Play music




Yesterday, I went over the May stats for this website. But because the software only lists the top 30, sometimes it is just as revealing to study the stats for the first of a month. There, one sees some of the more obscure pages that people also find interesting. So we're going to do that in a minute.

First, however, today, June 2nd, is my astral wife Abby's birthday. She was born on June 2, 1816, and has not yet incarnated again. It is generally understood that the time for reincarnating can vary widely, from a few years, to hundreds of years, earth-time. Abby was a deeply spiritual person who was a better fit for heaven than for earth, even when she was here. She would be in no hurry to return, except, when we can do so, together. First, she had to wait for me to grow up, spiritually, and for me to do some remedial training. That's because while, as Mathew Franklin Whittier, I was four years her senior, she was clearly my senior in terms of spiritual development and emotional maturity. So the irony is, that I had to wait for her to grow up, to begin courting her; but she has had to wait for me to grow up, in the wider scheme of things.

I could write five entries on Abby, and on our resumed relationship across the Great Divide. If you haven't watched my self-shot interview (I was talking with a friend), you will get a better understanding of it, there (it resides atop the "Interviews" section of this website). I think there was a day, in the distant past, when this type of relationship wasn't so unusual. Where you see men or women who refused to remarry, and preferred to wait to rejoin their spouse in heaven, some percentage of these people were actively carrying on that relationship, as I am doing with Abby, now. Even then, they probably didn't discuss it with others, except for their most trusted friends. I am public with my "cross-dimensional" marriage, because when I contemplated keeping it "in the closet," it didn't seem respectful to Abby; and also because she wants to encourage others who may be attempting the same thing. And there are such couples--I have met perhaps five or six, online, since we went public. It basically presents the same challenges, and sacrifices, that any long-distance relationship presents, though there are some benefits, as well.

Also, before I present the stats for June 1st, I wanted to briefly touch on something I did yesterday evening. I stepped back into my life as Mathew, in a sense, by seeing political comedian Lee Camp perform here in Portland. Mathew, being politically radical, and a humorist and social reformer in his own right, would encourage and extend the work of his colleagues by reporting on them for the newspaper. Once I was able to confirm his authorship of an unsigned lyceum lecture series in the Portland (Maine) "Transcript," I found that he had seen some of the greatest minds, and keenest talent, of the 19th century, including Charles Farrar Browne*, Henry David Thoreau, John Gough, and Mark Twain. His review of Gough, who assumed the part of the various characters in his monologue, is itself brilliant. Since I have given a sample in my book, "Mathew Franklin Whittier in his own words," I won't give it away, here. I have given away too much of that book in this blog, as it is.

Lee Camp is of this calibre, so seeing him here in Portland was really like stepping back in time, for me. He, also, is brilliant, and he is trying to make a difference in the world. I would compare him favorably to any of the finest minds of the 19th century, whom Mathew was fortunate to see on the lyceum circuit.

There is a paradox in stand-up comedy--one must take a routine, and make it fresh. Lee's comedy is based on deep insights into the social condition; the first time he had them, and expressed them with a blinding flash of ironic humor, it would have been like thunder and lightning sizzling through the room! But the very nature of such insights is that it is difficult to retain that same magic, retelling them night after night. What I'm trying rather unsuccessfully to say, here, is that the very nature of Lee's humor and insight into the human condition is spontaneous; but it is difficult to "bottle" that into a routine. He's the best out there, in my opinion, bar none--but I would rather have had a personal conversation with him. He was, in fact, signing books in the lobby after the show, but I didn't stay. So far as I know he's philosophically a Materialist, and we wouldn't see eye-to-eye. Besides, buying a book for a signature, is sort of like buying your way into an obligatory introduction. I'd rather just bump into someone and talk to them. So these sorts of caveats aren't Lee's fault--they are built into the situation of making a living as a comic.

Just now, in the paragraph above, I did precisely what I used to do, professionally, in my 19th-century lifetime. And not to give you all a demonstration, but because it came naturally. Mathew would also describe the person's speaking style, at the outset of his review; and he would always give his fair and honest opinions, pro and con. I could probably write such a review in his style, if I wanted to, although Mathew had learned shorthand, whereas I would have had to record it. I would probably start out with the impression that Lee strode about the stage like a lion, his long hair flowing like a black mane, ready at any moment to pounce on the "mice" of social ignorance.

But I won't attempt that, here. Instead, lets look at a screen shot of the stats for yesterday, June 1st:

Once again, I will split my screen, here, so I can see the stats and comment thereon. I won't explain anything I touched on yesterday, but rather, I'll assume you've read that entry.

