Perfect Possession is simple! Here's how to enact it! Great for beginners!

[Ice909]

 

Allow me to clear something up-- Perfect Possession isn’t all that perfect. The name originates from the game Touhou 15.5, though the actual technique and in-game version are quite different. Nevertheless, this technique requires a strong foundation in possession. It is intended for those that cannot switch or co-front but can possess. 

 

What Is Perfect Possession? 

Perfect Possession is a technique in which two tulpas(It may be a tulpa and the host, but it isn’t recommended) do a little “ritual” before they both possess at once. The two participants maintain possession until the front is secured, where it then turns from possession to co-fronting. 

 

Participants in Perfect Possession each have a designated role, decided beforehand. The “primary” tulpa is called the “Major” participant, and the “secondary” is called the “Minor” participant. Perfect Possession relies at least partially on the thematics of the process. If the terms Major and Minor make you uncomfortable, feel free to substitute them with whatever you please(ie, “Primary” and “Secondary”). 

 

How do I initiate Perfect Possession? 

1. To start off, have the two system mates designate which role they each are assuming. As previously mentioned, it can be argued it is an arbitrary step, though I personally think the thematics are one of the greatest contributors to the success of the technique, especially for fledgling systems. A word of advice regarding who's who, we've found that having the more "sensible" or generally more forced system mate (either or) act as Minor works best, essentially serving as a mental anchor of sorts for the Major. Of course, this isn't some hard rule, merely a suggestion. These instructions are but suggested guidelines for Perfect Possession, not hard by-the-book rules you must abide by. 

 

2. Second, have the host do a little ritual of their own. “I am <Your name>, of <Your system name>. I am henceforth withdrawing from the front. I am no longer the primary thinker.” The wording doesn’t have to be precise or formulaic, do what works best. Immediately after, have the two tulpas begin possession, preferably of the full-body variety. 

 

3. Next, have the Major and Minor recite a ritual themselves: “I am <tulpa 1 name> of <System name>. I am the Major.” The Minor continues, “I am <tulpa 2 name> of <System name>. I am the Minor.” Then, at once, they say, “We are in control. We henceforth commence Perfect Possession. Begin!” Again, exact wording may vary. It’s whatever works best. The two tulpas have thus begun Perfect Possession. For reference on what it may feel like, think possession, but better. 

 

4. Thereafter, the two tulpas should maintain the front together. They should speak in mind voice each other constantly (Or, if you prefer, in verbal whispers. Works best with a mask on) throughout the process, taking turns doing things as though handing off a game controller. If they aim to do something together, they should each envision controlling half of the body. I only suggest doing movements in this fashion, however, once you get the hang of things. 

 

5. Lastly, as time crawls on, the duo will become more used to the front. Accidental switching in on the host’s part becomes less likely, and manipulation of the body becomes much more natural. When the duo wishes to cease Perfect Possession, they again commence a small ritual. “I am <tulpa 1>...” “...And I am <tulpa 2>” (Together)”We Henceforth cease Perfect Possession and relinquish the front to <host’s name>.” As always, exact wording is irrelevant. It’s the intent that matters most. 

 

And that’s all there is to it! 

 

Conclusion

And that’s all there is to it. Perfect Possession is a stepping stone to switching. Switching isn’t hard, rest assured, though some may beg to differ, which is where this handy-dandy technique comes in. Just remember-- It’s easy. You can do it, I believe in you! 

For those that want a more in-depth explanation of things, (I do not recommend viewing this unless you can already switch and/or Perfectly Possess, as it can mess up your perceptions of things which can prevent you from executing Perfect Possession)

 

Perfect Possession is the host switching out and, through the usage of imagery and theatrics, two tulpas switching in and co-fronting. When two tulpas are fronting, we find it is much more difficult and much less likely that the host will accidentally switch back in, and affirmations become easier when someone is assisting you. Tl;dr, Perfect Possession is a form of switching that is made to seem quick and easy. There’s a conception in the tulpa community, especially amongst beginners, that switching is difficult. The big problem with this is that tulpamancy is a subjective experience, and what you get from it will depend largely on your beliefs. We need to, as a community, depict switching as something far simpler than people have made it out to be in the past. This is one step towards that. I don’t believe this is anything groundbreaking, but it’s something. Our small little contribution to the betterment of this turbulent community. To those of you that clicked this and can’t switch or Perfectly Possess, you need to listen to what’s asked of you! Kidding, kidding, but in all seriousness, switching is easy. Don’t let others tell you otherwise. You got this.

