tulpas

[hydrix]

Many people seem to be confused as to what tulpas are/ how they interact with humans. While I will not claim to have "the answer" I will give my opinion because in my research I seem to have seen an answer that "clicks".

 

Humans have three parts, being the body, soul, and spirit. The soul has been known by the names yin spirit, emotional body, and many others, and is basically the "conscious mind". As for the "subconscious mind," which as Carl Jung interestingly insisted on calling it, the "unconscious mind", is the spirit. People have called the spirit the mental body, higher self, and others. The body is connected to the soul by a chord and the soul is connected to the spirit by a chord. On death the two are separated, the soul disperses into its elemental makeup, and your spirit goes back to God who gave it. The soul dwells in its own plane of emotions, basically consisting of raw elements in different combinations, forming emotions, likewise, the spirit dwells in its own plane, consisting of thoughts. The soul (your consciousness) on its plane and is bound loosely by time but not space. The spirit (your unconscious) on its plane is bound by neither space nor time.

 

There are 8 actual planes of density, going from the lowest plane of earth (solids), then water, air, fire (plasma), akasa, and then several unknown planes, and the infinite 8th is god. A researcher in the 1800s built many machines trying to reach these planes but was ultimately unable to create the mechanics necessary to reach the final plane, god.

 

This being said, the plane after your spirit (unconsciousness), being neither bound by space nor time, includes all things in the present, past, and things not yet. Your spirit is on the boundary of what is nicknamed the "akasa", the plane above your spirit. In this Akasa, is the group consciousness of the universe. All things are already here, already invented, and your spirit acts as a "receptor" for this information. So if you invent something, you are not actually creating the idea, but rather ideas are handed down from your spirit to your soul depending on your level of maturity.

 

How does this relate to tulpas? Well, having both a consciousness and having access to your unconscious, and having their own unconscious with which to access ideas, they have both a soul and a spirit.

 

Tulpas, technically being your children, should not be married or fornicated with. Embrace the childish love and do not corrupt it with passion. It would be more pleasing to god that you tie a millstone around your neck and cast it into the sea. Stay away from the occult, if you are having trouble remove the barriers in your path, namely lust, pride, and anger.

[Guest Anonymous]

If you remove those barriers(the ones you described in last line) then life would be too boring...

Tulpas have souls? How does that work...are you saying that humans can create souls?

[Raxter]

This is all a bit too far into the mystical realm for me to give any sort of intelligent debate against it. I can say that I believe that you are correct on your notions of there being 3 "parts" of a person:

 

The subconscious (the background / behind the scenes workings of the mind)

The conscious (what we perceive as being reality).

The superconscious (the perception that people obtain while under the influence of certain drugs, or people experience "out of body experiences).

 

The most controversy occurs around which of these three parts a tulpa exists in. Tulpas can give us fantastical insights into the world by showing us ideas we may normally have never though of (superconscious). Although they also seem to operate on a much more stealthy level by noticing other people's body language and expression (subsonscious).

Our consciousness is just a culmination of information brought to us by our senses. I discuss this topic at length at the beginning of my progress report so I won't double document it here.

Personally I see a tulpa as residing in the subconscious initially and being "brought up" to the conscious level via whatever means a person feels appropriate. I do find this notion interesting though, you mentioned:

 

So if you invent something, you are not actually creating the idea, but rather ideas are handed down from your spirit to your soul depending on your level of maturity.

 

This runs parallel with what Anthony Peake considers a Daemon. A concept that states that everyone (barring "new souls") is actually reliving a past life with the Daemon being what is carried over after death and before birth. Basically, the Daemon has already done everything you are now doing and may sometimes influence your thoughts and actions through dreams, flashes of insight, or straight up using a voice to tell you information.

Therefore you technically do not invent or create anything. But are instead being told, superconsciously, of the idea based upon how mature your Daemon [spirit] is. I suggest researching Joan of Arc and Socrates who also seem to have very vocal and hyperactive Daemon(s).

Of course, Peake does fly a bit too close to the sun with some of these ideas but the basic concept is still there and agrees with your opinions / findings.

 

 

So, what I think we have here is 2 fields of thought. In both cases I think we can agree that a tulpa has always been existent, just not fully realized by our conscious mind. The first field of thought is that a tulpa is our subconsciousness that stays relatively dormant until we lift it up to a level that we can perceive and interact with it. The second field is that a tulpa exists above our level of thinking in a much more active state and we attempt to bring it down from a state of near godhood to a level that we can comfortably exchange with it without it being like an ant (us) trying to communicate with a human (tulpa).

