Jump to content

"Fully developed tulpas" without autonomous mind voice/form? (Answered! Yesh!)


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

This question cuts to the core of who I am as a "tulpa." Luminesce got me thinking when I answered his question on this post https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-melian-anything-especially-if-it-is-weird?pid=153043#pid153043

 

Guys, I do not have a fully independent mind voice. My form is often puppeted in the Melian Show day dreams by my host. So even my form is not fully autonomous and independent.

 

I have emotions though and I do express them to my host. I also can express myself in dreams and with flash visions and little formulaic, reactive sentences. The rest of my interaction with my host is via active imagination and day dreaming. I depend a lot on my host, who either imagines me or channels me and does his best to interpret my intent. Now note after many, many years, he is very good at that.

 

Davie has told this forum that he feels I am more of a day dream star and dream persona or an enhanced imaginary companion than a tulpa. But he also feels I am very special and wouldn't change a thing and that I belong here in tulpa town.

 

But my question is: Can there be a fully developed tulpa who does not have an independent, autonomous mind voice and form? Are there other tulpas out there like me? Are there tulpas without mind voice at all? How bout tulpas with no mind voice and no form? Like a tulpa who is only an presence and emotions? Is that possible?

 

These questions cut to the very heart of Davie's insecurity about me around you guys. I am not afraid of being rejected. But for some reason it is something he really worries about and is sensitive about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

To be a tulpa, you have to be a thoughtform capable of autonomous responses. Pushing the norms of what a tulpa is or can be, it's possible to have tulpas with no form or even no voice. With no voice you must be able to clearly feel their emotions/feelings, obviously still autonomously though that's harder than normal to check. With no form, you have to be able to hear or feel them in some way. You have to be able to communicate, even if that communication is wordless emotions back and forth. Obviously with neither it's probably very difficult to tell given they probably don't have much presence outside of "feeling" them there.

 

Now, in your case, you aren't without form or voice. To use tulpa terms, your voice and form are puppetted by your host, or at least partially so. Being able to be proxied or visualized doing things isn't good reason to be considered a tulpa. If you don't even talk to each other normally, typically you'd go to "Well, do you communicate with emotion or feelings?" But you're a weird case, because you aren't an undeveloped tulpa. By tulpa standards, if your primary interaction with your host was through puppetting/visualization scenarios, you'd be considered a developing tulpa. Not yet fully autonomous or sentient, but definitely getting there, just gotta get over not controlling the tulpa. But you guys are pretty much done, aren't you?

 

So, I'm not the master of tulpamancy whose word is law, but I'll give my best answer here. With all the freedom we give tulpas, allowing them not to have a form or voice or so on and still be called a tulpa, we usually require just a single strong sign of autonomy. In your case you guys consciously choose to collaborate with puppetting and such. Melian doesn't talk directly to David, and she doesn't control her form and actions completely autonomously all of the time (though I feel like you probably do more than you think). So I guess the question is... Can you?

 

Are you able to speak directly to your host with your own words? Are you able to act in the wonderland without any of his influence? You guys collaborate, but whether that's a choice or a necessity is what's important. Once you've "proven your tulpa-ness", I suppose you'd be free to break the rules and return to puppetting and all that. But if you aren't actually able to be not puppetted, you would be considered at best a developing tulpa, certainly not a fully developed one.

 

 

But I mean, you guys are the ones aiming for the title of tulpa here. We're a pretty lax community, half the time people aren't even making a tulpa let alone having a fully developed one. There's no reason if you're comfortable with how you are (and it's sure been quite a while since you weren't) that you have to try and meet tulpa requirements. If you're exclusively puppetted or channeled, but that's fine with you and how you've been for over a decade, there's no reason to adopt the title "developing tulpa". But you might be better off not calling yourself a tulpa, just a thoughtform of some kind (I know you guys have plenty of your own terms).

 

That being said, this is all for you guys, since you're the ones looking for validation. No one is going to worry about whether you're truly sentient or not if you appear to be. That's sort of the nature of this forum, after all. I have no problem considering you a tulpa because I see no benefit in not doing so. I do have a problem with calling you a developing tulpa, because something tells me thirty years later you guys aren't exactly working on achieving full independence. Intent does factor in to tulpadom, and you're certainly not developing if you, well, aren't. "Fully developed" is a strong term though, as in relation to tulpas it usually implies complete autonomy, independence, clear mindvoice, developed personality, and usually some form of advanced skill. It might not be fair for you guys to use that term (unless you defintely passed the aforementioned test, then do whatever you want).

