What do you think?
Rate this book
Here and Hereafter
Whether you believe in reincarnation or not, this book will fascinate you...
WHO HAS NOT experienced the eerie feeling, on glimpsing a village street or foreign seaport, that he has been there before/ Who has not met a stranger with whom he felt instant rapport, as if he had always known him, or taken a violent dislike to another before the introductions were even completed? Could these inner stirrings perhaps be prompted by soul memories of past life encounters?
Read HERE AND HEREAFTER then ask yourself: Is the cycle of rebirth really so hard to believe.
WHO HAS NOT experienced the eerie feeling, on glimpsing a village street or foreign seaport, that he has been there before/ Who has not met a stranger with whom he felt instant rapport, as if he had always known him, or taken a violent dislike to another before the introductions were even completed? Could these inner stirrings perhaps be prompted by soul memories of past life encounters?
Read HERE AND HEREAFTER then ask yourself: Is the cycle of rebirth really so hard to believe.
175 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1968
26 people are currently reading
634 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
November 18, 2013
I was given this book when I was seventeen, but I never got around to fully reading it then. At the time I was a regular visitor to Cassadaga, read tarot cards, played around with palmistry, and was a firm believer in ghosts and all things supernatural. I'm 30 now and much more skeptical, but I do keep a shelf for all my supernatural books and I finally got around to reading this one. I'm not familiar with Ruth Montgomery, but she's written several books and I get the idea she may have been kind of a big deal in the sixties when this book was published. She mentions using the help of her "Guides", spirits directing her through automatic writing. An alarm went off immediately in my head at that point, and if the whole book had been that, I wouldn't have hesitated to chuck it in the Goodwill box, but thankfully that was kept to a minimum in the beginning.
Here and Hereafter is an examination of hypnotic regression and reincarnation. Perhaps "examination" is too strong a word, as she handles the subject with kid gloves the whole time. While a lot of evidence is given, one can't help still feeling like any of it could be a bunch of hogwash. The argument is made by the author that if people were making up past lives for attention, they'd be more likely to make them glamorous, whereas no one in this book is claiming they were Cleopatra. Rather, we get people who are fully aware of everything they said under hypnosis and are often shocked or embarrassed to find themselves admitting to being cruel or crooked or worse, dull. The point the book seems to be making is that karma is very real and what one does in one life will certainly come back upon you in another, suggesting in plain terms that anyone who dies a violent death certainly dealt fatal violence in one of their past lives. I'm not sure if that's how I want to go about looking at people who befall tragedy.
Another issue I have with this particular exercise is the way the subjects are questioned while under hypnosis. I can suspend disbelief long enough to entertain the thought of answering questions on their own, but when one subject does not know the town he is in, he "asks" someone with him in the past and gives their answer. Pardon? I think the Simpsons may have said it best, "I am just your memory, I can't give you any new information."
I have no solid opinion on reincarnation and this book alone was never going to be enough to give me one, but the text is interesting. The stories told under hypnosis are engaging and the idea is entertaining to think about. When I was younger, I read a more convincing book called Old Souls about children under no sort of hypnosis or suggestion seeming to recall past lives (a book I was drawn to given strange memories I had myself as a child), and this has made me want to revisit that text. Mostly this book made me curious. It was written before we had the kind of immediate and thorough access to information that the internet has provided us. I'd like to see people put under hypnosis to remember past lives and then have those claims fact-checked and cross-referenced, though I can't imagine any situation in which I would not suspect fraud. The idea that we float above between our lives, that we choose our mothers and choose what new life we will take in order to better learn the lessons that failed us in this life feels too much like wish-fulfillment. Though maybe I'm a hardened cynic to feel like though we are all made of energy and that energy must continue to exist in some form after our physical brains die, it is arrogant to assume that we are here for some grand higher purpose.
I've heard the name Edgar Cayce before and knew he was a figure in the psychic community, but Montgomery goes to great pains to paint a flattering picture of him that feels a little out of place. While she uses him to illustrate her beliefs in the subject matter, such a strong focus on one individual seems to distract from the narrative. Also, the 1968 assertion that switching genders in different lives may account for the "problem of homosexuality" is an idea that has not aged well and provides a slight cringe, as well as the phrase "Mongoloid idiot". Overall it was an interesting read, but I wouldn't say that it altered my views one way or the other. But then, maybe I'm just the reincarnation of the doubting Thomas.
October 5, 2016
This was my second time reading this book. My mom recommended it to me, when I was about 16 or so, and it was a seminal read then - and it held every bit as much magic for me the second time around.
