Thoughtforms

[Truth-Seeker]

I have found a concept I would like to discuss with some skeptics. I have no proof and want to state that upfront. It's all speculation.

It's a concept with potentially wide-reaching implications, and it has wide-reaching problems. Thinking outside the box is essential in order to concider it. I don't even really know what to call it...a concept? A theory?

Thoughtforms are artificial entities, created accidentally or intentionally by the mind. They can be created by groups or individuals.

Throughout history they have taken many forms, depending on the local folklore of the culture that creates them. For instance, some modern cultures accepts the possibility of UFO's, it's part of modern lore, we have common conceptions of the characteristics of UFO's, and so thoughtforms take the shape of UFO's.

Poltergeists are another example of modern thoughtforms.

Long ago they would take the form of fairies, gnomes, elves, or whatever else the local folklore dictates.

Then there are the kind that are created intentionally. I don't know how much anyone here knows about ancient esoterics, but I know quite a bit. Every system I know of has methods of summoning and/or creating entities. They seemed to think they were spirits/demons/elementals, but I believe they were thoughtforms, created by the highly disciplined mind of the ancient adept.

King Solomon, the father of ceremonial magic, was a powerful summoner. Summoning and binding entities to his service was his specialty. I think he was creating thoughtforms.

http://ghostspirit.tribe.net/thread/aa07cd24-4141-458e-8d0b-e05ec541d6f1

Socrates, evidently, had a thoughtform. A Daemon. It seems likely that Socrates was a trained adept of the Mysteries and knew methods of thoughtform construction similar to those of King Solomon.

Shamans create thoughtforms. Witches create thoughtforms, and bind them to animals as a "familiar". Thoughtforms can also be bound to objects, those are called talismans.

If thoughtforms aren't bound to anything, they are usually invisible. When visible, one of the most common appearances is as a ball of light.

Thoughtforms can also be bound to people. When done accidentally the result is something usually mistaken for "demonic possesion". When done intentionally, the result is a "medium" who can "channel" information from the thoughtform.

Precognition and telepathy could be defined as receiving information from a thoughtform or from some level of collective consciousness.

I don't mean this to be an attack on any paradigm or belief system so I hope no one takes this concept as an offense. I am merely a truth-seeker.

[Admin]

Hi, and welcome.


Thoughtforms are artificial entities, created accidentally or intentionally by the mind.

Artificial?

Do you mean like memes: ideas etc. that replicate from mind to mind; or some kind of external phenomenon like the hundreth monkey idea?

[Truth-Seeker]

Hi! Thanks for the welcome! :)

Not quite like memes. As I understand it, memes are transmitted linguistically? I'm not familiar with the hundredth monkey effect, I'll have to read up on it. Would the hundredth monkey effect explain mass hallucinations?

I'm thinking more along the lines that thoughtforms are a hallucination of a group consciousness. A group consciousness I think of as a consciousness field in which the hallucination manifests and can be percieved by members of that group.

[Cuddles]

The main problem I can see with your idea is that it assumes the existence of UFOs, ghosts, daemons, etc., but there is no evidence that suggests they are anything other than misinterpretations of completely ordinary occurences. There is no point trying to come up with an explanation for these things until we actually have some evidence that there is something to explain.

I think your idea is quite a good one that does away with the need for a completely different explanation for every different phenomenon, but as I said, it is an explanation for phenomena that probably aren't there.

[Jocky]

Hello and welcome, Truth Seeker. good name O0 Thanks for sharing your ideas.


I don't even really know what to call it...a concept? A theory?

I think the term 'concept' might be preferable - the word 'theory' carries a different meaning in the scientific community than is does in general parlance, so in the interests of avoiding misunderstanding it might be best avoided.

I am interested in the different approaches people take towards rationalising unexplained phenomena. As Cuddles says, just because an event is unexplained doesn't necessarily mean that it would be inexplicable, were more information available. however, that does not preclude discussing different approaches to the question and considering how such concepts might be explored and tested.

