ruleofthumb March 21, 2022 Share March 21, 2022 I agree that mindkin sounds more like a synonym for “headmate” than “tulpa”. I like it better than headmate. It’s a little more precise. I use the word tulpa. I am open to being convinced that I shouldn’t use the word doing so has some broad negative effect on Tibetan Buddhists, or some broad negative effect in general. Cultural appropriation can be bad. It could indirectly rob cultures of resources because people are buying “Inuit” fashion from rich white “designers”. It can reinforce stereotypes used to put down cultures. It can simplify cultures by turning them into fashion statements or what not. But, I just don’t see what the word “tulpa” is doing to harm people. Is using the word “caribou” doing harm to the Mi’kmaq? Is using the word “umami” doing harm to the Japanese? I don’t think “this word came from a closed culture” is enough of a reason to stop using a word. Hypothetical forum-goer who wouldn’t exist: “Words like ‘caribou’ and ‘umami’ are used to describe what exists in nature, devoid of culture. The creation of tulpas is a cultural practice. Therefore, using the word ‘caribou’ is not cultural appropriation but using the word ‘tulpa’ is.” My preemptive response is this. The creation of tulpas is something that exists naturally. It’s not a rare thing for people to “accidentally create” tulpas, or to purposely create them with no knowledge of the terminology. The creation of thoughtforms is not specific to one culture, much like the taste of umami is not specific to one culture. Even if this wasn’t the case, I must ask again: what harm is being done? Someday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.