Yesterday's entry, I think, concludes my presentation of evidence regarding Edgar Allan Poe's theft of "The Raven" from Mathew Franklin Whittier. All the evidence is presented together in my sequel, "Mathew Franklin Whittier in his own world," which is only a $7.00 e-book. It is easier to read it there, presented in a coherent whole, for $7.00, than it would be to take several hours of your time to hunt back through the entries in this blog, where I have treated it piecemeal.
I realized, yesterday, that Amazon.com's "Look Inside This Book" feature has been giving away so much of my books for free, that it's no wonder nobody buys them. It took a telephone call, and being sent to a special customer service agency, to turn the feature off. Then in their follow-up letter, is a link to a short customer satisfaction form, with a place for comments. I politely suggested that it would be nice if authors could turn off that feature without having to make a phone call, and go through two levels of customer service.
As I continue to key in Mathew's reviews for the New York "Tribune," I find a lengthy review of a book by popular 19th-century author Mrs. Sigourney. Mathew expresses his opinion on the wanton destruction of old trees, as follows:
In contrast with the love of ravage which distinguishes the American settler and which makes the marks of his first passage over this land, like those of corrosive acid upon the check of beauty, rather than that smile of intelligence which would ensue from the touch of an intelligent spirit, Mrs. S. observes:
"It seems almost a wickedness, wantonly to smite down a vigorous healthful tree. It was of God's planting, and in its veins is circulating the life which He has given."
We have often marvelled to see the Reformers who weary every one by their protest against violence done to life in the animal kingdom, coolly hewing down and heaping on the hearth trunks that half a century had been required to rear, trunks of trees, the home of birds, and the fairest monuments of the earth's devotion. We suppose that the hatred of our people for trees is from a feeling that they are symbols of a wilderness to be conquered; and inherited from a time when each was a shield or hiding place for an Indian foe. But it is time that the barbarous form of this prejudice should give place.
Mathew is ambivalent about Native Americans, because of being exposed to stories of Indian massacres from his youth, which had occurred in his native Haverhill, Mass. Generally he is very sympathetic to their cause, excepting this particular habit. Both of the psychic mediums I used in 2010 stressed that Mathew's wife, Abby, was ahead of her time; the first one included Mathew in that assessment.
In one of my past-life regression sessions, I remembered seeing a man standing on a farm wagon, which he was using as a makeshift platform, giving an impromptu speech using a megaphone. This same review I finished typing, this morning, describes a man in the 18th century using a "speaking trumpet."
These kinds of little confirmations keep popping up. They are unavoidable when the information I initially received was accurate. (If I had ever seen a historical film of a man using a megaphone, I certainly don't remember it--though I have seen the non-powered megaphones of the old-time movie directors.)
I announced the release of my new book, "The Deacon Stories of Mathew Franklin Whittier" on my Facebook page. My friends, i.e., the ones I know personally, were supportive, with "likes" and brief congratulatory comments. None were interested in reading it. I wonder what I would have to do to hype up these books, in order to tempt people to actually read them. It's as though if you don't hype something, people assume it can't be very interesting. Sort of the way that restaurants have to use copious amounts of salt and sugar, else their patrons will declare that the food is insipid.
These are very funny stories, masterfully rendered by an expert storyteller. What more can I say? And they bear, philosophically, on the issues of moral authority (i.e., socially-designated moral authority), and the human condition.
That's my hype.
I have three radio hosts interested. The smallest show of the three is definitely lined up. The somewhat bigger host has tentatively scheduled me for mid-2019; and the biggest one, who has interviewed a number of "names," has indicated that his co-host will contact me to set up a time.
I haven't done a radio interview in a few years, but I have always found that I was surprisingly good at it. I think, at such times, I am reaching back to my past-life skills as Mathew. In effect, if you listen to those radio interviews (I have my old ones archived), you are listening to Mathew, albeit sans his New England accent.
I can seemingly remember what it sounded like when he said his name: Maathew Franklin Whitya!
Sometimes what is proof to you, personally, wouldn't be proof to anybody else. I am curently practicing several pieces of music for piano, from books of sheet music published in the 1830's. I have determined that Abby probably played from them (i.e., not necessarily these same physical volumes, but these publications), and I can recognize the ones we both loved. One is called "The Mayfly," written in an earlier century by one "Dr. Calcott." The title indicates that this is a "glee," which means it was sung by men in a small group. The lyrics begin, "Poor insect, poor insect, What a little day, What a little day of sunny bliss is thine." When I play it, and the bass part ascends in five notes from G to D, every single time I can hear, in my "mind's ear," a group of tenors singing this line.
