J.Iscariot

What IS a tulpa?

What is a tulpa, folks?  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. What is a tulpa, folks?

    • A tulpa is an imaginary friend. It inhabits the mind's imagination and is limited to the imagination. A tulpa possesses apparent sentience and no autonomy outside of their host's perspective.
    • A tulpa is very much like a simulation of a person; the human brain could not possibly take two or three constant thought processes going on at once, and tulpamancy originates from the subconscious and active imagination.
    • A tulpa is an entity that can be compared to other thoughtforms like headmates and soulbonds. Truth is, there might not even be any difference, and the tulpamancy concept is a highly subjective one.
    • A tulpa is literally what the definition on the homepage of this site says. It's a sentient and intelligent entity that probably originates from the subconscious and acts on its own with emotions and the likes.
    • A tulpa originates from escapism and detachment of sense of reality. Tulpamancy and plurality originate from the exact same roots, and we may never know if anything is true or not.
    • A tulpa is whatever the host wants it to be; an imaginary friend, a sentient entity, it all depends on the host and their will.


Recommended Posts

Hi!

 

I've been thinking for a while; when I type down my posts, I tend to forget about other points of views and opinions, more than that, the rants that are posted are purely reflective of one secluded and counter-progressive ideology: that tulpas are something, a very fixed concept in the human mind that can be developed and interacted with, and that other things have different natures.

 

And truthfully, when we hear the term 'thoughtform' (which can be expressive of any and all concepts, going from the concept of a waifu to something like a religious entity, or a tulpa, or a daemon, or a soulbond, whatever). Despite all tags we put on thoughtforms, and without the inclusion of pretenses of supremacy and elitism over certain types of thoughtforms, when we hear the term 'thoughtform', we tend to forget about what makes a tulpa what they are. Is a tulpa a sentient, intelligent and autonomous entity that is able of thought and emotions? Who put that definition? The consensus these days is one that tends to differ and shift more towards plurality.

 

With that in mind, I'm not here to enforce or impose my own definitions on others. I am genuinely interested in hearing what other people think, what they have to say, on various points, actually. How they regard their tulpas, how they think of them (as in, if they come to mind, do they think of a person they can converse with, or do they think of a simple thoughform in their minds...). I'm someone who does not adhere to the notion of plurality; I personally believe that it originates from escapism and detachment from reality and sense of identity, and while it is possible to have a tulpa and maintain that identity (except in the case that the host switches, only to me though, it could be different but I consider that the body represents as much the identity as the mind does in the case that the entity in question possesses a physical tangible body), that's why I tend to establish a difference between tulpamancy and plurality.

 

Plurals of all sorts are welcome to talk of how they exactly regard their folks. I come from the mindset that having two people in one brain can be tiring and can consume far too much energy for it to be plausible.

 

 

So, what IS a tulpa to you? Answer the poll and let me know!

 

(The poll is multi-option, so you can choose the answers that fit you the most.)


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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

From the Book of Melian: "Modern Western mystics and magicians use the term “thoughtform” to describe a manifestation of thought that takes on an independent life of its own. The term first appeared in 1927, in Even-Wentz’s translation of the

Tibetan Book of the Dead, and then was later picked up by theosophists. It is used as a general term for all manifestations of thought, including imaginary personas of the mind. ...Tulpas, thoughtforms and daemons made their way into theosophical writings and occult and fantasy literature of the 20th century. In recent decades, these ideas were being discussed and shared on internet forums. Today, thought-forms have been [only very recently] re-visioned by members of internet subculture to be psychologically based autonomous imaginary companions."

 

In short, internet geeks came up with the most recent idea of a modern tulpa, like half a dozen years ago, and it became sort of a mini subculture internet based fad.

 

To be honest, I have stopped caring what a tulpa is, nor do I really care a whit if I am a tulpa or not. I marked the last one, because I don't care and it is probably the closest to accurate anyway. As far as I can tell, from my perspective, they all might as well be imaginary friends and role playing characters anyway. It makes no difference to me at all. I will treat all thoughtforms of any type exactly the same, like they are people.


EDIT: I also don't care who has a tulpa and who only "thinks they have a tulpa." I don't see why I should care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

Kudos for interesting and well-worded poll options.

More often than not, the wording and variety on the poll options make it so a choice is hard to make.

Not the case here.

 

That being said, I picked both the options three and four.

