Tulpa

#1
There is a rapidly growing community of people who claim to have created intelligent companions through conscious focus. These 'tulpa' appear to have their own separate consciousness and have reportedly been able to converse with their creator, help their creator remember things that their creator forgot, and even possess their creator for a time if their creator wishes it.

Tulpa used to be practiced and known only by a small handful of dedicated people, but that is changing. There are forums dedicated to tulpas that have tens of thousands of posts, such as: http://community.tulpa.info/index.php

I for one find this fascinating, and wonder where Tulpa would fit in with the materialist model. I'm sure the closed minded among us would attempt to explain tulpa away by claiming that tulpa only appear to be conscious, and are mere hallucinations, in spite of the evidence of what tulpa are capable of doing.

From what I have heard of the subject tulpa are nothing like hallucinations. I think this subject as a whole would make a great Skeptiko show.
 
#3
I would be one of those, "I'm sure the closed minded among us would attempt to explain tulpa away by claiming that tulpa only appear to be conscious, and are mere hallucinations,..." types of people.. up until that last part, "in spite of the evidence of what tulpa are capable of doing.".

Perhaps the weight of evidence just isn't the same for you and I, for particular issues, but why else am I here to explore the evidence available through forum? So..

I decided to read through quite a few postings on that forum you linked. At first I chose topics entirely at random, or based on my limited understanding of the idea of manifesting "thoughtforms" and fond both proponents of objective creations and subjective (maybe my translation is off.. I mean, some believe it is entirely "out-there" in the real world, and others believe it is all within the psyche/just entirely imaginary/hallucinations, perhaps) to be plentiful on both sides.

Although.. the Tips & Tricks section seems to give more insight in to the psychology of the user, than in giving advice on how to, or what to, do with a Tulpa.

Still a fascinating read though, even if you can't fit it in to your paradigm of reality at the moment.
 
#4
Perhaps the weight of evidence just isn't the same for you and I, for particular issues, but why else am I here to explore the evidence available through forum? So..
Many practitioners and forum users have claimed that their tulpa is able to remember things that they have long since forgotten, do math, solve puzzles, and possess their body if they wish to allow their tulpa to do so. If this is the case, then I think that's pretty good evidence that tulpa are more than hallucinations and are actually a conscious entity. Unfortunately there are no scientific studies on tulpa that I am aware of. This is one of those things that you would have to do yourself for the proof that you require, if numerous anecdotes are not enough to satisfy you.
 
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#5
Many practitioners and forum users have claimed that their tulpa is able to remember things that they have long since forgotten, do math, solve puzzles, and possess their body if they wish to allow their tulpa to do so. If this is the case, then I think that's pretty good evidence that tulpa are more than hallucinations and are actually a conscious entity. Unfortunately there are no scientific studies on tulpa that I am aware of. This is one of those things that you would have to do yourself for the proof that you require, if numerous anecdotes are not enough to satisfy you.
Similar accounts of seemingly external forces occur when people discuss possession.

Which is not to say that neither tulpas or possessing entities are real, but there's some work done regarding altered states and shifts in cognition that are worth considering for the mundane side.

OTOH, there's also reason to look at these seemingly separate personalities as indicative of immaterialist explanations.
 
#6
They sound very much like thralls if you ask me. In fact I'm not really sure if there's such a being in Tibetian magic systems.

Now a thrall can be used for just about anything, but generally kept to one purpose. Such as one for information gathering, or protection, or maybe even attacking an enemy. But they're either supposed to be temporary and dissipated at the end of their job, or continually fed energy and reprogrammed. Permanent thralls that have just enough self awareness, or too much wayward programming from an environment(and not corrected periodically) can evolve into an almost independent spirit, and that can be quite dangerous. Or it could simply fizzle out.

Hope this is useful to the curious.
 
