Author Topic: Are we thought forms?  (Read 362 times)

Offline T.M.

  • ****
  • Posts: 457
Hi All,

I was listening to one of my YouTube shows yesterday. The host brought up what I think is a very interesting idea(s), that also ties in very much with Seth.

He was reading from a book by Charles Leadbetter and Annie Beasant of the Theosophical society about Thought Forms.
Free copy here.   https://www.anandgholap.net

The host went on to say we humans are Thought Forms. I haven't read the book so am not sure if that is the conclusion or not of the authors.

Since listening, I've found this a very interesting and freeing idea. For starters.  You can't kill an idea. So if we are in essence thought forms, then it's a pretty sure bet we are indeed eternal.

I got to thinking, if we are Thought forms, how could a teacher communicate that idea to other thought forms that are in an illusionary experience? That also are pretty sure they are solid physical bodies in a world of solid physical objects. Of course it would probably help to be able to define what a thought form is. I think the host goes into a pretty good exploration of that. There were times he could just as well as been talking about various aspects of the Seth material as well, imho. Not saying I completely agree with the host, just that I've found this to be an interesting concept.

The show is about an hour long. He's going to do follow ups on Wednesday and Thursday too.
Fast forward to 6:30 for discussion.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=VqqGYpffx7c&t=55s

ETA: Non Covid thread.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2021, 04:09:49 PM by T.M. »
Like Like x 2 View List

Offline Sena

  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Quote from: T.M.
Of course it would probably help to be able to define what a thought form is. I think the host goes into a pretty good exploration of that. There were times he could just as well as been talking about various aspects of the Seth material as well, imho.
T.M., it is interesting to compare the Seth teachings with those of Leadbetter and Bessant. I did not watch the video, but had a quick look through the book. It seems to me that the idea that we are thought-forms corresponds closely with Seth's idea that our physical bodies are "camouflage" physical bodies inhabiting a camouflage universe:

"Even for example, levitation is involved with camouflage to a large degree, in that the camouflage physical body itself rises, but we are still here using the camouflage physical form. Traveling without the camouflage physical form is a giant step, of course, but a possible one according to your development." (from "The Early Sessions: Book 2 of The Seth Material" by Jane Roberts, Robert Butts)

https://amzn.eu/hiucbTH

The "secondary personalities" Seth speaks of are very clearly thought-forms:

"Although you have chosen to form a particular group of qualities into a field pattern of a particular personality, upon which you focus the bulk of your energy, there are also other more shadowy, less well-constructed possibilities of personality selves that exist loosely within the psychic framework of the dominant personality, and these also have their influence. They also attempt physical constructions to a limited degree, and with limited success. I suggest your break. These secondary personalities, known to psychologists, have a much more important place within reality than is suspected. No psychic action is invalid. Every psychic action exists, has an effect and has durability in terms of value fulfillment. Every psychic action, and a psychic action is any psychic happening such as a dream, or thought, that may have no existence in terms of space and time, every psychic action then contains within it the potentialities of value fulfillment, transference, and even energy transformation. Secondary personalities are gestalts of more or less loosely affiliated psychic events. Unable to find value fulfillment in terms of physical growth and construction as the primary personality can, they seek fulfillment along more accessible lines." (from "The Early Sessions: Book 2 of The Seth Material" by Jane Roberts, Robert Butts)
« Last Edit: February 03, 2021, 03:56:29 AM by Sena »
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline T.M.

  • ****
  • Posts: 457
Hi All,

Hi Sena,

I'm wondering if there's much that can be learned by studying some of the Theosophical authors alongside with Seth. Years ago I read much more of these authors than I do now. I gave up after awhile because they have a habit of somewhat veiling their concepts. A person needs to learn to either look at the material a certain way, or ask the right questions to get to the concepts they veiled.

I tried reading the book and ran into the same walls I did way back in the day. For me, I'm happy the host of the show is presenting the material in a way I get easily. Plus, he studies other subjects I also study, and makes connections through the different subjects.

I do find the color chart in the book interesting and am going to start working with that. Combine the colors with various shapes in meditation. I think I will also start looking at authors, writings, books about thought forms and the 4th dimension. Actually that's kind of an old rabbit hole for me.  Around 2010 I was looking into those concepts quite a bit. I think the better work came mostly out of the Theosophical society authors as well, or those somewhat associated with the organization. There were some very talented, intelligent, and intuitive people that all showed up back in those times. I think they literally set the stage for and made possible the appearance of a Seth type being, and possible acceptance of automatic writing.

