July 3, 2016


Another occasion arises where I want to "break my silence," and that is the completion of our book about Steve's past-life self, and my husband in the 19th century, "Mathew Franklin Whittier in his own words." We have been working on it, together, since 2009, or seven years. Steve has continually revised it as new information became available, and numerous times he has announced it was completed! But, I was still busy finding new evidence, you see. There is more, of course--but we have what we need. We have what we need to prove that reincarnation is actual; we have what we need to flush out all of Mathew's imitators and plagiarizers. And we have the important points of our life together, and Mathew's life after I had passed, including his hidden impact on society.

Now, Steve is going to "take a deep breath," and see if he can give me scope to express my own thoughts, rather than his, superimposed, as is so very easy to do if one isn't careful.

From this, take away the crucial point, in channeling as in all "paranormal" or challenging aspects of life, that all is not hogwash; neither is all true. One must pick-and-choose.

Steve has written a great deal about why people don't seem to be responding to this work (or, responding in a favorable way); I don't wish to add to that. I have said that his real audience is still in diapers--perhaps they are toddling about, now, and using the "potty chair." Give them time. From my viewpoint, here in the astral realm, they will be reading it "tomorrow."

I want to talk about why people should read it; but first, I want to address the issue of plagiarism; and now Steve must pause, again, rather than risk writing his own essay on the subject!!

"Possession is 9/10ths of the law," it is said. Once someone steals a work, and lays claim to it, and then builds a reputation upon it, that reputation stands as a sort of "edifice" in its own right. It becomes "what everybody knows." It is extremely difficult to dislodge what everybody knows--even if it is absurd, when one examines the claim closely. It is Steve's impression (and here, we will put it that way), that plagiarism lawsuits rarely win, because the standard of proof is so high. One can never prove it wasn't coincidental, as it seems. Really, however, it is more than that. It is corruption and money and influence and social standing. The thief has worked very hard to build credibility; and it is credibility which wins the case, by influencing the law. What is credibility built on? Credibility, inasmuch as it depends on reputation, is the poor-man's integrity. It is integrity by reputation, by consensus. When the plagiarist commands credibility-by-reputation, credibility by integrity loses.

Take two highly talented people, who, because of their religious training, hide their authorship and refuse, as an act of self-abnegation (and/or naivete), to protect their work; and you have the formula for disaster. It would be like parking your jaguar in a poor neighborhood and leaving the keys in the ignition. Perhaps most of the people in that neighborhood are honorable, but there are a few thieves, and it is an open invitation for them.

This is what happened with Mathew's work, and mine, in the 19th century, when exceptionally good writing was even more coveted than a jaguar might be, today. That's because 19th-century society put a high value on literature. So that if you could make a name for yourself in that field, you were highly regarded by society. People with little talent, but large ambitions, took the easy route. Identifying exceptionally good work by obscure writers who had not protected it, writing anonymously, they simply published a few pieces of it in the literary newspapers, and then published a compilation. If it received acclaim, then any garbage they wrote after that was touted, by unsophisticated critics, as great works of art. The assumption was, "he or she has a reputation; if it doesn't look so good to me, I'm probably wrong, and in any case I don't want to look foolish."

Historians, writing in hindsight, were not always so kind; but only a handful of history students ever read those commentaries. And the historians didn't want to go entirely out on a limb by pronouncing the writer a plagiarist. They would simply bring up the question, as in, "Hmmm, later in life he wrote more poems, or travelogues, but they weren't nearly as good as his early work."

As though the person had gone senile after the first few pieces that put him on the map...

In our book, we had to wrest our respective works from the hands of numerous plagiarists. Only one of them did we catch red-handed--the man who tried to claim my own poetry! That makes for a little entertainment--I'll let you find it in the book, rather than spoiling it for you, now. :-)

Now to why you should buy and read this book. If you aren't fighting the very idea of reincarnation with every sentence, it is a rollicking ride. If you are fighting reincarnation, of course it is going to be an exhausting effort to read even a few pages. Therefore this book is not for cynics, who will never take the sincere effort to read it. This is for people who already know; and it is for people who are sincerely seeking knowledge. The reality is, that most people who sincerely seek knowledge, are reawakening the knowledge they already have gained in past lives. You see, those people who are now toddling about (having just accomplished their potty training), are scholars of the past. They will be attracted to this book because they remember it, not because they are open to something entirely new to them. But that is a service--to help reawaken this army of peace, which will soon descend on the world, in the form of the next generations. They will teach the rest.

Has anyone ever enjoyed J.R.R. Tolkien's work by flipping through a few pages? Has anyone who resists the idea of elves and wizards and other fanciful creatures (who are hardly fanciful where I live), gotten much out of that work by forcing themselves to read 50 pages or so? No. The people who get the most out of Tolkien's work, immerse themselves in it, joyfully, losing themselves in it for weeks at a time. Pizzas are delivered at the door; the phone is off the hook; vacation time is used up; e-mail remains unread. And they live, for that few weeks, in Tolkien's world. When they reach the end, it is as if waking from a dream, a jarring sensation of having to come back to this noisy century.

That is the way to read our book. It is that good; and people would find it so, if they would approach it that way. The reason you don't see any "lauds and honors," is that no-one, so far, has approached it that way. But Steve has written it, and read and re-read it, and polished it until it shines. He knows it is worthy to be read that way.

Yesterday, Steve watched another episode of the show, "A Craftsman's Legacy." What love, what respect, the host brings to each guest he visits! The respect is almost tangible, and there is nothing insincere about it. Yesterday's show was a visit with a boat-builder. And what love does that builder put into the crafts he fashions! The cameraman practically made love to the rich, varnished curves and lines in the close-up details of the finished boats, as he photographed them. In Mathew's day, craftsmen of all kinds were called "Mechanics," and there were societies built for their support and edification including libraries, lecture halls, and shows. Steve has read about these in the old newspapers he has perused for our research.

What I want to leave you with, is the understanding that we have approached this book the way that boat-builder approaches each of his crafts. We have lovingly seen to every detail. I have arranged for Steve to "bump into" the evidence, and to bring it to him, physically, in some cases; he has attended lovingly to every word and every phrase, so that it reads without the slightest confusion or hesitation. Mathew's humor is richly embedded therein, as, on occasion, is Steve's (since he has the same mind, and humor originates in the deepest layers of the mind).

What is humor but clear seeing--and the deepest seeing, sees the world as a circus, and it is quite funny (if it wasn't so sad). People act like sheep, far more than they realize. Everyone is looking over his or her shoulder to see what everybody else believes about a thing, lest they be left out and set aside.

The pundits and authorities will not tell you this is a good book to purchase and read and immerse yourself in. "Everybody else" will not tell you that, either. Nobody on your right, nobody on your left. Soon, you will be pushed aside, as it were, by those young people who recognize it, who "smell" it, of their own accord--just as the youth, today, recognized Bernie Sanders even while the mainstream society was marginalizing him. Their children are the ones who will recognize our work. Mark my words.

Love to each and all,

p.s. A few days after channeling this with Steve, he found two new sources of evidence on Ebay; one containing a very surprising revelation (the identity of one of our plagiarists), and the other, complete microfilm of a source our researcher had gone through, but which Steve had not been able to access, directly. He's afraid people will think this is a contradiction...but the truth is, being in the astral realm does not make me omniscient. It means I have the real internet, the one that your internet is patterned loosely after. Having said everything was completed, I had the whim to make one last check, and, in fact, I turned up a couple of things.