Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation

by Ian Stevenson, Curt J. Ducasse (Introduction)

Can anyone speak a language he or she has not learned normally, in childhood or later? Claims to have accomplished this are made from time to time, but only rarely do they receive support when carefully examines. In this volume Dr. Stevenson presents detailed reports of two cases taht seem authentic.

Authentic instances of speaking a language that has not been learned normally (responsive xenoglossy) suggest that another personality (perhaps one of a previous life) had learned the langauge. Cases of responsive xenoglossy thus add to the evidence concerning the survival of human personality after death.

Genres: Nonfiction, Spirituality, Psychology, Science, Philosophy, Buddhism, Religion

396 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1966

About the author

Ian Pretyman Stevenson (October 31, 1918 – February 8, 2007) was a Canadian-born U.S. psychiatrist. He worked for the University of Virginia School of Medicine for fifty years, as chair of the department of psychiatry from 1957 to 1967, Carlson Professor of Psychiatry from 1967 to 2001, and Research Professor of Psychiatry from 2002 until his death.

As founder and director of the university's Division of Perceptual Studies, which investigates the paranormal, Stevenson became known internationally for his research into reincarnation, the idea that emotions, memories, and even physical injuries in the form of birthmarks, can be transferred from one life to another. He traveled extensively over a period of forty years, investigating three thousand cases of children around the world who claimed to remember past lives. His position was that certain phobias, philias, unusual abilities and illnesses could not be fully explained by heredity or the environment. He believed that reincarnation provided a third type of explanation.

Reviews

[Fallible Human · Rating 5 out of 5]

Intellectual cowardice is a very common problem to be found among educated people. I've read the first volume of Reincarnation and Biology (1100+ pages, and where these 20 cases were partially taken from) and I can attest that the criticism that the families were researching the circumstances of a deceased person to match with the birth defects and birthmarks of their infant children is undoubtedly laughable. Many of the details could not be researched because they were never made available from the police to the public or even from the family of the deceased to the police/authorities to begin with. And that is leaving much more well researched evidence out of the argument here. I have no intention of summing up Dr. Stevenson's work here, and if you won't read it yourself, any opinion you may have is either irrelevant or buffoonery, and should be considered as such.

Several hundred cases make for a compelling body of evidence. Unless you are woefully ignorant and unaware of how real science works. In that case, no amount of evidence, no matter how large and compelling, will ever be enough.

[Caelisar · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this book to be problematic. Let me explain:

On the one hand, I'm quite convinced that something anomalous was going on in at least a few of these cases. I also admire the sincerity, professionalism, scientific approach, and documentation of the author. He continually assesses the possibility of fraud as well as the opportunities for the case studies to have gained information through conventional (non-paranormal) means. In short, this is an erudite, convincing, systemic, and scientific approach to these matters. It is also highly convincing of something unusual taking place.

Where I stumble, though, is the implicit metaphysics in play by the author in his conclusions. While I agree in the indications of non-normal events, I simply cannot subscribe to the metaphysics of those that pursue these cases. In talking (as he does) about re-incarnation, mediums, possession, etc., the author falls into the metaphysics of the 19th century spiritualists. Namely, that there is some type of Cartesian world where souls inhabit bodies until they depart. Then, these souls might show up again in another body or at a seance. To me, that worldview (while common in the West) seems rife with philosophical inconsistencies and poorly conceived presuppositions.

I don't believe in discarnate beings. I don't believe that immaterial entities can move physical items (e.g. a ghost knocked over a lamp) or that disembodied souls can somehow "take over" a new\pre-born body or an adult medium. That worldview opens up a host of philosophical problems which I believe are insurmountable. It simply doesn't make sense.

Having said that, as I mentioned above - something anomalous is absolutely taking place here. That is why this book is great. It carefully documents instances that indicate an epistemology and metaphysics that is other than our current simplistic scientific materialism (which also does not hold philosophical water).

