Confessions of a Poorly Trained Tulpa

[Guest Anonymous]

This thread was moved to the top once it was replied to. The threads are sorted by most recent replies.

And if you want any of your threads deleted, you can PM me, or another mod. Or just report the thread, and explain that you want it deleted. That one is actually easier on us.

 

Okay thanks! Hmmm, I almost like the idea of shadow ninjas moving my stuff around better. LOL Please leave this thread as it is, I am starting to like it. It is all about me and, well, you know my (our combined Mistgod-Melian) ego.

 

I swear to the gods sometimes things happen for a reason. I was thinking of leaving the forum for the most part. Now, after this post suddenly resurfaced, no way in hell. Don't worry, Melian and I will be nice. We really have kinda run out of criticism and fostering controversy material anyway. All that is left is sharing Melian's art and our lucid dream reports.

 

~Mistgod

[Guest Anonymous]

Many members of the tulpa community point to a specific book as an important support source concerning Tulpas, namely Magic and Mystery in Tibet by Alexandra David Neel.

 

Melian and I just finished reading our copy.

 

In this, the very book used as a root source for the concept of tulpas, David Neel outlines Tibetan mysticism practices. In its pages, Melian and I found a lot of supportive evidence that thought forms should be considered illusions.

 

The author explains thought forms (maybe something like my Melian) as being only figments, hallucinations and not truly real. The author describes, in many places in the book, meditative exercises in which mystics create mental constructs and visions. These are part of a learning process meant to lead the mystic on a path to enlightenment. David Neel explains in excerpts below.

 

page 267: "They [visions] provide the recluse with spectacles which rival the most beautiful fairy-plays that can be seen on the stage. Even those who are aware of their illusive nature many enjoy them, and as for those who believe in the reality of the divine players, it is not surprising that they are bewitched."

 

Now doesn't that sound a lot like the Melian Show and my concept of pseudo real? Notice the last sentence there folks. She is saying if a mystic believes the visions to be real, he is confused and delusional ("bewitched").

 

page 267"However, it is not to amuse the hermits that these exercises have been invented. There true aim is to lead the disciple to understand that the worlds and all phenomena which we percieve are but mirages born from our imagination. 'They emanate from the mind. And into the mind they sink.' In fact this is a fundamental teaching of Tibetan mystics."

 

Melian is a pseudo-real figment in my mind. She is not truly real. She is an enjoyable vision, nothing more. People have questioned my beliefs concerning this and suggested I am "holding Melian back" or confused or limiting my insight. I say I am closer to seeing Melian as an original Tibetan Buddhist (perhaps a llama creator of tulpas himself) would understand her.

 

Prove me wrong! LOL I stand by my conclusions once again. The sentience is not actual, it is a magician's illusion. At least it is with my Melian. It's still cool, and I still love her, but it is only my imagination.

 

Okay, I won't dwell too much about how the term "tulpa" is derived from magic and mysticism in Tibetan culture NOT psychology. I won't dwell too much on the fact that the term tulpa is being misinterpreted and taken out of context from the book. I can site passages and pages if anyone would like, but this has all been said before in this forum in other places many times. Yidams (also described in the book) are much closer to what we are calling tulpas, and are also described as emanations of magic. All of that is irrelevant concerning my point here about Melian really.

 

My main point is, there is just as much, or perhaps more, literary evidence for Melian being an illusion than for her being real sentience. I will spare you the Jungian psychology about visions at this point. I can go into it if you like though. LOL I have the books for that too.

 

I have been accused of not thinking this through. I have been thinking this through. A LOT.

 

~Mistgod

 

 

http://pre10.deviantart.net/7936/th/pre/i/2014/346/c/1/abstract_tribal_heart_with_no_sig_by_melianofmist-d89mops.jpg[/img] a Maori style tribal heart, by Melian. I am so amazing at these! ~Melian

[sushi]

But then some branches of Buddhism (including some branches of Tibetan Buddhism) believe that everything is an illusion. Look at J.H. Brennan's interpretation of the Yidam practice:

 

[H]e was struck by the realization that the world around him, the world he had always believed so real, was no more than a thought form, a walking dream manufactured inside his own head and projected outward, exactly as he had done with the Yidam.

 

If you look at things in that way, it's really very similar to Bishop Berkeley's idealism -- we're all dreams in the mind of God. (Or dreams in the mind of the Red King. Or the computer simulation in which we've all been imprisioned since birth by our robot overlords.)

 

Perhaps the only difference between you and Melian is that she knows who's dreaming her.

[Guest Anonymous]

But then some branches of Buddhism (including some branches of Tibetan Buddhism) believe that everything is an illusion. Look at J.H. Brennan's interpretation of the Yidam practice:

 

 

If you look at things in that way, it's really very similar to Bishop Berkeley's idealism -- we're all dreams in the mind of God. (Or dreams in the mind of the Red King. Or the computer simulation in which we've all been imprisioned since birth by our robot overlords.)