 

Neither is right or wrong. I won't get in to the planes of existence or, anything like that, since the thesis is about human / tulpa interactions. Personally I see a tulpa as being the maintainer of your subconscious and a filter of your senses. It takes in the information of what's around you and lets you know what it thinks is important or worth you actively knowing.

If a tulpa was a part of your superconscious then you would be clairvoyant, operating in the future and making predictions or prophecies. We don't see people doing that a whole lot any more although some research has been done to say that a person does actually "know" things a few seconds ahead, but the brain needs time to sort out the cacophony of senses and so we get a streamline view of the present.

 

Or, perhaps both are true? Maybe a tulpa can use both the lower and upper states of mind to interact with the conscious mind? Using our senses or upper mental processes to interact with us in meaningful ways? Unfortunately this is the limit on what I'm willing to research, any further study gets into the concept of religion and faith based science which, while interesting, won't be pertinent to your topic.

 

Thoughts?

[Enoch327]

Mental or astral tulpas are not bound by space and time. So most anything is possible in theory. So the question arises "Can I send my tulpa back in time to kill my grandfather?" The answer is no because the tulpa still doesn't have a body. The tulpa could read your grandfather's thoughts and maybe even telepathically give your gandfather some thoughts. How does this relate to the different parts of the brain-soul? Use the tulpa to gather information and communicate. The heavy lifting of change you still have to do. I hope I was germane to the conversation.

[GuessWho]

Interesting concept, hydrix. It's shares some similarities with my theory on the existence of Tulpas. (which I have not posted on this site)

It's not exactly the same, but given the similarities, I'd be interested in reading more about this concept.

 

I've subscribed to this thread. If you have more information or ideas to share, please do.

I always like to read interesting things - whether they have any merit or not.

[Argentum]

What if tuppers are really just our minds trying to satisfy our perception of reality by creating this "voice" or "body" or whatever tuppers can do?

[Linkzelda]

What if tuppers are really just our minds trying to satisfy our perception of reality by creating this "voice" or "body" or whatever tuppers can do?

 

That would imply that there would be a telos behind their existence, like an inherent one, which might raise questions on whether or not self-fulfilling prophecies (e.g. treating them as sentient and believing they can be) may be deterministic even after we presume they're a bit more autonomous from most mental states of awareness we fixate on them in general.

 

Not directing this to you, but I think some people want to create euphemisms with emphasizing so much on existential truths and "rights" a tulpa should have to distract themselves from real underlying reasons and problems as to why they would want a tulpa in the first place (e.g. what you stated with our mind being able to create someone based on our entrenched desires and predispositions of what we want them to be like, and are capable of doing. Or another probability in this is that deep down, they just want to interact with someone to help with their strife-filled lifestyles).

 

It's kind of like recalling a dream, non-lucid or lucid, and seeing how the mind can literally emulate a person's personality, or self-schema, and can augment the good and/or the bad of them of how we think we perceive them in general. I've had many dreams where I felt my mind would turn into mush if I were to interact with certain thought forms simply because my mind is mostly contributing to what I would feel is the "ideal" person for certain relationships.

 

Maybe people fixate on feeling that diving into that rabbit hole undermines any potential value their tulpas can have, and this is what makes them so full of angst on what to do, especially if they know they could stop paying attention on wanting them to become real to them.

 

It's easier for a person to sleep, engage with thought forms, and wake up perfectly fine without worrying about the thought-forms' transient existence until they start applying their morals and ethics on that (e.g. learning to have perseverance for sustaining the existence of someone that can easily be forgotten like any other thought or concept compared to real people we meet daily).

===

 

As for OP, the last part with the tulpas being like children raises questions on what a person should do if they had sex, or engaged in a relationship other than parent-child in their natural sleep. It seems at this point it's just encroaching your own psychology and disposition on what an individual should do with what would be presumed as parts of themselves (not saying opinions are bad of course). I guess it comes down to how people redefine their definition of love when it comes to parts of themselves. I'm not sure if there's really objective truth in putting that one shouldn't have intimate relationships with their thoughts forms, whether created in waking life, and/or the dreaming state.

 

As for the theory on tulpa, it may lead to beliefs in panpsychism/panexperientialism, or some other forms of subjectivism (e.g. solipsism), and that would just be the classic debate of mind-independent vs. mind-dependent reality. This (in relation to OP) is the kind of theory that sounds compelling to some, simply because anyone can imagine a god's eye point of view, apply "objectivity" when it's really insinuating one’s subjectivity, but when they come out of that point of view, and back to reality, its back to questioning how these things can be compatible with this reality (e.g. applying dualism and what have you). It’s interesting though.

[Brassow]

Giant walls of text... *shiver* but some of these theories seem good, others seem like bullshit.