Monday, June 7, 2010

Law of Least Effort

I woke up this morning thinking about the Law of Least Effort as a possible topic for today's blog. I wasn't convinced, but it has been on my mind, since our Second Sunday Spirit Food Group is researching it this month and we will be talking about it this coming Sunday. As with all things, that which we give our attention to, manifests. When I read my Horoscope this morning, I knew I needed to write about this topic! I think many people really misunderstand this law. I did for many years and I continued to even as I was actively learning about it in the 1980's! This Law is aka Path of Least Resistance and often referred to as "go with the flow".

I think on the surface we think its one thing but when we look at it, it is really something different! An example is the horoscope I mentioned....it said "Don't just say yes to your friends because it's even easier than usual now to take the path of least resistance." It could also be interpreted as instead of "going with the flow, go upstream". I took this to mean that the horoscope was telling me that if I say "no" to my friends I am not taking the path of least resistance. This is a misunderstanding of the law.

The law means that though it might appear to be easier to go with the flow or appear that you are taking the path of least resistance, you may in fact, be actually doing the opposite. Again, referring to the horoscope....If I'm saying "yes" to my friends when my heart is wanting to say "no" the path of least resistance would be to say "no"! The path of least resistance means I am true to my heart's desire, not saying "yes" because it appears to be easier in the moment!

I've heard this law referred to as "deferred gratification". I might think I want something in the moment, but if it moves me away from my heart's desire, it is not the path of Least Effort, nor is it going with the flow! Going with the flow means we are headed downstream and not fighting the flow of energy within ourselves. If we are not being true to our beliefs, we are not headed downstream, though it may appear or even feel that way!

In the early 1980's I started learning about this law, but with different wording. I heard, "plan the plan and leave the outcome up to God". Or, "Follow what is in your heart and leave the rest to God, the details are not your business". The Universe responds to our heart's desires. Once we've expressed them, the how, when, where, who (details) are taken care of by the Universe (God). When I bog myself down with those details, I've lost the spirit of my heart's desire because I am now focused on "making it happen" and while it may seem that I'm taking the path of least of resistance or going with the flow, I have in fact headed upstream and removed myself from the "flow" of my heart's desire. You see, we expect ourselves and others expect it from us, to work out those details; to struggle through to the other side. And then we call it "going with the flow" or the "path of least resistance" because it is easier to cave into the pressure of working out the details, than to follow our heart's desires.

Looking into this law at first seemed obvious...go with the flow....but when I considered how deceiving this can be I've discovered the many ways we use thoughts and words to lead us away from our true path of least resistance ~ by following the law of least effort and allowing the Universe to work out the details!

I'd love to start a dialog on this! Share your view!

1 comment:

  1. Laurie

    Thank you for sharing your thoughts through this blog.

    Disscussing this law today was was interesting. For me I like keeping it to the three components...
    1) Acceptance - make a committment; Today I will accept people, situations, circumstances and events as they occur.
    2) Responsibility; I will not blame anyone or anything for my situation, including myself.
    3) Defenselessness - I relinquish the need to convince or persuade others of my point of view. Saving my energy that would have been otherwise wasted.

    Take care,
    KJ

    ReplyDelete