"Continuing Love," my article about my relationship with Abby, is right at the top with 19 hits in one day. Did a few people read it, after reading yesterday's blog entry? Or are they all finding it through some other website's link? It has been very popular for several months. Coming in right behind it is Rick Brown's article about his case, "James the Submarine Man." And only then comes the theme music for my home page, which, of course, tells you that people are linking to my inside pages (or returning directly to their favorites, in the case of Abby's journal). I don't mind people linking to my internal pages, though it means they don't see my books which are listed at the top, there. When you link to an inside page, you are cutting into that person's income, if they are trying to sell something. That means I have to try to put banner ads on the pages that are being accessed directly; and nobody clicks on banner ads. Either that, or I have to try to prevent internal linking, which I have never done. I link directly to other people's pages, too--but it's something to think about, if you want to support the folks doing the work.

Incidentally, I don't know of a single soul who has intentionally tried to promote my work, that is, without a mutual back-scratching agreement of some kind. And I refuse to do that (like, cross-linking). If I like your work, I'll recommend it. If you like my work, your recommendation is appreciated. It is all free and above-board, with no obligations.

Next comes the blank article I spoke of yesterday, which believe it or not, is getting as many hits as my home page. It's not that funny, nor that insightful. But down at the #18 position, we do see that at least four people have read the original article, i.e., the one with words in it.

Then comes my article about my Guru, Meher Baba, which, as I have said, has been drawing in between 200 and 300 people every month for many years. Next is the announcements page, and the clip of music I used for yesterday's Update. Next, the links, and this Update page, itself. Eight people, not counting the times I hit it (probably, twice) to check it online. So the real figure is about six unique visits to that page, yesterday. Six people read that entry, and today, I am supplanting it, and moving that one to the Archives. I am doing all this work for six people (not that you aren't important)--six people, that is, plus whoever may find this interesting in posterity.

After my blog, comes Abby's journal, which I channel for her. Five of her regulars have already found it, even though we just channeled one a couple of days ago.

Numbers 13-16 are routine, but now it gets interesting, as we get a window into what a few people are looking at on this site, pages that don't make it into the top 30. First, we see that four people have poked into my list of questions, sent to Bruce Kelly (the reincarnated "Submarine Man"). Then, four also read the original article on the "Futility of Reincarnation Education" (undoubtedly, here, I am preaching to the choir, which proves my point). Four also read about Capt. Robert Snow's magnificent case; and now we see that four more have delved deep into my Update Archives, and have read the entry for March 1, 2013. Someone is linking directly to this one, obviously. As I recall, from having checked my stats on an earlier occasion, I carefully and rigorously analyze someone else's reincarnation case, by way of demonstration. If you read that page, here's what I want you to take away from it--anyone who makes an absurd, grandiose claim like "I wrote both 'A Christmas Carol' and 'The Raven' in a past life" should not be analyzing another case in this manner. It's oxymoronic. That is, unless I also analyzed my own case with the same rigor, and am honestly reporting my results. Which means that the assumption that I have made a grandiose claim based on an intellectual house of cards may not actually be correct.

The article in the 21st slot is an old one, which I wrote as a spontaneous response to an anti-reincarnation comment by the late Billy Graham, in his column, in answer to one of his readers' questions. I also wrote a second article in response to a second comment from Graham, which was so radical that I removed the link to it. In that article, I opined that St. Paul was really a "plant," instructed to undermine the early Christian Church with a subtle disinformation campaign. He was a con-artist who only pretended to have had a conversion experience on the road to Damascus.

If I am right about this, it is one of the biggest and most influential scams ever perpetrated in modern history. What he would have done, is to borrow (i.e., steal) the language of the genuine apostles, then mix in his own Pharisee nonsense with it, creating a watered-down amalgam which was more palatable to lesser minds. It would have been this popularized version of Christianity that was made the state religion by Emperor Constantine--thus giving him the perfect excuse to persecute the real Christians. I can make a fairly strong case for this idea; but it would be so unpopular, that I think there is little use trying. After all, it doesn't directly bear on the work I'm trying to do. Why destroy what little shred of credibility I may have left, with something that really isn't central to my mission? But the first article--the one linked, here--does a pretty good job of setting Graham (and hence, traditional Christian dogma) straight on a number of points. You can see that only three people have read it so far this month. I'm not sure how they are finding it. I will only say that it is en vogue to reject Christianity (i.e., as it has come down to us) altogether, throwing the Christ Child out with the bathwater; and it is also popular to cling to the entire presentation. But to separate out the wheat from the chaff is quite unpopular--as it has always been.

Next we see Jeff Keene's page, and the page I developed for kids, this one presenting Dr. Stevenson's work. Then, two of my articles, and then another entry from this blog. What is this one? I'd have to check...

It looks like my usual rantings, except that I address the question of UFO's and other paranormal phenomena; and a personal encounter (not with an alien, but with an experiencer) that I had many years ago. It indicates my own open-mindedness in this regard; and then, I go into some of the evidence for my own claims, in this context. It's a pretty well-written entry, if I say so myself. I have mentioned this before, but I typically post these things before I have thoroughly proofread them, out of long (and impatient) habit. If you read an entry shortly after it was posted, or even the same day, you can know it still hasn't been fully proofread; and that on re-read, I may add a few things that come to me after-the-fact. Once these are proofread, I would say that the quality of my writing comes up to the standard I set in my past life, as a professional writer. Before I'm through with them, however, you will see some stupid mistakes, and redundancy of language, which is my particular Achilles Heel.