 

Perhaps the only difference between you and Melian is that she knows who's dreaming her.

 

Oh my gods, that is fantastic! You rock my friend. Hah hah!

 

I am absolutely convinced I am getting more out of Melian, just as she is, than I would from a "more advanced" tulpa. I have had her so long! Most people are not understanding that such longevity of form and function means something important. She is very advanced in her own way and doesn't need to be anything else other than what she is. I wish people would quit telling me she is unfinished, stagnant, pretentious or not complete or not as good as a tulpa or any number of other labels. They are all WRONG.

 

~Mistgod

[TulpaFox]

I like this thread a lot, tons of interesting stuff here. It is so big of you to discard the "tulpa" label for melian. It's very open minded to accept that everyone's experience is different, and that different techniques have brought people here different results. Especially when the line between melian and a tulpa is so thin in a lot of ways.

[Luminesce]

Oh... there we go.

 

page 267"However, it is not to amuse the hermits that these exercises have been invented. There true aim is to lead the disciple to understand that the worlds and all phenomena which we percieve are but mirages born from our imagination. 'They emanate from the mind. And into the mind they sink.' In fact this is a fundamental teaching of Tibetan mystics."

 

You're missing the true meaning of this. A huge part of it in fact. They didn't say tulpas were illusions - they said everything is an illusion. They said tulpas were a tool to help us recognize reality as illusion, as tulpas seemed to be real but were obviously not physically or naturally so.

 

I learned that from my all-time favorite book, Illusions: Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah by Richard Bach. That book changed my life, so I'd recommend it. It might help you understand what "Reality is an illusion" means, but basically it boils down to the fact that nothing is fact. Every experience is subjective to each person, meaning it's all illusory and subject to your will. Something like that. It really does change your life when you realize it for yourself. It made me who I am now.

[Guest Anonymous]

I like this thread a lot, tons of interesting stuff here. It is so big of you to discard the "tulpa" label for melian. It's very open minded to accept that everyone's experience is different, and that different techniques have brought people here different results. Especially when the line between melian and a tulpa is so thin in a lot of ways.

 

Thank you! I'm very close to being finished with this self-reflection-via-public-forum-posts period in the community. It's like I want to share Melian, as I see her and understand her, on the forum and in the chats. I want to do this with confidence knowing that others understand why I feel the way I do. That is why I went through all this work, wrote a manifesto, and pissed everyone off. LOL Melian doesn't need labels or titles really, I just want to share her. But I don't want to pretend to be doing something I am not and to present her as something she isn't.

 

~Mistgod

---

You're missing the true meaning of this. A huge part of it in fact. They didn't say tulpas were illusions - they said everything is an illusion.

 

Reisen, you are amazing in your persistence that I am not doing critical thinking or reading for comprehension. I did not miss that implication, that the entire universe is a subjective illusion, at all. What about the first quote I presented? I thought it was pretty straight forward. Note that David Neel does speak of thought forms being illusions and visions quite clearly and that the mystic should not see them as real. It is very flatly stated in many places in her book. My main point in writing about this is not to attack your belief in tulpa sentience, but to support MY belief in Melian's sentience being an illusion as a legitimate perspective and possibility.

 

My point in all this is that it is legitimate to believe Melian is complete, fulfilled and fine exactly as she is. She is an amazing thought form as advanced and as good as any tulpa in the community. Experiencing a tulpa is a completely subjective experience. All of the "advanced" skill set of tulpas are also completely subjective. Melian and I don't need tulpa skills or tulpa sentience. Nope. I explained why in my podcast quite clearly.

 

Although I am sure I will, I don't want to hear anymore from folks telling me directly, or implying, that Melian is incomplete or that I am limiting her and myself by insisting she is what she is supposed to be, just as she is. THAT is what I am trying to say. I want to proudly share her without shame. I am proud of my Melian and I think she is important and related to tulpas and what people are talking about here.

 

At least I have been able to show that I am believing these things based on something and that I have "done my homework" in reading the guides carefully and researching a lot of books and information in making my conclusions.

 

I learned that from my all-time favorite book, Illusions: Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah by Richard Bach. That book changed my life, so I'd recommend it.

 

That sounds like a book I would love! I will be sure to get it and read it!

 

If the entire universe is a subjective illusion, so is Melian's sentience. You have just proved my point for me. If tulpa skills are entirely subjective illusions (like all else) then it hardly matters if I am happy with her being an illusion (just as she is) now does it?

 

~Mistgod

[Guest Anonymous]

Split from this thread. ~Kiahdaj

 

Difference of opinion makes the world go round. Can you imagine if we all still believed wholeheartedly in FAQ Man's guide? I don't think we should ban someone because they have different beliefs or experiences.

