Are Tulpas real or a sthitty bullshit?

They're really in your mind.

>>18687072
everything on /x/ is real. youre shitty bullshit

tulpas are shifty cunts

>>18687083

/thread

It would be real to you because it's in your mind, but from an outside perspective they aren't real. You're just inducing disassociative identity disorder into yourself.

Almost every godw are tulpas, egregory.

>>18687072
>Be 4 year old girl
>Playing with barbies
>Put voice tracks on and pretend like Barbie's are having conversation
There is your answer OP, go play with some barbie's and you'll know for sure.

File: 1483527159062.png (347KB, 657x1200px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 657x1200px

[What would you like to know, meatbags?]

>>18689244
How does one go by initiating an intervention on one of your tulpa's that has an obvious coke addiction, which is ruining their mental health and future.

File: 16807073_248519728929580_4906431443876956603_n.png (332KB, 667x960px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 667x960px

>>18689267
Seek drug addiction professionals.

next.

>>18689273
But they need to be Tulpa specific drug addiction professionals, any idea on where I might find such a competent person?

>>18689288
How did you fuck up this bad?

>>18689316
Well I just remember your autismo thread and that's why I'm memeing you memepai, nice waifu hto.
Plus you called me a meatbag, fk u, very offended.

File: 1486605627554.gif (2MB, 283x313px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 283x313px

>>18689331
What are you talking about

>>18689370
Thought you were the other anon, in the case you are, please don't play that card.

as we can see here tulpamancy can have powerful degrative affects on the state of the subjects mind

File: 1486504725334.jpg (37KB, 400x320px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 400x320px

>>18689405

>"Other anon"

Very specific.

>>18689419
I'm just playing this little game called, the same game you're playing.

File: 1472259359794.png (2MB, 2582x2944px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2582x2944px

>>18687072
Never forget

>>18687072

What is Tulpa?

File: takeitall.jpg (699KB, 2294x1536px) Image search: [Google]

699KB, 2294x1536px

>>18691110

Why are you posting this in multiple tulpa threads? Do you perhaps have an agenda?

File: tulpacrap.jpg (58KB, 552x448px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 552x448px

>>18687072
They're a real bullshit.
By which I mean there is a thing you speak of but it's not what average neckbeard thinks it is.

>>18691868
I honest to god freaks me the fuck out and I want people to know so they will see how weird and terrible tulpamancy is.

>>18692095

But I have one and I'm perfectly fine. Same with most people who have them, and even that Asuka weeb in your pic.

What's wrong with being weird? A person who qualifies as completely normal in our society is one that's generally miserable and a borderline slave. Nothing wrong with being different from what the status quo is when it gives you a chance to rise above it.

File: Deadpool-Fourth-Wall.jpg (32KB, 296x371px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 296x371px

>>18687072

That's a very interesting question anon.

>>18692289
>But I have one and I'm perfectly fine
NOPE

File: kunt.jpg (40KB, 700x525px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 700x525px

>tulpas are dangerous, just look at this greentext story of some random anon's sexual fantasy for proof

Please stop

File: 177785676.jpg (329KB, 858x833px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 858x833px

>>18692404

Now you provide a hysterical comment with no basis to back up your view. Not much more you can offer anyway, since the entirety of your premise, and the reason why you repeatedly troll these threads, is just

>It's weird to me and I DON'T like it! WaaAAAAaaaHHH

God damn man, you're actually making these tulpa people look good by comparison. At this point you'd do more to suppress these threads by just keeping your mouth shut.

>>18692558
>Defending your imaginary friend this hard
Anon you don't even realise that you've been taken over.

jackie chan tulpa

>>18693499
high kek

>>18693499
checked and keked

>>18687072
They're thoughtforms. By definition that means the don't exist outside of yourself, but that doesn't make their potential impact on you less real.

It's like Tyler Durden. He doesn't exist outside of the narrator, but his effect on him is no less real. The difference is you're aware of your tulpa not being the same person as you, and it doesn't operate you unless you allow it.

>>18694258
>the narrator
Sending you love for not calling him John Doe like a shit tier casual pleb

I have one

>>18689267
>>18689273

Got one around here riding shotgun in a bird.
Fuckin thing is a meth head.
Fkn bastard.

