David Wilcock

Many of us realize that we are living in something often called the Matrix -similar to what has traditionally been called maya or illusion. Characteristics of this include a belief in traditional political and religious dogmas, an attachment to popular culture and the like.

At a deeper level, however, all our definitions and categories are matrix-based -rooted in the language of duality and linear thinking. This includes most of what we read in the alternative and conspiracy media.

This is especially evident in the frequent discussions and debates over which gurus, whistleblowers, predictions or theories are true and which are lies or disinfo. When we get caught up in such thinking, we are not looking at Reality -if there even is a single, objective, capital-R Reality- but a very limited and simplified version of it.

To some, the idea of truth is a simple one. Yet how many people tell the truth 100% of the time -or 0% of the time? The illusion of the modern rational or scientific mind is that everything can be categorized in a precise way. So a person, group or event is either true or false, good or evil, right or wrong.

When you get emotionally involved in what authority figures (either ones you label good or bad) tell you, you’re expecting too much from them. You can look to others for guidance or inspiration, but you can’t expect them to hand you a perfect version of The Truth. Why? Because truth is not the same for everyone, and we all have to find it for ourselves.

For those following the recent controversy over statements made by Drake, David Wilcock and Cobra, we are seeing a predictable polarization of opinion. Sometimes people will change sides when they are disappointed in someone they placed too much faith in. Others will vilify such people as con artists or disinfo agents -all because they are not delivering The Truth on a platter. But who is?

It is rare that even the most exact of sciences can predict anything with certainty. Think of weather reports. Even with today’s advanced technology, they can only speak of percentages and probabilities -all subject to change. A 30% chance of thunderstorms, for example. So-called financial experts do even worse trying to predict stock or commodity prices or future economic trends.

In the larger sense, the very existence of free will means that exact predictions are impossible. They could only be possible in a universe where everything was preordained. There is also the possibility of multiple timelines, which is supported by quantum physics. That is, there are parallel realities where different probabilities occur.

So, we either have a single reality that is always changeable or various timelines -either way, exact predictions are not realistic. People who make them can be called liars or frauds when they don’t come true, but another way to look at it is that they are trying to translate information from one reality into another.

Remember that time as we understand it is an artificial construct. It’s the way we make sense of things in the Matrix or 3D. It’s not “real.” At most, scientists can predict the “exact time” that an astronomical event will occur -but that’s because it’s the very movement of the planets that we use as the basis of time.

There’s no way to force the complexities of life to perfectly fit into a time frame. All we can do, whether we are weather forecasters, economists, historians or psychics is to look at a certain phenomenon and see where it’s heading. An infinite number of variables could change that, slightly or drastically.

When you add the possibility of multiple timelines, it gets even more complicated. According to some sources, such as Bashar, we are “switching timelines” moment by moment. Reality only seems consistent because we usually choose timelines that are so similar. Yet we aren’t compelled to keep doing this.

So what conclusions can we draw from all this? For one thing, we can stop expecting reality to be exact and to fit into neat categories. For those who are open to channeled messages, you might want to go back and read some of Barbara Marciniak’s material from the Pleiadians where they often repeat that “we are storytellers.”

The idea of truth being revealed in stories is very old, and goes back to the earliest mythology and shamanism. It suggests that reality is fluid and is most accurately expressed in “fiction” (a more modern idea, but meaning something similar as story). The very notion of “nonfiction” is misleading, as it suggests a monolithic truth.

If our goal is to liberate the planet, to free ourselves individually and collectively, we have to create stories, even myths that support this. That’s why I’m less concerned with some about the “accuracy” of predictions such as mass arrests of the cabal that have been widely circulating recently.

Does that mean that it helps to simply say anything you feel like and this will make everything all right? Not necessarily. When you’re talking about collective reality, it takes a certain amount of momentum and collective belief to create real change. But when enough people believe something, what is a story or speculation today might be “truth” tomorrow. Some relevant modern expressions related to this are memes and critical mass.

So if you’re seeking truth, find the stories that please you the most. Better yet, create your own stories. You can share these with others, but don’t expect everyone’s story lines to match up perfectly. Yet when they match up in enough significant ways, then our experience of reality changes.