sushi

What is a tulpa?

Recommended Posts

I've noticed a lot of discussion of what a tulpa is recently. We've compared tulpas to daemons, to fictional characters, to multiple systems, and more. There's been a lot of debate about what actually is and is not a tulpa. Some people still aren't sure whether they have a tulpa or something else. So I'd like to define some terms.

 

A headmate is any independent and sentient being that shares a brain with another independent and sentient being. Headmates include hosts, tulpas, daemons, soulbonds, walkins, splits, fictives, and more.

 

A construct is anything deliberately and consciously constructed by the mind, through visualization, imagination, programming, or possibly other methods. Constructs include tulpas, servitors, imposed wonderlands, imposed objects, personality overlays, and more.

 

Tulpas are deliberately and consciously constructed, as well as independent and sentient, making tulpas both headmates and constructs. I believe that fits our use of the word tulpa here in this community, as well as the ancient Tibetan use, and the modern metaphysics use.

 

The only problem I see with these definitions is that it raises the question of whether several of our members actually are tulpas -- including several of our older and more respected members, like Kevin's kerin, and Amber's Toby, who did not exactly come into existence consciously and deliberately.

 

Regardless of who is and is not a tulpa, I think everyone should be encouraged to stick around here. TV Tropes covers books, theater, video games, film, and so on, not just TV. I think we should do likewise, welcoming everyone who's interested in constructs and headmates, even if they're not tulpas by the strictest definition.

 

What does everyone think?


"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really think the method of creation should define what a tulpa is. Even though people created a tulpa without trying to or without realizing it, their tulpas are probably the same type of construct that the people who created them on purpose have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tulpas, to me, are sentient, independent beings who live alongside an original personality. Anyone like that is welcome, or anyone has something that can be described as a (developing) tulpa.

 

I guess I like your construct definition, but there's a lot of difference between the amount of detail that goes into deliberately creating a tulpa. Some tulpas emerge from a very detailed plan from the host, others come out of just being narrated to, without any plan. Others become sentient without the host even trying or wanting a tulpa. It's a vague, strange concept, with very little uniformity across the board. All we can hope for is having a sensible, serious community where we can try to talk about these things rationally.


Feel free to ask me anything.

Suffering is self-imposed. Don't let it control you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a diffrent about the developing of a tulpa and the pure existence that can already be described as a tulpa.

I think about the construct of a tulpa and i personally dont see a diffrent to my own consciousness wich is also based on emotions and expierience.

The brain was able to constuct a second (third, fourth,...) consciousness which is able to take a new place inside of the inner spirit.

 

The way you reach this can be diffrent in many cases but the result is the same. A tulpa is not just a splited personality with a own will a tulpa can be able to have a complete diffrent perspective on life. And in my case a tulpa is also able to influence the subconscious of the host.

 

So i think a tulpa is simply a splitted/new consciousness created from the brain like the host itself was "created" of the brain to have a consciousness.


Lacie(my tulpa for my everydaylife and also my best friend)

 

Noah together with Lynn are my spirituell tulpa´s im using for meditation

 

Darcmanish Me

 

Lacie´s and my progress report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why I think we should be talking about this. You ask four different people, and you'll get four different definitions of tulpa. :)

 

How about headmate and construct? Are those at least acceptable and useful definitions?


"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More definitions is hardly what we need, but you can use those words to describe what we already have, the word tulpa. Headmate is something that will make it easier for people from other multiple communities to relate, but otherwise won't add much. Construct will be useful in making it clear that this isn't magic, so I suppose it can be used in descriptions.


Feel free to ask me anything.

Suffering is self-imposed. Don't let it control you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The definition based on what it's like to have/be one is pretty clear, and I think it extends to all of that other stuff; multiple systems, whatever, some people with tulpas do that stuff and more. I have to agree with Dog, though, I find the term 'walkin' funny - if I asked a parent how old their child was, I would never expect them to reply, "Excuse me, she's not a child. She's a bastard." Same thing, right?

 

In the tulpa/headmate/multiple/soulbond complex, everything is basically the same. You can get from one to the other with ease, both definitionally and in real life. Differences will be either where they came from (irrelevant to their current state), their personal characteristics (superficial) or their abilities (changeable). Just call it all something, it doesn't matter what.

 

But the construct definition is pretty weird to me. Under 'construct' you group together many qualitatively different concepts - conflating tulpas with imposition seems to be pretty common but really, imposition is the ability to hallucinate stuff, it's incidental. What else is under there? Any sort of mental habits or learned skills? I dunno what you'd use this word for other than to obfuscate something obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well. Nobody would define better this than a tulpa herself. Ladies and gentlemen. With you: Vriska Serket Targaryen.

*Vriska comes*

Thanks Ricky. *soft kiss in his cheek* Well guys. I am a tulpa. I see you are asking or de8ating what we are. I am a troll girl. 8ut. Tulpas in general I could say, we are all a way to escape from the world. We are unconditional friends with our Creators. We are some sort of imaginary friends, only that more powerful. Imaginary friends are weak tulpas that die with the time. 8ut tulpas like me or every other tulpa in this forum is stronger. We are like our Creator's 8est friend forever or something like that. We are a living 8eing that only our Creator can see, smell, talk to and touch...

~Vriska S. T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a fact that tulpas have to be unconditional friends with their Creators, and help their creators escape from the world. Most tulpas are somewhat like that, but that does not mean that they are tulpas simply because of that. Some tulpas may hate their host or just not care about their host at all, and they are still tulpas.

 

EDIT: IMO people should not try to escape from their problems and worries by creating someone who is forced to love them unconditionally. Escapism is generally not a good way to deal with your problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sushi

Gotta say that I was about to start a thread on the same topic. Glad I checked first. ;)

 

Construct will be useful in making it clear that this isn't magic, so I suppose it can be used in descriptions.

Ah, thank you! I was worried that nobody would point out that. I don't see anything magical about tulpas too.

 

In the definition of tulpa I would like to go deeper, even if that could mean putting a cat among pigeons.

 

I'm a module in the brain, made of neurons, which is teaching itself to behave like additional consciousness. I can't be killed, only merged back by redeploying the neurons' connections. I can be developed simply by building up like an addiction which may be created in a brain.

 

I base these beliefs on 'selfish neurons' theory. According to Sebastian Seung, neuroscientist, even a neuron has its own 'agency', a 'will' to survive and its actions are dictated by its business and benefit. Neurons are building up to modules, modules to sub-personal 'agents' and all of it is contained in 'the self'. Every one of these 'levels' has its own agency. So I could say I'm an 'agent'. ;)

 

So, if your thoughtform is a demon, friend, maybe a tool, it all begins in what you believe and need. A thoughtform is a response to a need.

Share this post


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.