March 18, 2018
As often happens, Steve could easily write this journal in my name; he must pause, take a (figurative) deep breath, and listen attentively for my inner promptings. He does feel we are connected, and ready-to-go.
Steve recently discovered clear proof, from the standpoint of literary historical research, that Mathew wrote both for the New York "Transcript" in 1835, and for the Boston "Carpet-Bag" in 1851. He has presented this evidence in his own journal, and, like all of the evidence he presents there, it will be ignored. Or if there is someone knowledgeable in this field who is reading it, he or she would not dare broach the subject at their institution, for fear of losing their standing, and perhaps their job.
The irony arises, that only an independent researcher like Steve dare break any significant new ground; but only a credentialed academic, with a long and illustrious career, would be believed. But by the very nature of the situation, that person would not dare come forth with it. Occasionally such a person may do so; and then that person, no matter their credentials and their standing, is ostracized. So it is what people now call a "no-win situation."
Here is the method--the independent researcher does all the work, and when Society is ready for the information--when Society has almost caught up--someone can rediscover that work, and present it. The "re-presenter" now becomes famous. It hinges on the ethics of that person, as to whether any credit goes to the original researcher, or whether the work is stolen and claimed outright.
I am giving Steve the impression that it is about 50-50. About half the things you think were invented by "Famous Person A," were actually stolen from "Obscure Person B" who invented it earlier, in an age when they were ridiculed or ignored. Only about half are accurately credited to the previous "giant" on whose "shoulders" the more recent person stood.
As Steve has pointed out, that Mathew wrote for both of these publications would primarily be of interest to scholars (most of whom work for institutions). But the further implications of this discovery are quite astounding. I won't go into them, here.
Steve must pause to get some breakfast...
Last night, as Steve was starting to fall asleep, I gave him one of my "electric kisses" on his forehead. He knows, now, what they feel like, compared to any normal sensation. This time I did not place it right in the middle, like I usually do, but off to one side. Steve wonders if my aim was off a bit! Then he wondered whether maybe I jogged it off like that, to show him that it was real, and not just some anomaly of the nerves at a certain spot. I'm not giving him any explanation.
I will "say this much about that"--it's hard enough to get the kiss on there in the first place! (He is lucky I got it on his forehead, instead of his knee ;-)
But later that night, when he was sleeping deeply, he had a sexualized dream about someone other than myself--not that they actually did very much together in the dream, but they had agreed to. In the dream, Steve was wondering why he had done that, and was apologizing to me and wondering whether or not he should follow through with it. And he feels very embarrassed about the whole thing this morning.
But I have explained this to him, before. I am human, and sometimes I feel amorous, and long to express my conjugal love to him (hence the kiss). But conditions have to be just so for a full visitation dream. The sleeper must become lucid. If the sleeper doesn't become lucid, and the astral spouse contacts him in this way, then all it does is to stimulate dreams--but the dreams may be of anyone. In other words, he dimly senses my presence (including my amorous presence), but not being fully awake in the dream, his mind generates some scenario, and some person, to answer it. This is nothing for him to feel ashamed of. His mind just drew bits of impressions from this and that in response to feeling me near. What this means, is that unless he can fully wake up in his dream, I generally hold back, for fear of embarrassing him in this way. I, myself, understand and don't feel jealous in the least; but I know it upsets him. But sometimes I feel such love for him--as I have after he published my anniversary poem, and also seeing him bravely face all his current challenges--that I can't resist the temptation to "come unto him." Just as I would feel if I was his wife, on earth, you see.
When he finally crosses over, we won't be so limited in our expression of conjugal love.
Steve feels he just wants to gaze into my eyes...and someday, believe me, he will have his opportunity! :-)
Love loses absolutely nothing by physical death. Not if one person dies; and certainly, not if both people do.
What of those people who have chosen to remarry? Well, people are different. Let's put it this way--I want Steve's happiness, but I am very pleased that he wants to be with me this way, in a "long-distance relationship" now, and to wait for me until he crosses over. I am giving Steve the feeling of pride; but of course it is much more. "Gratified" doesn't even begin to express it. "Honored" comes closer, but it is personal rather than impersonal. "Relieved" is in there, too... Here is what I am giving Steve. Take grief, and turn it backwards, and that is precisely what I feel about Steve choosing to be with me, now.
It is the affirmation of every time I ever thought and felt, "We are birds of a feather, and belong together." Indeed. Even now. That is how I feel.
So I suppose this is sort of my late anniversary letter...
I am giving Steve little short bursts of thought, which is why he is writing in such short sentences, today. He knows not to embellish, when he stops getting the message.
Steve has been practicing some of the tunes we used to play and sing, together. He is now in Portland, playing from the book that once belonged to the Portland Sacred Music Society. How poignant! But did that book ever belong to me, before it was donated to the Society? It has obviously been re-covered, meaning, for the Society. Did Mathew donate it to them after I passed, as he gave away my belongings, one-by-one? Sigh...if I told him that was so, he wouldn't be able to believe it. He would think he made it up in fond imagination. Steve has scrutinized the handwriting, where someone has written notations along a difficult passage, and compared it to my handwriting, and came up negative...
But he has been to my grave, and to his own grave. He has been mere feet away from my past-life bones, and his own--and to what avail? It is that kiss, on his forehead last night, which is of real significance, if he wants to be close to me. Not a music book I once played from, or even what's left of my body. But we are so attached to the physical, while on earth, that the few little bones seem like closeness, while the kiss is considered imagination! Just backwards.
Understand that life is spiritual, and everything comes around to its proper place. Even encumbered by the vehicle of the body, life is spiritual. It remains spiritual, as it was, when the body is shed. You, most of you, know this or you wouldn't be reading my journal--but some who chance upon it in the future, may not, so I continue to express these primary ideas for their sake.
Steve paused because I seemed not to be giving him any more impressions, and he thought it was time to take a housemate to work, and that I was telling him so--but then he realized it's Sunday! So you see how he can sometimes misinterpret things. But really, that is all I wished to communicate, today.*
Love to each and all,
*Turns out I wasn't entirely wrong--I had actually agreed to take him to the laundromat, about a half-hour later.--S