Confabulating Reincarnation

Problems with Past Life Regression: Part I

At the suggestion of a friend, I recently completed Michael Newton’s Journey of Souls. This is a classic text in the New Age genre, as evidenced by the 800,000 copies sold and the glowing endorsement written by Shirley MacLaine.¹ In this seminal book, the late Newton, a hypnotherapist, leads his clients through his modality of past life regression (PLR).

One of the more unique aspects of Newton’s practice is that he goes beyond the typical PLR therapy—a practice that gained notoriety with the infamous “Bridey Murphy” case²—leading his patients to recall their “life between lives” in the spirit realm. Newton, in his engagements with these patients (and their respective “spirit guides”) in what he calls a “superconscious” state, unveils for readers the secrets of the universe.

Newton insists that—despite the varied background of his patients—they all independently relate the same basic vision of the afterlife and spirit realm:

The astounding thing I found as I progressed with my research was that once subjects were regressed back into their soul state they all displayed a remarkable consistency in responding to questions about the spirit world. People even use the same words and graphic descriptions in colloquial language when discussing their lives as souls.

However, this homogeneity of experience by so many clients did not stop me from continually trying to verify statements between my subjects and corroborate specific functional activities of souls. There were some differences in narrative reporting between cases, but this was due more to the level of soul development than to variances in how each subject basically saw the spirit world.

The research was painfully slow, but as the body of my cases grew I finally had a working model of the eternal world where our souls live. I found thoughts about the spirit world involve universal truths among the souls of people living on Earth. It was these perceptions by so many different types of people which convinced me their statements were believable. I am not a religious person, but I found the place where we go after death to be one of order and direction, and I have come to appreciate that there is a grand design to life and afterlife.³

His amalgamation and synthesis of the testimonies of various patients—all from different levels of spiritual maturity—leads him to pronounce his conclusions on the world’s perennial metaphysical questions. As in any worldview, these questions include:

• Why does the Universe exist?

  • (The universal, absolute “Source” desired to manifest itself)

• What is my purpose in this life?

  • (To advance my soul to a higher stage of enlightenment)

• What is the reason for suffering?

  • (To learn the lessons needed by my soul to mature)

• What is my ultimate destiny?

  • (To reunite with and be subsumed within the Source)

• What is wrong with the world?

  • (Souls suffer from ignorance, immaturity, and alienation from the Source)

In this volume, Newton has provided us with detailed knowledge of angelic/spirit guide hierarchies that would make Pseudo-Dionysius blush. He tells us that some people, in addition to taking on human bodies on Earth, reincarnate as alternate life forms—and on other planets! He further elaborates that some people incarnate into multiple bodies simultaneously, and he insinuates that there is a duality between the “oversoul” from the superconscious realm and the biological person being inhabited (sometimes, as with the case of “Ashley,” this resembles possession more than incarnation).⁴

Qualifying Remarks

At the outset, I would like to make it clear that my purpose in writing this essay is not to assail Newton’s character. Indeed, he seems to have been a well-meaning therapist who helped many of his patients overcome deep-seated issues. I also make no claim to having read his later publications which explore his practice in greater detail. Perhaps improvements were made in his later methodology.

In addition, I harbor no special animus against the use of hypnosis in general. There is a fascinating history of hypnotic techniques being used as an anesthetic, most acutely exemplified by the work of James Esdaile in nineteenth-century Bengal, where removal of large tumors and full amputations of limbs (and other “sensitive appendages”) were performed painlessly through the use of his version of mesmerism.⁵ In the esteemed Scotch physician’s own words, “in the mesmeric trance the most severe and protracted surgical operations can be performed, without the patients being sensible of pain.”⁶

James Esdaile (1808–1859) - Image courtesy Telegraph India

Emily Williams Kelly writes:

Even after the introduction of chemical anesthesia in the mid-19th century, which quickly superseded the need for any other kind in most cases, mesmeric or hypnotic analgesia continued to be used occasionally, especially in situations when a chemical agent might have been dangerous. Bramwell . . . , for instance, described numerous cases of his own as well as those of other physicians, particularly for the removal of teeth (an excruciatingly painful procedure without anesthesia), but also for eye surgery, removal of tonsils and uterine and breast tumors, and childbirth. Even in more recent years, numerous painless surgeries under hypnosis have been reported⁷

Kelly continues to describe the many skin conditions that have proved curable through hypnotic suggestion, including allergies, bleeding, burns, warts, eczema, psoriasis, and ichthyosis (the dreaded “fish-skin disease”).⁸

Furthermore, my pastime of enjoying true crime television has persuaded me that forensic hypnosis can assist in memory recall—often leading to a witness accurately identifying the perpetrator from a lineup.

