“Hi all, I am writing a blog post about understanding entity attachments. As some of you in this group have experience with entities, is there anything you would be willing to share with me about your understanding of them? Most people don’t know about entities so my intention is to provide some information to lead people to a more informed perspective (especially issues like mental illness and difficulties in relationships with other people).
What are negative entities? Are negative entities the same as demons? What is it like having entity attachments?
Who is susceptible to demon possession?
When is mental illness actually demon or entity possession?
How do you know if you have entities? How does one acquire entities? How can one remove negative entities?
Do entities use cords with other people?
Anything you feel moved to share is appreciated. Thanks in advance,
Anna Medium responds:
“A demon is an entity being type just like an angel is an entity being type. So no, not all negative entities are demons, but demons are extremely common place, and nearly everybody has some. It is part of 3D as there are certain things we can experience as a result of having them attached to us that we couldn’t experience if we were only operating as our true self. I’m sure you are aware of some of that, but obviously for most people they do not understand the source of their problems, and assume it is just something unavoidable or natural.
I have never read a person that did not have an entity attachment. In fact I’ve never read anyone who didn’t have a whole lot of entity attachments. Then again, I’ve never met a human that was not experiencing the typical negative things we experience here. I’ve also never met a human being who has surpassed many of the limitations we experience here, or who isn’t succumbing to their physical ‘needs’ (myself included). Realizing those ‘needs’ aren’t coming from you and therefore aren’t natural is the first step, but even that is ridiculously uncommon to find in a person since entities never work alone. There will be several (or even more than that) which are causing a problem, and then there will be others that tell the person their problem is actually natural, and it’s part of life, something they should experience because entities want to hide themselves to keep themselves from being removed.
But the point is, that your soul wouldn’t be able to experience this type of negativity that we are able to experience here on Earth on its own. It would be so completely far from a vibrational match to it that there has to be something that counters that vibration outside of the soul in order for the soul to have those experiences.
That doesn’t mean we should just let ourselves succumb to those things, but it does mean that moving beyond those limitations, including the physical ones we experience means removing what isn’t ourselves and becoming only ourselves more and more while we are still in this physical form operating.
So, in answer, everyone is susceptible to demon possession, and it is beyond being susceptible, in fact most souls (at least coming here) will let themselves willingly attach to demons and other extremely negative energies in order to experience new types of negative experiences that they can then master and overcome. (in other words, we know what we are getting ourselves into) The problem is that typically a soul is so unused to this type of negativity, that it can be hard to remove the negativity. Ultimately however it is the soul’s journey to remove all of it, and ascend to a totally different kind of mastery. Most souls will choose an easier way to ascend, but there is a level of mastery they will not attain. We’re stepping into this vibration more and more where the energies are opening up to support this kind of complete ascension for more and more souls who wish to go that route (the hardest route, but the most rewarding route), overcoming physical limitations rather than just mental and emotional ones.
So to me it isn’t about knowing whether or not you have them, you have them, it is about being willing to admit that you have them. And if you will admit it it opens up a huge vast potential to experience any form of limitlessness beyond your current programmings even on this Earth plane.
Mental illnesses come from entities 100% of the time. But some souls are contracting to have those entities for their lifetime because it is by having them that they are able to have the experience of having a mental illness which they couldn’t experience otherwise.
Honestly, it really comes down to.. do you have any issue whatsoever? haha Then it is going back to either entities or thought forms. Which is actually a good thing, because you can remove it! Then you don’t experience the problem anymore. When we equate it to ourselves, and don’t realize it is something separate from us that is attached to us then that is the real issue because then you just believe its your issue that you have to just succumb to or struggle with all the time, or get better at but very slowly over your whole lifetime as in so many cases. People are so scared of thinking they might have an entity, but by not accepting that they associate whatever problems the entity gives them with their own self, and they are owning the problems and can’t get rid of them. So it isn’t scary for people to admit they have entity attachments! It is only scary to not admit it, because you will face that shit your whole life and not have a cure or answer for it when you could have just removed the parasite the whole time.
As far as how to remove them, and how people get them.. there are an infinite amount of ways to both receive them and remove them. But the main thing in removing them is to step into your own vibration, your own self more and more, to recognize who you are, to ask your guides to clear you, to ask your guides to show you what you are aligning with that isn’t you, to really want to remove what isn’t you, and to not accept limitations as yourself or identify with the things that are limiting you.”