Can I ask a few questions about thoughtforms? You call them "artificial entities", but this term leaves me guessing about some specifics:

Do you consider them to be sentient?
When they are "invisible", are they equally undetectable by human senses other than sight?
When they manifest in a visible form (such as a "ball of light"), do they also become corporeal and/or audible?
Are their visible forms only perceptible by the human eye?
Do they continue to exist after the mind(s) which created them stop thinking about them?
Do they continue to exist after the people whose mind(s) created them have died?
Are they able to interact with human minds other than those which created them?
Are they capable of interacting with inanimate objects in any way?

I appreciate that you may not have all the answers. I am simply seeking to achieve a more complete understanding of your concept. Such an understanding is the first step towards devising a method of testing your concept experimentally.

[Truth-Seeker]

Do you consider them to be sentient?

Oh boy, thats a tough one. I'm leaning toward no. A thoughtform doesn't seem to have the autonomy to operate outside of its parameters, which we set for it. Like a computer program.

On the otherhand, it's made out of the stuff of consciousness itself. Tough call. Are they self-aware? I doubt it.

When they are "invisible", are they equally undetectable by human senses other than sight?

I have two life-experiences which point me toward the thoughtform concept. One was visible, the other invisible.

In the case of the invisible one (similar to standard poltergeist accounts) the method of detection was by it's effects on the environment and the effects on the emotions of those of us who were present.

The effects on the environment included standard things like temperature change, objects moving, lights/appliances flicking on and off, ect. An overwhelming feeling of presence, similar to the feeling of being stared at. Very "twilight-zone" -ish.

When they manifest in a visible form (such as a "ball of light"), do they also become corporeal and/or audible?

Yes, I believe so. The visible balls of light I and a friend saw made a sound similar to that of cutting through - displacing - the air around it. This suggests to me a corporeal component or a "mind-over-matter" component.

Are their visible forms only perceptible by the human eye?

I suspect they are equally, if not more, detectable by animals.

Do they continue to exist after the mind(s) which created them stop thinking about them?

Most people who favor a thoughtform concept of some kind feel that they dissipate gradually over time. I think a great deal depends on whether the thoughtform was created by an individual mind for a specific purpose or accidentaly created by the group consciousness of a culture or community. If created by a culture, they would last at least as long as the culture, I suspect. They would change as the culture changes, perhaps. UFO accounts have changed over the years as our cultural conceptions of them change.

Do they continue to exist after the people whose mind(s) created them have died?

In the case of Socrates, I would bet that his thoughtform dissipated at the moment of his death. His was a highly personal thoughtform.

Thanks for the thought provoking questions Jocky!

[Allo Allo]

Do you consider them to be sentient?




Just putting in my penny's worth here - I remember reading about Alice Bailey who set out to prove that "we" can make thoughtforms. She constructed in her imagination daily a thought form -an entity with a form she created in her imagination. It took a long time but eventually this form (evidently) manifested it'self. Over time she regretted the experiment for it became such a nuisance she had to "get rid of it".... Now I have been searching the internet but cannot find anything about this - yet I have read of her experiment. I shall go on searching... and come back here...

But the point is - if this thing became a nuisance (how I can't remember) it must eventually have had some sort of sentience do you think? Or would it have developed its own will rather than feeling?

I know this sounds a very dodgy story - and maybe it is - but I'm just letting you know someone tried to do this ON PURPOSE as an experiment.

Michelle :)

[Truth-Seeker]

Just putting in my penny's worth here - I remember reading about Alice Bailey who set out to prove that "we" can make thoughtforms. She constructed in her imagination daily a thought form -an entity with a form she created in her imagination. It took a long time but eventually this form (evidently) manifested it'self. Over time she regretted the experiment for it became such a nuisance she had to "get rid of it".... Now I have been searching the internet but cannot find anything about this - yet I have read of her experiment. I shall go on searching... and come back here...

But the point is - if this thing became a nuisance (how I can't remember) it must eventually have had some sort of sentience do you think? Or would it have developed its own will rather than feeling?