I think we will find as we investigate alternate means of knowing that phenomena akin to ESP, reincarnations, etc. will have an explanation. I hesitate to say it will be a "natural" or "scientific" explanation because I'm not sure that there is room in Newtonian physics for these types of cases. I'm also not one to quickly jump to a conclusion that somehow quantum physics or entanglement or any other explanatory fad of the day is in any way related to this. However, I think as we move beyond a Newtonian worldview (and a Cartesian worldview) that we will be able to make some sense of this in a means that is consistent with a well grounded philosophy. I'm just not sure what that is yet.

I am very much reminded of the words of the British geneticist and evolutionary biologist, J.B.S. Haldane: "I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose."

[Nikita · Rating 4 out of 5]

Coming from a Christian background, I got interested in Buddhism about a year ago, through listening to the podcasts of Ajahn Brahm, a Theravadan Buddhist monk from Australia. Ajahn Brahm referred to this book in a few of his talks and I decided to get a copy to see if the strange idea of reincarnation made any sense to me.

I first attempted reading the book in December last year, and as someone else mentioned I felt like I was reading a horror story instead of a scientific work. I felt so uncomfortable that I put the book aside for some time. After that, I spent some time trying to understand why it felt this way. Stopping to think helped so much that after a few months I had no problem finishing the book and consider it a pretty good read. So this is my first advice to the readers who feel the book is spooky: try to understand why. Is it because the idea of reincarnation is taboo in your society? Is it the fact that cases are often connected with deaths of people? Is it because it almost seems like previous personalities 'possess' the new ones and sometimes even displace them completely?

The book is quite dry and documents twenty cases that Stevenson called suggestive of reincarnation. What he means by 'suggestive' is that a reincarnation theory, based on the case facts, seems to him the best theory that explains those facts. He gives some of his arguments on case by case basis as well as in the last section of the book, which offers some general discussion.

I felt that Stevenson was prudent when describing cases suggestive of reincarnation both in presenting facts and discussing different possible explanations of these facts. He presented a variety of cases both weak and strong and called out both strengths and weaknesses of each case.

As for myself, I have not completely bought the idea of reincarnation, but the book itself helped me to be much more open to the concept, which is a good enough reason for me to read a book. Considering how problematic it is to be able to prove the reincarnation theory true, I think Stevenson did a wonderful job documenting cases truly suggestive of reincarnation.

[Roberta Grimes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ian Stevenson was for many years Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Virginia, and he was a leading researcher in the field of reincarnation. Stevenson spent a half-century studying cases of young children who remembered recent previous lives that had ended violently, and the result is a spectacular body of work which will be celebrated only when the rest of modern science catches up with it. Stevenson wrote for scientists, so his writing style is dry. But the work that he details in his dozen or more volumes is overwhelming evidence for immediate reincarnation in what appears to be the narrow case of unexpected violent death. These are three of his seminal works.

[Christophe Finipolscie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I heard about this book by reputation, but it is not an easy one to get hold of.

Given the subject matter, and the fact that the author wanted to approach the subject of Reincarnation in a strictly scientific manner, it is perhaps not surprising to find that this is a very dry read - like reading a series of technical papers, but if you persist, a remarkable story emerges.

If you want an overview of the subject area before attempting this book I'd recommend 'Old Souls' by the journalist Tom Schroder, who followed Stevenson on some of his investigative journeys.

If you accept the style for what it is, and not a light read, (as I have done in my rating), the merit lies in the factual content which is understandably a direct challenge to many western viewpoints.

[Joseph Adelizzi, Jr. · Rating 4 out of 5]

In his 20 Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation author Ian Stevenson, M.D. dispenses with all the wonder and curiosity surrounding tales of reincarnation in favor of an if not quite scientific then surely a thorough examination of the perceived phenomenon of apparent reincarnation. Fortunately for my inner child, I managed to find several morsels to feed my appetite for curiosity and wonder.