I've been pondering the idea of being essentially a thought form and, I get much more easily how a thought form could straddle time and inhabit physical bodies, or multiple bodies; than I can get how multiple physical bodies, in various times, can somehow share a fundamental connection with each other.

I was thinking too, how many problems can something fundamentally invisible really have  :o  ;D

Somehow, I'm finding it a very freeing concept. I get much easier how I'm not my thoughts, feelings, emotions, or body. I have and can use those, am not primarily them, though

Offline Sena

  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Quote from: T.M.
I've been pondering the idea of being essentially a thought form and, I get much more easily how a thought form could straddle time and inhabit physical bodies, or multiple bodies; than I can get how multiple physical bodies, in various times, can somehow share a fundamental connection with each other.

I was thinking too, how many problems can something fundamentally invisible really have   

Somehow, I'm finding it a very freeing concept. I get much easier how I'm not my thoughts, feelings, emotions, or body. I have and can use those, am not primarily them, though
T.M., I agree that it is interesting to think of myself as a thought-form. It should help to overcome the fear of disease and death.
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline leidl

  • ***
  • Posts: 97
Hello T.M., Sena, and all,

Quote from: Sena
You can't kill an idea. So if we are in essence thought forms, then it's a pretty sure bet we are indeed eternal.

This is an appealing thought T.M.  When I was young I was attracted to the libertarian ideas of Ayn Rand.  At some point I moved on, but her ideas continued.  Even if every last person on the planet stopped holding her views, her ideas wouldn't simply cease to exist, so in that sense I agree with you.   But....if someone managed to destroy all references to her, and then in a generation or a hundred generations more she was forgotten completely, so that no person ever again thought of her and her ideas, would her ideas cease to exist?  We can't kill her ideas, maybe, we can't shoot them dead, but I feel like they will cease to exist over time if we lose all awareness of them?  Surely this has been the fate of many ideas *over time*.  And species, artifacts, etc.

But time is an illusion we experience in this limited reality. 

I came across an analogy the other day that works pretty well to explain the persistence of the self over time, at least for me...but I'm a sucker for gardening analogies. :D  I wish I could remember where I read this, so that I could give credit where it is due.  We are like plants that cannot see our roots.  We are rooted in another reality, outside time, which is hidden from our view.   We identify with our green leafy foliage, and are terrified of the killing frost.  We have lost awareness of the subtle stirrings of life, our deeper selves, that exist beneath the soil outside our view.  Then, inevitably, the killing frost comes.  The green leafy parts turn to mush, and we realize...hey, we still exist!  We were just confused, identifying with a fragmentary, temporal part of the whole timeless self. 

Luckily we have these Speakers showing up now and then in this dream of time, reminding us that we are more than the body we're looking at.  If we quiet our minds and pay close attention, we can feel our roots, which exist outside time.  We just have to stop obsessing over our showy bits.  :)

I totally accept your view that we are thought-forms, by the way; but I feel like that alone doesn't guarantee our continuity.  We have to couple it with the idea that time is an illusion, and all reality exists in the spacious present, even if we can't see it, no?  Always happy to hear other views.

Like Like x 2 View List

Offline Sena

  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Quote from: T.M.
Since listening, I've found this a very interesting and freeing idea. For starters.  You can't kill an idea. So if we are in essence thought forms, then it's a pretty sure bet we are indeed eternal.
leidl/T.M.,
That quote is from T.M.

If we agree that the soul or entity is a thought-form then, according to Seth, the soul or entity is eternal but not unchanging:

"First of all, a soul is not something that you have. It is what you are. I usually use the term “entity” in preference to the term “soul,” simply because those particular misconceptions are not so connected with the word “entity,” and its connotations are less religious in an organizational sense. The trouble is that you frequently consider the soul or entity as a finished, static “thing” that belongs to you but is not you. The soul or entity — in other words, your most intimate powerful inner identity — is and must be forever changing. It is not, therefore, something like a cherished heirloom. It is alive, responsive, curious. It forms the flesh and the world that you know, and it is in a state of becoming....... I hope in this book not only to assure you of the eternal validity of your soul or entity, but to help you sense its vital reality within yourself. First of all, however, you must have some idea of your own psychological and psychic structure. When you understand to some extent who and what you are, then I can explain more clearly who and what I am. I hope to acquaint you with those deeply creative aspects of your own being, so that you can use these to extend and expand your entire experience." (from "Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts, Session 526)

https://amzn.eu/e78cWf1

A related question is, does the brain "produce" the mind? It probably does not. Donald D. Hoffman, professor of cognitive sciences at the University of California, Irvine, has written an article on this. This article is summarized by Neville Hodgkinson: "Good News: You Are Not Your Brain!" (attached pdf). A quote from Hodgkinson's article:

"The theory offers a possible solution to why the mind-body problem has been such a
persistent puzzle. We may have confused cause – our consciousness– with effect – our
relationship with the material ‘icons’ surrounding us, including the body. It is as though we
have been playing a giant game of virtual tennis, for example, and forgot that neither the
players nor the ball are literal representations of reality, but an interface with the computer
that holds the rules of the game.
Similarly, ‘brains do not cause consciousness; consciousness creates brains as dramatically
simplified icons for a realm far more complex, a realm of interacting conscious agents.

This is a very counter-intuitive idea, given that human brains are considered to be the most
complex objects in the universe, but information technology has been showing us how to
store more and more information on less and less in material terms. Perhaps it is not
unimaginable that in the complete absence of matter, in a realm of Mind alone (or of a
substrate much more subtle than the material realm), vastly more information might be
available."

Hoffman's original article (34 pages, and I have not read it) is here:

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Conscious-Realism-and-the-Mind-Body-Problem-Hoffman/a99942e210221dfda38b9a8c52abbde91b5b4507
« Last Edit: February 05, 2021, 03:22:15 AM by Sena »
Like Like x 2 View List

Offline T.M.

  • ****
  • Posts: 457
Hi All,

Hi leidl,

I like your analogy  :)

There's a whole body of work concerning thought forms. I think most of it comes out of the Theosophical society authors. Thought forms have categories or classifications, and depending on that, potentially a shelf life. They do need to be fed with attention to survive. Also the 4th dimension where it's said thought forms primarily exist. I think it's also cognate with the astral plane. Thought forms imbued with a spark of source being considered eternal.

In a way that is where I get some of my ideas. Take religion for example. People focusing on the idea of a savior appearing over a long period of time. Seth says those kind of energies have to play themselves out. I sometimes wonder what that's going to look like, or how it's going to work itself out. That idea has to have a massive amount of power behind it. Considering how long so many massive amounts of people have and still are deeply focusing on it.

I didn't think of viewing ourselves, humans, as thought forms, till my YouTube channel brought the question up. I think it blends nicely with many of Seth's teachings. If Seth would have come right out and said that, I wonder if very many people would have taken him seriously, for any length of time.

It would be interesting to know more about the parameters of the existence of thought forms. How long they live, what dimensions they live in and such. I'm just guessing, I think they will be highly related to electricity. Humans being electromagnetic beings.

Hi Sena,

I keep an eye on scientific research. Seems to me, they always validate what Seth says :) Though I doubt the majority of the classical scientific community is even aware of Seth.

Like Like x 2 View List

Offline Sena

  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Quote from: T.M.
It would be interesting to know more about the parameters of the existence of thought forms. How long they live, what dimensions they live in and such. I'm just guessing, I think they will be highly related to electricity. Humans being electromagnetic beings.
T.M., we cannot assume that humans are the only thought-forms existing on Planet Earth.

https://vibeawake.com/metaphysics/gallery-of-thought-forms/
« Last Edit: February 06, 2021, 01:42:22 AM by Sena »

Offline T.M.

  • ****
  • Posts: 457
Hi All,

Hi Sena, I don't  see how my mentioning that humans are electromagnetic beings implies that I think humans are the only thought forms on planet earth or elsewhere  ???  :)
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline leidl

  • ***
  • Posts: 97
Hey T.M. and Sena,

Quote from: Sena
‘brains do not cause consciousness; consciousness creates brains as dramatically
simplified icons for a realm far more complex, a realm of interacting conscious agents.’

Hoffman is an interesting guy; I hope to make it through the paper you linked to Sena, but I haven't read it yet.  I've watched a few of his youtube videos in the last couple of years.  One of his main points is that we've got this idea that we've evolved to see the world as it is, because if we didn't see it as it is, we wouldn't survive long in it.  But quantum physics has shown us that there are no public objects out there that we're all looking at.  Those apparent objects are viewer-dependent.  Hoffman says it is more accurate to see ourselves as the product of an evolutionary process that hides from us all the things we DON'T need to know to survive, which is nearly all of reality.  Hoffman's idea that our bodies and brains are like icons that we mistake for reality, a reality which involves complex processes that occur outside our ability to perceive them, seems quite Sethian to me.