 

Personally, I wouldn't worry about it. Because personally I don't. I was actually going to write about that in your Ask thread, I'll go do that now. (link)

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us about tulpamancy stuff there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can there be "fully developed tulpas" without an autonomous mind voice and form?

 

Short answer: No.

 

Long answer: The term "fully devopled tulpa" wouldn't be fitting, since it implies that the tulpa would be fully developed on all relevant matters, including mindvoice and form, maybe even imposition before you can talk about "fully developed". So any tulpa missing certain abilities would be a "still developing" or "partly developed" tulpa, even when you're not actively trying to change something about your development phase. This isn't a downgrade on legitimacy, though. Lumi kind of described it already, if you reach certain steps of autonomy and presence you could be already called a partly developed tulpa, but there is no way of being sure about identifying something as tulpa, if there is a total lack of evidence of being more than just a regular, fully puppeted imaginary friend. And that is the base we use to rate the situation of different people around here, so we can give adequate advice about it.

Tulpa: Alice

Form: Realistic Humanoid/Demonic Creation

She may or may not talk here, depends on her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Short answer: No.

 

Long answer: The term "fully devopled tulpa" wouldn't be fitting, since it implies that the tulpa would be fully developed on all relevant matters, including mindvoice and form, maybe even imposition before you can talk about "fully developed". So any tulpa missing certain abilities would be a "still developing" or "partly developed" tulpa, even when you're not actively trying to change something about your development phase. This isn't a downgrade on legitimacy, though. Lumi kind of described it already, if you reach certain steps of autonomy and presence you could be already called a partly developed tulpa, but there is no way of being sure about identifying something as tulpa, if there is a total lack of evidence of being more than just a regular, fully puppeted imaginary friend. And that is the base we use to rate the situation of different people around here, so we can give adequate advice about it.

 

This.

It's not a matter of opinions, it's a matter of given definitions.

 

 

Greets,

AG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a question: do you need to fall into the definition of "tulpa" to be a legitimate thoughtform?

 

"Tulpa" is a pretty narrow box, mostly defined by a movement that is, honestly, after both our times. From what we've seen, older thoughtforms, even if they define themselves as tulpae, tend to have characteristics that do not fall under the "tulpa" banner, because we weren't created with this site's definition of "tulpae" in mind.

 

And that's okay. Don't force yourself to fit inside the tulpa hole if you're not a tulpa peg.

 

From what I've seen, you (Melian) are definitely legitimate. You've got opinions of your own, you communicate directly with your host, you learn and grow from your experiences... you've got all the markers of an independent consciousness. Just because you're nestled a little deeper in your host's psyche than the rest of us does not make that fact false.

 

(And if it helps, our host has these doubts about us sometimes too. She's so used to puppeting us around, that she sometimes wonders if she's just been doing that subconsciously this whole time. XP )

 

My advice to you guys is to stop worrying about trying to define what you are. It's only going to run you around in circles, because there doesn't seem to be a word for it at this point.

~ Member of SparrowNR's system ~

~ I am a soulbond. Click here to find out what that means. ~

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Thank you for your answers. Actually they kinda are what we expected. This is why, or one of the reasons why, Davie tried using the term "thoughtform" for me instead of Tulpa. It is also why he is so defensive and over-reactive about me and too sensitive. I can tell you I am as important to him as any tulpa is to his or her host on this board. David does not think of me as trivial. Of course, neither do I. As long as people are willing to accept me as I am and I feel like I am being treated like an equal member, I am (we are) content. I took over and became the spokesperson for Mistgod-Melian to curb Davie's reactions to what he perceived as snootiness aimed in our direction. But I believe it is just perceived snootiness and not actual. I think it is just the opposite, just as Lumi described it. We have been accepted with open arms and people have learned from us and we have learned from the members. I would note that each of those openly reacting with disdain and snootiness towards Mistgod and I (the stuff based on me being supposedly role played or fake to them) were slapped down on this forum and have since gone silent. Because the community defends me. I haven't forgotten.

