Question: Harry Potter chose to come back from the dead because he was the master of death. But how could he be the master of death as he never had the Elder Wand?

If Harry could come back does that mean that Dumbledore could come back from the dead too? Why/why not?

After all, Dumbledore did have the three Deathly Hallows. He owned the Elder Wand and the Resurrection Stone and the Cloak of Invisibility. He passes the Cloak to Harry, but he still owned it: you can give something to someone but you are still the owner of it. 

So when you die as the master of death you have a choice to come back. Dumbledore died as master of death but he never came back. 

Does that means that Dumbledore did not choose to come back or that he cannot and the Deathly Hallows don't work like this?

Answer: 
> 
> he passes the cloak to harry but he still own it
> 
> 
> 

No, Dumbledore never **owned** it. Harry's father owned it, and and passed it along with everything else to Harry. Dumbledore was simply in possession of it because he had **borrowed** it before Harry's parents were killed.

I don't have the exact quote, but in another part of the book Dumbledore mentioned that the cloak would never have worked as well for Dumbledore as it did for Harry/James, because the cloak belonged to Potters.

> 
> he is the master of death but he is never have the elder wand.
> 
> 
> 

He wasn't in direct possession of it, but via some convoluted stuff Harry was the 'owner/master' of the wand since Draco defeated Dumbledore, and Harry defeated Draco.

There is also the bit in the Platform 9 3/4 where Dumbledore mentioned that a big part of Harry's ability to not die from the curse was related to Harry's willingness to sacrifice himself for others. Harry chose to walk out to the forest, knowing that he would probably be killed. Dumbledore was never in a position where he **owned** all three items at the same time and had that choice to make.
Dumbledore *was* dead. Harry wasn't. That's established by the text itself:

> 
> “But you’re dead.” said Harry. “Oh yes,” said Dumbledore matter-of-factly. “Then . . . I’m dead too?” “Ah,” said Dumbledore, smiling still more broadly. “That is the question, isn’t it? On the whole, dear boy, I think not.”
> 
> 
> 

Harry came back from "King's Cross", not the dead. Dumbledore, who was, in fact, dead could not return from "King's Cross" because he was only present in Harry's mind's version of King's Cross.

The book is also clear that it's all going on in Harry's head. 

> 
> Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?
> 
> 
> 

Like so many other times in the books Dumbledore was clever and made very well educated guesses. He was pretty sure that Harry was a horcrux that would have to be destroyed. He also knew Harry would chose death over allowing his friends to be hurt. When he said that the experience was "real" but still all in his head I always assumed he meant that Dumbledore was present in some real, but magical way.

He was after all the most powerful wizard in the world and spells *can* behave and converse like real humans (see Tom Riddle's horcrux/memory in CoS, the portraits around Hogwarts, howlers etc.). While 100% theoretical I see two possibilities:

1. It's not at all unreasonable to guess that he cast a spell to cause Harry's experience 'upon destruction'.
2. Memories are powerful in real life and especially in the HP series. Memories of the most powerful wizard in the world occurring during a near-death experience where your soul/body is being separated from the *second-most-powerful* wizard the world might have side effects like we see in the book.

Basically: Dumbledore can't come back because he's present, but not really there.