But I have never heard this song in my present lifetime. You can't even find this on YouTube. It's not my imagination, because it's so distinct and unchanging. Every time I play it, I am hearing that particular line; I am, I think, in a room with wood paneling. I don't know why it would have stuck in my mind like that, but I think the voices were excellent; it stood out; and probably, I was listening to it being rehearsed. I would extrapolate from this, that Abby, who was an excellent musician, was probably pressed into service to play piano for rehearsals. I would go with her, and thus, when they were practicing this tune, I would hear it over and over. This portion of it must have particularly impressed me.
I also seemingly remember another portion of the song, but this memory is that Abby and I especially loved it, and that we would emphasize it, together, as a kind of private--not a joke, because it wasn't funny, but a moment of special significance to us, privately. The line which triggers that memory reads: "Thou humm'st thy tune, unmindful of the blast, And careless while 'tis burning noon. How short that noon that noon is past." It's on the last sentence I remember Abby emphasizing it, as we sang it, together.
She would be gone, died of consumption, only about two years later. I think she was psychic--perhaps she knew, and was trying to prepare me. I don't think I understood that, at all. It was just something she emphasized while we sang it, and which became a kind of standing joke between us (apparently, there were many such).
How short that noon that noon is past. It's past before you even finish singing it. The sentence doesn't even get a comma.
I have shared with you, recently, the URL on YouTube for the animation of the inventor whose young wife discovers blood on her white handkerchief. That I don't remember. I think I block some things out. It is odd which snippets of memory come to me, and which don't.
If one read my entire study, and could see that I have proven the match, one might then be inclined to believe me about these things I can't prove. If you don't believe me, or can't believe me, then this is your own doing, since you haven't read my books with an open mind.
What, I keep wondering, would it take to get people sufficiently interested in something which I know could make a significant contribution? I was watching more alien type videos on YouTube yesterday--that's my TV, for lunch and dinner. It seems to me that a consensus reality is building, almost a religion with its own beliefs, out there among the "conspiracy theory" crowd. I'm glad I'm educating myself on this, so I can talk the lingo. I have a passing knowledge, now, of the theories regarding ancient advanced civilizations; aliens; the government coverup of UFO's and aliens; signs of civilization on the moon, and on Mars; and the ancient Summarian civilization, with their Ananaki founders. I don't know that I buy all of it, but if I ever do the conference circuit, I will need to be able to converse on these topics.
In the literature having to do with my Guru, Meher Baba, there are--as I recall from memory--two entirely conflicting views regarding the "missing link" and the evolution of man. The one I can find, is a seemingly ludicrous explanation given by Meher Baba about the missing link, and also about seemingly improbable creatures in pre-history. But Meher Baba had an interesting habit. If someone disagreed with him, and insisted that their view was right, Baba would humor them. This material was, as I recall, given to some Western filmmakers, whom he had approached to create a film about what Baba called the Divine Theme, which included his view of evolution. If they had insisted on the Darwinian theory, Baba might have humored them to the point of giving this absurdist lecture. But if that was the context, it has been lost, and his current followers solemnly believe the whole thing!
The second, contradictory statement by Baba, which I can't find, was a response to a question about the "missing link." As I recall the gist of it--and I would have read this as a young man, in the 70's--the theory of a missing link was a "big mistake," and that mankind arose through a "special act of creation." It is said, also, that Baba was asked about UFO's, and responded only that they are "not from other planets." But Baba, who kept silence, used gestures--and the person he was speaking with, informally, may not have been adept at reading those gestures. He might have meant "not from other star systems." Or, he might have meant "they didn't get here from other star systems by physical means." So if this is even an accurate quote, one can't be sure of the correct interpretation.
That was for lunch; for dinner, I watched a long speech given to a Spiritualst church by a physical medium. That was spectacular, and more so because I trust the man's integrity. It is clear that people in the astral world can materialize out of ectoplasm, given a sufficiently talented physical medium; and that they can also create "apports."
Some time back, I went through a phase of studying fairies, elves, gnomes, and such. The generally-accepted conclusion is that they inhabit a world which bridges the physical and the astral. Their behavior is not unlike that reported for aliens, with some being good, and some bad. If they are manifesting temporarily from the astral world; and if they can appear to human beings as they wish to appear (with allowance given for culture and expectations), then we have the possibility that we are really dealing with the interaction between the lower astral realm, and the physical world.
