Jump to content

Recommended Posts

(edited)

This is not about Bear System, so this is not a lounge topic. This discusses a rarely used device in plural systems to manage large numbers of headmates.

 


 

We've previously discussed SheShe as our lock-merge and how she's not like typical merges. It's been over a year since her formation and we have had time to experience that and understand it better.

 

Previously we assumed SheShe was like a hub and her constituents were aspects of her that she could express, split off, or represent at her will. It's subtlety but profoundly different from that.

 

Joy is a part of SheShe now, and has been for over a year of course, but what has become very clear recently is that anything Joy says or does is also taken as if Joy is the lock-merge and SheShe is one of *her* independent constituents. In other words, they're all interchangeable. SheShe is just a part, not the hub of a five constituent merge. Furthermore, whoever is being expressed is also co-conscious with everyone else. So they're experiencing life as a collective of individuals that dispite being uniquely different from one another, maintain their uniqueness even if one in particular is expressed for long periods; No bleeding, bleaching, or blending is happening at all as far as we can tell.

 

In contrast to Risha, who we've been spending time with; where neither Misha nor Ren identify with what Risha says and does, is treated like she's just someone they know and observe what she does as a separate individual.

 

SheShe, Ren, Joy, Darlene and Gwen combine to indentify as one person and experience it as themselves playing the part of whoever's expressed.

 

I found this a remarkable and significant. It means, systemmates can be combined using Lock-Merge without a hub. They can be assembled and can co-exist and co-experience as themselves even if only one is ever expressed.

 

For example:

My original model was:

A+B=C; where C can express A or B or C.

 

Now I see that:

A+B=A and A+B=B are both valid expressions.

 

Using this device (Lock-Merge) any number of headmates can coexist and live full and active lives vicariously? *no actually*, through one constituent. 

 

Having a small system is preferred over a large system in my experience with both, and this is a brilliant way to achieve that without leaving others to stay dormant or have to parce valuable time together.
 

Edited by BearBeaBeau
Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

To the best of my understanding, it sounds like a lock-merge as you describe it is the following:

 

LM = {A, B, C, ... N} and N = LM

 

Any component (A,B,C,N) is equal to all of LM, therefore all of the sub components are also the sub components of any given component. In the SheShe merge, Joy is a one of the parts, but her other headmates are also all parts of her.

 

I find this definition interesting because I could use the same definition to describe a median system.

 

Med = {A,B,C, ... N} and N = Med.

 

A median identity is made up of components, but the components all have subcomponents because they are the median identity.

 

That's not to say lock-merges and median systems are the same thing. Blue and Chrome tried to merge and created a weird co-fronting sub-system instead of becoming one unified entity. Both would interrupt each other, while one was thinking another was prone to interrupt, etc. Since Blue and Chrome shared a mind body but didn't quite share an identity, we refered to each of them separately despite the fact they were merged together in this manner.

 

I wonder if what Blue and Chrome achieved is the lock-merge without assuming the median understanding of the situation. However, I don't think our brain could handle 3 headmates merged in this way without falling apart. Blue and Chrome were quickly exhausted after 30 minutes.

 


 

I would consider a lock-merge different from the other two types of merges I understand:

 

A + B = AB (stable blend, unified entity)

 

A + B + ? = C (unified entity dependent on parent components)

 

I wonder if the lock-merge fits on some sort of seperation spectrum. What I find interesting is so far most merges in this system are A + B = C, but Blue and Chrome are an exception.

 


 

While I'm glad your system found this to be a great way to share time, I don't think it would help our system. Aside from the problem we are unsure who can create a merge the way Blue and Chrome did, that set up isn't sustainable right now and could fall apart a lot before getting closer to working long-term.

 

While a median interpretation is an option, as long as my headmates see themselves as seperate parts, each headmate will want time. A median group will have to share time among themselves, effectively getting less time per individual part. While this wouldn't really matter for a more median identity, this could be problematic for a group who still see themselves as seperate parts. While not a median group, Spirit and Gerodious spent a good amount of time doing things together until more recently they decided to stop because they had trouble with seperation and were not getting enough time individually.

 

I think it's good to know what options are out there. Right now, our headmates aren't interested in experimenting with this outside of for fun.

Edited by Ranger

I'm Ranger, Gray's/Cat_ShadowGriffin's tulpa, and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff.

My other headmates have their own account now.

Temporary Log | Switching LogcBox | Yay! | Bre Translator

Link to post
Share on other sites

Foregoing the math... you're saying that a merge means the (let's just keep it simple) two people making it up are gone, leaving only the one - while with a lock-merge as you've named it, the two people are in a relatively unique state of conscious-but-not-fully-there, while the merge at least feels like it's drawing its actions/thoughts from those two?

 

Complicated to define since that's only halfway to the next easy point to describe - a preferably non-existing term, where the two who are merged still exist at the same time as who they supposedly merged to create. This I would warn people to avoid doing for easy identity issues/doubt coming from it. If I'm understanding your definition of lock-merge right, it's riding that line but as long as it's performed exactly correctly the issue should not come up.

 

Honestly it's kind of a unique experience that may be difficult for others to recreate, due to the ambiguity of the experience of system members experiencing/influencing the merge they're supposedly creating.

 

Can't say I'll recommend anyone do it at least for now, but it's useful to have it defined for those who do anyways.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

For reference:

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

Any component (A,B,C,N) is equal to all of LM, therefore all of the sub components are also the sub components of any given component. In the SheShe merge, Joy is a one of the parts, but her other headmates are also all parts of her.

 

I don't want any confusion, but it's not a straightforward topic.