I was curious to hear Stevenson attempt to either explain or refute reincarnation by juxtaposing it alongside such controversial phenomena as possession, extra-sensory perception, haunting ghosts, mediumistic communications, and maternal psychokinesis even after ruling out straight-up fraud for its "extreme unlikelihood."

I wondered about the impact on one’s outlook on the significance of this particular life should one completely and assuredly embrace continual reincarnation. In fact, Stevenson even sites one believer as pining for death so that he could be reborn to better circumstances. There’s definitely danger lurking there.

I wondered too about the impact on one’s mental health an awareness of a previous life would have. Again, Stevenson anticipated my wonder and addressed it with data. That being said, I can’t imagine how one would maintain one’s sanity when one firmly believed one had had a quick and violent temper in a previous life which resulted in one murdering the woman one was supposed to be marrying.

I was curious how the family of the supposedly reincarnated person could embrace an unknown individual as their reincarnated father or mother, brother or sister, uncle or aunt, which some of the families did in Stevenson’s 20 cases. One strange case had a father-in-law reincarnated as his daughter-in-law’s son. I mean we’re in “I’m My Own GrandPa” territory here.

I was curious to see the lengths to which some sects go to normalize reincarnation. I’m thinking of the Druses Stevenson deftly spoke of. The Druses believe in immediate reincarnation, and when presented with the possible predicament of wartime deaths far outnumbering wartime births, explained away the conundrum by saying that discarnate souls have a place where they wait for a body to become available; that place, they added, was in China. I guess if the Coneheads could say they came from France the disembodied souls can say they come from China.

While discussing the Druses’ sticky predicament mentioned above, Stevenson again deftly anticipated another question. How can one explain birthmarks which mirror marks on the previous body of the reincarnated soul? Stevenson mentioned maternal psychokinesis here wherein a mother basically wills the birthmarks onto her baby. Stevenson also mentions (almost in passing) the possibility that in some cases some bodies are reused by some souls. I couldn’t help thinking of an exhausted Almighty, wearied by eons of making new bodies for reincarnation candidates, finally exasperatingly ordering souls to “just reuse your previous bodies, for God’s sake!”

I know I kid. Maybe I’m scared. Maybe I’m incredulous. Maybe I’m scared to be incredulous. Regardless, Dr. Stevenson did a remarkable job with this book. The information he shares on various religious sects, various cultures and subcultures is well-presented, cogently explained, and well-placed within his overall framework. He makes an honest and strong effort to anticipate questions and objections, considers many possible alternative explanations, and, most importantly, always respects the lives, present and past, of all those involved. A worthwhile read.

[Jonita Sherman · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was pretty excited to read this--a research based book with case studies of reincarnation by a renowned department chair at a relatively prestigious institution. My sci-fi loving self just tickles at the notion of reading a para-psychology or fringe anything that is based in research. I love the idea of mulling over an idea without having to choose a side of belief or disbelief- and what more fun way to do that than to read honest-to-goodness real-life research?

It started off with a bang, some excellent case studies, fairly rigorous standards. The cases presented initially really are worth the read, even if the momentum doesn't continue and the research methods seem to circle the drain as the case studies progress. However, more than 3/4 of the way through the "case studies" had devolved to using testimony from 90 year old women freshly interviewed after being "temporarily psychotic" (but hey, who isn't? [btw, those are his words, not mine, p. 242]) my suspended judgement collectively reverted to using foul language that I had gotten suckered into thinking this might meet the bounds of "rigorous research". The researcher reverts to making comparisons between current personalities and past lives in the vein of "they both had moles--PROOF s/he was really the other reincarnated!" "They both wore eye-glasses--PROOF!" (I swear I'm not kidding, p. 246).

Next time I'll watch an episode of Fringe and just pretend it's real…at least the let-down won't be so harsh.

[Owlseyes]

https://social.thrillist.com/s/past-l...

