What exactly are the Akashic Records, and if everyone experiences them differently, how can we know the information coming through is actually true?
Daniel is joined by Stefanie Ruth, host of When Spirit Talks, Reiki practitioner, and Akashic Records reader, for a conversation about spirituality, religion, intuition, and the mysterious idea of a spiritual database containing information about our lives, past lives, and possible futures.
Before diving into the Akashic Records, Stefanie shares how her Catholic upbringing shaped her relationship with God, Jesus, and spirituality, and why she eventually moved away from the more rigid aspects of organized religion without abandoning the beliefs that still resonate with her.
From there, Daniel and Stefanie explore what the Akashic Records might actually be, how someone accesses them, and whether different people could be receiving different versions of the truth. If the experience is filtered through our own consciousness, where does genuine spiritual information end and imagination begin? And how much confidence should we place in information that can't be objectively verified?
Stefanie also shares how she approaches Akashic Records readings, why she believes discernment and personal responsibility matter, and an experience in which information she received about someone's past life appeared to mirror circumstances unfolding in that person's present life.
The conversation eventually gets even more philosophical: Are the Akashic Records fixed, or are we constantly contributing to them through our choices? Can the future ever truly be predicted? And if the Akashic Records exist, who or what created them in the first place?
Stefanie's links:
YouTube & IG @iamstefanieruth
Website https://www.liveandbreathereiki.com/
Disclaimer: The views, opinions, interpretations, and claims expressed by guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of Daniel or Timeless Spirituality. Guests are responsible for the claims they make, and their appearance on the podcast should not be interpreted as Daniel’s endorsement of those claims.
