Stuart Wilde (Page 17 of 17)

Well for me, Stuart Wilde at the moment is on the back burner, which is what I've already said in this thread.  That whole, "it's like a bus ride" analogy I used earlier, where everybody needs to decide where they're going to get off.  And I got off about a mile back.   But others are still on, still going, so everybody has to do what's right for them.  So he's on the back burner for me, but, I will still keep an eye out, still check in to his site.  I am interested to see where he may be going, and if changes do become evident.  If not, well, no worries, because I already got off the bus, and I still have some of his older materials, four books and a bunch of printed out articles.

___

And AO?  I know you mean well, but how is *commanding* anybody here to do anything any different than what Stuart Wilde is supposedly doing?   

I've always been very adament in my own life that I never directly tell another what they "NEED" to be doing.  No commanding of another to do this, do that, don't do this, don't do that.   My philosophy is, you don't tell another how to live their life, period.   You can present what you know, share your views, explain your side, so now they are more informed and have more material to make a decision.....but you stop short when it comes to outright commanding.

You may not agree with him, but he has a right to be out there, doing his thing, and people have a right to follow if they choose, even getting burned in the process, or at least coming away with a mixed bag of experiences.  Who are you to decide for the rest of the world whether Stuart Wilde is "allowed" to have sites out there, and making the final decision that will affect the people who read and follow his work?  For all you know, that's one of the lessons that somebody needs to go through.  So who are you to interfere with that and decide for them?

....Unless it's Stuart's material, right?  Read all you can.........just not his stuff.  Only read what *you* tell us to read.  Do you see your own hypocritical contradiction?  You claim that you want people to read all that they can, but in the next breath you talk about your campaign to shut him down. 

.....and only listen and give our attention to you, right?    Commands,  telling people what to do, what not to do.  How is this any different from what Stuart supposedly does?

You sound like the Man Behind the Curtain in "The Wizard of Oz" by this point, screaming with a booming voice, sounding panicked that anybody will dare continue on the path.  Or the Warning Rocks in "The Labyrinth"....."STOP!!  GO BACK BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!"  Like a crazy person, screaming and ranting with capital letters.

Again, I know you mean well and I do think you have some valid points for consideration, no doubt.   But it's never about outright demanding/commanding what others need to be doing or not doing.  It's about presenting the points for consideration, the information that you know, and then leaving it at that.  In the end the decision should be theirs.  Not yours.   

Stuart Wilde has just as much right to be here doing what he's doing, and his readers/followers have the right to make their own decisions and choices...whether you agree with it or not.  Have you never made any mistakes?   Didn't you learn from them?  It's called *living.*  That's what we're here to do.  What you want to do is deny people a life experience.  Again, I understand the intentions behind it, you want to spare people pain and suffering and loss of money and whatever else that you think will happen in your mind should they hook up with Stuart Wilde.  But that's where you present your information, what you know to be true about him, and then let people make up their own minds in the end.

I'll tell you this:  I've had people over the years try to prevent me from doing something I wanted to do, alter my life path basically.  I considered what they said....and in the end I made up my own mind, and usually I did what I wanted to do anyway.   I let my intuition guide me.  And I've never regretted it!   Whether it was trivial things like deciding to see a movie that most people were trashing (later to discover that the negative trashing was actually "damage control" to prevent as many people as possible from seeing a movie with highly meaningful metaphors about what's going on in this reality) or bigger decisions involving moving to a new state, like with Florida for instance several years ago - in the end I had to decide for myself.  I had to LIVE.  And if I ended up falling face first into the muck as a result of that choice, then so be it.  I still lived!

The fact that you even typed out your post and hit "Submit" means you're most likely unable to understand the points I'm trying to make here, and so my words will most likely fall on deaf ears.  You won't get it, but, so be it.  I'll try anyway!

Hey there AO, quite the venomous rant here...the comparison to Crowley, that's pretty rough.
Perhaps I've missed something looking through your other posts, but how about an anecdote or two in support of this radically polarized PoV? You know, it sounds kind of personal, like he stole your wife or ripped off your invalid mother. WTF?

It serves no purpose to go on like this without providing the details of what, why, where and how.

I've been a big fan of Stuart for about 10 years so I've been following this debate with interest.

First I'll say that I've no idea what the truth is about Stuart Wilde but my intuition says that he's a good guy - but far from perfect, and far from always being right - and I certainly don't agree with everything he says and does.

I think it was AO who asked why people like or follow Stuart, and for me the answer is that he has always come across as being very human and has always made spirituality very accessible. Personally I don't want my spiritual teachers to be holy and perfect and check every box on someone elses opinion on what makes a perfect spiritual teacher. I want my spiritual teachers to be real human beings, and as a sidenote - aren't we ALL spiritual teachers?

I will admit that I have some reservations about the direction he's taken this last few years, particularly with the redeemers club. However, I don't have much of a problem with what he's charging, even though I can't afford it myself. I say this because I absolutely know that Stuart isn't doing what he's doing for the money.

Perhaps a lot of people here don't know Stuart's background, but from the late 80's to late 90's he was making huge amounts of money from his books (which were fairly mainstream spirituality) and lectures and workshops which he did regularly all over the world.  At the height of his popularity I think he was making millions of dollars per year. He was also charging several thousand dollars for week-long workshops and many people would willingly pay that.

Then in about '98 or '99 he decided to 'retire' from being a mainstream spiritual teacher and he disappeared for a few years. In 2001 he returned with 'Gods Gladiators' which was effectively 'career suicide' for him. His previous publisher Hay House refused to publish it so he was forced to self publish it as an e-book initially before it was then published in paperback by an independent publisher. Most of his massive fanbase who were used to his more inspiring and inspirational books deserted him in droves. I think it's fair to say that most people just couldn't stomach his new direction.

I think it's fair to say that if Stuart was as controlling and egotisical as AO is making out then he would never have published God's Gladiators and commited 'career suicide' in the way he did. He could quite easily have kept on churning out books in his old-style that would most probably have been best sellers and kept his many hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of fans happy. He would still be raking in millions of dollars every year and perhaps have as big and adoring fanbase as any of the current popular teachers are enjoying (ie Chopra, Dyer, Redfield etc). The fact he rejected all that to speak his truth speaks volumes about the guy in my opinion.

I don't think Stuart's a saint and I don't think anyone should put the guy on a pedestal. Whether you agree with him or not I think he's always worth reading and I think a huge proportion of his written work is extremely valuable to anyone on any spiritual path. But as always, take what's useful to you, and leave the rest.

If AO is right and Stuart's really a bad guy. Then all I can say is that I sure wish there were a lot more bad guys like Stuart in the world.

Ayahuasca, some very good solid points that mirror my own I have to say. Though I wasn't aware that he lost so much of his fan base through God's Gladiators. It was the first book I read from him and the one I idenitfy with the most. I too like his human take on things. It's his contradictions that make me wary. Like, for example, he warns against Guruhood, but at the same times, seems to revel in it at times.
   Now, I lived in my teenage years on an ashram and the Guru was the most interesting, down-top-earth ladies you could ever meet. Hovever, the people who SURROUNDED her were often jealous, coniving, and just plain petty. A few of the people in SW's redeemers club makes me never want to join. And I wouldn't anyway, as there is a rather hefty price tag attached. Which is another thing I don't agree with. I won't pay for such matters, not that much, anyhow...
   AO your angle is respected by me, I can say that. I haven't met the man so I can't say for sure. ALOT comes into focus when your face to face with someone. I've done this before with another group I found very interesting and the person on the net was not the person I met...
   Words....kinda silly somtimes.