It's the end of the month, and being in-between my researcher's historical library expeditions, and being caught up (unless you count gobs of proofreading, which I'm going to save till the end), I'm in a reflective mood. Let me bring up my website's stats, here...
First of all, these are going to be jacked up a bit from a normal month, because for a couple of weeks I participated in an online group having to do with "research and education" on afterlife topics. I don't want to insult anyone; but I found that the bulk of the people participating weren't as serious about finding the truth at all costs, as I was. There were limits to what one could question, without offending. Most were grieving persons looking for support, or people who were advocates for the existence of an afterlife; some were professional psychics and mediums. I only noticed one other researcher there; and the group leader is an educator. No-one seemed to be really in favor of playing the devil's advocate, i.e., of being their own skeptic. I told them that real research demands that one try one's hardest to shoot down one's own theories--to explore all normal explanations for the data, before claiming, or theorizing, that anything paranormal is going on. It seemed to fall on deaf ears. So I quit with as little drama as possible. But in the meantime, in the course of discussion, I did have the opportunity to give my website's URL, and to briefly summarize my study. A few of the participants looked into it--hence, the stats will be a bit inflated. None looked at either of my e-books at my point-of-purchase site (I get a tally from that online store).
I continue to get the sense that people look at my information out of curiosity, but assume that I must be wrong, and don't investigate further. I'm drawing a reasonably large number of people to the information, but they aren't responding to it in any serious way. There are three explanations: 1) I am wrong, for whatever reason of self-delusion or poor research technique, 2) I am right, but I am so far ahead of my time that nobody believes me (yet), or 3) people are so conditioned to advertising hype, that they simply cannot purchase anything unless induced to do so via those methods.
I am pretty sure #2 is operating; but lately, I have been wondering about #3. Because people who seem to take me seriously about my cross-dimensional relationship with my 19th-century soulmate, Abby, still don't purchase my little $7.00 book about that relationship. I don't use hype, and the books are charged at $7.00 and $12.00, not because I am amateurish, but deliberately, because I don't even believe in manipulating people to the extent of charging "$7.99." A fourth likely factor is that people don't buy non-fiction e-books. All I can say is if only you understood the power of both of these works, and that they are more advanced, more rigorous and more accurate than 95% of what you may be familiar with, you would gladly "suffer" with one e-format or the other (I offer pdf, mobi/Kindle, and e-pub). People often say that they "can't read on the computer." But, how many hours do they spend on Facebook? Facebook has lots of pictures--but so do my books. The real issue, then, becomes one of attention span, not the computer screen, per se. If the problem is time, then, I would say they could give my book their Facebook and TV time for three weeks. They would find it at least as entertaining, and far more edifying.
I have said that I remember my past life, as Mathew Franklin Whittier completely, on an emotional, subconscious, and intuitive level. I don't have cognitive memories, with a few brief exceptions; and now, I'm thinking this may be a blessing. On my lunch hour, I usually try to find a video on YouTube on a topic I'm unfamiliar with, for the purposes of curiosity and self-education. I went through all the well-known mediums, and found them genuine; I went through a number of videos about ancient civilizations, and found them credible (except where aliens are brought into the picture, where I am undecided); I spent just enough time looking at images from Mars, to be convinced that there is a debris field of a former civilization there, which information is being covered up by the powers that be. But yesterday, I stumbled upon a presentation about people who don't forget. More specifically, give them a date, and they can tell you what was going on in their life on that date. Any date. Such people are rare, but they exist. And at least one of them is tortured by it. I was greatly amused to see her interviewed by Diane Sawyer, who tested her on-camera about a point of history. Diane thought she had her, as she was off by two days. But Diane's history text was wrong, and the subject was right. She insisted she was right, until the director, back-stage, having looked it up online, had to shout from behind the curtain, "She's right, the book is wrong."
Incidentally, this has happened over, and over, and over with my own research. The historical record, which we send young men and women through college relying on, is a mess. But I've demonstrated that before, regarding Mathew Franklin Whittier's personal history. In this latest phase of my research, I have learned that even though Mathew was five years younger than his famous brother, he was acting as a substitute editor for a paper in New York, at the same time that John Greenleaf Whittier obtained one of his earliest editing positions. In other words, given that Mathew was five years younger, his career roughly paralleled his brother's. But if you look at the recorded history (much of it compiled by the official Whittier biographer, who hated Mathew), you will find that none of this is mentioned. The unofficial biographer, a fellow named William Sloan Kennedy, only mentions Mathew's "Ethan Spike" satires (the only pseudonym Mathew was ever publicly "outed" for, out of dozens or perhaps even hundreds).* And what does he say? That they prove there can only be one genius in a family; and that they are not worth the trouble of looking up. Meanwhile, I could prove to you this minute that Mathew briefly launched his own liberal paper in 1838--because it showed up at auction, and that page is still online.