T.M., I looked at the wikipedia page for Besant and Leadbeater's book Thought-Forms, and I can see how you see Seth in it, especially in the first two kinds of thought forms they list.  The first type, thought forms which are in the form of the thinker, seem like Seth's counterparts.  The second type, thought-forms in the shape of objects, seem like the reality we create with our beliefs.
Here's Seth:

• "Every thought in one way or another is constructed by you in physical terms. You cannot escape the result of one thought. Every thought is an actuality. It affects every action and it forms your physical environment. As you sit listening to my voice, you are all subconsciously forming the physical environment of your classroom. You are forming the physical chairs. You are forming the blackboard. You are all forming reality, as you know it. [...]"

• "[...] For these are your own constructions, formed in faithful replica to your own thoughts. [...] Using these you form a physical environment that is cohesive enough so that you can all agree with what you see and feel and smell and touch."

—TES7 Part One Of Seth’s Lecture To Pat’s Boston High School Class March 25, 1967  (Yes, apparently Seth gave a lecture to a high school class?  :o)

But the Theosophists third type of thought-form is, well, just odd!  They are creations we throw off through our emotions, and apparently very specific emotions, such as "greed for drink", send out thought-forms that are consistent from person to person, and can be seen by a clairvoyant.  The thought form for "greed for drink" looks a lot like a claw. 

When I said that I think we are thought-forms, I must mean something different than the Theosophists do.  I may throw off thought forms from my body that look like a ghostly version of me and may appear to other people, as the Theosophists described.  (the first type.)  I think Seth describes something like this when discussing weak counterparts.  But what I mean when I say we are thought-forms is that our fundamental nature is consciousness, rather than matter.  We are thought forms that throw off thought forms, and thought forms (and all reality!) are processes in consciousness. What we see when we look at each other is the image of a complex process in consciousness; the "icon" Hoffman describes.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2021, 10:02:25 PM by leidl »
Like Like x 2 View List

Offline T.M.

  • ****
  • Posts: 457
Hi All,

Hi leidl,

I found some of the Theosophists pictures and conclusions as to what those pictures actually are somewhat questionable.  I like the basic color chart they have and want to try to incorporate  it in my visualizing.  I agree with you that our fundamental nature is consciousness. I was thinking that myself also,  we are thought forms that generate other thought forms  ;D
From that standpoint I can see how we aren't primarily our thoughts and emotions, or physical body

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/16269/16269-h/16269-h.htm
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline Sena

  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
It is interesting to compare Leadbeater/Bessant's thought-forms with Seth's consciousness units (CU)L

"Every thought gives rise to a set of correlated vibrations in the matter of this body, accompanied with a marvellous play of colour, like that in the spray of a waterfall as the sunlight strikes it, raised to the nth degree of colour and vivid delicacy. The body under this impulse throws off a vibrating portion of itself, shaped by the nature of the vibrations—as figures are made by sand on a disk vibrating to a musical note—and this gathers from the surrounding atmosphere matter like itself in fineness from the elemental essence of the mental world. We have then a thought-form pure and simple, and it is a living entity of intense activity animated by the one idea that generated it." (from "Thought-Forms" by C. W. (Charles Webster) Leadbeater, Annie Wood Besant)

https://amzn.eu/0lX6jyQ

"There are units of consciousness, then, as there are units of matter. I do not want you to think of these units as particles. There is a basic unit of consciousness that, expressed, will not be broken down, as once it was thought that an atom was the smallest unit and could not be broken down. The basic unit of consciousness obviously is not physical. It contains within itself innately infinite properties of expansion, development, and organization; yet within itself always maintains the kernel of its own individuality. Despite whatever organizations it becomes part of, or how it mixes with other such basic units, its own identity is not annihilated. It is aware energy, identified within itself as itself, not “personified” but awareized. It is therefore the source of all other kinds of consciousness, and the varieties of its activity are infinite. It combines with others of its kind, forming then units of consciousness — as, mentioned often, atoms and molecules combine. This basic unit is endowed with unpredictability. That very unpredictability allows for infinite patterns and fulfillments. The word “soul” unfortunately has been so used in regard to your species that it becomes highly difficult to unravel the conceptual difficulties. Using usual definitions, you would call a soul the result of a certain organization of such units, which you would then recognize as a “soul.”" (from "The “Unknown” Reality, Volume One (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts, Robert F. Butts)

https://amzn.eu/ftf8Y3g
« Last Edit: February 07, 2021, 09:47:06 AM by Sena »
Like Like x 2 View List