[Justin]

The most scientific book on this topic I have seen so far

[Marhalt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very thought-provoking book. The author is meticulous to a fault, and the cases he describes are very interesting and worth reading. The detail-oriented and careful nature of the work makes reading it cover to cover difficult, since it's like reading a series of case studies, but well worth the exercise.

[The Bookbutterfly's Quotage · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reincarnation or Resonance? A Sufi Critique of Ian Stevenson’s Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation

note: those open to interdisciplinary and interfaith perspectives might want to read on, yet readers who prefer strictly empirical or single-tradition approaches might want to pause here, as this review explores metaphysical concepts across Sufism (our focal point) and briefly touch upon how it is backed through Christian mysticism, and Greek philosophy.

In Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation, Ian Stevenson delivers one of the most empirically rigorous challenges to the materialist worldview in modern psychological and parapsychological literature. Through detailed case studies of children; primarily aged between two and five, who could recall lives they seemingly could not have known, Ian Stevenson constructs an argument that tugs at the metaphysical boundaries of self, memory, and continuity. His methodology is careful, his tone restrained, and his honesty commendable. Yet for all its strength as a phenomenological account, the work makes a metaphysical leap that is neither warranted by the data nor necessarily coherent within a broader, more nuanced spiritual framework.

This review offers a counter-reading of Stevenson’s thesis, not from the standpoint of materialist skepticism, nor from doctrinaire theology, but from the perspective of Sufi metaphysics, one grounded in lived experience, a years of study, and experiential insight into the hidden architecture of the soul. In this framework, the notion that these children "are" the reincarnated souls of previous lives is seen not as the most plausible explanation, but as a metaphysically reductive one. Instead, what Stevenson so diligently documented may point not toward reincarnation, but toward phenomena such as barzakhi soul resonance, imaginal imprinting, and pre-birth contact in the realm of souls; ideas fully coherent within Islamic cosmology and mystical epistemology. Here, I'll challenge the foundational assumption that such phenomena necessarily suggest reincarnation in the Buddhist-Hindu sense. Drawing from Sufi metaphysics; particularly concepts of Barzakh, ‘Alam al-Arwah, and ‘Alam al-Mithal; this critique proposes an alternative model: that these children may be recalling or resonating with experiences not their own, but accessed through liminal, imaginal interactions with souls or soul-imprints encountered in the intermediate realms. This lens widens the interpretive framework, de-centering Buddhist reincarnation and opening the door to a more pluralistic, transpersonal understanding of consciousness.

Ian Stevenson's book excels in many respects. His avoidance of sensationalism, his cross-cultural approach, and his insistence on corroboration of memories through external verification all contribute to the lasting value of his work. In many cases, the children not only recall vivid details of lives lived elsewhere, but these memories are matched by objective facts: names of family members, specific injuries or traumas mirrored in birthmarks, preferences, phobias, and even language fluency in dialects foreign to their family. These accounts present an epistemological challenge to mainstream psychology and neuroscience, which remain unable to account for memory without assuming a materialist origin in the brain. Ian Stevenson rightly problematizes that assumption.

Yet his own interpretive framework "reincarnation" rests on a set of metaphysical presuppositions that are not as circumspectly examined as the case data themselves. In essence, he assumes that experiential continuity and memory retention must point to the literal migration of the soul from one body to another. Framing his entire inquiry within a Buddhist-Hindu cosmological model. He rarely questions whether the recollections of past lives might have alternate metaphysical explanations; particularly those offered by other spiritual traditions such as Islamic mysticism, Christian esotericism, African ancestral models, or even depth psychology. Thus, his interpretive architecture rests on a presupposition: that verifiable memory of another life, particularly when paired with physical anomalies like birthmarks, must indicate reincarnation. This framework, while convenient, is reductive; an interpretive orthodoxy disguised as open inquiry. This is why this assumption collapses the complex multi-dimensionality of consciousness into a simplistic linear model: soul dies, soul returns, soul remembers. From a Sufi standpoint, this is not only unnecessary but ontologically incoherent.