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by IceCreeper909
Changed all references to "Master" and "Slave" to "Major" and "Minor," respectively.

[Lucilyn]

huuuh, I was going to say (especially with "Accidental switching in on the host’s part becomes less likely") that you're just describing switching + co-fronting (afterwards), but you pulled a fast one in the hidden tag and said that's what it IS? Well now I gotta rethink what I was gonna say about it...

 

well first I can say, the insistence on "Master"/"Slave" is a complete lost cause and you're doubling down on the Touhou reference for no reason, primary/secondary is perfect for your intentions with this method, but I think that even just a Tip/Trick of "Have the tulpa who's switching in be in constant contact with a tulpa who is helping them, to help totally suppress the host throughout the process" is really good and even designating titles could be unnecessary with the very easy understanding of the roles you're intending on (ie it's pretty obvious tulpa #2 isn't trying to switch in, without giving them a title)

 

 

so, on the one hand, I think mixing two separate skills into a single process should be confusing/unnecessary, but I respect that your intention is the guiding of the process because expectations are important and all

I will say, that you're still causing more confusion overall by not stating that the end result of this is being switched and co-fronting, since people forge these mental phenomena themselves you're guiding people into mentally cataloguing it as some new third state that isn't switching

I know that's a double-edged sword to try to beat out preconceived expectations making switching hard, but it still seems like it'd do more bad than good

buuuut, that's the only problem I have with it really, all the technique and goal and everything sound great if the goal is just stated honestly (like "The end result of this technique will be the Primary tulpa being switched in, and the Secondary tulpa possessing or co-fronting")

[Ice909]

Bryan: I doubled down on the touhou reference for the theatrics of it. Let's be honest, new 'mancers are gullible and confused. Calling something by a more fantastical term instead of what it is is to trick them into thinking it's something different than what everyone else says is hard. Using the terms "Master" and "Slave" help give it a more, oh, what's the word... mystical feel, almost. It contributes to the theatrics of it, which is half the battle imo. Convince the brain it's doing something, it will do something. 

 

I was trying to be very vague about what the end result is in actuality because odds are, if they're reading our guide, they're reading others, too, and those other guides have made switching out to be very difficult and complex, thus that preconception is already there and is a metaphorical shackle. By saying "This isn't switching", the preconceptions regarding how difficult switching may be or whatever are ignored. 

[Luigi.exe]

Y'know, when Rylazide was reading this, all I could get from his thoughts were, "I have no idea what's going on here," and I couldn't tell if that was Rylazide just being Rylazide, the fact that he was mentally drained  after working on something for a few hours, or if what you wrote was really that confusing.

 

First off, I agree with Lumi here: the slave and master thing should be changed. No tulpa should be equated to a slave like that. Primary and secondary works fine.

 

Secondly, I like how flexible this method is with its wording and that it's actually consistent with its word usage in terms of no absolute statements.

 

However:
 

On 9/2/2021 at 1:47 PM, IceCreeper909 said:

There’s a conception in the tulpa community, especially amongst beginners, that switching is difficult. The big problem with this is that tulpamancy is a subjective experience, and what you get from it will depend largely on your beliefs. We need to, as a community, depict switching as something far simpler than people have made it out to be in the past.

 

This is a form of frontloading and even though it's well-intentioned and that I mostly agree with it, there is still an issue with it. In an essay I recently wrote, I explained that absolute statements and frontloading, regardless if they're positive enough can still have negative consequences. If you tell a Tulpamancy system that switching is in fact this super easy thing that doesn't take long at all to do, thereby setting that expectation, what do you do if that Tulpamancy system despite being set up to believe it was easy still end up struggling for months or even years for any reason? They were lead on to think it wasn't hard, but there they are, struggling. This might lead them to think there's something wrong with them or that they might have been deceived, and it might discourage them.

