhonda Byrne’s book The Secret. People thought up a wish, imagined something related to this (as Rhonda Byrne advised) and waited. Since nothing came true, they declared it a cheap book and Rhonda Byrne’s advice – not valid.

With God it’s different; you can’t call him a cheat. As such, in the case that prayers aren’t fulfilled, people instead denigrate themselves.

But the essence of the matter is this: both in the case of unfulfilled desires according to Rhonda Byrne’s recipe, and in the case of unfulfilled prayers the technological process was violated because it was completely misunderstood.

Prayers, like desires, come to fruition only under observance of specific conditions. If these conditions are violated, there’s no chance for their fulfillment!

The difference between simple desires and desire expressed in prayer is not great, but it does exist. When a person “simply wants” something, he or she doesn’t turn to someone in person; their request is directed to impersonal space.

In prayer the exact same wish has a concrete address: a saint or the Creator Himself.

The first and most important condition is faith

When we talk about prayer, we’re talking about faith with many faces, each of which is very important. We’ll examine each of them.

The first face is faith in the Creator, in His omnipotence. Believers don’t have a problem with this part, that’s why they’re believers.

The second face is belief in the fact that every person is always within God’s field of vision; that he hears and looks after everything. Difficulties don’t arise here either. God’s status as Omniscient is firmly entrenched in the consciousness of every believer.

The third face is unconditional faith that a prayer will be fulfilled. And this is where everything’s messed up. Of the many dozens of believers that we surveyed in person, not one had that sort of unconditional faith. People believed this in principle; they admitted its possibility, but not 100%. But even 1% of doubt will break a prayer. It’s impossible to be partially pregnant. And as they say, a spoonful of tar spoils a barrel of honey.

We propose that regarding unconditional faith in the power of prayer, things aren’t just in a bad condition among the students we polled. The majority of believers throughout the world don’t possess such faith (since they received their faith along with their birth certificates, as written about earlier). If this wasn’t the case, the world would be different. Hundreds of millions of people are daily praying for the world, health, love and material well-being. And yet no sort of changes take place, whether on the planet as a whole or in the lives of those doing the praying. We need not to prove this. If a prayer finds fruition, it is instantly declared a miracle – a rare phenomenon. A vivid example of this is the story of the canonization of Roman-Catholic Pope John Paul II.