Finally, in slots 27-30, we come to the back entries for Abby's journal. Abby writes better than I do, even through the cumbersome process of channeling. I don't edit her entries the way I do, mine. I don't need to. I give it one, maybe two passes to check for spelling errors, maybe tweak an expression here and there if I feel she doesn't mind, and it's done. But these are arguably better-written than my own blogs, which I tweak as many as nine or ten times before considering them final.

I'm not sure why these particular entries were read, presumably by two people (or by one person coming back an hour later, depending on how the software is set). I'll look at the first one...

That's a short entry, in which Abby simply provides a link to a video of a harpist, who is somewhat as she once was. I have evidence clearly indicating that she did play the harp; and the girl in this video intuitively reminded me of her. What's the second entry, for Dec. 7, 2016?...

Again, she is talking about music, and songs she once played for me, which I have discovered in period sheet music. So perhaps the person reading these is a musician.

The third entry, for March 4, 2017, is also about music--the song I remembered Abby playing for me, as a young man, which caused me to fall deeply in love with her.

Finally, the entry for May 31, 2018 has also been read. That's the most-recent one. So on a typical day, two people might read her journal.

I am trying to use the same channeling method to let Abby teach me how to play these tunes, which I have identified as the ones that she once played for me, on piano. It is quite poignant. Music is known to be a powerful memory trigger, especially on the emotional level. I can remember how I felt, and how we felt, together, when we played certain passages in these songs. It starts to fade a little bit after repeated practice, but not entirely. She liked one, a "Glee," entitled "The May Fly." It's a poignant, ironic piece about the May fly, which has its one shining day in the sun, and then dies. There's a passage, in which the words are:

Thou humm'st thy short and busy tune,
unmindful of the blast,
and careless while 'tis burning noon.
How short that noon, that noon has past.

FYI, that is not a typo on the last word. Apparently what we would spell as "passed," was acceptably spelled "past" in the early 19th century. Either that, or a spelling error has crept into this published sheet music--but I have seen Mathew use it this way in his own works.

I have a distinct past-life memory of Abby and I singing that last line, turning to look at each other as we did so. I can't describe it. We would sing the last line in unison, with particular emphasis, as it was our favorite. Here's the tune, as best I could record it on my cell phone.

But when it comes to another song a few pages before this one in the same book, it is too painful. I've tried, and I can't bear it. It was also one of Abby's favorites; but what I remember is hearing it in services, after she had died. I would feel like running from the room; and perhaps, on some occasions, I actually did. It is entitled, "I Would Not Live Alway," but it is not the tune that one will find online.

Abby, being deeply influence by Victorian ideals, had her bags packed, as it were; and viewed heaven as the goal of religion. As I believe I discussed in the response to Billy Graham, that's a mistake; or, at least, a distortion. It's the children's version of religion. Abby learned that, at least for soul-mates--for souls which have taken the soul-mate path--Love is far superior to heaven. Heaven is like Disney World. Couples go to Disney World; but they don't split up over it. If one gets off work and goes earlier in the week, he or she waits until the other one can get off work and join them. You don't leave anybody to live at Disney World. So after Abby's death, Mathew tried mightily to accept it based on her own religious ideals; but she knew she had made a mistake, in letting herself go so easily, and not fighting. This is why we now have to do what we do; and it is part of making this up, to educate others. This is one reason that Abby is permitted to have a channeled journal, I think--because it is part of her restitution.

These are more advanced matters than one would usually get into with a general audience. Remember that I have studied mysticism from the best sources for over 40 years. I know a lot more than I talk about in these entries. And Abby, as a young girl, had studied these things at a time when I was just a skeptic, in the late 1820's and early 1830's.

I don't emphasize this, but it is known in occult circles that teamwork between a person on earth, and a person in the astral world, is a powerful combination. Like everything else, there are dark versions and light versions. Ours, obviously, is a light version, meaning not "lite," but Light. Abby helped me, via occult means, to find quite a bit of the evidence I used to prove my past-life case; and in at least one instance, I can prove it. That proof is provided in my sequel, "Mathew Franklin Whittier in his own world."

And because I have let myself go down a side-road, in this entry, I don't have a clever wrap-up. I will, perhaps, borrow Lee Camp's sign-off phrase: "Keep fighting."

Best regards,

Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.

*Charles Farrar Browne has been called the first standup comedian. I can prove that he got his start, as a printer's apprentice, by stealing one of Mathew's humorous sketches (already stolen by another plagiarist), re-working it, and inserting it, clandestinely, into the newspaper. His famous "Artemus Ward" character was a blatant imitation of Mathew's "Ethan Spike."


Updates Archive


Music opening this page: "Arithmetic," by Eric Johnson,
from the album, "Up Close"



purchase VHS and DVD copies of documentary reincarnation stories streaming video interviews links to reincarnation related sites home