Sufi metaphysics, especially as articulated by thinkers such as Ibn ʿArabi, offers a multi-layered vision of reality. The cosmos is structured through distinct realms: ‘ālam al-nāsūt (the physical world), ‘ālam al-malakūt (the spiritual realm), ‘ālam al-jabarūt (the realm of Divine command), ‘ālam al-arwāḥ (the world of pre-existent souls), and ‘ālam al-mithāl (the imaginal realm). Intermediary among these is the barzakh; a liminal zone neither fully of the here nor the hereafter, a veil that also functions as a bridge.

Within this vision, the soul does not undergo multiple embodiments. Rather, it proceeds along a linear arc: from pre-existence in the Divine knowledge, to earthly embodiment, to the barzakh, and finally to its return to the Divine. However, these realms are not strictly sequential; rather, they overlap in certain conditions; particularly in altered states, dreams, and early childhood, when the soul is still half-aware of its pre-temporal origin. This overlap creates the potential for phenomena such as the ones Ian Stevenson describes. A child may recall another’s life not because they were that person in a prior embodiment, but because they encountered that soul, consciously or unconsciously; either in the barzakh or the mithāl, where memories and identities are not as sharply individuated as they are in the waking material world. Memory in this framework is not possession, but resonance. The soul, in its porous state before full embodiment, may receive impressions or even emotional residues of other souls; particularly those who died with unresolved karmic or emotional weight.

Scientific Rigor vs Ontological Narrowness

The strength of Ian Stevenson’s work lies in his dedication to empirical observation. But scientific rigor is not synonymous with ontological truth. His failure to engage other metaphysical models; especially those with rich traditions of soul theory such as Sufism; weakens his claim to objectivity. It is intellectually irresponsible to posit reincarnation as the most “parsimonious” explanation without testing the data against non-reincarnation-based esoteric systems that still affirm the continuity and complexity of the soul.

Unity and Duality: The Metaphysical Blind Spot Here

A central distinction in Sufi metaphysics; and indeed, in many esoteric traditions, is that between the realms of Unity (Tawḥīd) and Duality (Tathnīyah). Stevenson’s entire framework for understanding past-life recall, though meticulously researched, remains trapped in a dualistic ontology: the self is individual, distinct, and temporally bound. Thus, to recall a past life implies that a discrete soul has traveled linearly from one identity to another.

However, the realm in which such phenomena originate; Barzakh, ‘Alam al-Arwāḥ, and ‘Alam al-Mithāl (as already mentioned above) are not governed by this dualistic logic. These realms operate according to the logic of Unity, where time is not linear, selfhood is not fixed, and separation between souls is less rigid.

In the Realm of Unity, "I" and "you" blur. Memory is not owned, but participated in.

From this perspective, what Ian Stevenson’s subjects are recalling may not be “their own” experiences in the personal, egoic sense, but rather shared or absorbed knowings; echoes in the imaginal field of a reality that transcends separation. In other words, these children may remember as if they were the deceased individual, not because they were them, but because in the realms of Unity, the distinctions we use to define ownership of experience dissolve.

Why This Matters: A Radical Ontological Reframing

This reframes the interpretive lens entirely. The Sufi view does not merely offer a different explanation for past-life phenomena, it proposes a different ontology altogether:

Ian Stevenson’s Model (Duality)

- Soul is a discrete traveler
- Time is linear
- Memory belongs to the self
- Reincarnation = identity continuity
- Person A becomes Person B

Sufi Model (Unity)

- Soul is relational and porous
- Time is layered and recursive
- Memory can be encountered or received
- Resonance = identity permeability
- The Soul of Person A; now residing in Barzakh, shares or impresses memories, emotions, or unresolved experiences upon the Soul of Person B in a liminal pre-birth state (the concept of Barzakh as a dynamic, permeable realm where such exchanges are conceivable and the cosmological belief that unity of being (wahdat al-wujud) allows for such mergings to happen without violating the individuality of souls)

The key is recognizing these realms not as rigidly compartmentalized “places,” but as layers of a metaphysical continuum where souls, memories, and consciousness move freely in ways that defy physical constraints.

