How do tulpas fit into your religion/belief system?

[Semi-Nomadic]

moreover the act of dissolving a tulpa is potentially destroying its soul.

Just a note, though, as far as we know there's no real way to permanently and surely kill a tulpa (or destroy the host's mind for that matter.) There's always something left, a dormant, sleeping shade, or worse, an imprisoned, barely-there consciousness, which can be resparked into life (or can come back on its own.) Once a tulpa is created, it's there.

 

dramatic paragraph break!!

 

Forever.

[Guest Rochambo]

Well I personally believe the universe has nothing against me creating a thoughtform in my mind. After all it is the universe, a vast collection of planets and stars, among other things. I myself am atheist but I don't see why you religious fags, I mean folk, would possibly think your god would have anything against this sort of thing.

 

I mean I think I understand religion well enough to know that there shouldn't be any sort of conflict. Am I missing something here? I just find it ridiculous for there to be anything wrong with doing this.

 

Aaaand souls. You guys seem to be interested in souls.... I don't believe in souls at all but if I was still christian, I'd still say calling tulpas souls is rather.. erroneous to say the least.

[waffles]

I don't think there is any religion that conflicts with creating a tulpa. What we are going on here is that a tulpa has a separate soul to the host/creator (assuming the Biblical definition of a soul). Were that the case, it would be impossible for the tulpa to have a soul equal to a human, as this would put the creator in a position of power over life and death.

[Hush]

If we're assuming people have souls, my guess would be that a tupper's soul is an autonomous, but forever connected part of the original soul.

[waffles]

Sir, this is getting boring, and i dont like what you are implying.

If I'm implying anything then it's probably unintended. I've explicitly stated everything I wanted to.

 

I said that tulpae are equal to humans, and therefore they have a soul equal to mine.

The soul aside, it is plain to see that tulpas are not equal to humans: they lack an inherent physical form, and were created wholly by a human - by this I mean aesthetics, personality traits and so on. It is also probably worth remembering that a large number of the tulpas here are - at least superficially - not actually human.

 

 

Tulpae is in no way sub-servient to me, and i consider them to be equal with me.

No matter what position you consider your tulpas to be in relation to yourself, they are inherently subservient. For instance, you could potentially do pretty much whatever you wanted with your tulpa, while the reverse is not true.

 

I never said that i am special, nor did i imply it. What i am saying is that tulpaes have souls, just like we do. The souls are in no way placed under me, because their souls are just like human souls.

What you said was that God gave you the ability to create human souls, and I quote:

He gifted me with the skill to make a tupper with a human soul, deal with it.

since God is perfect he has no trouble in making me capable of making a soul or two

God gave me the gift of tulpamancing, and with his blessings, i shall do so.

 

You also said that:

I would put making a tulpa on the same level as making another human

 

To link this together, what you are saying is that God gave you the power to Crete tulpas with human souls, essentially equal to creating other humans.

It is, of course, God's duty alone to make humans, and moreover all humans are equal religiously; [inference] this means that one cannot directly create another, and moreover [obvious] one cannot be in a state of intrinsic power over another. Additionally, were one in a position of power over another, it seems somewhat unlikely that God would endorse it, as it seems he is endorsing your creation.

In case it isn't already obvious, you are saying that God has put you in a position of power over other human souls, which is just plain bullshi

[waffles]

well fuck, if making tuppers makes me special and better than others, then i must be the fucking pope. Tulpamancing is nothing special, everone can do it, because God gifted it to everyone.

If everyone can do it, then what does God's blessing have to do with it?

If i however where to do this [make a tulpa] without the blessings of God i would fail on epic proportions.

Here you state that God's blessing has everything to do with making a tulpa, implying that you couldn't just do it if not on good terms with God, like the demographic you mention here:

since a lot of people here are hardcore atheists, they cant just skip down to the local church and make friends with God Jesus Christ.

So then how do those who have a thing against God and deny Him in everything they say even begin to make a tulpa?

 

Just because i can do anything i want with them doesnt mean that they arent intelectually on the same level as me.

Ignoring the irony of "intelectually", intelligence doesn't really factor in here. A computer may be more intelligent (by some measures) than you, and yet it has no soul. Moreover a severely brain-damaged human may have little intellectual capability at all, less than that of a chimpanzee, and yet do they lack a human soul? These examples show that whether or not something is intellectual is irrelevant in terms of their soul.

This demonstrated, the argument for inequality by way of actual power still holds.

 

Im not talking about having a fucking body, because when we are debating creation of souls then having a body or not doesnt matter, because we share a body. The body is just a shell, it does not matter how the body is, as long as the soul inside the body is good.

