May Q&A: Part 2

This is the second part of the questions that we have received so far!


ELIA: Hello, my question is about a sp (ex). We have been on and off for 3 years and made no progress as i wasn’t focusing on myself and kept replaying the past, we were trapped in the same situation. Finally we called it quits, we still are in communication, and it’s cordial. They told me that they search for me in every person and that they are sad because they really wanted it to work out. I know that there is a 3rd party, but, they haven’t committed. My question is how i can manifest a commitment from them, if there is already failure surrounding our relationship based on the past? They told me that they wish to be committed in the future to a partner who they are happy with and are intrigued by them always. I would enjoy if i was this person. Thank you.

Please read this article: Basing Your Judgment on What Was. You can’t expect to free yourself from this shadow world if you are thinking that the cause and the effect both exist in the physical reality. They do not. The cause is always spiritual and the effect is always manifested in the physical reality.

The story you are telling yourself right now doesn’t serve you. Third parties should be ignored. We have two articles about the third parties: Why The Third Party Doesn’t Matter & Third Parties & Why They Stick Around. There really isn’t much I could add to these articles.

We also have an article on Commitment. I believe this article will help you. You said that you would enjoy if you could be the person he commits to but you have the dominion in your reality. This means that there are no “ifs”. If you believe that you are the right people for one another, then that is how it must be. There is no separation. He is playing the role you give him in your reality.


SAMATH: Dear Ivana and Victoria. I love your blog and your work. I want to ask one question. In Neville’s lecture Pure in heart, he told the definition of pure as, the one who does not take advantage of other for personal gain. But in many other lectures or usually he tells that assumption is in itself wills the means. How can one not take advantage of other in this world? Infact our living in itself is taking advantage of our neighbour. Ex.If X liked a s.p. now X will assume that they are in a relationship. And with time his assumption will harden into fact. Now how can X restrain an impulse? The act of physical relation (sex) in itself is an act of selfish motive as we are gratifying our senses. Did not X personally gained? Now suppose X liked another s.p. He may do the same as controlling (restraining) impulse means almost doing the act. Did Neville followed this rule when he married to his second wife ? His second wife was young and rich. Did not he personally gained? What exactly is pure in heart according to your research. Kindly shed light on this.

Thank you for your kind words and your interesting question!

Personally, I don’t believe in separation. I subscribe to the way that Neville described this world: I am the person with supreme dominion over everything that exists in my consciousness. This means that I decide what is good and what isn’t in my reality. I give it that meaning but by default all things are actually neutral. I don’t think that you are taking advantage of anyone when you are simply living your life and manifesting your desires.

In the beginning of this lecture Neville says this:

“First of all, may I tell you: you need not think of moral perfection, and certainly it does not refer in any way to sexual purity, for we are told by the same one who uttered the beatitude that the harlot given to lust will go into heaven before the Pharisee. The Pharisee was perfect in keeping the outward law, the washing of the outside of the cup, of the hands, of the feet and he abided by the law outwardly. Yet, he was told that the harlot given to lust would go into heaven before he did. So it is not that.”

Neville Goddard

I do not think that Neville is talking about our moral codes that we follow. Everybody has their own. He is talking about learning until we become incapable of deceit. As he says in that lecture:

“The play goes on and you will be put into situation after situation until finally you become incapable of deceit. What you do sexually is not his concern, unless it is to deceive someone for personal gain. You marry someone with all the outer appearances of love, when basically you really want to get with them in twenty-four hours for what they have. That is marrying for personal gain, that is deceit.”

Neville Goddard

So, to answer your question about him taking advantage of his wife when he manifested her, it depends on his reasons for it. I do not believe that he married her for personal gain. She may have been young and rich but I don’t think that’s what he was after. He really believed that he can build the rest of his life with her and that’s why he chose her. I think this also answers the first part of that example where you mentioned that sex means gratifying our senses. What meaning do you put on that act? Are you doing it with the intention of only gratifying your senses or does it have a deeper meaning to you?

The way I understood this lecture is that it comes down to our intentions behind the manifestations. If they are pure, you are “pure in heart”. If you willingly deceive someone because you want to gain something from it, then you aren’t “pure in heart”. It’s not about the thing you gain because otherwise all manifestations (and life itself) would make you deceitful.


K: Hello my dear, I have one more question, my SP contacted me at Easter, but did not ask any questions and refused a meeting even though I was always positive and I at least felt that I lived in the wish fullfiled. It is also strange because everyone (Even People like my dad who mentaly abused me my Wohle Life) really reflects love in my life. Only he doesn’t. I am neither clinging nor sad that he rejected me because I know that he belongs to me. I no longer have the need to keep in touch because I feel loved and don’t need confirmation. As I said it just amazes me a lot. Do you have any idea what the reason could be? Then very rarely comes the thought “hm maybe he just doesn’t want me, or he doesn’t like me”.

First of all, I think you should be really proud of yourself for changing the situation with your father. It’s a proof of how well you can use the Law to change your life.

One of the most common reasons for failure is when we are thinking that our SP or our desire in general is an exception to the Law. When we are thinking that we can have anything but this thing we desire, that’s when we see the evidence of it. We are focused on the lack. We are not living in the end. The evidence is actually them not changing or our desire not showing up as fulfilled. It’s because we keep seeing them in the same state, over and over again. Even saying that everything is changing but him shows that you may have this underlying belief. I would really recommend inspecting this and overcoming it with mental diet.

Observe your thoughts when you are thinking about the Law or manifesting in general. What are you thinking? “I can have anything but him” or maybe “He can reject me because he is an exception and has free will”? Any similar thoughts will show you where you really are in relation to the topic of your SP.


IVAAN: As my past relationship didn’t work I really want to just rub it out from my mind & reality completely. I want to make my current sp my first love and partner. I know anything is possible but how should I change the past where that person or that relationship didn’t even happened for me. Revision is a way I know but can you suggest exactly what I can do for that.

I would suggest revising the beginning of the relationship so that you change the moment when you “officially” got involved into a moment when you decided to just stay friends. Of course, at the end of the day, this must resonate with you. Feel free to adjust it so that it feels more natural to you. The only other option I see is revising the entire course of the relationship which is probably very impractical.


More questions will be answered tomorrow.

Written by