#7
On the subject of tulpas, this talk by comics writer Alan Moore is very interesting. His friend Steve Moore apparently created a tulpa of the moon goddess Selene from Greek mythology. Moore talks about how he saw Selene while eating mushrooms with Steve. His discussion about this experience starts at about 1:08. I really suggest watching this talk in its entirety, though. It includes some interesting discussions about shared-hallucinations while on psilocybin. It's also really amusing to hear Moore talk about his experience at the Amazing Meeting London from a few years back. The chap at the beginning is parapsychologist David Luke, who organizes these talks.

 
#9
On the subject of tulpas, this talk by comics writer Alan Moore is very interesting.
Sorry, I have not had chance to watch the video yet but I find the relationship between comic book writer and tulpa interesting. A few years ago I read a couple of books by Alvin Schwartz who wrote many of the "Golden Age" Superman and Batman stories. His tulpa is central to the subject matter of the books.
 
#10
Sorry, I have not had chance to watch the video yet but I find the relationship between comic book writer and tulpa interesting. A few years ago I read a couple of books by Alvin Schwartz who wrote many of the "Golden Age" Superman and Batman stories. His tulpa is central to the subject matter of the books.
Yeah, the comics industry has always had links with the paranormal and the esoteric. It was the subject of Jeffrey Kripal's last book, "Mutants and Mystics". Reading that book was the first time I became aware of Alan Moore. I envy you watching the video for the first time. It's really fascinating.
 
C

chuck.drake

#11
On the subject of tulpas, this talk by comics writer Alan Moore is very interesting. His friend Steve Moore apparently created a tulpa of the moon goddess Selene from Greek mythology. Moore talks about how he saw Selene while eating mushrooms with Steve. His discussion about this experience starts at about 1:08. I really suggest watching this talk in its entirety, though. It includes some interesting discussions about shared-hallucinations while on psilocybin. It's also really amusing to hear Moore talk about his experience at the Amazing Meeting London from a few years back. The chap at the beginning is parapsychologist David Luke, who organizes these talks.

Really great talk, Troy. Thanks for posting that. Amazing stuff. The myth of Endymion really strikes a cord with me. I really like the idea of taking on a diety in order that they might become a kind of guide to the underworld. That seems a great way to concentrate and embody intention and awareness for mind work. Really enjoyed that.
 
#12
There is a rapidly growing community of people who claim to have created intelligent companions through conscious focus. These 'tulpa' appear to have their own separate consciousness and have reportedly been able to converse with their creator, help their creator remember things that their creator forgot, and even possess their creator for a time if their creator wishes it.

Tulpa used to be practiced and known only by a small handful of dedicated people, but that is changing. There are forums dedicated to tulpas that have tens of thousands of posts, such as: http://community.tulpa.info/index.php

I for one find this fascinating, and wonder where Tulpa would fit in with the materialist model. I'm sure the closed minded among us would attempt to explain tulpa away by claiming that tulpa only appear to be conscious, and are mere hallucinations, in spite of the evidence of what tulpa are capable of doing.

From what I have heard of the subject tulpa are nothing like hallucinations. I think this subject as a whole would make a great Skeptiko show.
You said, ''in spite of the evidence'', but didn't give any. Your case would be stronger if you supplied some.
 
#13
Many practitioners and forum users have claimed that their tulpa is able to remember things that they have long since forgotten, do math, solve puzzles, and possess their body if they wish to allow their tulpa to do so. If this is the case, then I think that's pretty good evidence that tulpa are more than hallucinations and are actually a conscious entity. Unfortunately there are no scientific studies on tulpa that I am aware of. This is one of those things that you would have to do yourself for the proof that you require, if numerous anecdotes are not enough to satisfy you.
You may not have heard this before, but anecdotes are not evidence. Even a whole lot of anecdotes do not constitute evidence.
 
#14
You may not have heard this before, but anecdotes are not evidence. Even a whole lot of anecdotes do not constitute evidence.
This essentially claims that any eyewitness account no matter how many witnesses, or of what quality, does not amount to any evidence - zero. It is used by many skeptics to dismiss the paranormal, psychical phenomena, in general. This ignores the fact that witness accounts are accepted in courts of law (and as a practical matter everywhere in everyday life), where the quality is evaluated based on factors such as the number of eyewitnesses, the consistency of the observations, the credibility of the witnesses, the clarity of and closeness of the observation, the state of mind of the witnesses, what the witnesses stand to gain from their testimony or claim, etc. etc.