All in all, I consider myself open-minded on the use and usefulness of hypnosis.

I should also point out that I do not find myself in utter opposition to all of Newton’s metaphysical ideas. I take no issue with notions of guardian angels, a life review after death, the “grand design” to everything that happens, or the notion of spiritual progression. Though I accept these ideas on different grounds from Newton, I can at least say an occasional Amen with him.

Furthermore, though I am not persuaded of reincarnation myself, I do think there are some respectable approaches to Cases of the Reincarnation Type (CORT)—the term used in academic literature. The work of Ian Stevenson and his successors with “solved cases” is exemplary in this regard. These researchers have shied away from hypnosis and tend to focus on spontaneous memory recall, mostly of young children, which they then match up with the documented details of a previous life.

While I am partial to other hypotheses that can account for this data aside from a straightforward reincarnation view,⁹ I do think this approach withstands more scrutiny than Newton’s work, as will be made clear throughout the rest of this essay. Since my interest in parapsychology has, by and large, been directed at Healing and Remote Viewing research, I am willing to admit upfront that the breadth of my knowledge regarding CORT and hypnosis is limited. Accordingly, my conclusions here will be provisional in nature.

My issue with Newton’s work, then, stems from the inherent problems with PLR therapy, particularly when such grandiose metaphysical claims are being offered to an audience hungry for answers.¹⁰ Newton’s presentation—for the “true believers” who are unaware of these problems—is persuasive in presenting his work as a trustworthy guide to the afterlife and the secrets of the universe.

Though the problems with past life regression therapy are manifold, I will home in on two in particular:

1. Confabulation assisted by Cryptomnesia, and

2. Telepathic Overlay.

Confabulation

As mentioned previously, Newton tells us that he has gained this knowledge through the “independent” testimonies of his many hypnotherapy patients. Though he claims not to have contaminated his own ideas into these hypnotic testimonies, this is belied by a straightforward reading of the book. Even in his curated selection of transcripts, he continually presses many of his clients into discussing topics on which they (and their ostensible spirit guides) are clearly uncomfortable and hesitant (encouraging confabulation). For instance, when Newton asks his patient, Does any soul ever go back to the World Without Ego after they have once been there and acquired identity?, the patient is described as being “uncomfortable” before replying, Yes . . . but I don’t want to get into that. Newton feigns agreement not to pursue this line of questioning before injecting a transparently leading question:

Well, then we won’t, but I have been told some souls do return if their conduct during physical assignments is consistently irregular. I have the impression they are considered defective and are returned to the factory for a kind of spiritual prefrontal lobotomy?¹¹

Though this particular patient exhibits “annoyance” and denies this assertion, it is telling that Newton would include such a blatant leading binary question in the official transcript of the book. Again, I don’t allege deliberate misrepresentation on Newton’s part. But if this is the sort of questioning he employs, who knows how far he might “lead the witness” in any individual session?

Though we will engage with insights from Remote Viewing more in the second part of this essay, it is instructive that that the original Coordinate Remote Viewing (CRV) manual produced by Tom McNear from the U.S. Army’s Fort Meade unit explicitly warns that data supplied after “a stutter, pause, or hesitation” are almost always a result of “Analytic Overlay” (a confabulation of sorts, wherein the “left brain” cognitive functions try to make sense of the raw data from a psychic signal).¹² As veteran Remote Viewer Paul Smith writes, data contaminated by this effect “are usually inaccurate, sometimes strikingly so.”¹³

Excerpt from the 1985 Coordinate Remote Viewing (CRV) manual

Assuming there may be a mechanistic overlap between Remote Viewing and Newton’s PLR therapy—both engage in a “plumbing of the subconscious”—I consider it reasonable to apply lessons learned in the former to the latter. When Newton presses his patients—in one case he even admits to “coaxing” one when she doesn’t answer his question¹⁴—he may be encouraging confabulation.

This is especially acute with regard to Newton’s interest in extraterrestrial life and other planets. Consider, for instance, this interaction with “Nenthum” (ellipses are original to the book and represent pauses by the Subject):

Dr. N: I wondered if certain types of souls have an affinity for specific forms of physical life in the universe?

S: (pause) I won’t argue against that.

Dr. N: In your beginnings, Nenthum, were you given the opportunity to choose other planetary hosts besides humans on Earth?

S: Ah . . . as a new soul . . . the guides assist in those selections. I was drawn to human beings.

Dr. N: Were you given other choices?

