REVIEW: Dr. Weiss answered a big "why" question for me. Why was I struggling between the notions of One-life, One-soul vs. Many-lives, One-soul? Through his research (much of which is presented in a worthy bibliography in the book), he discovered that the wording of the Bible has been modified -- at the order of Church leadership.

The story was quite grappling. I could not put this book down. I read it within 2 or 3 days. The experience through which I, myself, had just evolved compared too well with what I was now reading from another human for the first time in my (current) life; I was 35 at the time.

It was also quite compelling. Questions -- hard questions -- which many of us struggle to answer are addressed in his book. Being from a Baptist Christian up-bringing, I found it hard to acknowledge the Truth as presented. However, my own experience prevented me from disspelling it in the sake of other "unquestioned" teachings which cannot hold up to research methods.

Obviously, I believe that Many Lives, Many Masters is a great, yet simple, work. It excites me to think that when all has been deciphered from the Dead Sea Scrolls (and other ancient texts which have less political influence than the Bible), we will see that, indeed, Dr. Weiss has revealed to us the Truth -- Critically honest answers to the hard questions about our beings, both physical and spiritual.


Open you mind. Read this book!   March 17, 2002
 83 out of 102 found this review helpful

I guess the best way I can put this is that I respectfully disagree with the respected Pathologist and the other fellow who claims this was a good "story".

The truth is that in my experience as a hypnotherapist past lives are real. This book offers compelling evidence for the phenomenon but there are many other books that do so as well. I simply like Dr. Weiss's presentation.

Those who left negative reviews seem to not realize a simple principle regarding subjective experience. That principle is that all subjective experience is translated through the subconscious before it can be percieved or vocalized by the subject therefore there can be some confusing or disjointed perceptions. Subjective experience is just that, subjective experience. Sometimes it can be proven with evidence found in the objective world; such as historical observations that can be confirmed.

In other cases, these experiences cannot be verified because there are no references available. In these cases the reality of the experience will be its effect upon the subject. If the experience was transformative then it is fundamentally "real" for the person involved. These types of cases aren't able to be proven. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I have no doubt that those who gave negative reviews have beliefs that are less than 100% grounded in reason and proof such as God/Jesus/Buddha/Allah/Krishna or any Higher Power by whatever name or an afterlife. There is at least as much "proof" for the existance of past lives as there proof of God(s) or an afterlife. So before you scoff consider that we all hold beliefs (well 99% of us at least) that are gounded in a reality beyond that which we can perceive with the senses. I'm not talking about resurrections and parting red seas I am talking about that which we can experience, not in simple faith which can be likened to continuing to believe in Santa well into adulthood. You may believe but that belief is largely baseless.

Plus, the soul/mind/spirit has its own wisdom beyond the physical brain. It is that perception that allows us to perceive that which cannot be empirically proven. I love science, but my religion isn't materialism and sometimes we can become blinded by "reason" to truths beyond the scientific method.

Chris


An easy swallow for the Gullible   March 4, 2002
 77 out of 100 found this review helpful

I am a physician and a pathologist. Let me say right off the bat, an academic physician and any respectable physician making an unusual observation for the first time calls their colleague in for their opinion. The behavior of Dr. Weiss does not reflect academic objectivity. He distrusts the judgment of his colleagues and writes in the popular lay press where his observations and interpretations are not subject to peer review.

I have read the comments of reviewers mentioning the "B.C." problem and the problem of Netherlands geography. Here are some more unmentioned:

Most people who lived in the past, lived extremely provincial lives. They did not travel, or even know where in the world they lived. The village and the one beyond the next hill was all they knew. How is it the people in these past lives knew their geographic location, what language they spoke?

Here's another. In several passages, Catherine relates the foul smell of furs and the surroundings. People become accustom to their surroundings. Those who backpack for several days become accustom to their own body odor.

Yet another: page 111: "Osiris . . . Sirus . . . something like that" Please, did a person living in Egypt speak the name of the god just as we would thousands of years later?

Here's another: page 117: "What kind of plane do you fly?" "Some kind of chopper plane. It has four propellers. It's a fixed wing." The Germans flew very few four engine planes. It would have been a very easy matter to pinpoint who this was with a few more questions. The FW 200 Condor, Junkers Ju 290, Heinkel He 277, to my knowledge are the only four propellors planes in the Second World War German Air Force probably numbering less than several hundred produced and only several dozen flying at any one time. The term "fixed wing" did not come about until after World War II.

I won't go into the loss of pleasant near death experiences with some medications but wish to separate the process of observation from interpretation. Let us assume for the sake of discussion, Dr. Weiss and his patient(s) are not attempting to delude the reader. Does Dr. Weiss posit other plausible explanations? Does the absence of a readily available explanation for an observed phenomenon immediately call for the supposition of the paranormal?

An academic physician publishing their findings in a journal always has a discussion section proposing various competing theories, how their findings support or do not support previous investigations and how and why they reached their conclusions. For someone who has "published" in this style, this is for me the most curious absence of critical interpretation.

Medical and scientific community are not the closed-minded unwilling to accept alternative theories - fundamentalists are. (The Helicobacter pylori discovery story comes immediately to mind.) I have come across many dogmatic professionals who have cloaked their uncompromising slanted views with their professional credentials. What concerns me the most from reading the reviews is the number of people who read testimonials such as "Many Lives" without the benefit of a critical mind. For those who really wish to explore reincarnation and other paranormal phenomenon, I would suggest going to the home page of "The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal"...