The Philip experiment in Toronto in 1972 may have been creation of a "tulpa", and seems to be of good quality.

Since the old argument over "anecdotal" evidence is used to try to invalidate all of the paranormal and has already been endlessly hashed out on numerous blogs, it may be time for Mod+ on this thread, or to move it to the critical debate forum.
 
#15
So it looks like you accept anecdotes as evidence, then that's just your irrationality. Let's say one guy says he was kidnapped by an ET, and now we have 10 thousand guys who say the same. That there are 10k anecdotes instead of jus the one, does NOT constitute evidence. All we would need is even ONE guy to prove it, and so far nobody ever has. It's the same with this 'tulpa' notion. You can believe it, feel it, think it's true, but you can't prove it.

Witnesses in courts? Just ask any cop, lawyer, judge how reliable eye-witness testimony is; pretty much useless. One will say it was a black guy, the other white, one tall, the other short, etc. It has to be corroborated, and courts are not even science, in science, personal anecdotes are never accepted as evidence. Imagine a conference where you stand up and say; 'I have a whole bunch of friends who swear that tulpas exist, so let's just accept it''. They would just laugh at you.
 
#16
I'd not heard of tulpas before, but a cursory glance at some data (Wikipedia) suggests that, in the Tibetan tradition, tulpas were understood to be purely mental constructs, i.e. not physically present.

I would not say that eyewitness testimony is considered "useless." It's fair enough to say that eyewitness testimony alone isn't enough to prove a point, and not all anecdotes are equal, but I've heard men who work in both law and science take issue with the total dismissal of eyewitnesses in the latter.
 
#17
So it looks like you accept anecdotes as evidence, then that's just your irrationality. Let's say one guy says he was kidnapped by an ET, and now we have 10 thousand guys who say the same. That there are 10k anecdotes instead of jus the one, does NOT constitute evidence. All we would need is even ONE guy to prove it, and so far nobody ever has. It's the same with this 'tulpa' notion. You can believe it, feel it, think it's true, but you can't prove it.

Witnesses in courts? Just ask any cop, lawyer, judge how reliable eye-witness testimony is; pretty much useless. One will say it was a black guy, the other white, one tall, the other short, etc. It has to be corroborated, and courts are not even science, in science, personal anecdotes are never accepted as evidence. Imagine a conference where you stand up and say; 'I have a whole bunch of friends who swear that tulpas exist, so let's just accept it''. They would just laugh at you.

So...have you attempted to utilize a tulpa or thrall, or are you blowing steam out your behind? Granted I'd rather not these things be proven, but do you even experiment? Can you disprove it to someone who has used them? And your ET is contrived. Let's say 10k people claim to see the same object. They may get minor mistakes about what it looked like, such as colors or specific details, But they all saw it. Despite the fact it's 10k anecdotes, they saw the object, and does not change the objective truth of the matter. You're welcome to assume they're dealing with a "mass hallucination" or whatever other laughably contrived idea can be tossed out there.
 
#18
The tulpas belong to Tibetan Buddhism, the term means "magic body" and it were introduced to the West by Alexandra David-Neel:

http://www.tulpa.com/explain/alexandra.html

What interests me the story of David-Neel is that people who had nothing to do with the ritual for create the tulpa perceive the tulpa, as a projected hallucination, which I think can be paranormal.

Many practitioners and forum users have claimed that their tulpa is able to remember things that they have long since forgotten, do math, solve puzzles, and possess their body if they wish to allow their tulpa to do so. If this is the case, then I think that's pretty good evidence that tulpa are more than hallucinations and are actually a conscious entity.
I am open to the claim that the tulpas are not mere hallucinations, but this does not convince me by the following. I've never tried to create seriously a tulpa , but I can speculate that a tulpa is a visual representation of the unconscious, so if I do not consciously remember something, it may subconsciously remember, so the tulpa can would tell me what I do not remember because the tulpa is the representation of my own unconscious. We also note that many mathematical problems can be unconsciously solved while consciously do other tasks. Create a tulpa would be like separating self into two parts, but would still be a hallucination.