S: (long pause) Yes . . . but it’s not very clear at the moment. They usually start you on an easy world or two, without much to do. Then I was offered service on this severe planet.¹⁵

Newton’s persistence in asking about this esoteric topic is matched by a corresponding hesitation and equivocation on the part of his patient. The transcript continues with several notations on the disposition of the patient during Newton’s probing, including “pause,” “long pause,” “sighs deeply,” “troubled,” and “evasive.” The questions themselves consist mainly of binary Yes/No questions. And at one point Newton even “throws out a leading question.” This methodology is, I judge, a recipe for confabulation.¹⁶

This judgment is consistent with the longstanding recognition that hypnotees are highly susceptible to confabulation in general. Despite my earlier recognition that hypnosis can sometimes assist with memory recall, it is not without reason that testimony recalled under hypnosis has largely been rendered inadmissible as evidence in court, and even “hypnotically refreshed testimony” remains a subject of controversy.¹⁷

Cryptomnesia

Anyone who dreams is aware of how the subconscious mind is capable of creating scenes, dialogues, and details that seem ever-so-real to the subject. Though the dreamer is the creator of her own dreams, she can nonetheless be surprised and taken in by their content. If hypnosis is indeed tapping into the vast realms of the subconscious, this same penchant for confabulation is liable to be an active component of hypnotic memory “recall.” (It is helpful to point out that hypnosis has long been compared to a state of sleep, and that the word itself literally means “sleep induction.”)

To continue the parallel, dreams, in the production of their scenery, seem to be able to uncover memories that have been neglected or forgotten by the normal waking consciousness. This is where “cryptomnesia” comes into play, a term that has been defined as “memory without identification or recognition as previous experience, [the] original experiences being forgotten or repressed, and their reinstatement appearing as a new experience.”¹⁸

The concept of cryptomnesia is a two-edged sword for the practice of PLR therapy. On the one hand, advocates of the practice might point out that they are indeed tapping into repressed memories—memories of past lives and of the inter-life spirit realm. On the other hand, the reason that cryptomnesia is normally interjected into the discussion by critics is that one can have a forgotten memory of a book, movie, or conversation which is later used as raw material for confabulation by the subconscious mind (whether in dreaming or under hypnosis). The work of Melvin Harris illustrates this point:

Harris was particularly successful in discovering links to works of fiction and popular history, from which he argued that past life memories were a mixture of remembered stories and emotions. His most comprehensively explained case is [the] Livonia narrative produced by Arnall Bloxham’s subject Jane Evans. Harris found a likely source for the details in Louis de Wohl’s 1947 novel The Living Wood, which told the same story and featured the same characters, including a Roman lady named Lavinia.¹⁹

Furthermore, Ian Wilson

points to instances where the details of former lives accorded with popular/folkloristic information rather than true historical details: for instance, a subject remembering a life as a Viking warrior referred to the familiar horned helmet, which however was not what he would actually have worn into battle.²⁰

We must be fair, however, and point out that mere confabulation, even when assisted by cryptomnesia, may not account for all information gained from past life regression therapy. Joe Keetan, an advocate for the practice, forcefully writes:

You cannot listen to someone over a period of a hundred hours or more, talking of another life in another age, and still hold the view that he is recalling the page of a long-forgotten history book or remembering the details of an historical drama.²¹

Perhaps more compellingly, Newton claims that there was a substantial overlap and consistency of details in what was related by his patients in a “superconscious” state.²² If we are to give Newton the benefit of the doubt, we will not automatically assume that he “fudged” contradictory testimonies of his patients into a coherent gestalt (although this is possible). And though Newton does seem to evince some leading questions, I don’t think this works as an exhaustive explanation for the consistency of details. His patients, for instance, appear to report a more-or-less consistent “map” of soul colors which correspond to higher or lower states of enlightenment.

Taken at face value, this consistent, independent testimony would seem to point toward an objective source rather than confabulation. Within the context of Near-Death Experiences (NDEs), I have previously quoted J. Steve Miller’s observation that NDErs are “remarkably consistent regarding the specific, often unexpected nature of this otherworldly life,”²³ and that this consistency may point to an underlying objective reality.

Thus, while I demur from many of Newton’s claims, I do think there is more than mere confabulation at play here.

At this point, I will depart from the objections to PLR offered by skeptics of a conventional worldview, and I will offer considerations from a uniquely parapsychological viewpoint. Those who, like Newton, proffer up ideas like a “spirit world” and a “journey of souls” have opened a Pandora’s Box. Accordingly, other explanations of a spiritual or psychical nature must be considered.