Why can't I select 0 stars.   November 5, 2000
 72 out of 107 found this review helpful

I generally don't read this kind of books but I have been urged by a
friend to read this one. "You can't keep ignoring the
facts", he told me. "Here is this serious scientist who
writes about facts and you just ignore them because your mind is not
open and you want to preserve your old beliefs". So, reluctantly,
I made the effort and started reading this book.

The author
describes his experience with a patient he calls Catherine. When, on
page eleven, I encountered the sentence "I have slightly changed
Catherine's identity to ensure confidentiality" I said to myself
"here it starts, the well known pattern of these books, making
criticism impossible by making the facts the theory relies upon
inaccessible to others". I almost stopped reading the book since
I knew that through this sentence it declared itself as unscientific
and I would have no way to find out whether or not the facts my friend
said I was ignoring were, indeed, facts.

But, a couple of days later
I decided to go on reading, at least some pages, and see if I find
something I could relate to. I'm glad I did!

On page 27, the author
describes his first encounter with a previous life cycle Catherine was
able to recall under hypnosis. I'll cite only a few sentences from her
testimony: "We live in the Valley... There is no water. The year
is 1863 B.C. The area is barren, hot, and sandy"

See what I
mean? I don't believe I am the only person who read this book with a
mind open enough to understand that people in this time could not use
the term B.C. to designate dates! Even if she really wanted to
translate some other date representation to the terms we use today,
how could she do it? No way!

I only had to read 27 pages to find a
statement that, logically, cannot be true. There are many such
statements in the sequel.

In short, the story in the book cannot be
true. One cannot believe it and be rational at the same time. This is
the most significant fact one can be sure to know about this book. It
was, hence, my friend who was ignoring the facts, not me.

And what
about reincarnation in general?

All the reported reincarnation
events are about persons claiming to recall events in past lives. This
is natural, since how else could one prove that one has the soul of
somebody else?

Now, these stories assume something that we know for
a fact not to be true: they assume that the memories are in the soul
and not in the body (how else would the reincarnation of the soul
cause the new person know about the old one?).

How do we know this
is wrong? Simple! We know that we can loose our memory or parts of it
through an injury or malfunction of our brain. This is a common
phenomenon we encounter in car accidents. This is also the basis for
some diseases like Alzheimer. Now, in all these cases, it is only our
brain that is damaged. We don't loose our soul. If the memories were
part of the soul, we would not have lost them!

Hence, the memories
are not in the soul and all the stories of recollection of events in
past lives cannot be true.

"Well", you might be saying
now, "you may have proved that the testimonies of reincarnation
cannot be true, but you haven't said anything about reincarnation
itself".

Not quite! I've shown that if there is a soul that can
be reincarnated which is not part of the body, this soul cannot
contain our memories.

To me, the reincarnation of a soul with no
memory is as meaningless as the reincarnation of some of the atoms
composing my body in the body of the worms that eat it. After all,
what are we but our memories? What is it that makes us
"us"?

Have I deprived you of your hopes for reincarnation?
Look at the bright side. At least I gave you a good advice for free
and not a bunch of lies for money. I hope I have also encouraged you
to make the most of your current (and only) incarnation and (inter
alia) not waste it on pseudo science nonsense.

One last request:
...please buy a book about science instead. I'd recommend you start
with "Unweaving the Rainbow" by Richard Dawkins.



Past Life/ Reincarnation Primer   January 17, 2002
 69 out of 76 found this review helpful

Many Lives, Many Masters by Brian L. Weiss, M.D. was an easy, enjoyable read. Well written and fast paced, I read it in one sitting. Most of the subject matter covered will not be new to a long-time student of reincarnation. This book is geared for readers new to the subject, as Dr. Weiss was at the time the events he describes took place. His analysis of events may annoy those who don't require concrete proof of spiritual realities. He offered no verifiable scientific proof of what he presented anyway. It was encouraging to see a serious scientist open his mind to faith without proof. Dr. Weiss' enlightenment on the subject (in this, his first book) is limited to one patient he regressed through 12 of her 86 past lives. The ones that are delved into aren't described in much depth. Though the regressions reveal personal insight into her present life difficulties, there's not much applicable universally. Some "Masters" he quotes seem a little too judgmental to be enlightened spirits: "Humans just destroy. They will eventually destroy themselves." Much of their wisdom offered little new in the way of insight: "Wisdom is achieved very slowly." The methods he describes using to obtain this material don't rule out contact with less enlightened spirits, which Dr. Weiss admits at one point. So the "many masters" may not have been masters at all. He does show how past life regression can be a powerful tool in healing emotional problems and phobias. Journey of Souls and Destiny of Souls by Michael Newton, Ph.D, another regression therapist, are much more in depth and informative, though they deal with life between lives more than the mechanics of reincarnation itself. If your budget calls for more bang for your buck, your money might be better spent on classic "must read" books on reincarnation: Many Mansions by Gina Cerminara & You Were Born Again To Be Together by Dick Sutphen. Two newer "must reads" are: Adventures in Reincarnation
by Brian Jamieson and Past Lives, Present Dreams : How to Use Reincarnation for Personal Growth
by Denise Linn