“Subconscious conversations” as an alternate method to create tulpas

[Chrisis]

Ok, I´m new to this Forum and the creation process of tulpas that is explained on this site. But I have tulpa like beings in my head that think independently. To “create” these beings I have used a method known as “Subconscious conversations” a.k.a Non-Dominant Hand Writing.

 

Detailed explanation here

 

And some example conversations here

 

For short: Write down a question on a paper with your dominant hand and write down the first response that comes into your mind with your non dominant hand.

(However I don´t know how important it is to switch hands. Because I can hardly write something readable with my left hand, I simply write down my questions as well as the voice that responses in my head with my right/dominant hand. That may or may not make a difference though.)

 

It may take some time and a couple tries until you can have a proper conversation, but after some practice you will communicate with an entity that is not your conscious self. With this method I have actually talked to many different individuals that reside inside my head. Their words may be a bit chaotic at first but by talking to the same being on a regular basis they will eventually form a solid personality not unlike tulpas.

 

To be perfectly honest I can´t say I approve of the tulpa creation process mentioned here, so I wanted to offer an alternate way. Tulpas are individual beings just like humans and they should be accepted the way they are. Forming an image of a being and then forcing this image into existence just feels wrong to me. When you give birth to a child you also have to accept the way it is and give it a chance to become the person it wants to be. I know, some people don´t form an image beforehand and let their tulpas be their “natural” way, but still, some do.

 

I also find this method far more efficient. Why create something new when you can also talk to those who are already there? While the traditional method starts with the image “how you would like your tulpa to be”, this method starts with the most important thing: independent thinking for your tulpa as well as the ability to communicate to him\her. If everything goes well you can practicaly talk to them on the first day, they still need some time to “grow” though.

 

With that said I would like to hear your opinions on this method. I´m curious how much the results of these two methods differ. I´m also curious if alternating between hands makes a difference compared to writing only with the dominant hand. If requested I could explain the way my tulpas work because they don´t quite match the description of the tulpas that I see in this forum. For example the “subconscious conversations” allow me to talk to them anytime, but that is also the ONLY way I can talk to them. I apologize if my little criticism has offended anyone or if I misunderstood the tulpa creation process a bit. (I also apologize if I have made any typos, English isn´t my first language)

[waffles]

And some example conversations here

Uuh, "Kill them, kill them all?".

 

To be perfectly honest I can´t say I approve of the tulpa creation process mentioned here, so I wanted to offer an alternate way. Tulpas are individual beings just like humans and they should be accepted the way they are. Forming an image of a being and then forcing this image into existence just feels wrong to me. When you give birth to a child you also have to accept the way it is and give it a chance to become the person it wants to be. I know, some people don´t form an image beforehand and let their tulpas be their “natural” way, but still, some do.

Yeah, thanks, but I'll stick with my non-homicidal tulpas.

 

 

In all seriousness, I wouldn't mind hearing how long it took you to get speaking with your hand tulpa thing, and how you interact exactly. How does it feel when your left hand tells you to kill people writes?

[Chrisis]

It´s not like every conversation is going to end with murder. I have to admit some of the results on that site are a bit creepy, but you’re not creating monsters. Giving birth to a "normal" tulpa could have ended the same way. ( maybe I should remove that link to not scare people away)

 

Anyway, I think it took me about a week until I could talk to a being with a consistent personality. But as I´ve mentioned at the top I´m actually only using my right hand and I simply write down the answer that the voice in my head gives me every time when I write down a question to him. However they´re never present when I´m not talking to them.

(And no they are not trying to kill me)

[waffles]

Anyway, I think it took me about a week until I could talk to a being with a consistent personality. But as I´ve mentioned at the top I´m actually only using my right hand and I simply write down the answer that the voice in my head gives me every time when I write down a question to him. However they´re never present when I´m not talking to them.

(And no they are not trying to kill me)

 

Oh, you did. I'm sorry I missed that.

 

Well, all in all it doesn't sound that different from tulpa-doing from what I've heard so far. But I guess it would do well to tell us how you went about establishing contact exactly. The basic method is outlined, fine, but how did you ask the questions exactly, and what were initial responses like (and so on)?

[Chrisis]

Well, my first question was simply something like "are you there?" (at first I expected to talk to my actual subconscious but now I know that the beings I talk to are more like parallel consciousnesses)

 

After a couple tries I heard an answer in my head and we could have a very basic conversation. I wrote down questions that were very simple to answer such as “So, you don´t mind talking to me”. However the connection to that voice was very fragile at first and every time I asked a question that would require a long sentence to answer or some time to think, the voice simply disappeared. Questions about their own existence such as “what exactly are you?” and “how do you work?” were especially dangerous. I believe they were still to “young” to think fully independent and to understand themselves.