“A question that is on my mind a lot is whether there is a real distinction between entities based on whether or not they have a soul. It seems to me that reptilians have souls, and so do angels, but I have heard demons referred to as soulless by at least two sources. And thought forms seem too simple to have souls, especially since they can’t survive without feeding on something—it seems like having a soul means having a connection to source, which means you have an energy supply that is “just for you” and keeps you alive permanently as a conscious being. Anna or anyone else, do you have any ideas about what I’m talking about here?”
“A thought form is a baby soul that is slowly developing. It can sustain itself, the real problem is that it isn’t aware of itself enough to realize that it can, and the person who created it is giving it its sense of identity by first programming it as it’s created and then agreeing with what it sends which will be based off the way the person unknowingly programmed them.
A demon also has a soul, however they have no conscience. They are there to reflect a disconnection. They are disconnected from their soul and don’t consciously feel any positivity.”
Ok very interesting. Actually I had a feeling you would answer that way (after all I’ve read a lot of the channeled material you’ve made public). And when I thought that, some ideas popped into my head. So: more questions. Please feel free to correct me where I get concepts or terminology wrong.
1. a thought-form or entity that develops a sense of self is called an identity?
2. is this kind of soul origin (thought-form/entity —> identity?) related to or analogous to animals evolving soul-wise to become able to incarnate as humans? I ask this because it is said that animals remain part of a collective consciousness (as in the Great Bear spirit or the Great Eagle spirit as per Native American beliefs) until they develop a sense of self or individual identity, at which point they individuate from the collective and begin incarnations as an independent individual soul. This seems to say that when a (lower) animal dies, its soul does not sustain itself as an individual but returns to become part of its collective. However if an animal (generally a higher more intelligent animal like dogs, cats, birds such as birds of prey, bears, primates etc) learns how to conceive of itself as an individual, then its soul can survive its death without returning to and dissolving into the collective.
3. If this analogy is accurate, I.e. if there are some general principles at work both with animal-to-human and entity-to-identity soul evolution, then that suggests some interesting possibilities about thought-forms/entities. Do they belong to different collectives with distinct qualities? Like say good habit thought-forms versus neurosis thought-forms (just throwing out those as examples to explain the idea). And when a thought-form/entity “dies”, does it return to and re-merge into its collective?
4. You told me a while back about a solar plexus activation you did for someone in which the energy of the chakra itself presented itself to you as a kind of animal. This is interesting for many reasons but in this context it’s interesting because solar plexus is all about self-identify, and it seems that self-identity is first realized during an incarnation as a certain kind of higher animal. So maybe that’s what you were reading in that person’s solar plexus, it could have been the animal type they evolved from as a new human-level soul. But if a soul can also evolve via the entity—>identity pathway then maybe you would be able to read that as well in a person’s solar plexus. It would add a level of detail to “soul origin” reading type of information, not only where the person evolved and what “human type” they first had, but also what “animal type” they evolved from, which could maybe also be a thought-form/entity type.
Anyway I’m brainstorming, interested to hear your feedback!
Okay lol.. here we go..
1)Actually, the 3 stages of thought forms are not in any way referring to the thought form’s ability to comprehend itself, it is only having to do with the person’s agreement with it. The first stage belief, the second pattern, and the third identity. At first a person believes in something or in a behaviour, but then it becomes a pattern for them, and thirdly they identify with it to the point that they believe they are agreeing with themselves, it is them. As far as the thought form goes though, one thing it normally can indicate is the size of the thought form, and yes in many cases also how developed it is, but that isn’t always the case, you can usually assume that but only because the more you have agreed with something the more energy you have given it to allow it to grow and become more concrete (conscious).
2)No, they don’t consider that a soul origin. A soul decides its own origin in a sense based off resonation, and usually that happens within the first few incarnations a soul has. But a thought form cannot incarnate until it evolves enough to break away from the person who created it. That is the only difference between an Identity level thought form (stage 3) and an entity, the entity can sustain itself alone without help. An entity can also choose to incarnate somewhere else which a thought form is not evolved enough to do, but can end up doing so if it chooses to evolve more, and if the person chooses to keep agreeing with it. Also, the council doesn’t agree with the teaching of animals not being individual souls having their own unique incarnations. They have less responsibility, so they are younger souls, but they are just as individual as any other being is. They also believe this of insects, microscopic beings, and plant life. The less choices you are able to make, and the less impact you can have on those around you, and the planet itself, the younger of a soul you are, but if you are incarnating into a single form it is because you are a single soul. So that is what they believe and teach, a single soul for a single body.