I know this sounds a very dodgy story - and maybe it is - but I'm just letting you know someone tried to do this ON PURPOSE as an experiment.

Michelle :)


During the course of my esoteric studies into the thoughtform concept I have come across the name of Alice Bailey. She was a member of the esoteric section of the Theosophical Society.

In ancient esoteric systems, mental discipline and virtue were HIGHLY stressed. Initiates would train for years to gain control over their minds and purge themselves of evil. They knew that stray thoughts, hidden desires, suppressed emotions, ect during the construction of thoughtforms can have unpredictable results.

I suspect that Alice Bailey didn't have the mental discipline to completely control the characteristics of the thoughtform.

Black magicians would take shortcuts around this by entering into "pacts" with thoughtforms. Offering the "demon" such things as their souls after death...or innocent blood.

[Allo Allo]

Mmmm - :( my brain doesn't think Esoteric!!! Got a block!

but check out this forum - http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/esoteric.html looks like an interesting forum don't you think?


Michelle :)

[chillzero]

During the course of my esoteric studies into the thoughtform concept I have come across the name of Alice Bailey. She was a member of the esoteric section of the Theosophical Society.

In ancient esoteric systems, mental discipline and virtue were HIGHLY stressed. Initiates would train for years to gain control over their minds and purge themselves of evil. They knew that stray thoughts, hidden desires, suppressed emotions, ect during the construction of thoughtforms can have unpredictable results.
...


Do you think that perhaps deliberately forcing your mind to work in unnatural ways - against natural reaction, instincts and free thought - would have a somewhat adverse affect on a person?

Do you think that this might explain what they then claim to have experienced?

[Truth-Seeker]

^Ancient systems of thought frequently focused on harmony and balance with nature...putting oneself in accord with nature, in a balanced and honorable fashion.

Not all mystical or religious systems of thought reguard nature as evil, mankind as fallen, and natural impulses and instincts as evil which must be suppressed.

[chillzero]

^Ancient systems of thought frequently focused on harmony and balance with nature...putting oneself in accord with nature, in a balanced and honorable fashion.

Not all mystical or religious systems of thought reguard nature as evil, mankind as fallen, and natural impulses and instincts as evil which must be suppressed.




Okay, but how does that answer the question I asked?

You said above that "In ancient esoteric systems, mental discipline and virtue were HIGHLY stressed. Initiates would train for years to gain control over their minds and purge themselves of evil. They knew that stray thoughts, hidden desires, suppressed emotions, ect during the construction of thoughtforms can have unpredictable results. "

So I was asking - do you think this 'purging', this ridding of stray thoughts, supressing of things the mind has to do naturally to function, is perhaps what leads to the conclusion that they have experienced what they describe?

I wasn't arguing that "all mystical or religious systems of thought reguard nature as evil, mankind as fallen, and natural impulses and instincts as evil which must be suppressed." but I was ersponding to your description of a system that does.

[Jocky]

Hi Truth Seeker,

Thanks for your answers to my questions. Lots of food for thought there! I have just one further question:

Are there any people now living who possess sufficient mastery of these "ancient esoteric systems" that they are capable of creating a thoughtform intentionally, and binding it to an object so that it manifests visibly?

[Truth-Seeker]

Okay, but how does that answer the question I asked?

You said above that "In ancient esoteric systems, mental discipline and virtue were HIGHLY stressed. Initiates would train for years to gain control over their minds and purge themselves of evil. They knew that stray thoughts, hidden desires, suppressed emotions, ect during the construction of thoughtforms can have unpredictable results. "

So I was asking - do you think this 'purging', this ridding of stray thoughts, supressing of things the mind has to do naturally to function, is perhaps what leads to the conclusion that they have experienced what they describe?

I wasn't arguing that "all mystical or religious systems of thought reguard nature as evil, mankind as fallen, and natural impulses and instincts as evil which must be suppressed." but I was ersponding to your description of a system that does.


Oh, ok sorry about the misunderstanding.

