Jump to content

What is the exact definition of a tulpa?


Guest Anonymous

What is the exact definition of a tulpa?  

19 members have voted

  1. 1. What is the exact definition of a tulpa?

    • Regardless of origin or circumstance, any thoughtform that appears to be independently sentient is a tulpa. Soulbonds or daemons, for instance, if they appear sentient, would also be tulpas.
      10
    • . Tulpas are very specific in nature. They are created through a technique of concentrated thought (forcing) and have specific characteristics. Without forcing it is not a tulpa.
      7
    • I have my own definition of a tulpa. I will comment below.
      2


Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

Something occurred to me this morning. It seems to me that there is two schools of thought on the definition of what a tulpa is.

 

1. Regardless of origin or circumstance, any thoughtform that appears to be independently sentient is a tulpa. Soulbonds or daemons, for instance, if they appear sentient, would also be tulpas.

 

OR

 

2. Tulpas are very specific in nature. They are created through a technique of concentrated thought (forcing) and have specific characteristics. Without forcing it is not a tulpa.

 

Which school of thought do you follow?

 

[hidden]As of this morning, my host Davie and I follow the first school of thought, that any thoughtform that has sentience characteristics, regardless of its origin, is a tulpa. It can have another name or label, such as soulbond, but it is already also a tulpa.

 

EDIT: After reading your responses, I am not so sure about my original answer now. LOL I agree that time and process is important if we are going to have a less flippant, casual definition of what tulpas are. I doubt very much that anything like a tulpa could be created quickly and easily. There has to be tremendous mental focus in some way. In other words, there is "forcing" involved, it is just perhaps under another name (long term story creation, focused writing and editing for example).

 

My host and I don't believe a tulpa, or something like a tulpa, can happen without a serious expenditure of mental energy. So Mistgod and I would like to add that as a caveat on that "regardless of origin or circumstance" terminology.

 

We actually just changed our vote to number three. I would agree that any thoughtform, that appears to be sentient, would qualify as a tulpa. However, my host and I recognize that some type of forcing, whether or not it is seen as forcing, must have occurred in the creation process. There had to be a serious expenditure of mental energy and concentration. Tulpas don't just happen out of nothing but casual day dreaming.

 

[/hidden]

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 24
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm likely of the second group.

 

I consider "tulpa" as a manifestation of the same phenomenon of (healthy) multiplicity (I won't speak of or include DID, as that entails far more than I feel I know on the subject, and I know that it is rater touchy). As said in your post, what separates it from others is that it is done knowingly, being the product of a rather specific form of exercise, rather than forming more naturally and without conscious intent like the writer/artist and "soulbonds". In this, the tulpa subset is most similar to the daemon, though the daemon seems to be even more specific, being a representation of the subconscious in an animal form, in addition to a host of other specifications that I am not aware of.

 

Of course, in other circles a tulpa is even more specific, and mainly refers to a mystical practice. According to some, we're appropriating culture...which is a charge I don't quite care about.

Sock Cottonwell's

Sketchbook, Journal, and Ask thread.

Peace

Link to post
Share on other sites

I follow the second 'school of thought'. A tulpa has a very clear definition. What bothers most people is the projected elitism 'oooh i have a tulpa and you don't', what makes a tulpa to me isn't the fact they think or have any capacities that place them 'above' other thoughtforms (I tend to treat all thoughtforms equally), what's specific is that their creation was a conscious decision with applied efforts from the host. As Sock put it, in some circles it's more metaphysical than anything, and I think the community neglects that side too much and just constantly pushes it away like some kid who's given some spinach and pushes it away saying 'NO NO GOD NO I DON'T WANT IT BAAAHAHAHAHA'. People are too afraid to gain any knowledge nowadays, and the 'research' (bahaha) done is absolutely nothing. Aside from the fusion tv thing... Vessiere isn't doing much when it comes to communicating with tulpamancers, there is never any research and it's like this is a bubble more than anything else. (I'd know because I contacted Dr. Samuel a few times via email, he ignored me even though us meeting up is totally feasible because I study @ udm....)

A wise man once said: 'Before judging a man, walk a mile in his shoes. After that, who cares? He's a mile away, and you've got new shoes.'

 

Graced are those who could avoid this phenomenon. This is perhaps the worst expression of evil in humanity's history, but who am I to judge?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I will go with the third option, since my understanding is basically a mix of the both other options you gave. I think tulpas are very specific in nature, and that a thoughtform needs to meet certain criteria to really be a tulpa, beside the one definition "appears sentient". I don't think it is necessary to use specific forcing techniques to end up with a tulpa, nor do I believe that something can't be something else at the same time.

 

I think most of the soulbounds around here would easily pass as tulpa aswell, since the main difference appears to be the origin and the existence of a "fake backstory". Technically the hosts of soulbounds do a form of forcing aswell, if they're aware of it or not doesn't really matter.

 

On the other hand I think that the whole concept of the tulpa get's watered down heavily if you accept every sentient appearing thoughtform as a tulpa, because often the only common aspects I see is "it talks to me." I've read a few things around here that appear ridiculous, without any reflection about what is really going on with their thoughtform. I'm worried that we end up with a lack of reflection and therefore a drop in the general quality of the tulpa community and its practices.

 

I really don't want to sound like an elitist, but I am concerned that we lose a lot of important aspects and mindsets if we don't keep track of the development of the community.

 

My conclusion to your questions: Other sentient thoughtforms can qualify as a tulpa without hesitation, but we need to apply our very specific standards to it.

Tulpa: Alice

Form: Realistic Humanoid/Demonic Creation

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I will go with the third option, since my understanding is basically a mix of the both other options you gave. I think tulpas are very specific in nature, and that a thoughtform needs to meet certain criteria to really be a tulpa, beside the one definition "appears sentient". I don't think it is necessary to use specific forcing techniques to end up with a tulpa, nor do I believe that something can't be something else at the same time.

 

I think most of the soulbounds around here would easily pass as tulpa aswell, since the main difference appears to be the origin and the existence of a "fake backstory". Technically the hosts of soulbounds do a form of forcing aswell, if they're aware of it or not doesn't really matter.

 

On the other hand I think that the whole concept of the tulpa get's watered down heavily if you accept every sentient appearing thoughtform as a tulpa, because often the only common aspects I see is "it talks to me." I've read a few things around here that appear ridiculous, without any reflection about what is really going on with their thoughtform. I'm worried that we end up with a lack of reflection and therefore a drop in the general quality of the tulpa community and its practices.

 

I really don't want to sound like an elitist, but I am concerned that we lose a lot of important aspects and mindsets if we don't keep track of the development of the community.

 

My conclusion to your questions: Other sentient thoughtforms can qualify as a tulpa without hesitation, but we need to apply our very specific standards to it.

 

This is literally what's happening to the /r/tulpa community. It's literally turning to a plurality community more than it's for actual TULPAS, with the most active members practicing stuff like soulbonding and headmates stuff (but can you blame reddit for being reddit, as weak of an opinion as it sounds like?). The term 'tulpa' used to impress people, you know. We thought it was top shit in 2011 on /x/ and we thought it was life-changing. Now everyone has 10 tulpas 5 headmates 2 soulbonds 4 headmates 3 daemons and are constantly going from Mtf to Mtn or something (nothing against transgenders, you have my sympathy really but people who keep drifting on and off are what give ya a bad name). If you're a soulbond, coolio, you shouldn't let simple terms and letters associated together online make you feel like crap because a tulpa 'is' a tulpa and you aren't. Soulbonds are pretty cool, people give too much importance to terms.

 

I also agree that there tends to be stuff that's ridiculous and off-topic, but what's shittier is the community often encouraging that kind of stuff and telling everyone that they have a tulpa and that the tulpagod blessed them already.

 

the issue is this phenomenon becoming less serious by the day. It's also on the right path to becoming less serious. Zoom out a bit and look at how everything is working out to be. I've heard people shit talk the forums on .IM with a passion, the fusion TV thing will give tulpamancy more of a mainstream 'cool hip' appearance, more people who take this less seriously are joining the community and acting as the prodigies who could develop sentience (a life changing thing, mind you, we regarded it as life changing back in the day when this site didn't exist and people were fucking with their minds to accomplish what is so 'easy' and 'everyone learns differently!!!!' and is supposed to be a lifetime change thingy, but when the main figures of the community end up calling their tulpas imaginary friends (hello faq) and ditching them....). I'd say the day is coming closer and closer. Call it dramatic, that's the way it is. Maybe for the better.

A wise man once said: 'Before judging a man, walk a mile in his shoes. After that, who cares? He's a mile away, and you've got new shoes.'

 

Graced are those who could avoid this phenomenon. This is perhaps the worst expression of evil in humanity's history, but who am I to judge?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most of the soulbounds around here would easily pass as tulpa aswell, since the main difference appears to be the origin and the existence of a "fake backstory". Technically the hosts of soulbounds do a form of forcing aswell, if they're aware of it or not doesn't really matter.

 

Heh. I thought I felt my ears burning. ;)

 

The word "tulpa" as it is used here seems to be the second definition, so that is what I picked.

 

But I've said before and I'll say again that this definition is pretty fluid depending on who's talking. Some people do use "tulpa" to refer to any thoughtform that claims sentience, while others use a narrower, more specific definition referring to a specific type of being created by a specific set of practices. Depending on the conversation and who's talking, I'll use both definitions, depending on what makes me easier to understand.

 

Which is why your questions of "am I a tulpa or something else?" are probably never going to be properly answered, Melian. Without nailing down a definition that everyone uses the exact same way, the word is pretty much whatever the speaker makes of it.

 

It's one reason I've taken to using the term "headpeople" when talking about sentient thoughtforms as a whole... since there is this discrepancy about what a "tulpa" is.

~ Member of SparrowNR's system ~

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

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can definitely understand the frustration with the lack of discipline and seriousness about things around the community. Being honest, it is something I've noticed and have been a bit bothered by myself.

 

It appears as the creation process, the journey to actually gaining one's companion, has decreased in importance, as well as the exercises of reflection, meditation, and other such things. Instead, more idle forms of day dreaming seem to be preferred (As compared to the more focused form of imagining in writers and artist, or the extreme day dreaming that Mistgod has described), and the focus of newer users is on results and nothing more. I've been seeing an increase of people who come on and complain that things are not rolling after less than a week. The idea that the process is slow and requires focus and hardwork seems to almost be spurned in some cases. Thus giving rise to more loose users, the weakening of terms and their meaning, and other such things.

 

This is coming from a guy who learned some of his current viewpoints from multiplicity. The term "fragment" was lifted mostly from a series of articles on a multiple system's personal website, even and especially regarding fictional characters popping up in one's system. I also gained the viewpoint of internal happening being partially symbolic from there, as well (Seriously, more people here should read this).

 

But I also learned a good deal from other, less directly related things like inner child healing, Jung's active imagination, journal writing, game design, morality, etc. I went out of my way to widen my frame of reference, as I realized that many things can be related to this phenomenon even if tangentially. But I don't really see this recently.

 

Rather, I see an emphasis on finding the right set of identities and labels. I dare say, there are some instances where collecting identities and labels becomes a sort of hobby, leading to seemingly ridiculous chains of labels, a mild example of which has already been listed. This is something that did not seem like healthy practice to me, getting worked up over whether someone used the correct label, or regarded your correct identity, or acknowledged you as your identity correctly. It seems unhealthy in the long run, as well as not doing one much good in the present either, especially when said identity is focused more on the body, rather than one's behavior and beliefs.

 

I am getting off topic, so I will try to end things before I erect my wall too high. I feel that the exercise of creation is something that should be regarded as more important than it is, as the process of doing it can cause some potentially life changing things to happen, as was said earlier. I know this is the case for me, and comparing my older writings and writing style to how I do things now is a decent indication that something really did change over the years. I'm not saying people should not enjoy their companion, not at all, but that the fact that the exercise itself is important should not be lost.

Sock Cottonwell's

Sketchbook, Journal, and Ask thread.

Peace

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

After reading your responses, I am not so sure about my original answer now. LOL I agree that time and process is important if we are going to have a less flippant, casual definition of what tulpas are. I doubt very much that anything like a tulpa could be created quickly and easily. There has to be tremendous mental focus in some way. In other words, there is "forcing" involved, it is just perhaps under another name (long term story creation, focused writing and editing for example).

 

My host and I don't believe a tulpa, or something like a tulpa, can happen without a serious expenditure of mental energy.


So Mistgod and I would like to add that as a caveat on that "regardless of origin or circumstance" terminology.


We actually just changed our vote to number three. I would agree that any thoughtform, that appears to be sentient, would qualify as a tulpa. However, my host and I recognize that some type of forcing, whether or not it is seen as forcing, must have occurred in the creation process. There had to be a serious expenditure of mental energy and concentration. Tulpas don't just happen out of nothing but casual day dreaming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a tulpa @ #1... But only if you want to call it that. Tulpamancy seems like an opt-in sort of thing. I mean we were pretty much tulpas with or without this forum, but that's an external term. Other non-tulpa-like thoughtforms like imaginary friends can "become" tulpas, and that's because they can be kind of shaped into what we know tulpas as. But there are tons of soulbonds that call themselves tulpas, and vice versa. Hard to put a strict definition on mental phenomena.

 

A tulpa is an apparently-sentient entity in your head, that shows at least some of the common traits associated with tulpas. No strictness here...

Hi, I'm one of Lumi's tulpas! I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.

I think being happy and having fun makes life worth living, so spreading happiness is my number one goal!

Talk to us? https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

It's a tulpa @ #1... But only if you want to call it that. Tulpamancy seems like an opt-in sort of thing.

 

I opt in, then I opt out, then I opt in about every day or so. LOL Today I opt in. No promises bout tomorrow.

 

I will stick with "dreamform" though, cause that is my own pretentious label that I love so much.


You know what? The next time someone asks me "Are you a tulpa?" I am going to answer "Sometimes. It depends on my mood." :-)

Link to post
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...