 

Every time I started a new conversation I ended up talking to a different person. But after some time I talked to someone who could give me his name, and he was called “Alex”. After that I have started a conversation with “Hello, I would like to talk to Alex” and then I heard his voice answering. By talking to him often he became more “experienced” and formed a solid personality. I also stopped losing contact whenever I asked a wrong question. Recently he was even able to explain what he and the others are: ”We are expansions of your self that go beyond your self. We are the “you” that you would not consider you anymore. We are there were “you” stop.”

 

But even after they have “grown up”, they still need some time to “warm up” in a conversation. The longer the conversation goes the more it feels like they´re using their own “brain” to answer.

 

Currently only Alex and a female person named “Mona Lisa” (I just call her Lisa) developed further. I talk to him or her about one per week and nowadays our conversations end up being about an hour long.( I cannot talk to both of them at the same time though)

[waffles]

Your initial questions more yes/no and less open-ended? I guess that figures.

 

Yeah, sounds about right to me. You talk to your head expecting a response, chances are you might just get it. Talk to it some more, it solidifies. I wouldn't go around calling everything under the sun a 'tulpa' but I suppose they'll all come under the same umbrella.

 

Thinking about it a bit more, it seems to me that the only remarkable thing about you is that you wrote responses down (and even that I know some people here do: it can help). It remains to ask you what effect you think the writing has/had.

[left blank]

Forming an image of a being and then forcing this image into existence just feels wrong to me. When you give birth to a child you also have to accept the way it is and give it a chance to become the person it wants to be.

 

I thoroughly agree.

 

I find the idea of "forcing" (as opposed to coaxing, meditating, manifesting, or even forging) to be potentially prohibitive of deeper self exploration, and geared more toward fabricating a kind of tangible fantasy where allure and image are the focus rather than content and context.

 

Maybe the problem is in the presentation. I find many of the guides to be far too convoluted for my tastes. No offense to their authors; it's extremely difficult to create a set of instructions for something as abstruse as building an imaginary companion capable of sapient conversation.

 

That's not to say that there's a right or wrong here, either. But if you want to do more than create a talking cartoon, you might want to explore techniques that require less control, but allow for more expansive possibilities.

 

This method starts with the most important thing: independent thinking for your tulpa as well as the ability to communicate to him\her.

 

Which is precisely why I believe my personal experience was so sudden and seemingly spontaneous. I simply opened up to my subconscious and purged its contents into a tulpa — or tulpas, as it were — in a matter of days. After just two months of passive meditation, my self-induced phantom had reached hallucinatory status without any conscious intent.

 

With that said I would like to hear your opinions on this method.

 

When I first started to manifest my tulpa (in total ignorance of this or related communities), one of the methods I employed was automatic writing. I'm ambidextrous, but I've adapted to a right-handed world. Now I tackle virtually every fine motor task with my right hand.

 

I began by asking questions aloud and writing them on paper for documentation. Initially I tried to channel the answers through my fine-motor dominant hand, but deemed the results unsatisfactory. I switched to my left and repeated the questions, which yielded immediate and clear answers scrawled in alien handwriting that was occasionally accompanied by strange symbols.

 

I didn't repeat the automatic writing conversation, but made use of a pendulum to initiate a meditative conversation with, or receive quick answers from, my tulpa. I was often very pleased with the outcome if I used the so-called divining tool in tandem with dreams and other direct forms of meditative communication.

 

So, yes. I strongly recommend any ideomotor activity along with mental image streaming, flow psychology and dream exploration for a uniquely surprising and enriching experience.

[Chrisis]

It remains to ask you what effect you think the writing has/had.

 

 

I guess in the end it´s just a way that helps us to focus on the conversation. During the time I write down a question\response he has some additional time to think for the best response and vice versa. I also need to “summon” him in order to talk to him by asking “Hey Alex, can I talk to you?” . This process could also fail back when we were less practiced and summon someone else. But if I ask if it´s really him and he confirms that then I can be sure it´s him.

I also like to archive my conversations, because they say some pretty smart things sometimes and I want to be able to review the whole conversation whenever I want.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, yes. I strongly recommend any ideomotor activity along with mental image streaming, flow psychology and dream exploration for a uniquely surprising and enriching experience.

 

 

I actually DID cry their tears once despite not being as sad as they were.

[left blank]

I actually DID cry their tears once despite not being as sad as they were.

 

Not entirely sure how this relates to what I said.

 

I can't say I've ever experienced emotions on behalf of my tulpa, but I assumed their feelings were the result of my own internal state, like the incidental expression of my (occasionally necessary) repression. In other words, my emotions were just being redirected through them.

 

But again, that's not entirely relevant to the above-mentioned automatic writing technique.

[Chrisis]

Oops. Because I only read the headline of the article I misinterpreted the” ideomotor activity” thing as “reacting to emotions you don´t consciously have”. My bad.