If souls can visit earthly beings via dreams from Barzakh, then it follows naturally that souls can also interact within and across other spiritual realms like Alam al-Arwah. This interaction can facilitate the transmission or sharing of memories, impressions, or experiences across souls — a process that can explain “past-life” memories without invoking reincarnation in the conventional sense.

This is not merely a semantic difference. It has profound implications:

- Ethically: Claiming “I was that person” feeds ego and separative thinking, whereas Sufi humility emphasizes witnessing without ownership.
- Philosophically: The soul is not a static “thing” moving through time, but a dynamic locus of interaction in a metaphysical web.
- Spiritually: Rather than proving personal reincarnation, these cases may point to a deep inter-soul connectedness only visible from behind the veil.

All of this is why his bias toward duality undermines his argument. By defaulting to a Buddhist model; itself a dualist view where karma determines linear rebirth; Ian Stevenson subtly affirms a worldview that separates soul from soul, self from other, time from eternity. But the very phenomena he documents; children recounting obscure, intimate details of strangers' lives, beg for a model of reality where identity is not sealed.

In the Sufi tradition, the Real Self (al-Ḥaqq) is not “me” or “you,” but the One who appears in all forms. Thus, the child remembering the life of a deceased man is not experiencing reincarnation, but witnessing a flash of the One appearing as many

Christian Mysticism and the Echoes of Unity: Inter-Soul Resonance Beyond Rebirth

While traditional Christian theology emphasizes the individuality of the soul, especially in the context of judgment and salvation, the Christian mystical tradition offers a far more expansive vision, one that resonates closely with the Sufi metaphysics of Unity. Thinkers such as Meister Eckhart, Dionysius the Areopagite, and the Eastern Church Fathers conceived of the soul not as an isolated entity, but as a luminous point of emanation from the Divine. In the theology of theosis (deification), particularly in Eastern Orthodoxy, the soul is destined not merely for nearness to God but for participation in the Divine Essence, where separation dissolves and the many are gathered into the One. Meister Eckhart’s notion of the “ground of the soul” (grunt), which is indistinguishable from the ground of God, echoes Ibn ʿArabi’s concept of wujūd, that Being is singular, and multiplicity is a veil.

Even the Pauline image of the “Body of Christ” (1 Corinthians 12) speaks to a mystical collectivity in which souls, though distinct in function, are ontologically united in spirit. Julian of Norwich’s revelations further affirm this unity in love: that all souls are eternally held in God’s knowing, none forgotten or truly separate. In this framework, the soul’s journey is not toward private individuation, but toward rediscovery of its original unity, a return not as an individual, but as a shared light within the One Light. Thus, the Christian mystical tradition, for all their differences, in this respect, like its Sufi counterpart, affirms that what appears as memory of another life may in truth be a glimpse into the shared interior of all souls, where separation is only an appearance, and remembrance flows freely between reflections of the same Divine Self.

Greek Philosophical Echoes: Anamnesis and the Soul’s Shared Memory

The metaphysical framework supporting this interpretation is not limited to Sufism or Christian mysticism. In ancient Greek philosophy, particularly in Plato’s doctrine of anamnesis, the soul is understood to preexist the body and to possess latent knowledge of eternal truths. What appears as memory is, in fact, a recollection of realities encountered before birth, not necessarily one’s own in a personal sense, but belonging to a shared realm of knowing. Neoplatonist thinkers like Plotinus deepened this insight by positing that all souls emanate from a single source, the One, and that apparent individuality is a function of manifestation, not essence.
Thus, in both Hellenic and Islamic cosmologies, what we call “past-life memory” may instead be a momentary penetration of the veil separating multiplicity from Unity, an echo from the shared interior of Being itself.