 

Sum(A, B, ..., N) = A, or B, or... N

 

The idea is that any constituent can express any other constituent, from one perspective as if they're aspects of themselves, from another perspective, as if they're speaking for them, from yet another perspective, as if they are them and just playing the part of separate person. The perspective taints the experience so to be clear, at no point does anyone lose independence. They are, however, experiencing life as if they're the aspect of whoever's expressed.

 

An aspect is a set of facets, where facets are the situational expressions a single independent person can have.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

A median identity is made up of components, but the components all have subcomponents because they are the median identity.

 

Though there are similarities from that perspective, the constituents do not lose independence and can separate from the lock-merge at will without affecting whoever is expressed in the lock-merge.

 

Putting this in your format:

 

A lock-merge identity is made up of aspects, but the aspects all have their own facets because they are also separable independent persons.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

sub-system instead of becoming one unified entity. Both would interrupt each other

 

Lock-merge is not a subsystem because in merged state, they act as one person, they wouldn't interrupt themself. They are one unified entity in the merge like a typical merge.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

I don't think our brain could handle

 

I'm sure Lumi would argue that this is another Bearisian querk and normal systems simply can't. I don't know how to rebut that anymore, it's self-defeating just like some system saying they can never switch but somehow eventually manage to.

 

This is, I would say, easier than switching by a long shot, but it requires that same 'ah-ha!' Moment perhaps. I wasn't involved in that moment, Darlene and Joy mostly cooked up this scheme and if they practiced at all, they didn't include me. From what they said at the time, it seemed like they just decided to do it, got agreement and did it spontaneously as if they knew what they were doing beforehand.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

I don't think it would help our system.

 

At this point I won't argue. Some may find the concept useful, others won't.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

While a median interpretation is an option

 

It's actually not the same, so don't interpret it this way.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

as long as my headmates see themselves as seperate parts, each headmate will want time.

 

This is where the Lock-Merge gains usefulness. All constituents each 'get time' simultaneously. Just like Johnny Dep isn't feeling left out when he is Captain Jack Sparrow. If the pirate character was an independent person as well, this is how the Lock-Merge would be, only the pirate also gains experience when Johnny is expressed.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

A median group will have to share time among themselves, effectively getting less time per individual part.

 

That's right, which is why a Lock-Merge isn't like a median group.

 

Also, this isn't for fun, it's to solve a very real problem of overpopulation and time starvation.

 


 

For Reference:


 

1 hour ago, Luminesce said:

Foregoing the math... you're saying that a merge means the (let's just keep it simple) two people making it up are gone, leaving only the one - while with a lock-merge as you've named it, the two people are in a relatively unique state of conscious-but-not-fully-there, while the merge at least feels like it's drawing its actions/thoughts from those two?

 

No, not like that.

 

Each constituent is themself and only themself. They don't draw anything from anyone else. Even a typical merge can be like this.

 

The key point is, the constituents identify as the expressed when they're not expressing. Therefore they experience simultaneously. Even if the expressed does things that the constituent wouldn't do. In this way exposure therapy can work to expose constituents to things they would otherwise be afraid to do and they learn from this as if they themselves did it.

 

To use your format

 

the two people are uniquely themselves experiencing conscious and fully there simultaneously, while the merge is expressing personality [aspect] identical to one of them. It feels like it's drawing its actions/thoughts from that aspect only.

 

1 hour ago, Luminesce said:

Complicated to define since that's only halfway to the next easy point to describe - a preferably non-existing term, where the two who are merged still exist at the same time as who they supposedly merged to create.

 

Yes, it's a lock-merge. The teminological cat is out of the bag and long gone.

 

1 hour ago, Luminesce said:

due to the ambiguity of the experience of system members experiencing/influencing the merge they're supposedly creating.

 

[Joy] there's no ambiguity from my perspective. When I'm expressed, I'm me. When SheShe's expressed, I'm SheShe.

 

[Bear] what helped spark this recent revelation of understanding is that I can play with Joy and simultaneously the other constituents of her Lock-Merge are also feeling like they're playing.

 

So when I spend time with Aleshe, I'm simultaneously spending time with my entire system including all three dozen characters as she was designed. Again, she was a spontaneous evolution that I, the Bear, had no roll in creating but happened after we were playing with conventional merges.

 

I will eventually explain it in a way you can endorse, this is one step in that direction. 

 


 

The other users who said they had something similar haven't posted for a while. I won't call them out either, given this further refinement of the concept, they may change stance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no, so you are describing "lock-merge" as merge-ee's existing at the same time as their merge. You're just applying special connection rules to it in your system (that again, make it much much harder to recreate for others - it's not easy to understand and set up such a connection/way-it-works, which is why things like switching are so difficult to teach/learn)

 

I mean, for any system who can set up this framework this is perfectly fine. However I don't endorse the concept at all to people not already successful with it. Tulpas should be considered totally gone during a merge - what you're doing is the equivalent of taking the safety off. Still not a problem if handled well, but if not handled well, dangerous. Especially for the types who have trouble with walk-ins, or struggle with their senses of selves/their identities.

 

And merging/splitting is often used as a crutch by those very people with issues with their selves/identities, so I really won't recommend this "in general". Only to established systems that aren't liable to start doubting their very beings because of it. Non-permanent merging is already messy enough without the constituents co-existing with the merges.

 

 

Thinking about this in practice, it almost feels safe to say it's dangerous when merging is done with any intent to "fix" or "round out/improve" anyone involved, while it's safe when done recreationally. I don't at all stand by that very rough statement, but it's the overall feeling I get.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Luminesce said:

what you're doing is the equivalent of taking the safety off.

 

What safety?

