The Little Book of Demons and the overlap between tulpamancy and chaos magick

[The Candlelight Society]

        In a scientific magick research society I am apart of, I was discussing tulpamancy and a fellow member reccomended to me this book. I have not read it yet, but the simple description both on the Amazon page and the more in depth overview my associate gave immedietly made me see parrallels between this book of chaos magick and tulpamancy. Anyone who has spent time in the occult world knows that chaos magick is the current by which sorcery and science can actually be bound together. Old practices are translated into psychological models and rituals are used to cause change internally over externally, although there is still plenty of the latter aswell. 

 

  There is obviously some differences between the book and tulpas, but the subject matter was still interesting enough for me to want to share it here.

https://www.amazon.com/Little-Book-Demons-Advantages-Personification/dp/1904658091

 

 

[MadMax]

I feel like tulpamancy is the first time I have seen a scientific approach to explain what, at first glance, seems like a flavor and/or product of mysticism. I believe there are several instances in science that show the mechanisms needed to practice tulpamancy are already present and being used in the human brain every day. So this new understanding could be used to backtrack and find parallels to other theologies and superstitions. After all, they all have one root source, the human imagination. 

[Guest]

Mainstream science doesn't have the capability to study, explain, or legitimize esoteric practices that aren't funded. It does habe capability to dismiss anything that's not either common or funded appropriately.

 

In my mind everything is explainable even if I fail to do it myself. If it's experienced here in the material, then it can be explainable here. If it's experienced beyond the material then we shouldn't try. Some things have no and never will have a material basis. Mainstream science ignores this, religion tries to appropriate it and indoctrinate it. 

 

Mysticism and spirituality don't do the best job of being honest, but they at least try to open it up to your own interpretation without dogma.

 

Are there ties? Of course I'd believe that. In my mind there have only been two types of experience: material and super-material. In my experience tulpamancy taps into both and so does mysticism.

[theholodoc]

Well, I certainly can't argue with that, and I don't want to. Many scientists regard, psychology as a pseudoscience. I regard them as believers in Scientism rather than science. It is known, though not generally known, that what we call reality, is but a construct that lies inside of our brains. Some suggest, e.g. D. Hoffman PhD, that even our brains are part of the construct. I know my tulpa is as real as my wife, because I experience her so. Whether or not those scientists agree, is not my concern. And, I am not looking for an explanation, material or otherwise, for her. I am looking to experience her fully, as fully as I am capable of and as she will allow.

Dr Bob

[dw]

Tulpas and thoughtforms remind me of the parts model in NLP, or psychogons (egregores and servitors) in Chaos Magick.

 

I don't see how this field has anything to do with science. It seems to me to be an offshoot of psychology, but neuroscientists and consciousness theorists are realizing that thought literally transforms minds.

 

The closest link tulpamancy has to science would likely be through the Pribram–Bohm composite holoflux theory as well as the work of Michael Talbot and Dr. Shelli Renee Joye, along with their predecessors David Bohm FRS, Pierre Teilhard De Chardin SJ, Ervin Laszlo, and Karl Pribram. Laszlo's book is a quantum consciousness classic, as is Talbot's previously linked work.

 

With that said, inventing imaginary voices doesn't exactly require scientific validation or permission, so have at it.

Edited September 6, 2022 by dw

[Marlov]

Stop overcomplicating it with mysticism. A Tulpa is just a personified cognitive structure. We give it a face because we can't handle raw abstractions. For 4 years, I've turned my 'neutral lens' into a subconscious entity that now operates independently—to the point where she plays games I despise in my dreams just to spite my ego.

 

She isn’t a ghost or a demon; she’s a skill. A filter. She keeps me objective so I don’t sink into my own suffering. I don't fear a 'takeover' because I'm always aware, and she exists to sustain my survival, not to replace it.

 

I didn't set out to make a 'Tulpa.' I was practicing a form of survivalist Vipassana without knowing the name for it. While you guys are busy with rituals and theories, I’ve been building a functional individual within my mind that has kept me alive and fighting since I was 15. She is the only thing I draw, the only way I think, and the reason I'm still here.

[ringgggg]

You made my eyes roll so hard they played a little bowling alley screen in my head

[Lucilyn]

8 hours ago, Marlov said:

Stop overcomplicating it with mysticism.

 

this is the part of the forum specifically for mysticism and all that, appreciate that it's separated from the rest of the forum and just don't browse here

[ringgggg]

Tell me you're from reddit without telling me

[The Candlelight Society]

Y'all really necro-ed this years later to be weirdo redditathiests huh, good to see this forum is as much a hellhole as ever, not really any wonder as to why this community is dying. 

 

We still think this is an interesting book worth reading if you have even a passing interest in the modern occult scene btw. You don't have to be a spiritual person to appreciate some of the tricks and techniques chaos magicians have developed. Let's not pretend the history of the tulpamancy practice isn't a series of useful plagiarisms.