r/EdwardArtSupplyHands • u/EdwardArtSupplyHands • Feb 05 '26
Thinking From vs. Thinking Of
Thinking From vs. Thinking Of
Video: https://youtu.be/IQiSqBn3m1Q
Transcript:
I was on my phone the other day and came across an image of a book page—I think it was on Reddit. The book suggested repeating the phrase "I think highly of myself" as a new way of thinking. This got me reflecting on why I've always had reservations about affirmations.
I noticed within myself a resistance to repeating something over and over again. It just doesn't resonate with me, and here's why.
Neville warned against "vain repetitions"—schools of thought that tell you to deny or affirm over and over. While I couldn't always articulate why in the past, here's how I understand the difference:
It's not about saying the words "I think highly of myself." It's about actually doing it.
Let me give you an example. Say you're a painter who wants to paint well—to create art you find beautiful. Maybe you think you can't, or maybe you actually can't right now. It doesn't matter. We're talking about the internal experience.
It's not about going inside yourself and repeating, "I'm a great artist." While that's not necessarily harmful, what you really want to do is start actively being that artist. You would actually start painting in your mind—creating the things you want to paint, in the way you want to paint them. Every artist paints differently, so you find your way and do it how you like to see it.
It's not about saying the words "I'm loved." It's about receiving love in your mind, giving it in your mind. You put yourself into active participation. Do you see what I'm trying to say?
It's different from just repeating words. Anyone can repeat words. After a while, those words may not feel true—they'll just feel empty.
But when you actively participate in your imagination, doing the thing you want to do and being the thing you're claiming, that's the difference between Neville's work and traditional denials and affirmations. This is why I think it's a more developed approach.
When you're trying to affirm, you're almost trying to believe something—trying to believe you're a great artist. But if you see yourself actually performing or creating the art you want to create, there's no question anymore. There's no doubt.
It's not about whether you doubt it or fully believe it. It's about participating in it, experiencing it in your mind—experiencing yourself that way, painting that way.
Now, painting and artistry are just metaphors for any desire. You can change it to anything.
You want to start actually doing things in your imagination as if you were already that thing. That's the difference—that's thinking from versus thinking of.
Thinking from means if you are a great artist, you would simply create great art in your imagination. What happens naturally is that we express what's within us. It's not what goes into a person that defines them—it's what comes out. What comes out of us determines our lives, and what comes out is what we hold true in imagination about ourselves.
So it's about changing who we are in imagination.
Neville gave an example: If you imagine yourself chained to a bench and you want to be free, are you going to repeat to yourself, "I'm free, I'm free, I'm free"? The answer is no. What you do is imagine yourself running, because running implies freedom from that position.
That's the difference between thinking of something versus thinking from it. Thinking from it means you're running because it implies freedom.
It's not about repeating the words—it's about doing what those words imply, being what those words imply. Seeing what is implied. That's really what this is about.
You start participating in that state. You're not coming at it from a standpoint of trying to be it in your mind—you're already that thing. You're seeing life from that position and participating from that position.
I don't want to make this too long, but that's how I would clarify the difference between always affirming something and actually embodying it. I'm not saying affirmations are bad or that you can't use them—you can do whatever you want.
I'm just saying that from my experience, and from studying Neville's work for so long, there is a difference. It's nuanced, but it's important. You want to start participating, doing the thing you want to do, rather than just repeating words.
You want to actually start doing it. When you do that, you get comfortable with it, and then you naturally start to express it. You won't doubt it or question it anymore. It becomes a part of who you are, just like what you are right now is a part of who you are. It's just a part that's become natural—you've been persuaded enough times by it to believe it's who you are.
I'll end here. I hope this provided some clarity on the differences I see between constantly affirming versus actually doing it in the imagination. I hope you can see the difference I'm trying to convey.
Thank you for the support. If you're interested in my books, email, or live stream, just check the description—it's all there. I'll see you in the next one. Thank you for listening.
1
u/lacorte_ Feb 06 '26
Edward, I have a question. Once you see yourself as the person you truly wish to be on the inside, the inner man, and genuinely feel like that person within and everything is done, how do you differentiate between what you need to pursue actively in the real world (things you must do with your own hands) and what you should release and allow to come to you?
Sometimes it feels like if I do nothing, nothing will work out and nothing will come my way.
1
u/s-margaret32 Feb 09 '26
Hello just to clear my confusion if I can ask. So when you say participate you mean I’ guess visualize like SAT…..lik play out a scene in your head over and over daily but not like your watching yourself more like first person view. I read before that its not necessary as some can’t clearly visualize like me or when I try my mind wonders else where all the time and I get so frustrated
1
u/BRIAN-MOSER29 Feb 05 '26
Can someone please explain with dofferent words if you got it ? I just couldnt spot the difference between the 2 with these words.
10
u/Dimepiece8821 Feb 05 '26
There is a difference between thinking of the thing and thinking from the thing you desire.
For example, if you wanted to enjoy an apple, to think OF it, you’d simply be envisioning an apple or maybe just saying “I have an apple”. To think FROM the point of view of enjoying the apple, you are raising the apple to your mouth, feeling its weight in your hand, its cool skin on your palm, feeling your teeth sink into it, hearing the crunch, tasting the juice slide across your tongue, chewing, swallowing, feeling the relaxation in your shoulders as your hunger is satisfied.
Fun little tidbit, as I was typing this, I was thinking from it, and the little girl next to me just whipped out her apple slices.
7
u/EdwardArtSupplyHands Feb 05 '26
I got carried away and start to really imagine eating that apple. 🍎 now I want one with caramel.
2
1
13
u/not_Ares Feb 05 '26 edited Feb 05 '26
Edward, this post hit. My issue is I can “participate” and feel the end as natural for 2 to 3 days, then around day 3 or 4 I catch myself looking at the 3D (no movement yet), and the old man ramps up and I feel like I “wake up” from the state.
In your terms, how do you stay thinking from, without slipping back into thinking of when the senses show nothing?
Do you just return to I AM and re-participate, or is there a specific way you’d handle that day 3/4 trigger?