20 minutes ago, Luminesce said:

Tulpas should be considered totally gone during a merge

 

This is consistent with a typical merges.

48 minutes ago, Luminesce said:

struggle with their senses of selves/their identities.

 

Tulpamancy is in itself dangerous for DR/DP and psychosis prone individuals. It's an ungrounded activity. Yet no one warns this. I've seen a pattern of seemingly ok people in tulpamancy for a few years, and suddenly they're having DID symptoms. It's a correlation.

 

Your concerns are noted. Being of sound mind and body probably should be a prerequisite to tulpamancy IG.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BearBeaBeau said:

This is consistent with a typical merges.

 

What do you mean by this?

 

By safety, I mean that by not attempting to keep parts of a merge active while they should be merged, you avoid many very easy problems of doubt and identity confusion, sense of self philosophical issues... But as soon as you start having both the merge and any of the merge-ee's active at the same time, these questions arise and need to be dealt with, and a lot of people really aren't good at dealing with them.

 

Also, when I talk about problems with identity and sense of self, I'm usually just referring strictly to tulpamancy. You don't need any kind of disorder to struggle with this stuff, only doubts. And inversely, having a stable understanding/set of beliefs about how these things work make them non-issues. A lot of people lack that and kind of just play-by-ear tulpamancy, and stuff like this is the kind of thing that really "rocks the boat" of their beliefs/starts up doubts. IMO

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 hours ago, BearBeaBeau said:

The idea is that any constituent can express any other constituent, from one perspective as if they're aspects of themselves, from another perspective, as if they're speaking for them, from yet another perspective, as if they are them and just playing the part of separate person. The perspective taints the experience so to be clear, at no point does anyone lose independence. They are, however, experiencing life as if they're the aspect of whoever's expressed.

 

I'm not sure if you were agreeing with what I said, disagreeing, or adding to it after reading this. I'm going to try a different example to see if I can better understand this.

 

Scratch that, I read again and I realized my example probably doesn't apply. I'll leave it here instead of deleting it:

 

Spoiler

 

For the sake of example, let's say merging is like mixing two fluids together.

If you take a cup, pour water and oil, and then shake, it will become one liquid. Let's call this an A + B = AB merge because the end result is something new. If you want the merge to seperate, you stop shaking the bottle and let the cup sit, allowing it to seperate.

 

Let's say you have two new liquids that when mixed together, create a new liquid. This would be an A + B = C merge. If the two liquids have a hard time mixing, you may add another ingredient to make it easier for everything to stay somewhat mixed, hence the + ? part of the equation. This new liquid can actually stand as a new headmate if given forcing time, but it's highly recommend against. In some systems, the same merge is created, in ours it's a different merge every time.

 

What Blue and Chrome did is like pouring oil and water into the same cup and not shaking it. Blue and Chrome shared a mind form and seemed to share other things, but overall they were still distinguishable from one another.

 

From what I'm gathering, a lock-merge is one entity, but it also allows for seperation? Is a lock-merge like having 5 cups and you only get to hold one cup at a time or is it more like one cup with 5 liquids forming distinct layers? If it's more like the latter, why is it different from the latter?

 

 


 

4 hours ago, BearBeaBeau said:

The key point is, the constituents identify as the expressed when they're not expressing. Therefore they experience simultaneously. Even if the expressed does things that the constituent wouldn't do. In this way exposure therapy can work to expose constituents to things they would otherwise be afraid to do and they learn from this as if they themselves did it.

 

5 seperate pieces... All 5 are paralell processing, and only one is interacting with the system while everyone else passively observes... That sounds like a sub-system, especially if the thoughts of the others are hidden from everyone else but shared between each other.

 

Without paralell processing, it would just be a group of tulpas who take turns. Instead of Blue and Chrome sharing a body, they would just take turns talking and the other wouldn't be allowed to talk.

 

A sub-system isn't exactly median, although I think it gets more complicated because each headmate can choose to have their own mind form and independent presence.

 


 

3 hours ago, Luminesce said:

Oh no, so you are describing "lock-merge" as merge-ee's existing at the same time as their merge. You're just applying special connection rules to it in your system (that again, make it much much harder to recreate for others - it's not easy to understand and set up such a connection/way-it-works, which is why things like switching are so difficult to teach/learn)

 

When Bear first started talking about SheShe, I assumed that SheShe was a separate tulpa that formed as a result of people playing with merging. However, I made this assumption with a lack of understanding on how a lock-merge works.

 

Right now, I'm still confused if SheShe is a merge or a tulpa. A merge is dependent on their parent mergers to exist inside of them or at least for their call triggers to point to the merge. If the merge splits, the merge dissipates if it is an A + B = C merge. I think when a merge is so sloppy the C part is disconnected from A and B, it's safe to call that a walk-in and/or a merge baby.

 

Here's where I am confused: Assuming the following:

 

1) SheShe is interchangeable with Joy, who is a separate entity

 

2) SheShe is a merge between Joy, Ren, Gwen, and Darlene

 

3) Joy is now a merge between Ren, Gwen, Darlene, and SheShe

 

Therefore I have to deduce SheShe is now a separate entity and can no longer be thought of as a merge.

 

You mentioned a "hub" wasn't necessary, so I'm assuming SheShe was the expected "hub" and that lead to her being a separate tulpa.

 

I would like clarification on SheShe because I think the concept of a questionable merge being part of a merge is possibly overcomplicating things. If I understand this concept correctly, Joy, Ren, Gwen, SheShe, and Darlene are not at risk of creating a new headmate because you talk to one at a time while everyone else is sharing the experience and watching in parallel. The expectation they would become one new headmate lead to SheShe's creation.