What would convince me that there tulpas that can not be hallucinations, but physical beings made of pure mental strength? The following points:

1. A tulpa that starts to perceive by outsiders of tulpa creator, so it is not likely to be a collective hallucination or " folie à deux".

2. A tulpa that provides unknown information to its creator both consciously and unconsciously. Sure, find out if a data could not be known conscious or unconscious is difficult, but possible.

3. A tulpa able to move objects as Phillip in the experiment of Toronto.

4 A tulpa able to do tasks, for example, setting the table, washing dishes, that is, a psychically created slave.

5. A tulpa appears after the death of its creator , that is, an artificial ghost.

I have looked at this website that you have shown and I think that there is no case that meets any of these points, but maybe it is possible, I do not know but David -Neel tulpa seems to fulfill the first point.

I'd not heard of tulpas before, but a cursory glance at some data (Wikipedia) suggests that, in the Tibetan tradition, tulpas were understood to be purely mental constructs, i.e. not physically present.
No, according to Tibetan Buddhism a tulpa is an idea that becomes physical by pure mental strength. The problem is whether the tulpas are possible or are just hallucinations.
 
Last edited:
#19
The tulpas belong to Tibetan Buddhism, the term means "magic body" and it were introduced to the West by Alexandra David-Neel:

http://www.tulpa.com/explain/alexandra.html

What interests me the story of David-Neel is that people who had nothing to do with the ritual for create the tulpa perceive the tulpa, as a projected hallucination, which I think can be paranormal.



I am open to the claim that the tulpas are not mere hallucinations, but this does not convince me by the following. I've never tried to create seriously a tulpa , but I can speculate that a tulpa is a visual representation of the unconscious, so if I do not consciously remember something, it may subconsciously remember, so the tulpa can would tell me what I do not remember because the tulpa is the representation of my own unconscious. We also note that many mathematical problems can be unconsciously solved while consciously do other tasks. Create a tulpa would be like separating self into two parts, but would still be a hallucination.

What would convince me that there tulpas that can not be hallucinations, but physical beings made of pure mental strength ? The following points:

1. A tulpa that starts to perceive by outsiders of tulpa creator, so it is not likely to be a collective hallucination or " folie à deux" .
2. A tulpa that provides unknown information to its creator both consciously and unconsciously. Sure, find out if a data could not be known conscious or unconscious is difficult, but possible.

3. A tulpa able to move objects as Phillip in the experiment of Toronto.

4 A tulpa able to do tasks, for example, setting the table, washing dishes, that is, a psychically created slave.

5. A tulpa appears after the death of its creator , that is, an artificial ghost.

I have looked at this website that you have shown and I think that there is no case that meets any of these points, but maybe it is possible, I do not know but David -Neel tulpa seems to fulfill the first point.



No, according to Tibetan Buddhism a tulpa is an idea that becomes physical by pure mental strength. The problem is whether the tulpas are possible or are just hallucinations.
Or, they could be like any other religious notion, ie, anything you want them to be.
 
#20
I'd not heard of tulpas before, but a cursory glance at some data (Wikipedia) suggests that, in the Tibetan tradition, tulpas were understood to be purely mental constructs, i.e. not physically present.

I would not say that eyewitness testimony is considered "useless." It's fair enough to say that eyewitness testimony alone isn't enough to prove a point, and not all anecdotes are equal, but I've heard men who work in both law and science take issue with the total dismissal of eyewitnesses in the latter.
Anecdotes to not have the level of evidence. Let's say every tibetan buddist claims to believe in tulpas. What that huge number of people convince all those other buddists who don't believe in them? I don't think so. Then, would all the hindus in the world take it as evidence and thus change their minds?
Would all the jews, and christians take those anecdotes as evidence? I don't think so.
 
Top