Question 2 for David Wilcock 11 et 7-19-07

[rdndntrdndnt]

i would also love to hear david wilcock's take on gary renard, don miguel ruiz, ram dass, ken wilber, eckhart tolle, adyashanti, and other disseminators of nondual "conceptions" of reality.

if anyone would like to ask him about a course in miracles, toltec teachings, buddhist, hindu, sufi, taoist, and christian(gospel of thomas) nondual conceptions i would like to hear how he thinks these things correlate to his research and experience making up his conception of reality.

mostly, does david think that the individual(ego) is illusory and that all time and space are individuated, and in such illusory themselves, engrossed by an unconceptualized ineffable reality?

it seems as though i hear the same story of david's life everytime he is interviewed, that is in the book the reincarnation of edgar cayce. let's hear some new information that has not been covered on the website, in interviews, and books etc...

no past, no future, no now, only the eternal always. no here, no there, everywhere always. glad to be a part of this forum. thanks all:)

[David Wilcock]

dear "redundant redunant,"

your comments veer away from love and toward control and are therefore disappointing.

there is only a finite amount of material that i have. this is true.

it is also true that on coast and beyond reality, i went into a similar back-story.

this is intended to serve the greater good. that means people who are not familiar with the site and have not read the book.

i deliberately did not go into it again on law of attraction radio, and even mentioned why i was not. i knew that in that venue, almost all the listeners would be fans of the site.

the onus is not on me to keep providing everyone with unending amounts of 'new material'.

the "universal arcana of esoteric wisdom" is finite in nature. the point is to learn the system and plug yourself into it, finding those areas where you need to work on.

all the names, the philosophies, the products and the gadgetry are secondary to the quest to integrate the personality. the law of one series quote i gave in the last post answers the question of whether the indivudal self should be obliterated or overcome in the quest for "nirvana."

that being said, if this question comes up tomorrow i will try to answer it.

- david

[Larry Seyer]

i would also love to hear david wilcock's take on gary renard, don miguel ruiz, ram dass, ken wilber, eckhart tolle, adyashanti, and other disseminators of nondual "conceptions" of reality.

if anyone would like to ask him about a course in miracles, toltec teachings, buddhist, hindu, sufi, taoist, and christian(gospel of thomas) nondual conceptions i would like to hear how he thinks these things correlate to his research and experience making up his conception of reality.

mostly, does david think that the individual(ego) is illusory and that all time and space are individuated, and in such illusory themselves, engrossed by an unconceptualized ineffable reality?

it seems as though i hear the same story of david's life everytime he is interviewed, that is in the book the reincarnation of edgar cayce. let's hear some new information that has not been covered on the website, in interviews, and books etc...

no past, no future, no now, only the eternal always. no here, no there, everywhere always. glad to be a part of this forum. thanks all:)


personally, i see no conflict here...

some history:

i am (and have been) a course in miracles student for 19 years.

in fact, i teach weekly on acim gather as a regular course in miracles teacher.

and i am a big fan of gary renard... (i loved du and yir) even went to his seminar here in austin a couple of months ago... loved it... he and i are both guitar players from way back.

i work with david here helping him do what he is called to do... and i see no conflict in his teachings nor with those that i have been studying. he is doing an incredible job and works tirelessly towards his mission.

however, if one is looking for conflict, one will certainly find it.

david and i have discussed some of the common grounds between the "law of one" series and "a course in miracles" and have found that there are many similarities.