 

4 hours ago, BearBeaBeau said:

At this point I won't argue. Some may find the concept useful, others won't.

 

I'm not trying to say other people can't find this helpful, I was trying to explain that my understanding of your lock-merge (from my previous post) may not be a good fit for us. I don't believe what Chrome and Blue experienced was a great alternative for our system, and that was my initial understanding of what a lock-merge is.

 

However, right now I'm really confused about what a lock-merge is. If it involves parallel processing, that's not something we can do anyway, at least not right now.

 


 

2 hours ago, BearBeaBeau said:

Tulpamancy is in itself dangerous for DR/DP and psychosis prone individuals. It's an ungrounded activity. Yet no one warns this. I've seen a pattern of seemingly ok people in tulpamancy for a few years, and suddenly they're having DID symptoms. It's a correlation.

 

Your concerns are noted. Being of sound mind and body probably should be a prerequisite to tulpamancy IG.

 

I'm going to start a separate thread with this, I have more to say but I don't want to derail this thread.

Edited by Ranger

I'm Ranger, Gray's/Cat_ShadowGriffin's tulpa, and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff.

My other headmates have their own account now.

Temporary Log | Switching LogcBox | Yay! | Bre Translator

Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, Ranger said:

5 seperate pieces... All 5 are paralell processing, and only one is interacting with the system while everyone else passively observes...

 

No. One piece experiencing from one point of view. All experience shared. Like the example I gave with Johnny Dep and the pirate, they're not a system. The pirate is his aspect as in a group of facets used to express the pirate.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

That sounds like a sub-system, especially if the thoughts of the others are hidden from everyone else but shared between each other.

 

I'm obviously doing a poor job of explaining it. When *you* roleplay you are not being yourself, but you're still you, not a system of you(s). The model that fits my data best is that the independent people become aspects of one, each with their own set of facets.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

Without paralell processing, it would just be a group of tulpas who take turns.

 

Nope. You're trying to understand by calling it things that I already said doesn't apply. Abandon that concept, it's not what this is.

 

Parallel processes is not required either. It's a singular experience that's shared by the constituents. "That time I was a catboy, I wasn't also a bear."

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

A sub-system isn't exactly median, although I think it gets more complicated because each headmate can choose to have their own mind form and independent presence.

 

This is off topic, just so you know, because we're neither talking about sub-systems nor independent minds within the merge. Only that they can be separated into independent minds. It's not a blend either, it's a shared experience is all, otherwise they would all be inactive (dormant) and have no experience.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

Right now, I'm still confused if SheShe is a merge or a tulpa.

 

SheShe and Ren (and Aleshe) are more classically a tulpa than anything else considering they were generated thoughtforms. They're the only ones that approach tulpas. Everyone else is other or soulbonds. I thought she was only defined as the merge when I first met her, but she was more a catalytic focus that was designed by Darlene, Joy, Gwen and Ren for their combined representative. What I realized was she wasn't needed to make this happen, but she certainly is appreciated and loved.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

A merge is dependent on their parent mergers to exist inside of them or at least for their call triggers to point to the merge.

 

Risha.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

I think when a merge is so sloppy the C part is disconnected from A and B, it's safe to call that a walk-in and/or a merge baby.

 

Yes, Risha does not exist without Ren and Misha. She's just like Felicity in EweEff system.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

SheShe is a merge between Joy, Ren, Gwen, and Darlene

 

*a Lock-Merge, not a conventional merge. As it turns out, she just acted as the 'face of the merge', unlike a conventional merge, she's her own person outside the merge. I wouldn't call her a sloppy merge baby though, lol. So it's extra confusing because Lock-Merge shares traits with merge. It's like the non-newtonian fluid of tulpamancy.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

Joy is now a merge between Ren, Gwen, Darlene, and SheShe

 

Joy is Joy, and because of her current connection to them, when Joy is Joy, Ren is also Joy, Gwen is also Joy, SheShe is also Joy, and Darlene is also Joy. Just like Johnny Depp is also Jack Sparrow, though in his case, they're not independent and Jack is a character aspect in all cases, inseparable and dependent (as far as we know.)

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

Therefore I have to deduce SheShe is now a separate entity and can no longer be thought of as a merge.

 

That's one of my points. Always has been.

 

They make up a configuration of connection that allows them to co-experience instead of go dormant. I.e. Lock-Merge(tm).

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

You mentioned a "hub" wasn't necessary, so I'm assuming SheShe was the expected "hub" and that lead to her being a separate tulpa.

 

I can only model based on experience. This is what I thought she was and it was easier for me to understand it this way, less confusing. I was confused enough, trust me.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

If I understand this concept correctly, Joy, Ren, Gwen, SheShe, and Darlene are not at risk of creating a new headmate because you talk to one at a time while everyone else is sharing the experience and watching in parallel.

 

I can only talk to one headmate at a time no matter who or what they are. Conversation with words is limited to linear operations. Their state can be combined and expressed separately (one at a time) or separated and independent again. Like Misha and Ashley always are. When I talk to and interact with SheShe alone, I am simultaneously interacting with all her constituents because they identify as her. They're as good as dormant though because they're not just sitting back and watching in easy chairs, they *are* her.

 

When they are Lock-Merged, there is no parallel, there's one. They will share and identify as that singular experience regardless of who's expressed.

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

The expectation they would become one new headmate lead to SheShe's creation.

 

That was by design in this case. I wasn't involved though. I am sure I would have been confused more if say Joy said, "I'm all of them now." But now it makes perfect sense to me. That's why I called her a catalytic device for this prototype configuration. Aleshe is as well. I think it's a lot easier to accept and adjust in that way, but it's not necessary. At this point it doesn't matter though, my system size is now configurable using this mechanism.