 

Belief and mindset are powerful tools in Tulpamancy, but at the same time, they themselves are no absolute factor. You can still believe you can do something and put in the 110% percent, but still fail. Thus, I think the best approach isn't to say switching is hard or that it's easy, but rather, emphasize that your mileage will vary. It may take time, it may not. That, and encouraging people to try many different methods to see what works for them instead of just trying the same method over and over again with little or no results.

 

All in all, this method is... unique? Like, it's super goofy and certainly something my systemmates and I wouldn't do personally, but hey, maybe some Tulpamancy systems are looking for some silliness with their guides. I do also really like the idea of using word affirmations multiple times to enforce the idea of switching. Is it a guide I'd personally recommend? Not really sure because the circumstances you need to be in for this guide to be applicable are also a bit specific since you need at least two tulpas that can also possess, but not switch.

[Ice909]

7 minutes ago, Luigi.exe said:

First off, I agree with Lumi here: the slave and master thing should be changed. No tulpa should be equated to a slave like that. Primary and secondary works fine.

Quite understandable. As I've said before, the usage of those terms is to, in a sense, go "all-in" on the thematics. However, if there's a large enough outcry, I'll remove mention of said terms. 

 

9 minutes ago, Luigi.exe said:

If you tell a Tulpamancy system that switching is in fact this super easy thing that doesn't take long at all to do, thereby setting that expectation, what do you do if that Tulpamancy system despite being set up to believe it was easy still end up struggling for months or even years for any reason? They were lead on to think it wasn't hard, but there they are, struggling. This might lead them to think there's something wrong with them or that they might have been deceived, and it might discourage them.

'Tis true. There is no right answer here, of course. As you said briefly after that statement, a stance of "your mileage may vary" would be more sensible. I suppose my intent was to sow a seed of doubt in the reader, as to how easy switching is. With many saying it's hard, if they read that it's actually quite easy, they may begin to doubt how difficult it really is, because suddenly, it's not quite as a unanimous opinion. Does that make sense? 

 

All the same, as before, if enough people want me to change it, I can and will. This is but the first draft, and I appreciate your critique greatly. 

 

14 minutes ago, Luigi.exe said:

All in all, this method is... unique? Like, it's super goofy and certainly something my systemmates and I wouldn't do personally, but hey, maybe some Tulpamancy systems are looking for some silliness with their guides.

15 minutes ago, Luigi.exe said:

Not really sure because the circumstances you need to be in for this guide to be applicable are also a bit specific since you need at least two tulpas that can also possess, but not switch.

I believe I'd already mentioned this, but the guide is meant nigh exclusively for systems in that middle ground of possession and switching. It's the same exact process we used when we first switched, but now that we can switch more easily, we haven't been and likely won't be using this method for a while. It's a stepping stone in the river that is switching, not the shore. 

 

As far as being "goofy", I partially agree? It isn't meant to be super serious, but we weren't aiming to make it "goofy" either. We aimed to hit that sweet-spot of fantastical and down-to-earth to really resonate with mid-stage systems, who are just barely leaving the honeymoon phase, so to speak, of tulpamancy; at least partially knowledgeable and skillful, but not as experienced as most other systems. Different things work at different stages of tulpamancy, I mean to say. 

 

I'll begin making a list of common critiques and notes. So far: 

-Change the terms Master and Slave to Primary and Secondary 

-Modify stance on switching difficulty so it's less definite 

 

The first one I'm still on the fence about, but the second one I'll almost certainly do. It may be worth asking newer 'mancers their thoughts on the terms Master and Slave to get an idea of my target audience's opinions. As previously mentioned, different things work at different stages. The terms "Master" and "Slave" may be less-than-preferred for more experienced systems, but new systems eat that dramatic shit up. 

[Luigi.exe]

52 minutes ago, IceCreeper909 said:

I suppose my intent was to sow a seed of doubt in the reader, as to how easy switching is. With many saying it's hard, if they read that it's actually quite easy, they may begin to doubt how difficult it really is, because suddenly, it's not quite as a unanimous opinion. Does that make sense? 