April 12, 2020
Very thought provoking and intriguing read. She references many other authors and book who also studied past regression therapy and reincarnation. She also describes the phenomenon from different religious perspectives which is refreshing! Definitely reccommend to anyone interested in books on spirituality and reincarnation.
January 1, 2014
The book is a bit dated but probably the perfect start to discussion on reincarnation. The author made several efforts to record accounts of remembering past lives and it makes for very interesting and thought provoking reading.
May 25, 2024
MONTGOMERY TURNS HER ATTENTION TO REINCARNATION
Ruth Shick Montgomery (1912-2001) was a journalist and syndicated columnist in Washington, DC., who later became a psychic who wrote a number of metaphysical books (sometimes through ‘automatic writing’), and claimed that she could communicate with medium Arthur Ford after his death.
She wrote in the Foreword to this 1968 book, “In our present state of development, it is no more possible to prove reincarnation than to prove the existence of God. But the doctrine of karma and rebirth is so logical that if two-thirds of the world’s peoples did not already accept it, it would probably be hailed by Westerners today as a major philosophical breakthrough. This belief… explains, better than does any one known creed, why some are born to affluence and others to abject poverty. Why one youngster is a genius and another a dullard. Why some are crippled or blind; others healthy and beautiful… Belief in reincarnation persisted in the early Christian church for several centuries. In the Confessions of St. Augustine 1:6 we read: ‘Did I not live in another body, or somewhere else, before entering my mother’s womb?’ … In the sixth century the Synod of Constantinople … condemned the teaching of reincarnation, and some scholars believe that most references to it were thereupon expunged from the Bible…” (Pg. 9-10)
She recalls, “toward the end of my work on ‘A Search for Truth’ … the mysterious Guides who had been bringing messages through automatic writing began to hint at reincarnation… The Guides added that since some are in different stages of living than others, ‘The ones you call the ‘unfortunate” may not be unfortunate at all. It may simply be their way of achieving goodness and oneness with God more rapidly than you, because if they sacrifice more… they are far more fortunate than those of you with mink coats, chauffeured cars, and the countless temptations that beset your trail through the maze of parties and working hours.’” (Pg. 16-17)
She recounts, “Few people seem more vibrant and thoroughly ‘alive’ than Sam Sneed, a cocky young gambler who swaggered his way across the continent in 1872… My introduction to Samuel S. Sneed occurred … [when] a cultured, well-educated young woman … followed a hypnotist’s introduction to let herself drift … ‘back in time.’ … Asked to write her name … on a piece of a paper… [she wrote] Sammy Sneed.’” (Pg. 57-58) Montgomery adds, “It was therefore with an uncomfortable sense of spying … that I wrote to Eugene Hill, managing editor of the Sacramento Bee, to ask if he would check out some of the assertions… He said that there was no record of a Sacramento Hotel on L. Street where Sam had placed it… The City Directory of that era listed no Sam Sneed… the city cemetery has no listing of a Sam Sneed burial, and the Bee has no knowledge of his having worked there seventy years ago… [But] Sam Sneed seems entirely too real to be shrugged off as a flight of fancy. He may have boasted too much about his … status as a solid citizen, but those who have seen Barbara under hypnosis … are convinced that a witty cardshark named Sam Sneed once lived, breathed… Sacramento may not have bene the place where he cavorted, but perhaps a reader of this book may be able to supply the missing clue.” (Pg. 63-66)
She suggests, “How much more comforting to believe that our souls are their own judge of good and evil, that God loves us all equally, and that through His mercy we will be granted as many lifetimes as we choose in which to atone for our waywardness… We are our own judge and jury, so it is time that we stopped whimpering about the cruel fate that cast us in an unwanted role. The doctrine of reincarnation teaches that in most instances we ourselves selected that role, and that if we would prefer to have a pleasanter one in the next go-round, now is the time to begin earning it by understudying the saints.” (Pg. 131)
She concludes, “It is not overly important whether we ‘believe’ in reincarnation. If the laws of karma and Grace are real, they will survive without our attestation. What does matter is that we conduct ourselves in such a manner that we incur no bad karmic indebtedness. The skeptic may ask, ‘What it there’s no such thing as karma, or reincarnation, or eternal life?’ Yes, but what if there is?” (Pg. 175)
This book will be of interest to persons interested in reincarnation, and alternative/occultic forms of spirituality.