 

2 hours ago, Ranger said:

If it involves parallel processing

 

It's not related. It's simpler than having separate headmates active. So simple that Aleshe can represent *all* of them, and in turn, she indenifies as everyone, when they're merged or not, but Misha doesn't identify as Aleshe unless Aleshe is active and Misha is not.

 

SheShe identifies as Joy when she is merged into Joy, not when she's independent of Joy as a separate person.

 

Example: (leave Misha and Ashley out if this for a moment)

 

Joy is in mindspace alone, everyone in her Lock-Merge identifies as her, she does not identify as anyone other than herself.

 

Joy and Ren are in mindspace only. It defaults to Joy co-experiencing with the rest while Ren is just Ren. Everyone but Ren is identifying as Joy.

 

Ren is in the room alone. Everyone is identifying as Ren, even Joy. Etc.

 

SheShe, Ren, Joy, Darlene and Gwen are all in the room; At this point, there is no experiential connection between them.

 

*It's that simple*



Edited by BearBeaBeau
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.

  • Similar Content

    • By neo
      Earlier this week was having a lot of head pressure due to extended periods of visualizing, so as the pressures became annoying and persistent enough, I thought I should address it.
      I've noticed before that my head pressures are related to the way I was flexing my tongue muscles really hard and pressing it against my palate inadvertently.
      I have tried many times visualizing without doing this and, it works momentarily but whenever I stop paying attention to my tongue, there it goes again pressing my palate really hard once I start to concentrate into the visualization. I only notice that I'm doing that after I already start to feel the head pressures. By that time it's too late and it's already bothering me.
       
      So after two days of attempting to visualize with my tongue relaxed without success I thought that I should probably google that.
      So there I go googling the terms "tongue" and "meditation" and I came across this:

      https://www.easyayurveda.com/2020/01/31/khechari-mudra/

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khecarī_mudrā
       
      Very weird, right? That's what I thought too.
      Basically, they stick the tongue up into the nasal cavity above the palate and use that to aid the process of meditation.
      So of course I went down this rabbit hole and found out that some people seem know how to do this naturally.
      This girl is an example of someone that has this ability naturally:
      https://youtu.be/ijpBUfOTBT0
       
      Also other people report having head pressures identical to what we see in tulpamancy in this practice, here's an example of someone describing their head pressures in the context of Kriya meditation:
      https://www.reddit.com/r/kriyayoga/comments/mgpk73/tension_in_the_head_during_dhyana/
       
      Described as "tension in the head that is somewhere between no pain and the pain you experience during a headache."
      This seems to me like it's the same kind of head pressure we experience in tulpamancy. At least to me.
       
      Also I forgot to mention that, they say THIS GIVES YOU IMMORTALITY.
      Which, of course, is bullshit otherwise there would be 1000 year old yogis walking around.
      Then I thought it would be a good idea to ask around here because, well to be honest, the people that practice this don't know how to explain it without anecdotes and dogmatic stories. Which is fine for spiritual people but I want to find what part is real and what part isn't. Or a deconstruction to find the line where the anecdotes end and the actual benefits of this practice begin. Or if there are any benefits at all.
       
      Here is a small list of claims about this technique: (which I have absolute no idea if it's true or not)
       
      -Helps you overcome hunger and makes it so that you go extended periods of time without food.
      -Gives you access to DMT that is stored in your pineal gland. By licking it directly. (yeah gross, the girl in the video seemed to get very high from doing it, she even says she's high afterwards)
      -The practitioner doesn't suffer from decay, disease and death. (this part I think it's flat out not true)
      -Gives you immunity to snake poison. (This one I think it's sorta possible, because some snake poison triggers your immune response and the response of the body is what kills the person not the poison itself, so technically by controlling your immune response you would therefore not die from the poison)
       
      So my questions are:
       
      1-Does anybody else experience their tongue forcing up the palate unintentionally while visualizing or concentrating really hard?
      2-If so, do you think this is related to Khechari mudra? Or is it just tension and I'm looking way too much into it?
      3-Are those just stories and not meant to be interpreted literally? (If so people are doing a bad job at explaining that)
      4-Is there something to this at all? Is it a practice worth looking into?
       
      Just thought it would be cool to ask here, since if I asked on their forum they would either not tell me because it's a closed practice, or even if they did tell me I wouldn't understand because the vocabulary they use is very far removed from anything I can contextualize.
       
      So what do you guys think? Is it all nonsense or not?
    • By ruleofthumb
      Stone: Hello all. I’ve been writing down my experiences with Betty for a few days, and I decided I’d post them here, especially since things have gotten interesting pretty quickly for me. Feel free to comment with any advice you may have.
       
      Day 0 - 11/10
       
      As I was lying on the couch, in a position in which I could fall asleep, I decided to force a bit with Betty. I was in a room full of bins and other stuff, but I wanted to place her form in the room, as opposed to my developing wonderland, as I wanted her to be with me in a real location. I decided to put her in the crib, and as she is the size of an adult woman, she looked unamused.
       
      I’m unsure if what I’m about to detail is parroting/puppeting:
       
      I started talking to her. As this was a casual forcing session before bed, I did not write down what we talked about, and I don’t remember what we talked about. However, I remember getting verbal and non-verbal responses. When I asked her questions, sometimes she’d verbally respond before I was finished asking the question, and sometimes she wouldn’t respond at all. She also responded non-verbally with facial expressions. I remember these expressions as being somewhat unnatural but making sense. When I say somewhat unnatural, I mean she used non-verbal expressions more than a human would use, and used them in instances a human would likely not use them. However, these expressions made sense, as they weren’t completely random and did convey some sort of answer to my question. It almost seemed she’d answer with a face because my brain was too lazy to generate a response from her, or couldn’t figure out how.
       