That little volume appears to be the only one in existence. I don't know who bought it (this was a physically small paper, and only February through May) for over $7,000. I have tried to get in touch with them, and have never gotten a response. For a long time, I felt very frustrated by this. But since then, I have found Mathew's work (as well as Abby's) going back still further in time. I have evidence of his writing from Dec. 1829, when he was 17 years old. I have physical copies of his work from five different publications, now, from 1831 through 1837. One of Abby's poems was published in William Lloyd Garrison's paper, the "Liberator," on the very day (or three days after, I can't remember which, right now) that the first edition of Mathew's own paper was launched. So I am not hurting for Mathew's early work. I was able to access a few of the articles from that paper, as they were reprinted in other papers (including the "Liberator"); I was able to find work that he wrote, and that they wrote, together, from the period immediately before, and soon after. So I think I did an effective end-run around this jack-ass, whoever he or she is, who is squirreling the information away as though he actually owns American history itself, and not just the physical volume.
But, I digress... ;-)
Let's look at those stats, briefly.
Incidentally, before I begin, there is a meta-message here, which I should not have to hit you over the head with, and that is that if I claim to be the reincarnation of an excellent writer, I had darn-well better be able to write at a high level, and that, in bulk. Keep in mind that I am just "jamming," here. I will go over it for grammar, style and typos a few times, and then I'll write another in a day or so--and I've been doing this now, for fun, for the past few weeks-or-however-long-it's-been. (Definitely, I am not one of those people who can remember what he was doing on any specific date--I have enough trouble telling you what I ate yesterday.)
Average daily visits is 335, which is low compared to previous months. In the last 2-3 weeks, it has dropped from near the 400's, about 100 points-worth to near the 300's, and below. I don't know why, except one always suspects that someone with a large website has unlinked from you.
Because this entry is already so long, I'll provide a screen capture, so I don't have to quote the figures:
I have it up as a split screen, here, just what you're seeing. My article on continuing a soul-mate relationship after the death of one partner, across the Great Divide, has been read (or seen) a whopping 393 times. It may reach 400, as the final tally for last night isn't in yet. That is probably due, in part, to the online group. There were some people posting in that group who were already doing this. In fact, to my knowledge, I have never actually inspired any couples to do this; I have only encouraged couples who were already doing it. Each couple seems to figure out their own idiosyncratic methods of communication. But just as with reports of near-death experiences, there are a great many commonalities; and by the same token, if enough cases are recorded, the phenomenon will gain at least that degree of credibility, someday.
The theme music for Abby's journal has been played multiple times, by somebody or by several readers--her journal comes in at 201 for the month (with some regulars); but the music has been played 324! Abby has channeled through me, in her journal, that this music is her "calling card," to let people who can hear know that she is genuine, and that our presentation is real. It will briefly take those people, vibrationally, to her level. Apparently some people like to visit repeatedly! If you are not attuned, it will do nothing much for you, sorry. But just because you, personally, don't experience something, don't automatically assume that nobody else in the universe does.
My second article, about the method I used in my own reincarnation study, has had a respectable 318 hits this month. I did give the URL for this one to the group, as well. So this figure is somewhat inflated, but not too much so.
My article on my Guru, Meher Baba, has been visited between 200-300 times every month for many years. It's down just a bit, now. It isn't easy to find on this website--I never hype or advertise it. It's just there, down about half-way in my Articles page. People are linking to it, apparently.
Meher Baba was the Avatar of this modern era.
Incidentally, the writing style of this article--meaning, not just the way I put words together, but more subtle elements like the detective work, insertion of personal and subjective elements in italics, etc.--is a precursor to the style I adopted for my book about my past life. People seem to find it entertaining in the article, and I think they would find it equally entertaining in the larger work.
This page you are on now, the Updates, comes in below that article, at 212. Considering that I've been writing interesting entries (if I say so, myself) every other day for the entire month, this is pretty low--especially if it counts a few regulars. I think I have burned everyone out, writing so much. Nobody (besides myself) is that interested. But I write these so that each one could stand by itself, for a new visitor. Last entry, I gave rock-solid proof that Abby is both real, and helping me with my study in tangible, concrete ways, through what might justifiably be called magic, i.e., intentional synchronicity. For some reason I felt from her that it was okay to share it, there, in context. Nobody paid any attention. If anybody was paying attention, and was taking me seriously, this would be earthshaking stuff. It means that where you have seen the old shows like "I Dream of Jeannie," they were based, however loosely, on something real. One wonders about the "Men in Black" films...
Abby has permission, as I understand it, to pull "tricks" like this for two purposes--in her role as my spirit guide, to protect and guide me, and in assisting me by locating evidence for my reincarnation study. In other words, strictly for selfless purposes, not for hedonistic purposes. There may have been magicians who used astral beings for selfish purposes, but we are not practicing such stuff. This is above-board and in the context of contributing to the welfare of humanity.
Directly below my blog, is Abby's journal, which I do my best to channel (not being particularly psychic). We do it based on soul-mate rapport and resonance, not on any talent of my own. But after years of doing this, it seems I am really channeling. As Mathew Franklin Whittier in the 19th century, I had many years of experience writing letters as various characters, including female characters. So I am bringing this past-life talent subconsciously to the table--which, interestingly, is evidential in itself. But once I "clothe" Abby in words on a page, she is able to step in and direct me. So it is both imagination (as I provide the "clothes"), and substance, at the same time. She, also, has her faithful regulars. I think 212 is down a bit; cause unknown. I didn't give the URL for this journal to the online group, though I did mention our relationship several times. One never knows, by the way, who is really taking it seriously, and who is patting me on the head, "Isn't that cute?" I think many people actually can't believe it--not really--no matter how hard they might wish to. They may trick themselves into believing they believe it, so to speak...
If anybody really believed me, I think I would be a bit more on the map than I am, today.
Finally, the supporting page for my book has been viewed 133 times. Not a single one of those persons has been motivated to look at the book in my online store. Whether any of them looked at it on Amazon.com, but decided against purchasing it for $12.00, I don't know. Perhaps they saw that there was no hype, and it seemed bland to them, accordingly. Perhaps they saw that it was $12.00, and that seemed amateurish to them, as did the home-made cover.
There is a principle which states that people are protected from what they are unready for, by their own ignorance. Far be it from me, to risk blowing someone's mind because they realize that I am giving real information. There is another principle which says that if a seed falls onto good soil, it may eventually germinate and sprout. Nobody expects a tree to be transplanted from one mind to another. The natural course of things is for a seed to lodge there, and that takes time. It may take lifetimes. That's why I would guess that these people who encounter my material now, may be ready to take it seriously about the time that Abby and I reincarnate, together. By that time, there will be a little museum to commemorate and present Mathew Franklin Whittier's legacy; the book I wrote in this lifetime, which nobody will read, will have been widely read, analyzed and discussed by that time.** People will want to see these original manuscripts, containing Mathew's clever sketches and Abby's magnificent poetry, written as early as age 17 and 14, respectively. They will understand that this couple did, actually, write the original of "A Christmas Carol"; and that Mathew did, actually, write "The Raven," in deep grief but still attempting to bring humor into it for relief, after she had died of consumption in 1841.
By this time, someone will have looked into the matter, and there will be strong evidence that I was right about all of this. Instead of being a claim that turns people off instantly, it will be something that draws people to learn more about this historical couple; and about reincarnation, which the case proves beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.
*Actually, he did also briefly mention that Mathew had been a "versifier," implying, perhaps, that he was a hack in contradistinction to his famous brother. I have shared one of Mathew's poems in the previous Update. This one retains a hint of humor, while dealing with old grief; "The Raven," which I believe Mathew also wrote, did much the same with fresh grief. Mathew most often wrote humorous poems which contained embedded within them serious messages; occasionally, he wrote poems that were entirely serious. In my opinion they are of high quality, though entirely different in style from his brother's work. He was very shy about his poetry, and always published it under a pseudonym, though at least two of those pseudonyms I can definitely prove were his.
**Partly because I was an early disciple of Meher Baba, who may be recognized by many as the Avatar by that time, so that anyone associated with his Advent, and who accomplished anything, will be of historical interest. Meher Baba dropped his body in 1969; I first heard of him in a high school psychology class, in 1971, and became a follower in 1974.
Music opening this page: "Evinrude Fever" by Eric Johnson,
from the album, "Europe Live"