Regarding what Justin said below, I remember seeing this and it "didn't" seem to me that she was faking.

"If she's a "fake", then she is a very, very good actor, because in a number of interviews when she talks about certain things, like merging with Source (actually the Creator Being of this Universe/larger reality), she spontaneously starts to tear up and you can plainly see and feel the depth of her emotion about it.  At least i could, and it seemed/felt very genuine."   

Hi Kathy,

I am about 80 pages into her book (just got it this past weekend).  I like to read what she wrote, though it is unsettling, her speaking about our spirit merging with an independent "human animal capable of living independent of us."  Not sure I buy that one, but I'm open minded about it. 

One of my concerns was whether or not she died, and was resuscitated.  NDERF lists her NDE as a "possible" NDE.  She was given anesthesia.  I haven't seen the details yet.  But if her heart did not stop, and she had an altered consciousness OOBE, that does put a slightly different spin on it. 

Her account so far does go along with ES and others in some ways, but not in others.  She states emphatically that there are no hells or lost souls for all consciousness returns to Source with a sort of pre-programming.  She reasoned that if there are hells, they only stem from the early fears after death, but that passing through those, the soul would still leave the hellish experience and return to Source fairly soon.  Of course we all would like that to be true. 

She does quote from other NDErs, Moody, etc.  I actually find this to be a turn off, though I understand the need to add the experience of others.  I was hoping to hear her experience alone. 

She did sort of answer Don's question about afterlife contact.  Making the post-mortem soul much expanded and no longer bound by human fears - essentially saying our consciousness expands so far that we are not bound by the earth plane concerns, since we know our loved ones will be safe. 

She further was surprised not to meet her deceased relatives, but 5 light beings who were her disc group who she felt like she knew forever. 

Will finish it in the next few days and give any more that I can.  Thanks for recommending the book.

Matthew

Albert,

As I understand her, she is saying that everything is ok, because we all return to source in the end.  This is a thinking that sort of transcends good and evil - and she states that as much.  She believes that the human animal experience is just a pit stop, and that the various souls involved do not suffer for long (even the rapists, murderers, etc.) except how their higher souls regret what they did.  This, I assume would include the worst mass murderers, etc. 

Our polarized human incarnate animal sense of fairness and justice doesn't usualy like the idea that life is just a play or a dream and all will be fine in the end. 

M

DocM wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 2:10pm:



   A relative truth yes, but not the whole truth.  What of freewill? 

    Imagine this, every helper/retriever/guide type suddenly stops caring and stops trying to help those, whom by their use of freewill, get stuck.

  What happens then?  Do we still magically end up as all as consciously One with Source again? 

  Certainly, it is a possibility that it would eventually work out that way, but can we even begin to imagine the difference in the amount of time and suffering between scenarios wherein helper/retriever/guide types are active and doing as much as they can to help the process along, and another where everyone becomes completely laissez-faire  and says, "oh, it will work out in the end, so might as well be passive and only be concerned with self."

  Funny enough, not a single Light Being i've communicated has the latter attitude.  Some are little more hands off than others, but they ALL care and they all work towards the end of suffering and towards faciliating conscious Oneness of the Whole in some way and some fashion.


In other words, common sense and feelings people!!!  Spiritual platitudes can be taken too far, especially when suffering is involved.

  What i take away from a balance of these two extremes, is, work as much towards the betterment of the Whole as you can, but do not become overly attached to the process and the effects.  Make haste slowly and carefully

  But i do feel that there may be some people out there, who read Nanci's words and may take it in a limited way, as an excuse to not be active in the process, and a big part of being active in this whole process is improving self.  The more one improves self (by becoming a more pure channel of PUL), the more one can effectively help others. 

Which begs the question, should we listen over much to teachers who are not themselves fully consciously one with PUL consistently?  Should we not discern where they are off and where they are accurate to the best of our ability (especially by taking it to those expanded guidance forces under more ideal conditions of attunement)?


Goes back to that whole Yin-Yang, receptive/passive--active/directive thing.  Ever does balance tend to be more preferable, not one extreme or the other. 

  Yin tends to be too laissez-faire and/or overly tolerant of sources of they like, and Yang tends to be too demanding or impatient or wanting to rush the process overmuch. 

recoverer wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 1:47pm:

LOL I don't think anyone is "an all knowing master" regardless of their experiences... period!  However, I'm not sure what you mean by her being "one-sided" about some things.  She does indicate, at least in my opinion that "undesirable things" can happen.