      I hypothesize that giving her a form has given my brain an out when it cannot generate words for her, and I’m hoping this will speed up the process.
       
      This is not the first day interacting with Betty, but I’ve barely talked to her at all before this, and have pretty much only imposed her in my room and puppeted her. I feel like I got a response too early, and I’m worried this may have been parroting/puppetry on my part. I am excited if these were “real” responses though. I’m not sure if there’s much of a difference this early though.
       
      It’s partially a shame this happened, as I want to organize these notes into some sort of study, but after opening with, “Maybe my tulpa answered as soon as I started talking to her,” this likely won’t be taken as seriously. And, that’s valid.
       
      Day 1 - 11/11
       
      Didn’t talk with Betty today.
       
      Day 2 - 11/12
       
      I haven’t done any forcing yet today, as it is 3:40 AM (I was woken up by family).
       
      I was thinking about meditating before each active forcing session, as it clears my mind and I like it, but these stats are making me think twice about that idea.
       
      https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/504226472526086155/506764115721584650/tulpa_creation_big_survey_writeup.pdf
       
      Still, I tend to get distracted and have trouble jumping into forcing, and I believe short meditation before forcing may help me. Though perhaps meditation, the way I do it, focuses more on plain reality than the world of thought, and will take me out of the world of thought. Perhaps this is why it seems to hinder some people.
       
      I’m thinking if I meditate on my tulpa, and not on my body as I usually do, it may help more than hurt. I plan to not meditate the first week, and to meditate the second week, and see how I feel. People are different, and meditate differently, so I’d like to see how meditation works on me.
       
      I would like to personality force soon, and I would like to use Man’s method along with symbolism. I have a list of personality traits here:
       
      http://ideonomy.mit.edu/essays/traits.html
       
      I want her to be a rounded person, but I wonder how ethical it is to purposefully give her negative traits. I suppose I will give her positive and neutral traits, and, those traits will naturally have negative sides. Virtue is the mean of two vices, after all.
       
      30-35 personality traits: (31)
      Affectionate - Bun (they hug whatever they surround)
      Amusing - Laffy Taffy (hahahahahahahahaha)
      Charming - Pringles (the Pringles guy seems like a charming fellow)
      Clever - Barbecue Chips on Bun (how does this taste so good!?)
      Confident - Kettle Chips (tougher and more sure than regular chips?)
      Edgy - Chips and Salsa (chips have edges, and salsa has bite)
      Empathetic - Marshmellows (soft empathy)
      Esthetic - That’s It Bar (minimalist aesthetic)
      Ethical - (ethical alternative)
      Extroverted - Fruit Loops (there’s a party in my bowl and everyone is invited)
      Familial - Rice Crispies (families commonly make treats out of these)
      Friendly - Peach Cup (sweet and good for you)
      Healthy - Plain Cheerios (healthier)
      High-spirited - Skittles (sugar rush)
      Honest - Plain Toast (it is what it is)
      Irreligious - Pretzel Rods (secularized pretzels)
      Leisurely - Sub (this takes longer to make, but it’s worth it)
      Loyal - Saltines (there even when you’re sick)
      Maternal - Applesauce (often for babies)
      Neat - Mints (keep yourself and your breath clean)
      Observant - Fritos (have you noticed these smell like dog feet?)
      Outdoorsy - Seaweed (or is it lakeweed, in Michigan?)
      Protective - Oyster Crackers (Oysters have a Shell to protect themselves, and you use yours to protect others as well)
      Ritualistic - Mobius-strip Bagel (the endless cycle of traditions)
      Romantic - Strawberry Lemon Ice (pink!)
      Sarcastic - Mint Chocolate Oreos (means one thing (toothpaste) says the other (cookie))
      Stylish - Gardetto's (more fancy than Chex Mix)
      Spontaneous - Donut (donut think about the calories)
      Trendy - Pea Crisps (health food trends)
      Vivacious - Strawberry Remune (lively and carbonated)
      Witty - Berry Good Lemonade (get it?)
       
      Below are some interactions I recorded. They are not exhaustive:
       
      Interaction 1
       
      “How are you?”
       
      “Ok.”
       
      “Yeah I’m sure you are. I’m sure you’re not just parroting.”
       
      “...”
       
      I feel mean now. Apologize to the nice lady.
       
      “...”
       
      I feel a stare.
       
      “God this is so awkward,” I say instead of apologizing. I turn away.
       
      I feel her watching me. I turn to her.
       
      “How are you?”
       
      ”...”
       
      Interaction 2
       
      “Are you listening?”
       
      “No.”
       
      “What are you doing?”
       
      “Paying attention.”
       
      “Paying attention to what?”
       
      “To, Hefty.”
       
      I burst into laughter.
       
      Interaction 3
       
      “I’m sorry.”
       
      “No that’s alright.”
       
      “Everything’s ‘no that’s alright’ with you. That’s your main thing, isn’t it?”
       
      “No.”
       
      “Really? What’s your main thing?”
       
      “Bicycles.”
       
      “No. I made you say that.”
       
      “Yes you did.” She smirks.
       
      I laugh. “Yes I did. No really, what’s your main thing?”
       
      “Shopping carts.”
       
      “Now you’re just thinking of things with wheels.”
       
      “No. You are.”
       
      “No I’m not.”
       
      “Yes. Think of shopping carts.”
       