No, I certainly don't think that 'purging' the mind of stray thoughts during meditiation leads to the conclusion that they have experienced what they describe.

I don't think that meditation is supressing of things the mind has to do naturally to function.

[Truth-Seeker]

Hi Truth Seeker,

Thanks for your answers to my questions. Lots of food for thought there! I have just one further question:

Are there any people now living who possess sufficient mastery of these "ancient esoteric systems" that they are capable of creating a thoughtform intentionally, and binding it to an object so that it manifests visibly?


I suspect there are, but I know of none firsthand. I doubt there are many in the west. The eastern systems are more disciplined, and masters of an eastern way, I suspect, are much more powerful than their western counterparts.

[Jocky]

BTW, there are two other questions I asked earlier which you didn't answer. I don't mean to grill you, I'm just trying to be precise about what we are talking about.


Are they able to interact with human minds other than those which created them?
Are they capable of interacting with inanimate objects in any way?


Any thoughts on these?

[Truth-Seeker]

Are they able to interact with human minds other than those which created them?

I think it depends on the paradigm under which they are created, and the paradigm of those close enough to see.

Lets say you have 99 devout catholics and 1 atheist in a group. Lets say the catholics accidentaly create and see a thoughtform which takes on the characteristics of an angel. A shared vision. Would the atheist, who is convinced they are all crazy, see the angel? I don't know. Perhaps not. It would make an interesting study.

Are they capable of interacting with inanimate objects in any way?

Absolutely.

[Mojo]

Are they capable of interacting with inanimate objects in any way?

Absolutely.

How, exactly? Can you give some specific examples?

[Jocky]

You took the words right out of my mouth, Mojo ;)

Truth Seeker, what I'm thinking of here is some sort of interaction which could be detected by some kind of automatic apparatus, without human intervention or perception being involved.

[doubting thomas]

I wouldn't normally reply to a thread like this one but i put 'thoughtforms' into google and one item it came up with was:-

http://britishdowsers.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119&sid=be161de7e38d189a2a730357999cca75

This is on "The British Society of Dowsers" forum talking about thoughtforms, maybe it will be of interest. Or maybe its entirely different.

[Truth-Seeker]

You took the words right out of my mouth, Mojo ;)

Truth Seeker, what I'm thinking of here is some sort of interaction which could be detected by some kind of automatic apparatus, without human intervention or perception being involved.


Ah, I see.

I'm not sure what to say to that. I know of no such apparatus.

I have often thought that if mainstream science really wanted to, it could develop a way to detect, create, and manipulate thoughtforms.

[Truth-Seeker]

I wouldn't normally reply to a thread like this one but i put 'thoughtforms' into google and one item it came up with was:-

http://britishdowsers.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119&sid=be161de7e38d189a2a730357999cca75

This is on "The British Society of Dowsers" forum talking about thoughtforms, maybe it will be of interest. Or maybe its entirely different.


It is of interest, thank you doubting Thomas. It looks like the thread deals with the exact same concept.

[Mojo]

Ah, I see.

I'm not sure what to say to that. I know of no such apparatus.

I have often thought that if mainstream science really wanted to, it could develop a way to detect, create, and manipulate thoughtforms.



Can you give some specific examples of how thoughtforms interact with inanimate objects?

[Jocky]

Can you give some specific examples of how thoughtforms interact with inanimate objects?


Yes, a specific example would be enlightening.

BTW, when I used the word "apparatus" I was not necessarily thinking of any kind of frightfully clever scientifc machine - merely some mundane object set up in such a way that it could be monitored for some kind of interaction (for example, whether it had moved or not).

[Ginger Rogers]

Fascinating stuff.

I often wondered if ghosts were a thoughtform. I'm glad you put a name to that, but I used to wonder if 'ghosts' were some kind of ..... i dunno, 'form' that are created by a persons thoughts but can be shared by others.

i've never had any experiences of such though, but it's a very interesting concept indeed.

I think perhaps we can underestimate the power of the mind, or maybe we completely over-estimate it!