Conclusion: Expanding the Field of Inquiry

Nevertheless Ian Stevenson’s work deserves praise, preservation, and further study, but it demands reinterpretation. By filtering anomalous experiences through the lens of Buddhist reincarnation alone, he inadvertently obscures other, perhaps more nuanced, explanations. The Sufi metaphysical tradition, with its embrace of the imaginal, its emphasis on spiritual resonance, and its caution against egoic claims of identity, offers a far more ontologically elastic and spiritually mature lens.
One capable of holding Stevenson's data with both reverence and critique.

The idea that a child might remember the life of another is not evidence of soul-transfer, but of soul-resonance; an echo arising from encounters that transcend the terrestrial plane. If souls in Barzakh can communicate with the living via dreams and visions, it follows logically that they can also commune with souls not yet born, including those still in ‘Alam al-Arwāḥ. Within this liminal exchange, impressions, unresolved experiences, or even strong emotional residues can be transmitted, not as literal ownership of a life, but as a spiritual memory carried across realms.

What Ian Stevenson interpreted as reincarnation may, in fact, be evidence of a much more subtle and universal truth: that memory is not always autobiographical, that identity is not indivisibly personal, and that the soul’s knowledge of the other is often a knowledge of the Self in its broader, transpersonal dimension.

Thus, the twenty cases Stevenson documents are not "the proof suggestive of" reincarnation so much as they invite a rethinking of what the soul is, where it travels, and what it remembers.

A metaphysics of resonance; informed by Sufi cosmology and the logic of Unity, offers a more expansive, more coherent, and ultimately more spiritually resonant model. One that preserves the mystery of the soul without flattening it into the machinery of rebirth.

And if seen through a combined view of Sufi metaphysics (discussed at length), Christian mysticism, and Greek philosophical thought:

In this view, the children did not “return.”

They remembered what was never theirs, and perhaps, in the deepest sense, what was never anyone’s to claim. Because beyond the veil, all souls are “One” at the level of Essence (dhāt).
What these children glimpsed may not have been a former life, but quite possibly a momentary resonance with the greater Soul of Being; a crossing of thresholds where individuality fades, and the deep interior of all souls is revealed to be the same.

Final Evaluation:

Rigor: ★★★★★
Interpretive Range: ★★☆☆☆
Philosophical Depth: ★★☆☆☆
Interfaith Pluralism: ★☆☆☆☆
Enduring Value: ★★★★☆


- 3.75 ★'s

[Little Miss Esoteric]

One of the good ones.

[Kar Wai Ng · Rating 2 out of 5]

As a certified bookworm, there is only one (1) genre of book that I do not, and will not, read - the horrors. I would never touch books like Singapore Ghost Stories etc etc, after a terrifying experience I have had in middle high school.

This brings me to this book. This book is super scary, to the extent that I could not continue after reading the third case. As such I have put this book under the horror books list that I will not touch, despite its being a scientific research book.

Perhaps, in fact, it is its status being a scientific book that was written by an M.D. that scares me. (Either this or I was reading it at 3:00am) It is not scary in the BOO! way, but more like, the fear creeps into your heart because you were imagining who are these people around you, in their previous lives - and where will you go next life? Would you still remember all the things and people here?

It just is content to think that I do not remember any fragments of my previous life, else I would be subject to discrimination, jeers, and even a study; and I sure hope I won't remember my life (this one) in my next.

[Avery · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fascinating book of various cases, from India, Sri Lanka, Brazil, and other locales, that in my opinion gives credibility to the concept of reincarnation. Mr. Stevenson diligently reports on his interviews with the subjects themselves and various witnesses in their orbits. A book dense with detail and facts, it tells of the widespread belief in different cultures of reincarnation or at least rebirth, distinguishing Hindu versus Buddhist doctrines.