Believe it or not, the body is actually rather important by way of Christian souls. Let's look at Genesis, the authority on souls:

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul

What we see here is not the soul being inserted into the body as a container, but rather the 'breath of life' (typically invariable by translation) being added to the body to form a 'living soul' (variable by translation, but commonly understood as this). The implications of this are that the soul encompasses the body too. From this we could argue that the tulpa has no true soul at all, lacking a body. Even if not that, you still cannot dismiss the lack of a body out of hand.

 

The body is irrelevant, we are discussing the soul here, and the soul of humans are equal to the soul of tulpae.

See above for 'the body is relevant'. You should back up that second point, because you haven't.

 

TL;DR: the souls are on the same level.

You definitely can't say that. You need at least one point that holds to even begin to conclude like that

[Guest Rochambo]

Well I'm not going to argue much with either of your logic. However, I'm curious... How exactly do each of you define a soul?

 

If anything, I go by the scientific terms, in which, a "soul" is nothing but personality, memories and things within your head that make you who you are. But you guys are talking about how our bodies are mere shells.

 

Tulpas are hardly studied, so none of us can really be right yet, but.. What's to say a tulpa is nothing more than another voice in your head? one that you, armed with effort and time, crafted?

 

Brains are very easy to exploit.. brains are flawed. I like to think of tulpas as another brain exploit, only.. a good one. One with a lot more pros to it than cons.

[waffles]

Well I'm not going to argue much with either of your logic. However, I'm curious... How exactly do each of you define a soul?

Here, the Christian Biblical definition: in essence, the eternal self; the part of you that was truly created by God, and lives on after your body dies.

 

If anything, I go by the scientific terms, in which, a "soul" is nothing but personality, memories and things within your head that make you who you are. But you guys are talking about how our bodies are mere shells.

Since the point of a soul is that it lives on after death, you're not really describing a soul, just a sense of self.

If you take a look at my previous post, you'll see that the body is more important to the soul than you think.

 

Tulpas are hardly studied, so none of us can really be right yet, but.. What's to say a tulpa is nothing more than another voice in your head? one that you, armed with effort and time, crafted?

Well, one of us may be right, but it can't be proven.

A good theory (in my opinion) is that a tulpa is basically another personality; either way, a tulpa isn't just a voice in your head because it can take control of the body too: possession and switching show that tulpas can exert control similar to that of the dominant personality.

 

Brains are very easy to exploit.. brains are flawed. I like to think of tulpas as another brain exploit, only.. a good one. One with a lot more pros to it than cons.

I agree. In terms of beneficial exploits, tulpas are a bit like lucid dreaming. Both are an exploitation of a psychological coping mechanism. While lucid dreams are 'cheating' the system of dreams, one could view tulpas as an exploitation of the coping mechanism involving multiple personalities: DID happens to protect the mind from trauma, and we are just controlling that.

[Guest Rochambo]

 

Since the point of a soul is that it lives on after death, you're not really describing a soul, just a sense of self.

If you take a look at my previous post, you'll see that the body is more important to the soul than you think.

 

 

 

mm yess. You're right. in that case I suppose I do not believe in souls then.

 

"A good theory (in my opinion) is that a tulpa is basically another personality; either way, a tulpa isn't just a voice in your head because it can take control of the body too: possession and switching show that tulpas can exert control similar to that of the dominant personality."

 

True. I myself am curious as to how the brain can execute such a thing. It's as if we're creating an entire person within our heads.. at least.. to the point most of us consider another living being. The only thing is, those who look at this rationally at least, know it is fictional. Your character isn't real, there's a reason they can only interact with things within your mind. I was indeed false with what I said earlier though; calling tulpas seperate personalities is far more accurate than calling them mere voices.

 

Also I have a question I hope you religious fags don't mind answering.

 

If, by your beliefs, a tulpa is a soul, that you have created,then.. how bad/immoral is killing a tulpa?

 

We all know it is more or less easy to disconnect a tulpa from yourself, and they thrive solely off of you, your mind and the world you give them, so is killing them allowed?

[EightyEight]

I'd just like to throw another puzzle piece into this mess: birth. If it's God's duty alone to make people, why do you also need a pair of humans to reproduce? Even Jesus Christ had a mother and a father in addition to God. Also, if a human created by another human does not have a full human soul, what does that make us? We all had parents. I think whatever it is God does to the cells in the womb to make it human, He does to the neurons that are the Tulpa, or maybe even the Tulpa's form itself? That would mean you aren't making a soul but God is enabling you to bring life into the world regardless.