Offline Sena

  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Leadbeater/Bessant on how theosophy can help us overcome the fear of death:

"The comparison between the two illustrations shown in this plate is surely a very impressive testimony to the value of the knowledge given by the theosophical teaching. Undoubtedly this knowledge of the truth takes away all fear of death, and makes life easier to live because we understand its object and its end, and we realise that death is a perfectly natural incident in its course, a necessary step in our evolution. This ought to be universally known among Christian nations, but it is not, and therefore on this point, as on so many others, Theosophy has a gospel for the Western world. It has to announce that there is no gloomy impenetrable abyss beyond the grave, but instead of that a world of life and light which may be known to us as clearly and fully and accurately as this physical world in which we live now. We have created the gloom and the horror for ourselves, like children who frighten themselves with ghastly stories, and we have only to study the facts of the case, and all these artificial clouds will roll away at once." (from "Thought-Forms" by C. W. (Charles Webster) Leadbeater, Annie Wood Besant)

https://amzn.eu/a8g7iDT
Like Like x 2 View List

Offline Sena

  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
@T.M., I found a reference to thoughtforms in another book, “Bottoming Out the Universe: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing” by Richard Grossinger. Here is a quote:

“Humanity’s noblest endeavor—not its crossbows and siege towers—up to the scientific
revolution was to decipher thoughtforms and nature in tandem and make provisional holy books and
keys. Once technocracy took over, the thoughtforms were not so much banished as put under their
own lockdown thoughtform, which stripped them of rights, power, and their true nature. The result
has been an outburst of violence, cruelty, and madness, because you can’t hide a whole universe in
a porcelain pitcher or a safe-deposit box. Of course, these same crimes and deliria took place in
earlier times, but on a smaller scale and under different rubrics of society and selfhood.
Enormous thoughtforms are gathering now like thunderclouds across our planet, crying out
for recognition:
“We are creating this. Recognize us. Absolve us. Recognize yourselves.” As long as
we are mesmerized, we cannot act. We don’t realize that materiality with its wonders is both
inexhaustible and binding. Meanwhile the so-called “real” is burgeoning with crises of fixation,
from opiate addiction to hyperconsumption, from industrial pollution to nuclear proliferation to
mass shootings and executions, from human trafficking and sexual enslavement to savagery against
children and animals. These cannot be derailed by rules or good intentions or even remedial acts;
they can only be changed by the thoughtforms creating them.
The good news is, they are thoughtforms, so we can change them. If we change ourselves,
we change the universe. That’s a tall order, but it’s the only .


Grossinger follows this with a quote from "Adventures in Consciousness" by Jane Roberts (She quotes Seth Two):

“After Seth Two speaks, it takes me a few minutes to
come back, while with Seth the transition is almost instantaneous.
But this time I returned easily, as if down a chute of consciousness.
Class was obviously excited and impressed, but when the students
told me what Seth Two had said, I had mixed feelings. This is
the part of the message that bothered me :
“Certain translations are being made for you so that these
communications make sense. Our energy forms worlds. We help
you maintain your lives, as you help maintain other existences of
which you have no conscious knowledge. We watch you as you
watch others, yet so vast is the distance that communication is
difficult.
We do not watch as human forms. You perceive us that way
in distorted view. In your terms our forms would be geometrical.
We do not understand the nature of the reality you are creating,
even though the seeds were given to you by us.
We respect it and
revere it. Do not let the weak sounds of this voice confuse you.
The strength behind it would form the world as you know it and
sustain it for centuries.””
« Last Edit: March 02, 2021, 08:17:35 AM by Sena »
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline T.M.

  • ****
  • Posts: 457
Hi All,

Hi Sena,  that's very interesting, Thanks for posting it!

ETA: Richard appears to have some interesting interviews on YouTube I'm checking out tonight. Just put Richard Grossinger in the YT search bar and they will pop up
« Last Edit: March 02, 2021, 07:31:38 PM by T.M. »
Like Like x 1 View List

 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.
Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
Jane's last name (not case sensitive):
Rob's last name (not case sensitive):