3) Some of this was already answered but, a thought form is also an individual consciousness on its own, and doesn’t belong to a collective. However, because of how underdeveloped it is if it doesn’t receive enough energy coming towards it by the person who is sustaining it it will evaporate (if you will lol) back into pure energy. Then it will be available to be used by somebody else to create something new entirely.
4) This is a totally different thing. They call that the chakra’s ‘essence’ and its something I only came across about a year ago or maybe even a bit more recently because of continued clearings I’ve done. The further you go with an activation, eventually you reach a full activation which is basically when the chakra itself turns on. So it is also like the consciousness of that chakra, and they always seem to take on an animal form, almost like a power animal in the person, but it doesn’t have to have anything to do with any other lifetime or previous association. It is actually a part of the person’s consciousness. Like you have your higher self, and various levels of yourself, so it is like a part of your own subconscious which operates the chakra and sends its energies up and down through your chakra system. Kind of like in Harry Potter with the patronus charm, the animal that comes out seems to be out of their own consciousness even though it also seems to act separately on its own.
Ok here are more questions! Hope you don’t mind, actually I think this has already been a very informative “interview”, thanks so much for the information.
On the same numbered points as above (feel free to correct my statements):
1) That’s a nice subtle distinction, that the thought-form/entity/identity classification is about the degree of attachment of the person to the entity and not necessarily about the entity itself, although the degree of attachment can go hand in hand with the degree of development of the entity due to the greater attachment feeding the entity more. I think you are saying there is also another distinction, between the size of an entity versus its degree of development? Can you say more about the difference between these? How is it that an entity can grow without becoming complex? Can an entity become complex without growing very much in terms of size?
2) Do I understand correctly that the distinction between an entity and an identity is that the identity has incarnated enough times to have resonated with some place, so that it takes on some character of that place as its “origin” or “identity”?
3) Ok so given what you said about all beings being individual souls, it seems like I made a false connection between the idea of a collective and the idea of an animal or thought-form not really having an individual soul. So let me revisit that idea and say that a collective must still consist of individual souls, even if they are operating very much in harmony with each other.
Now with that understanding, I’d like to try again to understand how to fit together plants and animals with thought-forms/entities. Do thought-forms/entities first start incarnating as bacteria or simple plants or animals, once they have gained the ability to do that?
And, do all souls start off as thought-forms created by humans or higher beings that have the ability to create thought-forms? Or are some souls starting off via another route, for instance it is said that Source is constantly creating angels, or say maybe fairies are creating plant and animal souls that we wouldn’t think of as having started as thought-forms, or nature elementals are creating new elemental beings in the form of crystals or other natural phenomena?
4) So about chakra essences, maybe I was misled by the coincidence that you were working on someone’s solar plexus when you saw a type of animal. So is that true of all chakras, would the essence of say my throat chakra or third eye also be represented by an animal? Or, basically I wonder if any other type of being could be chosen as representing a chakra?
Okay so.. lol 1) size really has to do with territory gained within a person, which often also means ways that its programming has overlapped into other areas. But this doesn’t always happen. So a thought form can end up greatly advancing by a person feeding it in just one area of their mind let’s say, and maybe the thought form hardly branches off, and so it remains small in terms of territory gained, however it gets enough energy with just that one issue that it still slowly advances, and becomes a small entity. It is mentally aware enough to sustain itself, however it continued on a single (or very few) branch of development, and so it doesn’t end up taking up a large amount of territory within the person’s mind, but it develops enough awareness to sustain itself without the person eventually (i.e. entity).
2) An event can create a thought form, but a thought form doesn’t identify with anything other than its programming. However, calling it an identity is still solely referring to the person, and the amount of energy the person is feeding it, or how much in other words the person identifies with it. So it really doesn’t have anything to do with the thought form. Some thought forms become entities extremely quickly, with one lifetime, others take several. Some entities choose to stay with the person regardless of becoming an entity and no longer ‘needing’ the person’s energy to sustain them because they are still growing by feeding off of their energy. Some choose to leave (although it is a lot more common for them to stay if they have a choice.) So you could think of an origin as the original programming in a sense, but they don’t have an origin really. They are a baby soul, not a soul developed enough to have a lifetime yet. But it is possible for them to develop to that point of awareness where they could have an actual lifetime, and then they could develop an origin such as we have. Typically they don’t get that far (because we, creating them, aren’t that conscious), but it is very possible.