[Donnary · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting take on one of the remaining mysteries left unsolved. It has the potential on being great but Stevenson's writing is a bit dry.

I saw a documentary about this topic with a doctor that took over Stevenson's research so I thought it would be a good start for my research on the topic. Stevenson is a pioneer in this area, I expected it to be more scientific and less guesswork but even with all the references, interviews that Stevenson has done I was disappointed.

[Caroline · Rating 1 out of 5]

Amazing that this book should still be in print. After Stevenson's research had been discredited and he made no serious attempt to defend himself, the book should have been consigned to the litter bin of history.

That it hasn't suggests that facts aren't going to change the minds of readers excited by the idea of reincarnation and eager to see it proved 'scientifically'.

[Kevin McAvoy · Rating 1 out of 5]

Left me disappointed. Interviewing people about reincarnation 14 years after the fact, or fiction. Also interviewed "witnesses", He said, she said and it's all just gossip to get the "book guy" to pay attention to them. Poorly studied and sadly lacking in an convincing proof that reincarnation happens.

[Артем Михайлов · Rating 5 out of 5]

After I had read the book I changed my mind on religious beliefs and afterlife.
Moreover, I’ve changed my view on parapsychology.
I was looking for facts. I’ve got it and found them convincing.
Don’t expect entertaining reading, you should be patient and rigorous to read and finish this book like any other scientific book.
Also, was impressed by intellectual honesty, that Stevenson called all the cases “evidence”, not “proof” of reincarnation, so I personally fell the difference between these two.
So, thank you, Mr. Stevenson, for your work and good luck with that lock.

[Benoît · Rating 3 out of 5]

Écrit pas un psychiatre donc l'approche est très rigoureuse et très prudente. Tel un détective, Ian Stevenson a cherché à accumuler le maximum d'éléments directement sur place pour aller dans le sens de la réincarnation. Le livre est cependant assez lourd à lire ( on dirait plus un mémoire de parapsychologie qu'un livre pour le grand public). Je me suis donc mis à plusieurs fois pour le finir. Des cas sont surprenants comme ce jeune indien persuadé être la réincarnation d'un monsieur assassiné et qui a permis la résolution d'une enquête policière bloquée depuis un moment.

[Santaraksita · Rating 4 out of 5]

A pretty good book concerning evidences of reincarnation conducted in a scientifically rigorous manner. However, if you are looking for a casual non-fiction book to read, this is not the best book. The individual cases contain, apart from the events concerned, a detailed list of identified objects, the dates on which they were encountered, etc. Also, it is a collection of evidences and facts with no accompanying commentary or narrative.

[Jitendra Kotai · Rating 4 out of 5]

Assumptions and beliefs. I was quite interested to know how they are suggestive cases. But they can easily be hoax as the researchers are believers and they have no cynics or critics in their team. There is no argument stated whether or not it could be true or false. If it is not created by the writers then it is quite fascinating how someone totally unrelated remembers about someone else's life

[Kirsten Mortensen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very thoughtful and thought-provoking application of empiricism (via field research) to a "paranormal" area of study. Thank you Ian :)

[Katie · Rating 2 out of 5]

My two star rating is not for content but for writing style. It is a pure academic text: very dry and based on his research. I just couldn't get into it, despite many attempts, for it reminded me of being back in college and I couldn't shake off the feeling of having to study for a test. I'm very disappointed that I couldn't finish it as I'm very interested in the subject matter.

[Hillary · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a very interesting book, but incredibly dry. I had a hard time getting into it, but I should have put more effort into it.

[Demi]

Only just started!

[Kat · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read years ago when it was one of the few books available on the topic. Recently saw a tv show about a research project on reincarnation by the professor who took over his work.

More to come.

[Thao · Rating 1 out of 5]

Belief is not easy to demonstrate...

[Else Byskov · Rating 5 out of 5]

An indispensable book for those who want to explore former lives.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

A scientific study of reincarnation by a serious scholar applying proper scientific methodology.