Ruth Shick Montgomery (1912-2001) was a journalist and syndicated columnist in Washington, DC., who later became a psychic who wrote a number of metaphysical books (sometimes through ‘automatic writing’), and claimed that she could communicate with medium Arthur Ford after his death.
She wrote in the Foreword to this 1968 book, “In our present state of development, it is no more possible to prove reincarnation than to prove the existence of God. But the doctrine of karma and rebirth is so logical that if two-thirds of the world’s peoples did not already accept it, it would probably be hailed by Westerners today as a major philosophical breakthrough. This belief… explains, better than does any one known creed, why some are born to affluence and others to abject poverty. Why one youngster is a genius and another a dullard. Why some are crippled or blind; others healthy and beautiful… Belief in reincarnation persisted in the early Christian church for several centuries. In the Confessions of St. Augustine 1:6 we read: ‘Did I not live in another body, or somewhere else, before entering my mother’s womb?’ … In the sixth century the Synod of Constantinople … condemned the teaching of reincarnation, and some scholars believe that most references to it were thereupon expunged from the Bible…” (Pg. 9-10)
She recalls, “toward the end of my work on ‘A Search for Truth’ … the mysterious Guides who had been bringing messages through automatic writing began to hint at reincarnation… The Guides added that since some are in different stages of living than others, ‘The ones you call the ‘unfortunate” may not be unfortunate at all. It may simply be their way of achieving goodness and oneness with God more rapidly than you, because if they sacrifice more… they are far more fortunate than those of you with mink coats, chauffeured cars, and the countless temptations that beset your trail through the maze of parties and working hours.’” (Pg. 16-17)
She recounts, “Few people seem more vibrant and thoroughly ‘alive’ than Sam Sneed, a cocky young gambler who swaggered his way across the continent in 1872… My introduction to Samuel S. Sneed occurred … [when] a cultured, well-educated young woman … followed a hypnotist’s introduction to let herself drift … ‘back in time.’ … Asked to write her name … on a piece of a paper… [she wrote] Sammy Sneed.’” (Pg. 57-58) Montgomery adds, “It was therefore with an uncomfortable sense of spying … that I wrote to Eugene Hill, managing editor of the Sacramento Bee, to ask if he would check out some of the assertions… He said that there was no record of a Sacramento Hotel on L. Street where Sam had placed it… The City Directory of that era listed no Sam Sneed… the city cemetery has no listing of a Sam Sneed burial, and the Bee has no knowledge of his having worked there seventy years ago… [But] Sam Sneed seems entirely too real to be shrugged off as a flight of fancy. He may have boasted too much about his … status as a solid citizen, but those who have seen Barbara under hypnosis … are convinced that a witty cardshark named Sam Sneed once lived, breathed… Sacramento may not have bene the place where he cavorted, but perhaps a reader of this book may be able to supply the missing clue.” (Pg. 63-66)
She suggests, “How much more comforting to believe that our souls are their own judge of good and evil, that God loves us all equally, and that through His mercy we will be granted as many lifetimes as we choose in which to atone for our waywardness… We are our own judge and jury, so it is time that we stopped whimpering about the cruel fate that cast us in an unwanted role. The doctrine of reincarnation teaches that in most instances we ourselves selected that role, and that if we would prefer to have a pleasanter one in the next go-round, now is the time to begin earning it by understudying the saints.” (Pg. 131)
She concludes, “It is not overly important whether we ‘believe’ in reincarnation. If the laws of karma and Grace are real, they will survive without our attestation. What does matter is that we conduct ourselves in such a manner that we incur no bad karmic indebtedness. The skeptic may ask, ‘What it there’s no such thing as karma, or reincarnation, or eternal life?’ Yes, but what if there is?” (Pg. 175)
This book will be of interest to persons interested in reincarnation, and alternative/occultic forms of spirituality.
April 10, 2021
I call bullshit!
I call bullshit on this book! I read this book hoping to understand a little more about reincarnation, but this book was not the way to do it.
What bothered me most was the lack of citation. "The Guides" are not a citation. Heresay from people you may or may not've met are not a citation. Really, this felt a whole lot like "My friends and I tripped shrooms and then hypnoed eachother." Really, if you're going to reference expirementation done by your psychologist friend, do it right.