      “Ah you got me. Let me write that down.”
       
      ***
       
      Stone: I talked to her a bit today, and I talked to her a little bit about spontaneity with a donut. But, I think I could have explained it more. I will after I sleep, as I’ve been up all night. I got a lot of great responses out of her, and she felt there, but she tended to sound like me. I kept mentioning that, then felt bad for being overly critical of her, as she was doing so well. I also felt bad interrupting her and making her wait so I could write something down.
       
      It’s only been three days and I hate this clinical approach I set up. This “study.” Or maybe I’m embarrassed by how I acted and am taking it out on the format. I don’t know. What I do know is that this process if for her, then for me, then for whoever may end up reading this. I’m not going to interrupt out fun to give us imposter syndrome because I have to analysis every god damn thing she says for some post.
       
      Anyways, today was a positive, and I hope I will feel better with some sleep.
       
      I’m awake now. I’ve devised a schedule for forcing.
      Sunday - Active: 2 hours
      Monday - Active: 40 minutes
      Tuesday - Active: 40 minutes
      Wednesday - Active: 40 minutes
      Thursday - Active: 40 minutes
      Friday - Active: 40 minutes
      Saturday - Active: 2 hours
       
      Methods of forcing I’m thinking of using:
      Food/Personality
      101 Things To Talk About With Your Tulpa
       
      Font - Arial, Size - 14
    • By Wray
      Text by Wray is in black
      Text by Shizuku is in blue

      (Sorry, this wound up being pretty long! Feel free to skim, or if you want to read the whole thing, strap in!)

      Weird coincidence: I’ve written fiction as a hobby for a long time, and I think nearly half my protagonists have someone else to talk to in their heads. Somehow, I always found the idea fascinating.

      But I can’t say I ever expected to join them. Not until recently, anyway.
       
      We’ve been looking forward to posting this. It’s my first big chance to introduce myself to other people! Here’s a profile:
       

      Origin StoryTM
       
      October 2020. I was in quarantine, alone, and feeling isolated—Shizuku started as an imaginary friend based on a character I might have been (was) a little bit (totally) obsessed with at the time. I’m really into writing, so I didn’t have much trouble getting her to talk, even early on, though I assume she was mostly parroted at first.
       
      A couple weeks later, I stumbled onto the concept of a tulpa in Japanese, and quickly found my way to this website, which is kind of the launch pad for Japanese tulpamancers. (I found a good English rundown of the Japanese tulpamancy scene here, so I’ll leave most of that aside for now. If there are questions about anything specific, though, we can definitely do our best to answer them.)

      Compared to the English-speaking community, the Japanese-speaking one gives a lot more credence to tulpa horror stories. They call it 暴走 (bousou). The idea that if things go wrong, your tulpa might harm you, or the people around you, or try to take over your brain. To be fair, I think there are multiple schools of thought on this bousou concept, and these are only the most extreme examples—still, when I read about this, I couldn’t help panicking.
       
      I went out for a long walk. Tried to think things over. Was there a chance my tulpa would wind up that way? Should I turn back now? Or was she already sentient, meaning it was my responsibility to take care of her? Or was I crazy, in the first place, to even be thinking about any of this?
       
      We imagined that I stayed behind in our apartment, though I must’ve been somewhere in headspace the whole time. Maybe a wonderland version of the apartment? We didn’t know enough to ask that question, then.
       
      I couldn’t make up my mind, until the second I got home, opened the door, and realized how afraid Shizuku must’ve felt while I was out thinking about whether I should try to erase her. My heart sank through the floor. I did my best to apologize, though I didn’t know if it would help.
       
      She replied: “I was sad, but I wasn’t scared. I trust you.”
       
      Okay. If she had been afraid, or angry, I would have felt bad enough. But that packed a punch.

       
       
      That day, we promised each other that we’d stay together and try to make this “tulpa” thing work, for better or worse. Not to jinx anything, but six months later, “better” is definitely winning out.
       
      Our long-term goals
       
      (1) Become able to split fronting time 50/50 (or whatever arrangement winds up working for us). I expect it’ll be a long time before we can actually do this, but hopefully not too long—if possible, we’d like to get to this point within a year or two. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a 50/50 split, but I don’t want to feel like Shizuku is prevented from doing things she wants to do by us not being good enough at tulpamancy.
       
      (2) Learn to co-front and keep Shizuku active (as close as possible to?) all the time. We spend a lot of time together, but I still get distracted and forget to check in with her more often than we’d like. Eventually, we’re hoping she can stay around all the time (or whenever she wants to, at least) and get my attention whenever she has something to say.
       
      (3) Stay a two-person system, if possible. I know there are a lot of large systems out there who do perfectly fine, but my instincts say that it would be more than we could handle. Besides, I already feel like I love Shizuku too much for it to be fair to whoever Headmate Number 3 would be. 😂
       
      I do have one soulbond-ish character (using the terminology from Bear’s PR) from my own writing. We’ve talked things over with her in WL, and she’s adamant that she is not interested in becoming a tulpa or participating in the system. (This checks out with what I know about her character, too.) If things change, there’s a slim chance that she might join us, but I doubt it. Either way, I can’t imagine us going any further than that.
       
      (4) Help Shizuku find life goals of her own, and figure out how to rearrange my our life so that we can both do what we want to do. At the moment, we’re just doing regular forcing to try and help her grow as a tulpa. The vague plan for this one is to eventually learn how to switch, accomplish goal number (1), and then let her follow her interest and try a bunch of different things.
       
