This afternoon, I finished going through every English department of every college in the United States, excepting those with a Christian foundation, in search of professors whose stated areas of interest coincided, in one way or another, with my study. That's one heck of a lot of professor profiles. All of those faces are kind of swimming vaguely in my head, along with my impressions of the state of Academia, as a whole. I'm not sure I want to go into that in detail...my impression is that if professors were cars, about 95% of them would be revving their huge engines to no particular purpose, spinning their wheels. But there is something more sinister. While the level of sheer intellect is very high, the level of spiritual ignorance is even higher. Sri Ramakrishna was spot-on, when he said that the pundits soar into the sky, but like vultures, they always keep their eye on the carrion, below.
The reality of continuation after death is obvious. The evidence is there for anybody who is serious enough about the truth, to look for it. Many of these people, however, are materialists. A lot of them are concerned with studying sex, and the body. I was amused to see that one very pleasant-looking woman was into dead bodies in literature, or something like that. And it gets worse, but we won't pursue this line of investigation. Suffice it to say that these people can't accept the truth of what I'm trying to tell them, not because my evidence is weak, or even because it's so different from what they've been led to believe. They can't accept it because of their spiritual ignorance. If it wasn't for that spiritual ignorance, they would have already seen it. Because it is obvious, to anyone who is spiritually grounded, that Charles Dickens could not possibly have written "A Christmas Carol"; and that Edgar Allan Poe could not possibly have written "The Raven." It is likewise obvious to any spiritually perceptive person, that the "Carol" is not a ghost story; and that "The Raven" is not a horror poem.
In short, these things were accepted as such by an ignorant public; and this interpretation has been maintained by the ignorant progeny of that ignorant public.
I don't mean to be an elitist snob, here. It is simply that these spiritual gems were stolen, and sold off as trinkets. Therefore, they are taken as trinkets, and they are believed to have been created by men who were only fit to make trinkets.
I have a very nice quote from psychic Andrew Jackson Davis in my first book, about the low state of Dickens' mind. Davis doesn't mention the "Carol" in his assessment. I won't quote it, here--read it in my first book, and pay for that book so that I can move forward without worrying that my savings are depleting. It's only fair to support my work in a reasonable way, you know, instead of simply taking everything I give away for free on this website.
I almost never buy anything. I make do with what I can download for free off the internet. But I do that, not because I'm cheap or don't wish to support people doing good work. I do it because I am so severely marginalized, myself, that I literally cannot afford to support anyone else's work. If I was making a reasonable living--and given what I am trying to contribute to Society, I should at least be able to feed myself and keep a roof over my head, with a little to spare--I would most certainly buy what I now have to find a way to procure for free.
Because it's the weekend, I haven't composed e-mails to the last 10 or so professors, whose contact information I culled from the last 100 or so colleges. I'll write them, a few at a time, next week. I am spending 10-15 minutes on very well-written, personal letters, to people who can't be bothered to write back--or if they do, it's one terse line. But right now, I have to prepare myself mentally for my next interview, with a station in Great Britain. Then I have to start drumming up some more of these. I've really kicked it into high gear--but so far there is very little to show for my efforts. I couldn't even get my supposed friends on Facebook to look at my new video about Poe stealing "The Raven," with a couple of exceptions.
I think that people are not really in charge of their own minds. They think they are. But in actuality, they are a slave to prejudices of various kinds. If someone whom you know, who is intelligent and otherwise sane, tells you that he has proven, with 10 years of intensive research, that he was the past-life author of a famous literary classic, you will not be able to control your reaction. Your mind will force you to interpret that he must have gone crazy. It will not permit you to seriously consider the matter, or to even look at the evidence with an open mind. You will reject your friend outright--betray him, in effect--sentence him without a trial. And you will imagine that you did this of your own free will.
That's my conclusion. When I try to break through this automatic reaction, say, with strangers, I am up against a force of nature so powerful, that I am shut down in every single instance. But here's what's on my side--numbers, and time.
I haven't counted how many e-mails I composed--maybe 50 or 60 all told? But this is to professors who all specialize in the same areas. They do, presumably, communicate with each other, at least in conventions and through journals, if not directly. So they will run into this information again, from each other. Then, as I get the message out there through other channels, they will run into it that way, as well. Perhaps they assign a reading of "The Raven" as found on YouTube, and one of their students says, "What about this video that says it was really written by Mathew Franklin Whittier? It's pretty compelling." Because I linked my video in the comments to every instance of "The Raven" being read, on YouTube, that I could find.
Then, what if said professor happens to run into one of the clues that I mentioned in that video, in the course of his or her study. It will come back to mind. And it is with repeated exposure, over time, that radical ideas start to gradually eat their way through the ignorance barrier.
All this presupposes that my conclusions are correct, of course.
Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.
Audio opening this page by the author,
in parody of NPR and Robert Seigel