What bothered me most was the citing of religious texts. Cheifly the Bible. I felt the author was taking verses out of context and bending them to fit their narrative. (Which, if you believe in a christian god, taking verses out of context will earn you a pretty black look at the throne.) I didn't like that all the references were in KJV. It felt like the author was just trying to throw in some "Thee thous" to look cool. Really, if we're trying to get closer to the original version the reference it in Greek! The cherry on top was that the citation was "The Bible" not the citing the Bible lends itself too, ie Jeremiah 7:4. It feels like we, the reader, are supposed to take the references at face value. LIke, by not citing the scripture being referenced Montgomery is making it harder to look up. "Every man should be dead to his old life and start anew" has a completely different meaning in context.
I realize this book is dated, and there were terms to describe various races that were perfectly respectable and politically correct in 1960. That part did not age well at all. However, it seemed like the author and company were a bunch of westerners, who were fascinated by eastern culture, but continously made sniping remarks about them. All without citing their religious texts of course! Referencing, yes! Citing? No. The author mentioned, at least twice, western moral supporiority in not subscribing to the caste system. Or rather, not treating the unclean like they were unclean. To add a layer of skeeviness to this attitude she and her friends could afford both college educations and drugs. The western caste runs on money.
It was strange how many times white people had been reincarnated as people of color but still remained that subtly racist. Let's not even touch the subtlety ableist attitude that "people who are bad in a past life are born crippled in this one."
Another thing that bothered me was the fact that all of the people they hypnotized went to their own funerals. Do spirits bother to stick around? Do we really care that much? Everyone from the slave woman to the dumpster baby. All watched themselves die, and then their spirit stayed with the corpse to watch what happened next until they were reborn. The cookie cutter story telling also bothers me. I, as the reader, just do not feel like I'm being told the truth when every story follows the same rules.
I have to admit, I completely lost any hope I had of this book not being utter bullshit when one woman manifested as a cavewoman before dinosaurs. I'm going to refrain from further comment and let you draw your own conclusions about that one.
Having studied dreams, and psychology (in an arm chair, not at a university) their method of regression felt a lot like tapping into the subconious mind for dreaming. Yes! Your brain might tell you fun annecdotes that will help you make sense of your life's purpose in this go-around, but a grey wad of gelliton and electricity show you expirences you weren't physically there to have? I remain a skeptic. I feel like their regression was making sense of situations they had encountered in their daily lives. Such as that woman who was afraid of men. She was shown she was assualted in a past life. Couldn't the more logical explanation be that she was afraid to be assaulted in this one as her friends had been? I mean really, today one in four women are victims of r*pe and that's only what gets reported. I imagine it was worse in the 60's.
All in all, it was entertaining, but it was utter bullshit. There are things in this world I don't have explanations for, and I would like to know what they are and how they work, but this did not help.
I call bullshit on this book! I read this book hoping to understand a little more about reincarnation, but this book was not the way to do it.
What bothered me most was the lack of citation. "The Guides" are not a citation. Heresay from people you may or may not've met are not a citation. Really, this felt a whole lot like "My friends and I tripped shrooms and then hypnoed eachother." Really, if you're going to reference expirementation done by your psychologist friend, do it right.
What bothered me most was the citing of religious texts. Cheifly the Bible. I felt the author was taking verses out of context and bending them to fit their narrative. (Which, if you believe in a christian god, taking verses out of context will earn you a pretty black look at the throne.) I didn't like that all the references were in KJV. It felt like the author was just trying to throw in some "Thee thous" to look cool. Really, if we're trying to get closer to the original version the reference it in Greek! The cherry on top was that the citation was "The Bible" not the citing the Bible lends itself too, ie Jeremiah 7:4. It feels like we, the reader, are supposed to take the references at face value. LIke, by not citing the scripture being referenced Montgomery is making it harder to look up. "Every man should be dead to his old life and start anew" has a completely different meaning in context.
I realize this book is dated, and there were terms to describe various races that were perfectly respectable and politically correct in 1960. That part did not age well at all. However, it seemed like the author and company were a bunch of westerners, who were fascinated by eastern culture, but continously made sniping remarks about them. All without citing their religious texts of course! Referencing, yes! Citing? No. The author mentioned, at least twice, western moral supporiority in not subscribing to the caste system. Or rather, not treating the unclean like they were unclean. To add a layer of skeeviness to this attitude she and her friends could afford both college educations and drugs. The western caste runs on money.
It was strange how many times white people had been reincarnated as people of color but still remained that subtly racist. Let's not even touch the subtlety ableist attitude that "people who are bad in a past life are born crippled in this one."
Another thing that bothered me was the fact that all of the people they hypnotized went to their own funerals. Do spirits bother to stick around? Do we really care that much? Everyone from the slave woman to the dumpster baby. All watched themselves die, and then their spirit stayed with the corpse to watch what happened next until they were reborn. The cookie cutter story telling also bothers me. I, as the reader, just do not feel like I'm being told the truth when every story follows the same rules.