Both together reflect my opinion on the whole thing rather satisfyingly accurately.

 

 

Greets,

AG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full disclosure, I don't consider myself to be a tulpamancer, but I have a thoughtform that matches the literal definition on this site. And this is the definition I use.

 

A tulpa is a thoughtform that is independent and sentient. Or rather, a thoughtform that the host perceives to be independent and sentient since there's no way to objectively prove it.

 

It's a broad definition. A daemon can be considered a tulpa if it's independent and sentient. A soulbond can be considered a tulpa if it's independent and sentient. An imaginary friend can be considered a tulpa if it's independent and sentient.

 

In my lurking I've noticed that sometimes, people get really caught up in definitions. If instead of the using the guides here to create a tulpa, someone follows the guides used to create daemons, if they both end up with a sentient independent thoughtform what's the difference?

 

I worry a bit that it'll make this community stagnant. Sure I haven't started posting until now, but I've been familiar with the concept since the threads on /x/. And I've lurked here in the past. If people try to assign a very hard, rigid definition to what a tulpa is and how it's created, unconventional methods for creating/nurturing them/etc might never be explored or accepted. Or an already small community will have to splinter off into multiple smaller communities and make up new subcultures to follow these new schools of thought. I think it's best to have a broad definition, to enable a big comprehensive knowledgebase. While of course still respecting the personal views people have on what a tulpa is/is not.

 

That's my opinion at least. I respect people who believe tulpa has a stricter definition. But if any of those people are reading this I'd love to hear their thoughts on what makes a tulpa more specific than just "independent and sentient thoughtform". Is it the creation process?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaargh. We deliberated over this one longer than we should have, because we could literally make an argument for every one of these choices (except #5, just because we don't have enough knowledge of plurality as a whole to speak on that one way or another).

 

Picked 3, because that's the one I'm personally feeling most strongly recently, but pretty much all of them make sense from a different point of view. (Including some held by my bonds). It's such a subjective topic that it's hard to nail down a single description that works for everyone.


Sparrow---Temar---Joss---Ayo--et al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

"A tulpa is literally what the definition on the homepage of this site says. It's a sentient and intelligent entity that probably originates from the subconscious and acts on its own with emotions and the likes."

 

I know I am being a butt today, but this is not really what the definition on the homepage really says at all. It it says "In short, a tulpa is like a sentient person living in your head" It is like a sentient person, not IS a sentient person. Again, (I keep pointing this out on this forum) it also states "It’s currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient," and that "It takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality." A convincing personality, not a real personality.

 

People keep saying how the definition on the homepage is absolutely saying tulpas are independent sentient beings. It is not stating that explicitly at all. It just isn't. It was just a side note I wanted to bitch about in this thread. You disenfranchise a portion of the tulpamancers on this forum every time you misrepresent the official wording on the homepage like that.


EDIT: But carry on, cause I really don't care, like I said earlier. But it just irks me that these false statements go unchallenged again and again on this forum. Flat out.


EDIT2: Perhaps if the senior members don't want to make the effort to note and clarify those mistakes, maybe they, the admin and the mods should change the friggin definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted three and six. Every single one of those answers can be right, but exclusively picking 1 or 5 would probably be flat out wrong. It's what "tulpas" are in general, not what yours is. Subjectivity and all that, you can't judge precisely what is going on in someone else's mind.

 

But hey, Reisen appeared likely due to acute stress and depression on my part. So like, I could've also chosen 5 maybe. But that gives off the impression that somebody believes 5 exclusively.

 

Three and six are the only two that left enough options, for me.


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 stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is anything that I have learned about psychology, it is that the human mind is capable of amazing things, and it is certainly NOT a computer. Therefore, I believe that if I exist and am conscious, I see no reason whatsoever why there couldn't be more than one sentient being in here with me. I also believe that with development, a tulpa can process and think just as well as I do simultaneously to me. In addition to this, I also believe that hosts are the same exact thing as a tulpa. Just served up a little differently.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you change "It's a sentient and intelligent entity that probably originates from the subconscious and acts on its own with emotions and the likes." to "It's an apparently sentient and -"? To Melian's credit, it does not "literally" say that a tulpa is sentient. It says they appear to be and we treat them as such, although we can not know for sure. I'd be a little more comfortable with that option with that change, as I didn't vote for it either.


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 stuff.

Share this post


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.