This is a continuation of yesterday's entry, by way of example.
Yesterday, I received an e-mail from an author who has created a work of fiction, the plot of which concerns reincarnation. He will be easily-identifiable, so I may be stepping over the bounds of propriety by reproducing his private correspondence. However, since I think he will never darken my digital doors again, I think the liklihood of him reading this is quite slim. I will, however, keep sarcasm to a minimum, just in case.
He had written me what is probably a slightly-personalized query e-mail, as follows:
No, I will have to summarize it, since it is pretty-much ad copy. But he has obtained my name because in 2006 (the year after I had discovered Mathew Franklin Whittier), I had reviewed Dr. Jim Tucker's book, "Life After Life," online. Just as I did when I was Mathew, writing favorable reviews for colleagues like Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson, I have always tried to push forward the work of my colleagues in this life, for the sake of the cause. So that is how he has my name, and he proceeds to tell me about his believe in reincarnation, and the plot of his reincarnation novel.
Briefly, it concerns a detective who solves the past-life death of himself and his wife. I told him that, being so badly marginalized that at present, I can't afford to buy anybody's books. But then I do him one better on his plot, by telling him that I have actually done, in real life, what his character has done in his fictional novel--except that I have solved cases of plagiarism, rather than of murder. I wrote him as follows (and this is all preparatory to giving you his response, which illustrates yesterday's point):
I believe I have run into a mention of your book, before. I think it's an excellent plot idea. In my current situation, sans income and living on savings and Society Security, I have a moratorium on spending in place. But I hope to read it one of these days.
I actually did something like your book describes, in real life--except that the crimes were multiple plagiarisms, rather than murder. In my past life I was an author who had to publish anonymously, because I was doing dangerous undercover anti-slavery work. As a result, my work was plagiarized many times--and it made a few people famous. I was the original co-author of "A Christmas Carol" (with my past-life wife, who is now my present-day wife in spirit); after her death in 1841, I was the real author of "The Raven."
This is not fiction, but quite real, and I have good evidence for it. Here is a video I recently released, giving some of my best evidence for the theft of "The Raven" by Edgar Allan Poe:
Just as you are working hard to promote your work, I have begun to promote mine in full earnest. I have recently done four radio interviews, with a fifth scheduled for this coming Monday, and more tentatively to follow. My research is presented in an e-book and a sequel. Perhaps we can assist each other somehow in getting this information out to the public.
Keep in mind that this is a personal letter, written in response to a slightly-customed canned letter. Keep in mind, also, that I was exhausted from going through hundreds of online professor bios, at the end of the day. This is what I found in my e-mail, this morning:
It's amazing how we all have had interesting past-lives, and that we are all brothers and sisters connected to the web of life.
Each one of us has stories to tell.
But, the only thing that really matters, is what we learn while living in our present lives - so that we can further evolve our souls, and come around full-circle, to become completed spirits.
It's nice to know that we have other lifetimes to look forward to for eternity.
Good luck in your endeavors.
Be well, and safe.
Shall I translate this for you? The operative words are "stories" in the second paragraph, and "well," in the last one.
He's saying, "I don't believe a word you're saying. Obviously you're nuts, and your story is as much fiction as mine is. I hope you can recover, and won't come to harm in your insanity. Don't write back, I don't want to have any further dealings with you."
Am I right? You see, the instant he saw that I claimed the authorship of not one, but two world literary classics for my own past life, he had no choice but to associate to megalomania. He subjectively imagined that he was making this assumption on his own free will--but he was a helpless pawn of social conditioning in the matter.
Note that his philosophy of reincarnation is self-contradictory. My own understanding of this subject is far deeper than most of the people working in this field, because I have studied the best sources for 45 years. Here, he says that we evolve our souls and come around full-cicle, to become completed spirits. But then he says we have other lifetimes to look forward to for eternity. If we become completed souls, we don't keep reincarnating. Furthermore, it is not actually our souls that evolve. The soul, by its very nature, is already complete. It is only consciousness which develops, and then must be unveiled.
Of course, this fellow thinks he knows, and there is no-one so difficult to teach as the person who thinks he knows.
What, exactly, can I saw about this, by way of wrap-up? Not much. It's ignorance. My spiritual master, the Christ of this age, remarked that in this particular advent, he would be persecuted by the advanced souls. I see it all the time, in the attitude of those people to his life. Just as I have dared to tell the truth about my past-life literary accomplishments, because it's true, so he has dared to say that he was the Avatar, because it was true. Therefore, you will see every New Age teacher out there being respected, except my Guru. Even the fakes who claim to have had his spiritual status. Why? Because those teachers subtly pander to people's ignorance, while mine doesn't. I'll give you an example, by way of analogy.
Many years ago I decided to give up salt. But occasionally I would sprinkle a little parmesan cheese on my dinner. I liked it so much, the habit grew, until I was lathering parmesan cheese on every meal, regardless of what it was. Finally it occurred to me that I was probably getting as much salt that way, as I ever did before I supposedly gave up salt.
When my Guru pulls the salt, he pulls the parmesan cheese, as well.
People crave spiritual ignorance. I can't explain what spiritual ignorance is; if you are caught in spiritual ignorance, either your heart is closed, or you lack discernment of the truth. Or both. If you are in the process of climbing out of spiritual ignorance, your heart is opening and, at the same time, you are developing discernment.
Most people in the New Age world lack discernment, though their heart may be opening. Most skeptics have closed hearts, though they are attempting to discern the truth. For obvious reasons, neither group wants anything to do with that person who is developing both qualities simultaneously. Discernment offends the one; while an open heart offends the other. If the person who has been striving to develop both for many lifetimes, admits honestly of some of his inevitable accomplishments, it is a great affront. Projected onto him, is what that claim would mean if they made it.
In other words, these people project onto me what their motives would be, if they claimed to have written two world literary classics in a past life. The New Age people can't perceive the discernment, the careful, thorough scientific rigor which went into that conclusion--because if they made such a statement, they would be operating on imagination. Meanwhile, the skeptics assume I am a New Age type, doing what they do. They automatically assume that if I was rigorous and had run all of my evidence through my own skeptical acid bath, I would never say such things. They have not made such accomplishments, and so they are quite certain that I never have.
I am, in short, up against a mountain of spiritual ignorance, attempting to break through it with very strong, remarkable evidence, and persistence. I can literally hand people overwhelming logical evidence, in my books and this little half-hour video, and they can't see it and won't have it.
This is just how it is. But I go all the way back to my very first metaphysical text, which I used to read when I was just out of high school, spending half-days in a beautiful place called Fairchild Tropical Gardens, in Miami, Florida. The Bhagavad Gita--which Henry David Thoreau also used to read each morning, with reverence--says:
You have the right to work, but for the work's sake only. You have no right to the fruits of work. Desire for the fruits of work must never be your motive in working. Never give way to laziness, either.
Perform every action with you heart fixed on the Supreme Lord. Renounce attachment to the fruits. Be even-tempered in success and failure: for it is this evenness of temper which is meant by yoga.
Work done with anxiety about results is far inferior to work done without such anxiety, in the calm of self-surrender. Seek refuge in the knowledge of Brahma. They who work selfishly for results are miserable.
Therefore, I persist, and they persist, and we shall see what God wants to make of it.
Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.
Music opening this page: "We're Not Gonna Take It,"
from "Tommy," by The Who