Reincarnation in some form and at some level has pretty much been proven to be a fact.

Look up the case of Shanti Devi, or read Trutz Hardo, The children who have lived before. Unfortunately old Trutz is a serious nutter who favours a fez and cape which doesn’t help his argument, though I appreciate his commitment to the cause.

Another more serious tome is Ian Stevensons “20 cases suggestive of Reincarnation”. Thoroughly researched and totally convincing, this man’s life’s work is unfortunately boring as hell to read. However, the scientific methodology and years of research completed over decades, while tedious, are impossible to refute.

But with Shanti Devi - perhaps the most famous ever example of reincarnation- there really is no viable explanation to her knowledge of a previous life other than the fact that she had previously experienced that other life. Take a moment to Google and you too will be convinced. Shanti Devi would appear to be the Lionel Messi of reincarnation.

Of course, it shouldn’t come as any surprise to us that someone like Shanti Devi exists. In any field of human capacities there is always someone who stands out as the supreme example of what can be achieved. Often through practice. Often through genetics.

So how might reincarnation come about? And why would the experience be stronger for some than others? Let’s make a suggestion. As always the idea here is based on the premise of things that we have previously agreed.

Even the scientists will tell you that every part of the Universe gets recycled. As you are probably aware, every atom of your body was once part of a distant star, with elements such as carbon having been forged in the dying expulsions of an exploding sun.

Every particle of you, was once a fragment of something else. Some molecules were once a dinosaur. Several atoms were at one stage built into Shakespeare and others likely came from Octavius Caesar. The Universe which we know continues to recycle repeatedly in an endless regeneration.

Again, according to the scientists, these atoms all hold some level of force. A “strong nuclear force” as it turns out, though not “strong” in a way that we would recognise. Doesn’t it seem reasonable that these atoms would also retain a fraction of memory of what they once were? The same as an ass impression on a cushion. The ass is no longer there, but the memory of it is. Even the microscopic cells of the immune system have a memory of some description. Which is how they recognise and kill invader viruses.

Now I’m not suggesting that the existence of three of Shakespeare’s atoms in your ass will make you a playwright, although it may well give you a predilection in that direction. But what if this. What if those diffusing atoms from the star, or Shakespeare’s butt, or Octavius Caesar don’t in fact disperse evenly out into the ether? Doesn’t it seem far more probable that while some would spread vastly apart never to encounter each other again, that others would clump together. Just like seeds eddying in a stream. A few are thrown out and to the side, but others stick together and float away in a lump. Just leaving sufficient of you in a blob to leave some recall?

It seems a likely outcome. In fact, highly probable. So surely it stands to reason that the greater the quantity of these atoms clumped together, the greater mass of a memory they would retain. And if, rarely, enough adhere together in one of those freakish occurrences that we see throughout evolution, might that not be sufficient to provide you with the memory of a previous life? However fleeting? However faint the impression? Just for long enough, while those atoms are adjusting to their new situation and while the small impressions within them are adapting to their new situation in the universe.

This would certainly explain why memories of reincarnation appear so frequently in very young children, usually between the ages of two and six, before gradually fading away. They are fresh to the previous memory. The childish mind is still forming and trying to find its place before fully forming and settling on its current place in the timeline.

The question which then arises, what is the most likely way in which the atoms of somebody’s previous existence would stick together after their demise? What would be the most likely cause for them to clump together?

The further I investigate this, it appears that in the majority of reincarnation experiences, the people who died originally were not buried. Most of these bodies were disposed of in some kind of funeral pyre. Therefore many more of their “atom’s” would have been released, increasing the likelihood that sufficient number could escape to clump together to form a previous life memory.

It is also apparent that those claiming reincarnation have a preponderance to having died both early and unexpectedly. Shanti Devi died in childbirth for example. Would that combination of youth and “lack of wear” make the atoms “fresher”? More pliable?

One final coincidence for which I have zero explanation but which seems important. Research has shown that in many cases of reported reincarnation, wounds which caused the death of the former, created highly similar and appropriately located birthmarks on the body of the latter.

There is also a typical timescale. A fifteen to eighteen month gap between prior death and later rebirth.

So if people are being reincarnated in clumps of atoms, is it not possible that they sometimes come back as the wrong /different gender. There are hundreds of thousands of people who are convinced that they are in the wrong body. Might this not be an explanation? Transgender people just know they are the incorrect gender. Might they have a surfeit of atoms from the previous life? And if so, might they be the best people to research as to whether there is a previous life.? This cuts deeply into my personal beliefs that there are actually only two genders and numerous mental illnesses. And were that to be correct then a problem arises. If you suggest to a nutter that a previous life could be the cause of their transgenderism, aren’t they likely, as existing nutters, to grasp on to that theory too readily? I digress. Dont want to get involved in that debate.

Reincarnation of the part seems far more probable than reincarnation of the whole. Once again, this concept would appear to be a reality that our simple minds can’t quite grasp.