I have to admit, I completely lost any hope I had of this book not being utter bullshit when one woman manifested as a cavewoman before dinosaurs. I'm going to refrain from further comment and let you draw your own conclusions about that one.
Having studied dreams, and psychology (in an arm chair, not at a university) their method of regression felt a lot like tapping into the subconious mind for dreaming. Yes! Your brain might tell you fun annecdotes that will help you make sense of your life's purpose in this go-around, but a grey wad of gelliton and electricity show you expirences you weren't physically there to have? I remain a skeptic. I feel like their regression was making sense of situations they had encountered in their daily lives. Such as that woman who was afraid of men. She was shown she was assualted in a past life. Couldn't the more logical explanation be that she was afraid to be assaulted in this one as her friends had been? I mean really, today one in four women are victims of r*pe and that's only what gets reported. I imagine it was worse in the 60's.
All in all, it was entertaining, but it was utter bullshit. There are things in this world I don't have explanations for, and I would like to know what they are and how they work, but this did not help.
January 18, 2022
Good book, very intriguing and gives a good explanation about reincarnation.
June 10, 2018
1st Read: November 19, 2014 - November 20, 2014 (*** Rating)
So many case files of people who have had past life experiences in this book. There is also a lot of history there as well. I have often wondered about this regarding my own life.
I think anything is possible, other than the majority of people always believing they were someone notable or famous in history. That is likely, but it is more unlikely in my eyes. What is wrong with just being a regular person during The Black Plague? Or a Shepherd boy? It seems more gratifying to the individual to say he or she was such and such a person, in regards to the contrast of their pathetic life they are living today.
This is where an expert named Edgar Cayce comes into the picture and puts those who are willing, under hypnosis to search for truth in the matter. He has been making quite a few appearances in these last few books I have read. It wouldn't hurt to fire up the next book, EDGAR CAYCE ON THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS, which revolves around his gift of clairvoyance. It should prove to be an interesting and enjoyable read.
I have put this book into a box dubbed as, "To Read Again". It is an interesting read, but like anything, a second opinion never hurts either.
2nd/Final Read: April 9, 2018 - April 14, 2018 (*** Rating)
Enjoyable once more for the very interesting reading it was, particularly the final two chapters. Still curious about the past lifes I've lived. I often feel a sense of deja-vu when reading about the era of Alexander the Great and the 1960's. Who knows where I've been?
So many case files of people who have had past life experiences in this book. There is also a lot of history there as well. I have often wondered about this regarding my own life.
I think anything is possible, other than the majority of people always believing they were someone notable or famous in history. That is likely, but it is more unlikely in my eyes. What is wrong with just being a regular person during The Black Plague? Or a Shepherd boy? It seems more gratifying to the individual to say he or she was such and such a person, in regards to the contrast of their pathetic life they are living today.
This is where an expert named Edgar Cayce comes into the picture and puts those who are willing, under hypnosis to search for truth in the matter. He has been making quite a few appearances in these last few books I have read. It wouldn't hurt to fire up the next book, EDGAR CAYCE ON THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS, which revolves around his gift of clairvoyance. It should prove to be an interesting and enjoyable read.
I have put this book into a box dubbed as, "To Read Again". It is an interesting read, but like anything, a second opinion never hurts either.
2nd/Final Read: April 9, 2018 - April 14, 2018 (*** Rating)
Enjoyable once more for the very interesting reading it was, particularly the final two chapters. Still curious about the past lifes I've lived. I often feel a sense of deja-vu when reading about the era of Alexander the Great and the 1960's. Who knows where I've been?
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 14, 2015
Tries a bit too hard to convince one that reincarnation works. I suppose this is fine, in the context of America. But in any case this book did not take off and achieve its purpose that well, so dear me.
This is an opener to New Age thinking. But had it focused less on the stories and interactions, and more on the symbols and meanings of things then I might have liked it more.
This is an opener to New Age thinking. But had it focused less on the stories and interactions, and more on the symbols and meanings of things then I might have liked it more.
June 19, 2014
crazy loopy fun
April 26, 2016
Not exactly sure when I read this. Probably sometime between 1969 & 1972. Found it fascinating.
September 20, 2020
Think this is my third read of this book, first time was in 1973 ! Good primer and I've read a few of her other works
February 21, 2024
Fascinating!
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews