NoneFromHell February 26, 2016 February 26, 2016 Well tulpas are part of your own ...brain (mind doesn't fit /consciousness neither. How would you word it?). I think we're very aware that they're a form of psychological phenomenom of some kind, and no "real entity" like a ghost, a demon or something else from the metaphysical spectrum. This is difficult to pin down in words. They exist like your own being, your identity and way of thinking, inside your head. They're are as real as "you" are, if you don't consider yourself as the flesh and bones; as your physical impression on this world. They can think, they can feel. If your own mind would fade, they would be psychological absolutely real and present. The tulpa would become "you" for the people around you. Tulpa: Alice Form: Realistic Humanoid/Demonic Creation She may or may not talk here, depends on her.
Luminesce February 26, 2016 February 26, 2016 Metaphysics are physics with no determinable basis in reality. Technically includes all types of spirituality that aren't just "a general sense of fulfillment or well-being". So we tend not to discuss things with no basis in reality. We don't consider it productive to discuss subjective (because there are no solid facts to base truth on, only opinion) beliefs in a reality-encompassing sense. We can hardly handle the subjectivity of "sentient imaginary friends", let alone "sentient imaginary friends who are incarnated spirits that have forgotten their past selves when crossing through the veil between the physical and spiritual worlds". Yet as both are equally undeniably subjective, we don't deny metaphysics either. Just prefer to keep them in the Metaphysics board so those that are allergic don't die. Anyways. As far as I can tell there was nothing metaphysical about ancient tulpas, per se. The goal was to train your mind to experience something so vividly you believed it to be real and sentient, in an attempt to realize how reality was so subjective that "real" and "fake" were indistinguishable. If they were Buddhists, then I assume it was an exercise in detaching yourself from worldly things. Recognizing "reality" as illusion was an important step in that process. Still is, I think, though they sure don't use tulpas anymore. 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.
Guest Anonymous February 26, 2016 February 26, 2016 According to Alexandra David Neel (our primary source of Tibetan tulpa junk), the Tibetan llama practice did involve magic ritual. She didn't write about it being a psychological mental construct, but a magic and metaphysical one.
Leaf February 27, 2016 February 27, 2016 I have looked through a fair deal of Buddhist literature looking for the concept of tulpas and it is very scant at best. Perhaps the closest related thing is the concept of magical emanations that can interact with other worlds. Magical emanations also had a more practical purpose of doing something that the Buddhist feared just so then they could overcome that fear. Buddhists were not required to see tulpas as illusions, but novices were told that tulpas were gods and then had to figure out that they were actually creations of the mind. Unless you believe, you shall not understand.
Luminesce February 27, 2016 February 27, 2016 I just go off of the fact that the general goal of Buddhism, as far as I know, is "Deliverance from the mind". I've heard people say things akin to what I just posted numerous times, and it makes sense to me. If it was metaphysical then that's just more reason for me to be disappointed in Buddhism. I almost became a Buddhist until I learned it wasn't as frivolousness-less as I thought. It's really no different from any other religion, other than its goals and practices being more respectable than most. 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.
Drakaina February 27, 2016 February 27, 2016 I just go off of the fact that the general goal of Buddhism, as far as I know, is "Deliverance from the mind". I've heard people say things akin to what I just posted numerous times, and it makes sense to me. If it was metaphysical then that's just more reason for me to be disappointed in Buddhism. I almost became a Buddhist until I learned it wasn't as frivolousness-less as I thought. It's really no different from any other religion, other than its goals and practices being more respectable than most. Technically Buddhism is a philosophy, not a religion. It's a way of living and understanding life. Religion is an organised spirituality, focused around one or many gods. There are two schools of Buddhism, Theravadin and Mahanyana. The former seek to attain enlightenment, which is not so much separation from the mind and physical world, but more a profound state of understanding and oneness. The latter seek to lead others to enlightenment. From what I understand of Tibetan Buddhist practice, tulpa were actually used as a test for the student. The teacher would plant the seed that the thought form was really a diety. If they student believed this they were considered a failure and sent away. To pass the student needed to recognise the tulpa as an illusion. In Indian Buddhism it seems Tulpa were regarded as something different. They were seen as a way to "ascend to the heavenly plain", what I understand to be what we today would call astral projection. Some sources also mention tulpa as projected illusions, citing a supposed miracle where many of one Buddha appeared in the sky at once. It seems Indian Buddhism saw "tulpa" as more of a mystical extension of the self rather than it's own being. "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." -Arthur Conan Doyle
Tirisilex February 27, 2016 Author February 27, 2016 Technically Buddhism is a philosophy, not a religion. It's a way of living and understanding life. Religion is an organised spirituality, focused around one or many gods. There are two schools of Buddhism, Theravadin and Mahanyana. Actually there are 3 schools of Buddhism.. Theravadin, Mahayana and Vajrayana. Vajrayana is not exclusive to Tibet. There is a sect of Vajrayana in Japan as well. Don't believe the things I say just because I tell you.. Test these things and prove them to yourselves so that you know them to be true. ~The Buddha
Guest Anonymous February 27, 2016 February 27, 2016 Lumi, Don't be disappointed with all Buddhism because of Tibetans. They are light years far out to other sects! Tibetans are kinda a weird mix of old world magic and mysticism and traditional Buddhism. They are ... different.
Drakaina February 28, 2016 February 28, 2016 Actually there are 3 schools of Buddhism.. Theravadin, Mahayana and Vajrayana. Vajrayana is not exclusive to Tibet. There is a sect of Vajrayana in Japan as well. I've seen the word Vajrayana before in my digital sangha, but apart from being a Sanskrit word, I didn't know it was a branch of Buddhism. It seems most formal Buddhism schools are pretty removed from the world by their nature, so it kind of makes sense they'd be the ones to invent a concept that plays off subjective reality. "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." -Arthur Conan Doyle
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.