      Current forcing practice
       
      Working on senses in WL: we’ve been doing our best to spend an hour each day focusing on visualizing Shizuku in wonderland, and also practicing one other sense per day. Wonderland sight and touch have started to show some improvement recently, but overall it feels like we still need a lot of work. Conversation: We also do our best to talk as much as we can each day. We’ve been working through the Tulpa Vocalization Practice worksheet when we can’t think of any other topics. Diary writing: Shizuku writes a diary entry most days. This is something I picked up from the Japanese tulpamancy community, though I think I’ve seen it recommended in English guides too. It’s a lot of fun—somehow, reading through the things she’s written (by proxy or possession, at this point, though our possession game is still pretty weak) does a lot to help me fight off doubt. Imagining Shizuku in stories we’re reading/watching: This has been pretty fun so far, too—right now, we’re rewatching Hunter X Hunter. As we watch, we try to keep up a “mental fanfic” where she’s running around with the main characters. Passive forcing as much as possible: Taking inspiration from the method I used to learn Japanese, I’m doing my best to find ways to involve Shizuku in everything I do. We’ve had some success reading, studying, watching things, and playing games together, but in particular, staying aware of Shizuku during work that I really need to focus on and conversations with other people has been a killer—I haven’t had much success in these situations yet.  
      To anyone who slogged through all of that, thanks for reading! This post already goes on for a million years, so I’ll try to write some (hopefully shorter!) summaries of our progress so far in other updates.
    • By Cosmic Cuttlebone
      Well, I've lurked, and I've lurked, and then I've lurked some more.
      I've read pretty much every guide there is. But now it's time to actually get to work
      Problem is... Well, you see, I'm lazy. Like, really really lazy. I also have a habit of hesitating and second guessing myself. I can also get a little distracted. Sometimes.
      So, I'm starting this little journal here.
      I'll try to add a post here periodically, even if it is relatively short. At least in the beginning. Cultivating this small habit will hopefully force a little discipline.
      Typing it all out will hopefully solidify my thoughts. Yell at me if don't keep this up. :Þ
       
      That being said. Lets start:
       
      Why am I doing this? What do I hope to gain?
      Well a companion for one. I don't have that much trouble making friends, but I have trouble keeping and maintaining connections. I've quite often drifted or grown apart from many people in my life. I'm a bit socially awkward, maybe even a bit socially anxious in some respects. I can certainly hide it, but the more people are around, the more I find myself wishing I was somewhere else, doing something else. It's not that I hate people, I don't.  And I don't plan to stop making connections with physical people. I just don't have the physical or mental energy to deal with too many people for too long.
       
      Still, the opportunity for someone to understand me on a truly deep level that no one else can is very enticing. I can only hope that I'll be, and remain, worthy of this connection.
       
      This will also be a bit of an ego journey for me. A chance to better know and understand myself as well as my future headmate. having someone to share this journey with will make it much more enjoyable.
       
      Also add to that the opportunity to learn first hand an experience that seems rather alien at first glance and that I'm already a creative person, this becomes less of a choice and more of an inevitability.
       
      The start
      Right now I have a name and very loose, general idea of who I hope this tulpa will be.
      Staying within the tradition of opposite genderedness in tulpamancy, "Hazel" will start female. This will help me differentiate her thoughts from mine.
       
      A couple main traits I will be cultivating are:
      Compassion- A personal code I like to live by is if someone needs or asks for help and I am able to do so, then I will help. Lessen the suffering of others. Having her share in that will make it simpler to coexist. This will also encourage many positive traits
      Curiosity- a desire to learn and grow will help develop her and push her to be self sustaining
      Outspokenness-  to encourage vocality.
      this is not exhaustive just some major points
       
      What I won't be forcing:
      Love- From what I understand, most tulpas tend to be already naturally very caring towards their hosts. Also love, I feel, needs to develop naturally. Making someone love me just feels weird. plus that is a pressure I wouldn't want on anyone. Still, I'm sure my subconscious may still add this to the list regardless.
      Lust- same
       
      Form:
      I don't have much of a form for her yet. I've had some ideas but none are really sticking. It is humanoid though. Freckles and dark hair are also coming to mind. That could just be my attraction to them.
       
      I will, of course, accept any deviation from her. Encourage it, even.
       
      The Method
      I'm a very secular being by nature. Still, the mind loves symbols and most of the tulpamantic process is extremely symbolic. As such, I'll be taking some inspiration from the occult, particularly chaos magic.
      so:
      I love symbols, glyphs, and sigils. This is a representation of my intent to create a thoughtform. It is a seed or an egg as the round shape suggests. A beginning. Small and empty at first, but as time goes on, I'll be altering it and adding to it. It will slowly grow as she grows. In time, I may pass it to her. I'm creative by nature so this will just be a natural part of my creative process. The dotted outline suggests openness, inviting life to enter. The geometric shapes invoke a crystalline structure to "trap" the energy or qualities being cultivated. (Again, I'm not a proponent of metaphysics, but the symbology here is very useful).
       
      I will use and meditate on this as an aid while I cultivate her development. I'm not too fond of the term 'forcing' at all, so I'll use the term 'cultivate' as it way better describes the process: to raise, to grow, to prepare, do develop, to improve, to acquire. It brings to mind watering and tending to a garden. This will further put me in the right mindset. (I also have mixed thoughts on the terms tulpa and tulpamancy but I have no desire to get into a fight with the entire lexicon).
       
      Wish me luck.
    • By Renesmee
      Hi! Renesmee here. So, today I created Rosalie (placeholder name). I introduced myself during an active-forcing session and then sent an email to an account I set up so I could email her for forcing. I'm feeling encouraged and optimistic. More reports as events warrant!
×
×
  • Create New...