I have pondered the David Wilcock question for some time and I’d like to share my thoughts, especially in light of Quantum’s query, because it seems to have value in the abstract (i.e., independent of the specific person) as well as in the corporeal.
So, given the statement: “If a person claims to be performing their life's work from within the Law of One, but on occasion acts or makes claims in a way that is contrary to the Law of One then, especially given that the person is a public figure, are they indeed providing a valuable service, worthy of our time and attention?”
It seems to me that the answer is yes, at least to some degree. You see, in order to determine if they are providing a valuable service, then we must first provide them our attention. Only after we have provided them our attention, in sufficient quantity to digest their message, can we determine whether or not the service they are providing is valuable. For value, at least in esoteric matters, is quite a personal experience.
Given such an opportunity to partake in their perspective, we can, and do, constantly reassess our “taste” for that person’s spiritual cuisine, as it were. And just as with any cuisine, we will, over time, experience varying appetites for the given variety. This is particularly true for me, of David Wilcock’s fare. I find his cuisine too “peppered”, if you will, with transitory statements and speculation which is distasteful to me, personally, right now.
I do see that he serves a significant purpose in regards the Law of One, however, in much the same way that a trawling net serves to catch fish. He is like a fairly large, public scoop, if you will, that attracts awakening souls and helps them find their place in this world. As such a lure, he has several aspects that may attract different interests. His purported relationship to Edgar Cayce being one, his purported association with whistleblowers trying to expose the various conspiracies that have occurred and continue, his scientific slant and attempts to bridge the gap between eastern and western scientific philosophies, his practice of channeling and involvement in many new age movements, and not least, his embracing of the Law of One as a foundational philosophy. I propose that one could not invision a more effective, multifaceted, “lure” for seekers of “truth” and awakening souls than our dear David Wilcock.
Once attracted to his many wavelengths of light, the awakening soul is offered a smorgasbord of spiritual delicacies. A veritable banquet for the soul. Some of it is delectable to everyone, little of it is of interest to all. But at David’s banquet are also recipes for your favorite dishes and references to many of his source cookbooks, thus, to bring these tangled analogies full circle, both providing us with fish, and teaching us how to fish.
Does he transgress and does he misinterpret the Law of One, on occasion, probably unconsciously, in ways that are manipulative and self-serving? I do believe so. But so what? I am certain that I do the same, as do we all. Is this a more serious issue given that he is a public figure? I think not. I believe that in our culture, we try to hold public figures to too high a standard. We’re all human, and we are all responsible for everything we do, and for making our own decisions. I think a greater sense of personal responsibility would be most beneficial for everyone in the world, especially those in western cultures. But that’s just my opinion.
As to his public persona, I find it entertaining, and perhaps necessary (even adding to his cachet of "lures", that of rock star and movie writer/producer), but also potentially dangerous to him and his work. It is certainly easy for the ego to take over and allow one to be totally misdirected and taken off path, and thus publicly discredited. This is certainly the preferred modus operandi of the opposing forces, and one to which I hope David is superior. I fear, however, that he has forgotten that fame and success are by far the more seductive and damaging of “negative greetings” than is any amount of criticism and disagreement that he may have with the guests he has invited to his banquet.
I was attracted to David’s banquet through his purported connection with Edgar Cayce. I have sampled many of his tables, and still drop by for a snack now and then. But very quickly after finding him, I found that most of his material didn’t rest well in my stomach. His favorite cookbook, however, called the Law of One, quickly became one of my primary sources for spiritual sustenance.
David, I think, is doing fine. I send him light and love and hope that he is able to distinguish and appropriately respond to all negative greetings that may come his way. He is currently serving an invaluable purpose, and I wish him Godspeed and all success that is appropriate.
3D Sunset
So, given the statement: “If a person claims to be performing their life's work from within the Law of One, but on occasion acts or makes claims in a way that is contrary to the Law of One then, especially given that the person is a public figure, are they indeed providing a valuable service, worthy of our time and attention?”
It seems to me that the answer is yes, at least to some degree. You see, in order to determine if they are providing a valuable service, then we must first provide them our attention. Only after we have provided them our attention, in sufficient quantity to digest their message, can we determine whether or not the service they are providing is valuable. For value, at least in esoteric matters, is quite a personal experience.
Given such an opportunity to partake in their perspective, we can, and do, constantly reassess our “taste” for that person’s spiritual cuisine, as it were. And just as with any cuisine, we will, over time, experience varying appetites for the given variety. This is particularly true for me, of David Wilcock’s fare. I find his cuisine too “peppered”, if you will, with transitory statements and speculation which is distasteful to me, personally, right now.
I do see that he serves a significant purpose in regards the Law of One, however, in much the same way that a trawling net serves to catch fish. He is like a fairly large, public scoop, if you will, that attracts awakening souls and helps them find their place in this world. As such a lure, he has several aspects that may attract different interests. His purported relationship to Edgar Cayce being one, his purported association with whistleblowers trying to expose the various conspiracies that have occurred and continue, his scientific slant and attempts to bridge the gap between eastern and western scientific philosophies, his practice of channeling and involvement in many new age movements, and not least, his embracing of the Law of One as a foundational philosophy. I propose that one could not invision a more effective, multifaceted, “lure” for seekers of “truth” and awakening souls than our dear David Wilcock.
Once attracted to his many wavelengths of light, the awakening soul is offered a smorgasbord of spiritual delicacies. A veritable banquet for the soul. Some of it is delectable to everyone, little of it is of interest to all. But at David’s banquet are also recipes for your favorite dishes and references to many of his source cookbooks, thus, to bring these tangled analogies full circle, both providing us with fish, and teaching us how to fish.
Does he transgress and does he misinterpret the Law of One, on occasion, probably unconsciously, in ways that are manipulative and self-serving? I do believe so. But so what? I am certain that I do the same, as do we all. Is this a more serious issue given that he is a public figure? I think not. I believe that in our culture, we try to hold public figures to too high a standard. We’re all human, and we are all responsible for everything we do, and for making our own decisions. I think a greater sense of personal responsibility would be most beneficial for everyone in the world, especially those in western cultures. But that’s just my opinion.
As to his public persona, I find it entertaining, and perhaps necessary (even adding to his cachet of "lures", that of rock star and movie writer/producer), but also potentially dangerous to him and his work. It is certainly easy for the ego to take over and allow one to be totally misdirected and taken off path, and thus publicly discredited. This is certainly the preferred modus operandi of the opposing forces, and one to which I hope David is superior. I fear, however, that he has forgotten that fame and success are by far the more seductive and damaging of “negative greetings” than is any amount of criticism and disagreement that he may have with the guests he has invited to his banquet.
I was attracted to David’s banquet through his purported connection with Edgar Cayce. I have sampled many of his tables, and still drop by for a snack now and then. But very quickly after finding him, I found that most of his material didn’t rest well in my stomach. His favorite cookbook, however, called the Law of One, quickly became one of my primary sources for spiritual sustenance.
David, I think, is doing fine. I send him light and love and hope that he is able to distinguish and appropriately respond to all negative greetings that may come his way. He is currently serving an invaluable purpose, and I wish him Godspeed and all success that is appropriate.
3D Sunset