3)A thought form (and there could be rare exceptions to this) would always start off as something like a bacteria or an atom, or something inside someone else’s organs or something like that. Maybe something inside the water for instance that you can see with a microscope. Or they may start off as an insect or they might go the plant route, and start off as vegetation.
We all started off as thought forms in a sense, however most of us were created by beings more far along in their own awareness than we typically experience here in our 3D Earth plane, so in that case there wouldn’t be a baby or undeveloped soul phase, they would just begin as a soul already capable of sustaining themselves, and typically they would start off as a positive being type of whatever kind they were created to be. Then they would go on their own route of evolution. So yes, a faerie could create an animal that would then begin its own evolution. This isn’t limited though. A very high being could create something like a deity or angel or ascended master right from the get go. Then this being would begin its evolutionary path from that vantage point. But a being that is malicious and yet aware enough to realize its ability to create could also create a demon that was fully functional at the start, etc.
4)Well, during your crown chakra activation which I’ll be uploading soon (along with all the others from our series of clearings) it fully activated, and the essence took the shape of a polar bear. So I have only experienced this with animal forms, and I feel that this particular part of ourselves expresses itself through that form-type.
This is very interesting. So what information do you think is contained in the animal form taken on by the chakra? Would it make sense for me to go look up polar bear as a spirit animal or animal totem, in order to understand something about my crown chakra?
It’s funny because I just recently randomly read someone saying that everyone has nine animal totems. So then the converse question would be, when someone tells me my spirit animal is xyz, are they maybe reading one of my chakras? The woman we have gone to for getting spirit animals says she sees an animal in the center of each persons chest. So is she just reading the heart chakra? I’m inclined to ask her if she’s tried reading other chakras, with your permission I will do that.
By all means lol, ask her. However, I will tell you that if the chakra essence isn’t activated she probably will not pick up on the essence. That doesn’t mean she won’t pick up on a totem animal that is perhaps aiding you in enhancing qualities of that specific chakra. But if the bear is sleeping, and unconscious of itself its not going to give off much energy if that makes sense. Of course, the bear in this case is activated lol, but I was just using that as an example. I really get a feeling though quite clearly as I’m reading your text and writing this response that she isn’t picking up on a chakra essence when she is getting an animal as she connects to the heart chakra. I feel this is another way she is tapping into energies either within the person that are then being represented (interpreted) as an animal, or that it is a power animal or animal guide enabling the person emotionally or maybe clearing the person emotionally. I really don’t think it’s the same thing. It is still a valid question to ask anyone lol, but you would probably get a contradictory animal or response, not for the reason of a wrong answer! But because it is something else entirely being received.
I’m not really sure about that specifically (looking up polar bear lol)… I’ll have to ask about it. But I will say that I picked up on a very strong protective energy, and felt that this chakra needed a type of strong protective energy for you!
This is truly fascinating information!!! It ties a lot of things together in a unified explanation. Totally awesome. Thanks very much. When we are done with this de facto interview (assuming you want to keep going lol), I think it makes sense to take all the questions and answers and put them into an interview format and publish it on our respective media pages. What do you think? I have read a lot of internet articles and I think all this information may be very unusual and a lot of people will find it really interesting and useful.
If we went digging into more in-depth spiritual authors and texts (more in-depth than the usual internet articles), say for instance people associated with the Theosophical Society, like Rudolf Steiner, Alice Bailey, Madam Blavatsky, or else say the Golden Dawn like Alistair Crowley etc, we might find related information. But then that would be a lot of a academic work, the language and old fashioned paradigm would probably be hard to understand and maybe not even totally relevant for us in our time, and then you have the issue of mixed information especially where people like Crowley are concerned (that poor fool is probably going to suffer in Hell for a million years, mainly due to lack of prudence and discernment.) So even if someone else has talked about these things, I think there could be great value in having your/The Council’s perspective out there now.
What do you think?