"seek and ye shall find" is as true today as it was thousands of years ago. look for common ground and not for differences. it is amazing what you will find.

it is time for science to 'bring up the rear' so to speak with facts that support the teachings of some of the non-dualistic teachings in my opinion.

however, above all we don't want to be 'stupid'. just because the course says that 'this world was over a long time ago' does not mean that we have to be stupid about our lives and live as if nothing we do matters.

because it does matter (to us anyway).

the fact is we believe we are here and so much so that we are extremely fearful of dying. i believe if we were enlightened and non-fearful we wouldn't be here in the flesh anyway.

so there is a need for the research and i am happy to be a part of it... and thankful to be a part of his journey... and that all of us are heading towards a common goal of peace and understanding and enlightenment.

best to all!

larry seyer

[rdndntrdndnt]

[note from moderator: we understand that this is not a "talk to david" forum, but since redundant is fairly new we will allow this to pass-personal emails normally are sent to david's contact address on dc, so any further questions to david on the forum may be rejected. thank you]

firstly, i would like to appologize to you david if i came of as desiring to control. it must be partly due to the fact that i am limited in my knowledge of language, and the inherent vagueness of this way of communication. i will work on expressing myself more fully yet still concisely, and hope to one day communicate face to face.

what is love and how can one move away from it? i am under the impression that all is love. all a blessing. there is no need to be disappointed. no expectations=no disappointment.

i have read most all you have published and listened to many of your interviews, and while your material is finite, you are the infinite. i simply am agreeing with what you stated on the law of attraction radio. i have heard the summary of your past, and would like to hear other things, not specifically scientific research or theory, just something fresh. perhaps this is just my hangup, unnecessarily expressed. not to pressure you into changing the way you voice yourself. be free.

i wholeheartedly agree with you larry, i as well see no conflict between what david poses and what others have posed throughout history. perhaps it is because i don't look for conflict, that i don't see differentiations. who knows? this is why i am curious as to why these public figures (david, gary, don miguel, etc..) don't accredit each other as being of a like mind. i have heard gary mention that his books are not the only place you can find similar concepts, however he mentions the advaita vedanta, rather than any of his contemporaries. [note from moderator: redundant, please read our rules under announcements and this will explain why]

to try and think of an anology, perhaps it would be like an impressionistic artist trying to teach about impressionistic art without ever mentioning other impressionists. i would think a renoir would mention a cassatt or a monet or degas, and tell their students "go on, see what they are doing."

i do not expect anything from david. i am a professional chef and if someone comes into my restaurant and says they would like to try something particular, or more of something, or they would like to see something else on the menu, i do not tell them that the onus is not on me to provide it, besides there are limitations to what i can do. i don't feel dissapointed that they would ask, i simply take their request as a blessing, and take their opinion into account for the future, free of any feeling of constraint to comply.

again, let me state that it is not my intention to be critical or judgemental.

the quote about the ego's place in the world from the law of one series;
the purpose of an entity in [third] density is to:

* experience all things desired,
* to then analyze,
* accept, and
* understand these experiences,
* distilling the love and wisdom found within them.

nothing is to be overcome. that which is not needed falls away.

the purpose of an entity in [third] density is to:

* experience all things desired,
* to then analyze,
* accept, and
* understand these experiences,
* distilling the love and wisdom found within them.

nothing is to be overcome. that which is not needed falls away.

is a message i have received from a couple sources lately. very synchronized. this doesn't mean one can help "not knowing better" than to consider personal perspective as illusory. what does one do when they come to an end of all desire? how can one overcome or obliterate that which does not exist?

finally, i would like to express that i am eternally grateful for all experience, including our identities, our interconnected journey of life, including your efforts david, in diligently questioning reality, and looking for common ground through the scientific processes. i especially enjoyed your collaboration with david, larry in the science of peace mp3's. you make beautiful music together. are you going to be involved with david on the convergence movie soundtrack? oh and larry, i agree that if we were enlightened and non-fearful we wouldn't be here anyway.

i only think the best of david's actions always. he has and will never disappoint me.

with love for all, always, no matter what:)

[Cmotors]

dear "redundant redunant,"

all the names, the philosophies, the products and the gadgetry are secondary to the quest to integrate the personality. the law of one series quote i gave in the last post answers the question of whether the indivudal self should be obliterated or overcome in the quest for "nirvana."