 

Melian is a great example. We don't want people coming in to the community and thinking that Melian is typical for a tulpa. However, now that she and Mistgod have defined what she is, and how she's different from a tulpa, I think it's an asset having them here. Some people will be coming here who experience the same thing, or who want something more like Melian than a tulpa, and we can point them to Melian as an example.

 

Thank you Sushi. I appreciate that someone is willing to accept a little bit of difference instead of demanding we all line up in rows and follow the leader like little sheep. New ideas and discoveries come from learning and discourse and presenting contrary opinions and competition of hypothesis. It does not happen from "everyone believe this or else they should leave" or "don't question the community or you will be thrown out." The community should not have the policy "conform or die." I not only stated what I believe but why I believe it. My opinions are just as valid as those of anyone else concerning a phenomenon as subjective as thought forms and tulpa. ~Mistgod

---

In my opinion, certain people shouldn't be welcomed at all, they are cancerous and better off elsewhere.

 

How do we determine who is not to be welcomed? Should we have an application and screening process? Perhaps a resume submission of core beliefs along with a personality profile? Should we appoint thought police?

 

Different opinions are fine, great even. Spouting baseless opinions and your unresearched thoughts of the day about the philosophy of the mind should not be accepted, though. Melian is a great example of that, yes. They simply speak whatever nonsense they come up with that day, just so people pay attention. There seems to be little coherence besides that their opinion on things change every few days so they are able to make more long posts. They're an attention whore that shouldn't be here, not an asset. They shouldn't be an example to anyone, in my eyes, they're a joke, and it's a bigger joke that they haven't been removed yet.

 

I have stated my opinions yes, in a forum with a weak claim on being based on science. The guides have no bibliographic source references. The entire concept of tulpas is taken and changed from Tibetan mysticism and magic, recent occult literature and internet forums. Baseless opinions? The entire site is chalk full of baseless opinions, conjecture and speculation and differing personal beliefs. Yes there may some valid discussions about a possible application of psychology and about the physiology of the brain, and the nature of consciousness. That's nice. But it is hardly rocket science going on here.

 

I have a thought form. She is quite different. I wish to share her. What is so wrong with that on this forum? It is quite relevant to tulpae.

 

My thoughts are well researched btw, and I think I have demonstrated that in my forum posts. I back up what I believe very carefully and thoroughly. I think my musings about "the philosophy of the mind" is very much right on the theme of a forum based on the power of thought and the imagination.

 

I am an asset to this community. I have good things to share and, quite frankly, much of the problems early on were caused by how I was greeted by those who wanted "more control" of thought and attitudes and speech. I think new members should be allowed to speak their mind absolutely freely. If you disagree with their ideas, say so and say why in a polite way. Then everybody will learn if the opinions stated are strong or weak.

 

That is how a science forum should work. Unless it is not a science forum at all, but a cult religion instead. In that case, by all means cast out the unbelievers and burn the heretics once they have been tortured.

 

~Mistgod (with Melian nodding assent)

[jean-luc]

.. instead of demanding we all line up in rows and follow the leader like little sheep.

 

... a forum with a weak claim on being based on science.... recent occult literature and internet forums. Baseless opinions? The entire site is chalk full of baseless opinions...

 

..My thoughts are well researched btw...

 

I am an asset to this community. I have good things to share ...

 

... Unless it is not a science forum at all, but a cult religion instead. In that case, by all means cast out the unbelievers and burn the heretics once they have been tortured.

 

Somebody is in a strong mood today.

[Luminesce]

If you want a real, universal truth, then you're going to have to do more than just look for someone else's personal truth that can defend itself better than yours. I'm not interested in forming the "strongest" subjective proof and calling it objective "for science". I'm interested in understanding the very nature of it, and how it can change for everyone. And hopefully, how everyone can choose their own truth.

 

Science, huh. But it's a soft science, a science of the mind, of subjective phenomena different to each person. What is it exactly that you're looking for from science? Rules? Because as a science-minded individual, I absolutely will not claim "rules" or "facts" in regards to tulpas. It's unscientific. In a phenomenon where your thoughts and beliefs dictate your experience, there's a need for a greater underlying understanding. The truth is there is no single truth, that it can change. Pretending otherwise is unscientific. Applying the scientific method to a subjective phenomenon is much more complicated than an objective one. You can't just "find answers" and have them fit everyone. There is no unifying truth under it all, at least not the kind you're looking for.

 

Anyways, that's the kind of science I'm doing. You can keep trying to find rules and facts by reading books about the mystical, but even then you seem to have missed the meanings of their teachings so far by focusing so much on facts. Once you accept that there aren't any, maybe then you'll start learning.