OMG which one of you posted this wiki info.

The community originated in 2009 from the discussion board 4chan, and gained popularity through the emergence of the My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom.[15][16][17] These individuals, calling themselves "tulpamancers", belong to "primarily urban, middle class, Euro-American adolescent and young adult demographics" and they "cite loneliness and social anxiety as an incentive to pick up the practice." wtf lmao is this the true history of the 4chan tulpa?

File: 1487389663329.jpg (225KB, 750x1050px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 750x1050px

[Meatbags my patience is wearing thin.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoAzpa1x7jU

>>18687072
Both. It's self-induced psychosis. You can teach your brain to think in two sperate personalities, just as you can train your voice to vibrate in two seperate pitches. It takes time and effort and a lot of dedication. But really, psychosis is all it is. You will not give physical form to a tulpa. You will be foever wonker for the experience though.

Magic is real, but not in the sense people normally assume. Real magic is taking a thought and changing the world around you with it. memes are in their own way magic, but again not really in the same way so many people like to believe.

It's really ard to explain genuine magic. Look at Lovecraft's career and massive influence on culture. He poured his heart and soul into his work and dedicated a large part of his being to that work. Things about the man will now live on forever in a world that sees, tries to understand and incorporates him into their own "images" that will in turn give them a certain kind of permanence in this world. The cycle continues, in a near endless loop.

This is only one aspect of what genuine magic is. I'd go on, but it's 7am and I haven't slept. I'm all murky in the head because of it.

>>18687072
>make an army of tulpas
>lucid dream and invade other anons' astral planes
>easily crush them and force them to swear loyalty to your empire
>your army just gets bigger and bigger as more tulpas and humans join
>your wars of conquest drag on for eternity until God himself gets sick of your bullshit and kills you
>Your soul is ripped into 1000s of pieces and distributed between all your tulpas

>>18695739
Oh shit maaan, soo deeep.

>>18695669
>>18695739
Anyone else see synergy in these ideas?

>>18687072
KONO DIO DA!

>>18695739
>all the tulpas are banished into different timespaces so they can't easily locate each other or work together
>as they naturally die and are born they all get purged and folded back into the godhead any way

and you nearly escaped with a sense of self too

>>18693489
>shitting up a good thread this hard
Anon you don't even realise that you're cancer.

I've had a tulpa since... shit, 2013 I guess and it's done wonders for me in terms of mental versatility, adaptability, and other mental tasks. I've mostly kept her to myself for a few important reasons:

1) I don't want people thinking I'm bats hit insane. Tulpas, contrary to what most people going into it are looking for, are not and should not be a mental instability or intrusive hallucination. It's a mental discipline, just like meditating or hypnosis. Besides making me a bit more neurotic over the years, her impact on my life has been minimal and nothing but a benefit. Unfortunately that doesn't stop people from labeling you as mental and barring you from certain jobs.

2) She's my ace in the hole. I could probably withstand all sorts of isolation or interrogation I couldn't otherwise. Obviously that's not something most need to worry about but it's something that might come up in my career.

3) Can't stress this enough, most other tulpamancers are intolerable autists that either make the most cringy and deplorable tulpa ever or allow themselves to get too into it until they mentally implode. I can honestly say that my Tulpa is the only normal, well rounded tulpa I've met that could easily pass as "human" instead of some dead eyed barbie doll like anon suggested. Other tulpa manners and tulpas are so insufferable that I've sense distanced myself from the community and stopped trying to teach my own personal brand of tulpa forcing.

(Inb4 "jokes on you anon, you're an autistic too!" I know....)

File: 1467393078588.jpg (16KB, 268x313px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 268x313px

>>18696640
>Unfortunately that doesn't stop people from labeling you as mental and barring you from certain jobs.
jesus fucking christ what the fuck anon

do you, like, put "i have a tulpa" on your resume or something?

Tulpas are the most bullshit shit I've ever heard of. Fuckin retard lonely pieces of shit who have too much time on their hands can't get real friends have to make up their own imaginary friends. Retards.

>>18687072
Do you mean if the methods are viable? Then yeah, i haven't touched any of that tulpa stuff but my hobby has been hypnosis for years (and the reason i'm here to get inspiration from all the rp) and i can tell you dissociation is possible and yeah you can create and maintain positive hallucinations.