- david

although i have not read the law of one series, i feel that i have some insight to the matter of self and 'nirvana'. i don't mean to come out of left field like this, but i guess my perspective could relatively be considered left field. as such it follows. from having experienced "it" (nirvana, ascension, etc..) first hand, there were two distinct selves present. one was my current self as i know myself, and another self that was more grander/evolved. the grander self was pushing me in the direction of accepting the unlimited abilities that had taken root within me (or just fully realized those abilities that had always been there). my normal self couldn't face it and wanted to repel or run away from it. the contrast of both selves was very distinct. they could not co-operate, at least for me. so it is an interesting question when one says that the self would be obliterated or overcome. at that crossroads in time, i felt out of instinct that it came down to accepting one over the other. one self was familiar, the other was not. the self that i recognized was in contrast much 'smaller', and of far lesser perception. prone to fear and over-reaction, hiding, pettiness, etc.. having no frame of reference, it seemed as though i would probably lose my recognized self if i transitioned to following my grander self. i personally don't know if it actually has to come to a choice like that, but in all these years of hitting that question, it seems the only path.

[rdndntrdndnt]

i appreciate the leniency. i only intended a couple of lines of my response as a direct response to david's comments and a couple lines to larry's comments. i will try to comply with the forum rules and keep an entirely open dialog. i appreciate the direction towards the rules under announcements.

as to having to let go of personal identity in order to experience a grander perception, i feel that was what was being express by larry's statement:

"the fact is we believe we are here and so much so that we are extremely fearful of dying. i believe if we were enlightened and non-fearful we wouldn't be here in the flesh anyway."

this statement resonates with me. also as david stated recently:

"that’s why one of my favorite law of one quotes is, "it is entirely necessary that an entity consciously realize that it does not understand in order to [make the ascension]."

to me this is saying the same thing in an entirely different way.

it seems we are here by faith alone, and this is the illusion of self. one cannot hold on to a personal identity and experience a grander reality. you can't have your cake and eat it too.

that's been my experience anyway, thanks for the personal insights...
peace

[Kenneths149]

i find this thread complex. the ideas challenging.
i think we, i , all of us have created a wonderful, awesome , amazing. incredible world! i think there are those of us working hard, quietly with out care of enlightnment or spiritual quest for it own sake , out of love for others. ( not taking anything away from the value enlightenment, masters, personalites or adepts). i think you can let "others eat their cake and have it to." many people do eat their cake and own it and pay for it. i have enjoyed the metaphors thought provoking and insightful.
kenneth;)

[soup]

...from having experienced "it" (nirvana, ascension, etc..) first hand, there were two distinct selves present....

thanks for sharing something about that.
this seems a curious topic. the closest i've come to experiencing "nirvana" is by way of ecstatic dream states that seem to reside beyond conventional imagery - as if in a state of full body ecstatic vibration. in every instance i would describe the experience as a union of more than myself involved.

the most profound and extended episode of this (for me) was synchronous to the christmastime tsunami of 2004. i can remember being telepathically called to "distance meditate" with a local psychic, and then it was as if many many hours in that state - all night long, unknowing at the time of what was occuring elsewhere in the world.

later i would reflect with other dreamers of the possibility that i was facilitating in some way those who were confronting the repercussions of that disaster.

[Cmotors]

thanks for sharing something about that.
this seems a curious topic. the closest i've come to experiencing "nirvana" is by way of ecstatic dream states that seem to reside beyond conventional imagery - as if in a state of full body ecstatic vibration. in every instance i would describe the experience as a union of more than myself involved.

you are lucky to have an expanded ability to sense more than what the human/mortal mind can typically afford. i personally am completely unable to get anywhere near that kind of operation with the mind that i have. however, even if i could, the current mind of the people can only be stretched so far, because i don't believe it can ever sense every facet of existence. to me it seems a filter, and as long as that filter is in place, only so much perception can take place. there are those that can expand that filter to allow more in such as yourself, but relative to what is actually happening in full existence, they are drops in a very large ocean. until the day comes when we can shed our current mind, we can only work with and expand what we currently use to perceive our existence in quite a limited fashion. from having experienced it first hand, there is a "huge" contrast of what is out there, to what we can perceive now (even amongst the most highly enlightened of us).