I think what she means when she says there is no hell is the "type" of hell she was taught... eternal condemnation... burn in hell forever... God will punish you and throw you into hell if you're not good... sort of thing.  She does quote Dannion Brinkley a few times as I recall, but right off hand I don't recall what it was about.  She does state the following, which I'd agree:

"Souls relatively new to the process [of transition] may experience each transition stage for long periods of what we would call time.  ...Others would appear to us to be stuck at a particular stage of transition until they are ready and willing to move on."

"The dark void stage is meant to be momentary.  For most it is.  Some souls, however, do not adjust well to the blackness and they panic.  This is particularly true if the newly freed soul does not instantly see the Light.  Human panic may have distracted the soul from proceeding with its transformation.  ...their fearful thoughts of some NDErs instantly manifested into hellish realities.  Had they continued through the process, they would have progressed through the terrifying stages to be drawn into the Light."

Though she doesn't state this in so many words, but I interpreted the words she did say as the idea that "salvation" is built into the system, so to speak.  After all is said and done, all souls will be able to return to God/Source through evolution of the soul, that none will truly be lost.  Certainly a possibility, however, I do wonder about souls that end up de-evolving.  Also a possibility, but only if the soul doesn't return to the light after a "life" is completed.  If, reincarnation is true and a soul does return to the light at the completion of a "life", it seems there could be a natural progression that could eventually result in salvation or returning to God/Source, where none is lost.

K

Albert,

You'll have to give me some examples because I did not see where she as you say... "treads on misleading ground."  My feeling was that she tried her best to describe her experience and did so very well in my opinion.  You saying things like this makes me wonder if you are questioning her integrity?

Quote:


No she didn't.  If something like this wasn't a part of Danison's experience, she'd have no reason to write about it since the book is about her experience.

What makes you think her intention was "telling the whole story" that would include everything that "could" happen?  I know you've read her third book.  Have you read the first one, too?

K

Hi Albert,

Ok, now I think I understand what you're saying.  Yes, everyone's "history" does seem to put a spin on how they interpret something.  I guess that's one of the things that make each of us unique.  It sounds like you may be basing your impressions on her interviews, which, I agree, they really don't tell the whole story.  I believe Justin said he's only watched the interviews and that's likely the case with Roger, as well.  The book, of course, goes into much greater detail.  And I really don't see how someone could read the book and make the conclusions you're concerned with, unless they were to only pick and choose a few statements, make a conclusion, and not "hear" the rest of what she has to say.  I really think there's no need to worry or be concerned about that.

For example, she mentions her life review numerous times to impress on people that there are repercussions for "living life in a negative way" as you mentioned.  During the life review, you will feel the way all the people you caused harm to felt because of your actions.  Not how you felt when someone wronged you, but only how they felt, as well as the repercussions that rippled downward.  No doubt we will judge our self quite harshly when we experience firsthand what we did to someone from their perspective.  I think we're all in for a painful awakening at some point, unless of course, you've never caused harm to someone else.

In her words from the chapter on hell which is only 2-1/2 pages long:

"No soul goes to a place of damnation for all of eternity.  No human body goes anywhere after death but back to the component chemical elements of which it is comprised.

That is not to say that Source avoids all unpleasant or hellish experiences.  Individual souls may temporarily experience hellish adventures and states of being as part of their overall travels in quest of experiences of all types.  Source understands that it cannot know true bliss until it is contrasted with true suffering.  So we Light Beings experience both on its behalf.

Some NDErs report trips to hell after they leave their bodies.  My understanding of our nature as Light Beings leads me to believe that those NDErs may not have gone far enough through the transition from human to Being of Light to lose their combined human/soul personalities.  So they manifested events born of human fear, as though they were still in the body.

Alternately, these NDErs may consider the life review, with its associated emotions, to be a form of punishment expected only in hell.  During a life review you feel every emotion you caused another to feel during human life.  You will live it fully, intensely, and remorsefully if you cause another being pain.  This is the only hell you will suffer when you leave this life, but it will be so much more humiliating because it will be a hell of you own creation.  Yet it is temporary and lasts only so long as it takes you to come to terms with the end of your human adventure and make emotional peace with yourself.

We are responsible for our own choices, our own thoughts, acts, and deeds.  Only us.  The desire to escape that responsibility may be human nature.  Yet we cannot escape our true nature as Light Beings, who do take complete responsibility for not only our own actions but also their consequences."

K