I am right now in an active marital relationship with a denizen of the higher astral realms, i.e., my wife Abby. That means I'm doing something more radical than these popular conspiracy theorists are talking about. But then, nobody would take it seriously.
I was thinking, last night, of the relative intrinsic signficance of aliens, vs. reincarnation. If aliens exist, you have a social and a political crisis (especially if their technological capabilities are far more advanced than our own, reverse-engineering from downed spacecraft notwithstanding). I don't think, however, that there is much spiritual significance in this. They are not going to be any more spiritually advanced than, say, the people that Spiritualists communicate with in the astral realm. And that's a mixed bag.
Reincarnation, on the other hand, has profound spiritual implications. It is not really spiritual in and of itself. In itself, it drives home the same truth that the existence of ancient advanced civilizations does--that life is not linear, but cyclical. Mankind's history is cyclical, and each person's individual history is also cyclical.
However, if we all reincarnate, then there is 100% accountability for all our actions. There is an intrinsic meaning to life--and it is not primarily physical. We are here to learn things, to grow personally, to gain in wisdom.
In other words, reincarnation, properly understood and widely accepted, would restore the spiritual view of life that undergirded 19th-century society, before the rise of philosophical Materialism. Mathew warned of what would happen to society, if the traditional churches persisted in rejecting the discoveries of the Spiritualists. Let me see if I can find that quote...
Yes, here it is, in the letter which urges the president of the Portland Spiritualist Society to published a series of talks given by the president of that organization, Jabez C. Woodman. The letter is dated July, 1857; the talks were presented in the Portland "Transcript," in response to an anti-Spiritualist sermon by a conservative Portland minister, one Rev. Dr. Dwight. Mathew reported the talks for the paper as an anonymous reporter; and I believe he ghost-wrote the talks, themselves (or at least their presentation in the booklet). Definitely, he is one of the officers signing the letter; so whether or not he ghost-wrote the book, he almost certainly had a hand in writing the letter. He says:
Many good men, and some even of the clergy and the church, are of opinion that, should the old church and other opponents succeed in crushing out modern spiritualism by branding it as a tremendous delusion, the Bible, which is full of spiritual phenomena, as exhibited at the present time, would at no distant period, be itself denounced as a delusion; for men would say: "If we cannot believe in the phenomena, or the so-called spiritual manifestations, which millions of us have seen and are still witnessing, how can we believe the precisely similar ones recorded in the Bible, but which we have not seen?"
This was entirely prescient. Have you ever thought that the reason religion was relegated to the realm of wishful thinking, fantasy, and myth, in favor of materialistic science (i.e., a science hijacked by philosophical Materialism), was a direct result of the proven evidence from Spiritualism being marginalized and suppressed? Had traditional religion embraced those scientifically-demonstrated phenomena, and modified its own doctrines where necessary, the disaster might have been averted.
But it was an inside job. Spiritualism was discredited from within, by fradulent practitioners and human ignorance. Whether any part of that was infiltration by outside conspiracy, I'm not in a position to judge. It wouldn't surprise me. Materialism is good for business--spirituality is not. For example, if everybody bought at the grocery store the way I do, the place would go out of business in six months. Business requires that people's desires be artificially inflamed by advertising. An economy in which people become immune to advertising--which will happen, someday--will be a radically different economy.
Reincarnation accomplishes what the mediums and the NDE advocates are accomplishing, plus what is being accomplished by the ancient advanced civilization theorists. It demonstrates that man is a spiritual being having a physical experience, and it shows that life is cyclical.
For some reason, however, reincarnation seems to be the last esoteric truth to be embraced, even by the vanguard. This pro-Spiritualist booklet still views "transmigration" as an error, which the Spiritualists have supposedly explained away. Mathew was personally more open to it, as I have discovered in an unsigned article which I believe he wrote. But while ghost-writing, here, for the Spiritualist association, he had to toe the party line.
I do hope that I get my chance to present at conventions, of the sort I see during my meals, on YouTube. Mathew had formal training and experience in both debate, and public speaking. These skills seem to be accessible to me, in the sense that when I am in the line of fire, they "kick in." My one or two experiences of public speaking in this life weren't especially scintillating--but it's a different story, for me, in radio interviews. I think that what Mathew learned, and had as skills under his belt, are also under my own belt, now, and could be awakened with a little exposure and practice. If they were, I think you'd see something.
Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.
Music opening this page: "The Mayfly,"
by John Wall Calcott, performed by the author