Are you attempting imposition? Have you achieved imposition? (2016 poll)

[Guest Anonymous]

This morning there was this great thread here about the process and techniques people have used to achieve imposition. https://community.tulpa.info/thread-imposition-how-did-you-learn-practice-imposition

 

I wanted to add this thread out there to go with it. As soon as I saw the "how did you achieve imposition?" question, my actual reaction was "there just can't be very many who have really achieved this at all." I am being honest, that was my thought. So I am curious to see how many people respond saying they have achieved imposition or are trying it.

 

Very recently I have been considering that a true tulpa would be fully imposed as in a full sensory hallucination. Anything less is something like an enhanced imaginary friend or even an alternate personality (or maybe an unfinished tulpa, which is not really a tulpa). I don't say that to make anyone upset. It is just Mistgod thinking again so ignore it if you don't like that statement. No need for angry rebuttals on that please. Alexandra David Neel and other authors describe tulpas as sensory hallucinations.

 

The reason why I have been thinking that is because I think the concept of "tulpa" has been gradually being watered down. The original concept was a projected hallucination, manifest thought that you can see, hear and feel in a seemingly tangible way.

 

So. Are you attempting imposition? Have you achieved imposition?

 

Question for comment responses (separate from the poll): Does a thoughtform need to be imposed to be a considered a tulpa?

[Luminesce]

You accidentally a word in the title.

 

We've done imposition before and had decent results, but it's not something we're super interested in so we haven't done it intensively since last year.

 

I don't consider it necessary at all to have a tulpa. I don't remember if the original tulpas required a projected appearance, but I don't think so? I thought said tulpas were thought to be communing with god(s) or some such, so that would be weird, but I dunno. Pretty sure it was a mental experience as if they had a physical appearance the illusion would be broken when others didn't notice them.

 

Our definition's changed, of course, so it doesn't really matter. Tulpas are tulpas whether or not they can switch, possess or impose. Those are just optional skills many attempt to develop. A tulpa at its core is the apparent autonomy of a separate person in your head. Anything else is auxiliary.

[Vos]

We've accomplished imposition, but we're of the opinion that you don't need to have all of that down to have a tulpa. Tulpas don't require a form, voice, etc. as far as I know, so I don't see why that would be the case.

[Guest Anonymous]

A tulpa doesn't require a form or a voice either? So a tulpa can be just emotional responses and a presence? If that is the case, Melian was a tulpa as far back as 1978.

[NoneFromHell]

"Mistgod Thinking" can kiss my butt. But I see what you're up to this time. I agree that a tulpa should be able to reach some form of imposition sooner or later. If you don't attempt imposition you leave your tulpa "unfinished" to some degree. But since it is probably the most difficult task I can see why a lot of people won't reach that level. I don't agree that you need to reach a full sensory hallucination for your tulpa to count as tulpa. Let's say you can't smell your tulpa. This would be a stupid reason to degrade your tulpa to "just an enhanced imaginary friend". It is still a tulpa with all defining aspects, just with one lacking piece. I'm really unsure about how people in the past really handled this. For them it was always a target to reach the full sensory hallucination, but we can't ask them how they felt about their tulpa during the creation process, how they would label them.

 

Alice is handling touch imposition atleast, I'm unsure about other aspects. Her voice might appear as auditory hallucination from time to time, but it is really hard for me to tell if it really is. I'm unsure about her appearance aswell. Technically I project her image right onto my view, but I think it is rather a mix of my minds eye and what I really see. Also she lacks control about her visibility, which I want to change somehow. She can move her appearance and everything, but in most cases I need to project it for now. Sometimes she seems able to handle it herself. It is a work in progress, for sure.

[Lacquer]

What exactly is "complete" imposition?

 

I do seem to remember having a discussion and hypothesizing that if a tulpa were fully imposed, it could sit in front of you, blocking your conscious view of something, but your tulpa could tell you what was in front of them. Something like if someone was showing you a card, "you" couldn't be able to see what card it is, but your tulpa could tell you what it is.

 

Does that sound right?

[Guest Anonymous]

@Everyone,

 

Interesting responses so far! Thanks.

 

You know I love to stir things up. LOL I just found a new angle this morning. I tried "all tulpas are illusory and non-sentient" and ultimately failed horribly. I learned stuff that means something to me along the way however. So now this. "Nobody really has a tulpa or very few do." I love ruffling feathers! The trick is not to take me too seriously. I am full of shit and very clueless really.

---

What exactly is "complete" imposition?

 

I do seem to remember having a discussion and hypothesizing that if a tulpa were fully imposed, it could sit in front of you, blocking your conscious view of something, but your tulpa could tell you what was in front of them. Something like if someone was showing you a card, "you" couldn't be able to see what card it is, but your tulpa could tell you what it is.

 

Does that sound right?

 

Yeah, I would consider that full imposition I guess? Oh the thought experiments that imposition leads to!

[NoneFromHell]

Something like if someone was showing you a card, "you" couldn't be able to see what card it is, but your tulpa could tell you what it is.

 

Does that sound right?

 

That would be an level of unreachable visual imposition if i got it right.

 

Let's differ: If the tulpa is sitting in front of you, blocking your view, but the card is still facing your direction, but you can't see it because of your tulpa, you would have a really good visual imposition. This doesn't defines the missing senses like touching, hearing etc. So i wouldn't count just that as fully imposed, since you would need to include the other senses aswell on that level.

 

If the card isn't facing your direction, and only visible to the eyes of your tulpa, it shouldn't be able for your tulpa to tell you what card it is, or we enter the metaphysical.

[Guest Anonymous]

Let's differ: If the tulpa is sitting in front of you, blocking your view, but the card is still facing your direction, but you can't see it because of your tulpa, you would have a really good visual imposition. This doesn't defines the missing senses like touching, hearing etc. So i wouldn't count just that as fully imposed, since you would need to include the other senses aswell on that level.

 

If the card isn't facing your direction, and only visible to the eyes of your tulpa, it shouldn't be able for your tulpa to tell you what card it is, or we enter the metaphysical.

 

It is a beautiful derailment, so I love it of course!

 

I have touched on tulpa perception a bit before. It is interesting to consider these things as it relates to tulpa sentience. How much does the tulpa perceive in association with or through its form? How is this perception achieved and how much of it is illusion? How much of the illusion is projected from the tulpa's mind and how much is projected from the host's mind? Is it a collaborative illusion?

[Lacquer]

 

That would be an level of unreachable visual imposition if i got it right.

 

Let's differ: If the tulpa is sitting in front of you, blocking your view, but the card is still facing your direction, but you can't see it because of your tulpa, you would have a really good visual imposition. This doesn't defines the missing senses like touching, hearing etc. So i wouldn't count just that as fully imposed, since you would need to include the other senses aswell on that level.

 

If the card isn't facing your direction, and only visible to the eyes of your tulpa, it shouldn't be able for your tulpa to tell you what card it is, or we enter the metaphysical.

 

Yeah, that was specifically for visual imposition. Other senses are harder to block, so using that as a measure for the completeness of imposition wouldn't work for, say, touch or smell. Maybe for hearing if your tulpa could plug your ears with their fingers, but that's a different story.

 

And the card is definitely facing you, no metaphysics here. If your tulpa was not "out" then it would just be you looking at a card and seeing that it's the Jack of Hearts or whatever.