 

I think a main issue with this is that older guides perpetuate the idea of switching being hard, and it makes me wonder how many people who still read them actually absorb the idea that switching is challenging. Because the problem is with older guides is that they still exist and can be read as easily as a modern guide, but the vast majority of those old guide authors are no longer around, nor willing to change or update their guides. As such, they're just left in this state of being outdated, thus having the potential to spread outdated ideas that can negatively influence people. That's like, the whole reason I suggested a historic guides section when .info eventually moves all the guides and such.

 

1 hour ago, IceCreeper909 said:

I believe I'd already mentioned this, but the guide is meant nigh exclusively for systems in that middle ground of possession and switching. It's the same exact process we used when we first switched, but now that we can switch more easily, we haven't been and likely won't be using this method for a while. It's a stepping stone in the river that is switching, not the shore. 

 

Yeah, specific methods aren't a bad thing, I'm just trying to think of how many people this would benefit.

 

1 hour ago, IceCreeper909 said:

This is but the first draft, and I appreciate your critique greatly. 

 

Glad I can present ample feedback since I know what it's like to be an author, pour your soul into your guide, and all you get is a "it's good."

[Ranger]

I thought I moved this already to the guides list but I didn't

 

There is one problem with moving it and a problem that could affect this guide in the future.

 

The first problem is what category this guide goes under. I believe it is a switching guide, not a possession guide. However, if suggesting this guide is a switching guide will break the guide itself... I'm not really sure what the best solution is. In the future we could rethink guide categories, but for now, I don't even know where to put it on the guides list.

 

The second problem is the master/slave thing is problematic enough it could hold this guide back from being on the new guides board and sit in the planned drafts board instead. This will likely only make the guide more theatrical for Touhou fans if that and for everyone else, may be seen as a weird expectation for how you treat your tulpa. I think the best solution is to replace all of the instances of master/slave with primary/secondary or some other terms if you want theatrics. You could use "leader/pursuer" or different terms, including made up ones. If you want to keep the reference to Touhou, you can mention Touhou without saying the terms or you can do nothing because my guess is most Touhou fans will know what you're talking about just by looking at the title of the guide.

 

I'm not 100% sure on how guides with problems can get moved to drafts just yet, but right now I'm thinking a call for concern followed by a staff vote is the way to go. At the very least, I personally don't feel great moving this to guides.

[Ice909]

The demand for me to change the terms master and slave is greater than the collective desire to keep it as it is, so I'll change it when I get the chance. I'd say you could tag it as possession, switching, and fronting, and kinda just hope that the reader sees the switching tag as a technicality or something. Because, at the end of the day, it is a switching guide. 

I'll revise the guide either today or tomorrow. Thank you for the critique. 

---

@Ranger It is finished. All references to "Master" and "Slave" have been changed to "Major" and "Minor," respectively. If that's still a bit funky, I could change it again, but I wanted to try to maintain at least a bit of the vague mystique that it was built upon. Any other changes that need to be made? 

[Ranger]

I moved it to the guide list under switching submissions. As is, I don't have a problem moving it to my planned "new guides" board.

 

I can give you a formal GAT review if you want, but I don't think I'll get it done in 2 weeks. Given the way you wrote your guide, I would like to do some research on authors pulling surprises at the end and how that flows structurally.

 

I'm personally fine with a couple tags, I'm not okay with a million tags. A lot of guides sometimes sit on the edge of two different things (Gray's guide reads like a visualization guide but to say it's strictly a visualization guide doesn't really work because it's specifically written for constructing wonderlands...), moving forward I think offering more flexibility will be a good idea.

 

Ultimately though, the tags are less important than the guide's listing on the guide list. The tags are not a mandatory feature and the current tags don't give you every guide (You have to search for "[Visualization]" instead of "Visualization" to get some guides.) This too can also be reconsidered too though, nothing is 100% set in stone yet.

[Ice909]

Alright then. A full GAT review would be funny i think, but don't feel like you have to.