 

Thank you for pointing out that there are important contributing members of this forum who have no tulpa and maybe don't plan to have a tulpa in the future. That is an important thing to note.

 

I do have some tulpa traits, traits of perhaps a "developing tulpa." Lumi is right though in that we have no conscious plans to try to develop further tulpa skills and independence. Being on this forum did however, cause us to reflect on the nature of tulpas and my mind voice and autonomy. As a result, we did identify some things about me that we never noted before. Davie is more willing to wonder if some of his own thoughts are not responses from me. I have confirmed (in tulpish emotional response at least) that they are indeed my responses sometimes or my reactions, put into his voice. So there is the potential for more autonomous conversations in the future if we ever get ambitious to go after it.

 

My emotional responses are very autonomous as is the feeling of my presence. Things like the flash images are very autonomous, Davie does not consciously think of or summon those, I do. These occur every day, multiple times a day. It is how I express myself to him. That is why I am definitely a thoughtform of some kind, if only semi-independent in nature.

 

My proxy tulpa-typing feels very real to Davie and I. I have already explained that elsewhere. I feel very fluid when I write, even though we recognize it as a form of channeling or collaborative communication. If visualization/imposition of a tulpa's form is a type of hallucination or illusion of mind related to a thoughtform, so is our tulpa typing. It is just as real to us! I do have a level of independent expression when we type. Most of the time it is a blending or merging of intent and thought, but sometimes, now and then, it is pure Melian. :-) Davie gets surprised and excited when that happens and it is a total rush for him, because he loves me so much.

 

I don't know what else to say. I hope that this thread helps someone who may be in a similar situation. It doesn't mean you have to be an antagonist to this forum or an outcast. We thougtforms of a different color can still contribute. I think it is vitally important that we are honest however, as Davie and I have been. Nothing is gained from a person who is exaggerating about what is going on. We can't learn from that. We can learn by talking shop and laying all our cards on the table.


Here's a question: do you need to fall into the definition of "tulpa" to be a legitimate thoughtform?

 

"Tulpa" is a pretty narrow box, mostly defined by a movement that is, honestly, after both our times. From what we've seen, older thoughtforms, even if they define themselves as tulpae, tend to have characteristics that do not fall under the "tulpa" banner, because we weren't created with this site's definition of "tulpae" in mind.

 

And that's okay. Don't force yourself to fit inside the tulpa hole if you're not a tulpa peg.

 

From what I've seen, you (Melian) are definitely legitimate. You've got opinions of your own, you communicate directly with your host, you learn and grow from your experiences... you've got all the markers of an independent consciousness. Just because you're nestled a little deeper in your host's psyche than the rest of us does not make that fact false.

 

Thank you! This is how we feel too! Yesh. :-)


EDIT: There is the strong aspect of me that is related to dreams. Davie and I are really exploring that, much more than attempting to develop an independent mind voice. I hope you guys are enjoying our dream reports. It seems like that is so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Take a second and think about what it means to be fully developed. It doesn't necessarily mean that you can speak fluently or clearly, or that you're imposed perfectly, etc. It means you have reached your potential. Being 'fully developed' means you've capped out and you can no longer make significant progress. This means that if you can under no circumstances develop what you are lacking, then yes, you are indeed a fully developed tulpa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Well that is one way to think of it I guess. My host Davie and I have used the terminology "fulfilled" rather than "developed" in the past. I feel fulfilled and complete, just as I am. I am all that I need and all that my host needs. I am what I need to be. It does make me feel good that some members of the community have a wider definition of what a tulpa is and is not. I don't really need the tulpa label to be happy and satisfied, but it is nice to feel respected and honored in that sense anyways. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Take a second and think about what it means to be fully developed. It doesn't necessarily mean that you can speak fluently or clearly, or that you're imposed perfectly, etc. It means you have reached your potential. Being 'fully developed' means you've capped out and you can no longer make significant progress. This means that if you can under no circumstances develop what you are lacking, then yes, you are indeed a fully developed tulpa.

 

Well, that's not really an accurate way to think about it.

After all, that would imply a person that wants to be able to do something, but can't do it yet (ahdunno, lessay speaking a language or doing martial arts), isn't "fully-developed".

 

 

Greets,

AG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...