This essay continues in Part II, where I discuss “Telepathic Overlay” and how it might play a role in hypnotic regression techniques.

1. This statistic comes from the publisher website. The full title is Journey of Souls: Case Studies of Life Between Lives, first published in 1994. I am working with the 5th revised edition (2002). Since there are so many editions in circulation, citations will note the Chapter rather than page number, following the abbreviation JoS.

2. See K.M. Wehrstein, “Bridey Murphy (reincarnation case),” Psi Encyclopedia (London: The Society for Psychical Research, 2019). See also Jimmy Akin’s 2-part series on the case: Part I & Part II.

3. JoS, “Introduction.”

4. JoS, Chapter 13, “Choosing a New Body.”

5. Emily Williams Kelly, “Psychophysiological Influence,” in Irreducible Mind: Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century, edited by Edward F. Kelly et al., 117–239 (Lanham; Boulder; New York; Toronto; Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007), 185–190.

6. As cited in Etzel Cardeña and Carlos S. Alvarado, “Altered Consciousness from the Age of Enlightenment Through Mid-20th Century” in Altering Consciousness: Multidisciplinary Perspectives Volume 1: History, Culture, and the Humanities, edited by Etzel Cardeña and Michael Winkelman, 89–112 (Santa Barbara; Denver; Oxford: Praeger, 2011), 97. It should be noted that there is some dispute as to whether Esdaile’s specific technique can be considered “true” hypnotism or mesmerism. On this matter, I would cite the conclusions of Emily Williams Kelly: “T. X. Barber (1963) contemptuously dismisses those who ‘almost always rel[y] heavily on Esdaile’s series’ in support of their contention that truly painless surgeries have been performed under hypnotic analgesia alone (p. 316). Similarly, Spanos and Chaves (1989) ‘view with alarm the retreat to nineteenth century anecdotes’ (p. 131). I make no apologies for being another who is profoundly impressed with Esdaile’s reports. I can only wonder at the intransigence of those who simply dismiss reports that run counter to their beliefs, and moreover in doing so grossly misrepresent them. Furthermore, the suggestion that such reports are limited to one reporter or to the 19th century or any other ‘pre-modern’ or ‘pre-scientific’ period is simply false” (“Psychophysiological Influence,” 189n38).

7. Kelly, “Psychophysiological Influence,” 185.

8. Kelly, “Psychophysiological Influence,” 190–199.

9. For an overview of the debate surrounding CORT, see this entry from the Psi Encyclopedia. Jimmy Akin has also proposed a “psychic link” hypothesis which avoids some of the problems with other views.

10. The marketing blurb for the book makes it clear that the primary audience is not researchers looking for objective evidence for the afterlife but rather spiritual seekers looking for meaning in their lives: “After reading Journey of Souls, you will gain a better understanding of the immortality of the human soul. You will meet day-to-day challenges with a greater sense of purpose. You will begin to understand the reasons behind events in your own life.”

11. JoS, Chapter 10, “The Intermediate Soul.”

12. Thomas N. McNear, “Coordinate Remote Viewing: Stages I–VI and Beyond,” 1985 (declassified in 2000), 16.

13. Paul H. Smith, “UFOs and Remote Viewing: An Insider’s Perspective,” Aperture 25 (2014), 19.

14. JoS, Chapter 11, “The Advanced Soul.”

15. JoS, Chapter 9, “The Beginner Soul.”

16. I fully understand that there is a need to keep hypnotic subjects “on track,” lest they lose themselves from the questions at hand (JoS, “Introduction”). This logistical problem, however, does not erase the problems associated with persistent leading questions. The onus is on the hypnotist to devise ways of keeping his patients on track without leading them in a particular direction.

17. P.C. Giannelli, “The Admissibility of Hypnotic Evidence in U.S. Courts,” International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 43:2 (1995) 212–233. See also Cathy Ching, “Misuse of Forensic Hypnosis: Should It Still be Admissible in Court?” The Boston Scope, December 17, 2021.

18. J. Drever, A Dictionary of Psychology (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1952), 55, as cited in Ian Stevenson, “Cryptomnesia and Parapsychology,” Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 52:793 (Feb. 1983), 2.

19. M. Willin, “Past Life Regression,” Psi Encyclopedia (London: The Society for Psychical Research, 2016).

20. Willin, “Past Life Regression.”

21. As cited in Willin, “Past Life Regression.”

22. JoS, “Introduction.”

23. J. Steve Miller, Near-Death Experiences as Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven (Acworth: Wisdom Creek, 2012), 56, cited in Matthew C. McGuire, A Magical World (Independent, 2024), 195.