If you meant if they were literally real then no.

File: australian-peacock-spider.jpg (457KB, 1000x588px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 1000x588px

>>18696772
You haven't looked into the tulpa thing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulpa

Have fun.

>It's interesting if you are into the subject, some say that's unavoidable to find your Tulpa during meditation.

>>18696787
>an internet subculture of practitioners who create imaginary friends which they call tulpa and believe to be sentient.
wikipedia editors are such bullies

>>18696787
I know about the concept, and i think it's unproductive and kinda dangerous if you're genetically or mentally prone to have any kind of mental illness.

Using psichoconflictive techniques or messing up a deepening technique with hypnosis can already trigger mental disorders/diseases in people who's prone to it. The way they want to manifest these tulpa hallucinations is way more rudimentary and unstable than hypnosis, it's like buying a car and then push it everywhere getting an hernia in the process instead of riding it.

The thing is achieving a clear positive hallucination through hypnosis takes experience and it's really hard to maintain without several anchors, it's easier to just pathologically induce the hallucination using scars instead of anchors and even then you have to achieve the point of being real twisted and fucked up to get to see the tulpa with your own visual channel.

In other words, i'd say not even 2% of these people will get results, even when they're using the easy route.

>>18696747
He probably means it's more like "Did you hear about Bob?"
"Hear what?"
"He has an imaginary friend"
>deletbob.exe

>>18696887
If you're not an idiot, you're not going to tell other people who you're not extremely close to that you have a tulpa.

That's, like, one of the very first tenants of modern tulpamancy. If you don't follow it, then it's your own retarded fault, not the fault of tulpamancy as a practice.

>>18696911
Maybe he told someone he thought he could trust, and they told someone else, and so on and so forth, until everyone knew it.

Or maybe others notice his occasional communications with his tulpa (Like a nod, or some mumbling, or a gesture, which makes no sense to do alone.), or at the very least his awkward behavior.

>>18696747
As I've said, I keep her mostly to myself. The only person I know IRL that knows about her is my high school friend, who first introduced me to the concept of tulpas but never really got the process down.

But obviously, yeah, you don't want to mention this little hobby to any employers, potential coworkers, or any medical professionals are you'll more than likely be slapped with a memo that prevents you from getting a government job for the rest of your life.

>>18696752
>the most bullshit I've ever heard of
>fuckin' reard lonely pieces of shit

boi, you're posting on /x/ you don't get to talk shit.

>>18696772
This.

Too many people got all hung up with the metaphysics of it all and it just compounded their mental instabilities tenfold.

It's all about disassociation and mental discipline.

>>18691728
your mom

>>18696926
Have you ever been outside before, anon? Other people don't just magically all know each other. If you get burned in the circles of person A, that doesn't mean that you're going to be burned at job B, since the people at job B are most likely not the people of the circles of person A.

And, worst case, a rumour goes around. Say you were drunk or something or that you don't know what they're talking about. As long as you appear to look like a normal person, no one is seriously going to believe some asshat going "GUIZ ANON HAS AN IMAGINARY FRIEND I KNOW IT", just based off the sheer perceived absurdity of such a statement.

Either way, "don't tell anyone" is pretty good general practice. Just don't, and you don't get any of this kind of retarded problem.

>>18696973
Have you ever lived in a small town?
Everybody knows everybody, and they'll especially know you if you have a reputation as "That crazy guy".
And you sincerely underestimate people's ability to believe almost any and all rumors that appear before their face.
I'd argue half this board is evidence of that.

File: 1e933a46d1b3f72e22696301d91f15bf.jpg (75KB, 651x960px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 651x960px

>>18696884
You are thinking of the full dissociation, this only happens from time to time.

Let me get you some context.

The Tulpa can be that self image you have of yourself back when you wanted to be a superhero.

That residual identity, when you played and believed, you are bound to find those memories at some point.

This self image lingers in your subconcious and creates things that you do in order to live up to that image you have of yourself.

We are internet superheroes.

Anonymous it's a Tulpa, a self image that's not ourselfs.

You make the role of, in that pretending you believe it, and other people too, in that sense it's real.

It's the Alter to our egos.

As above as below.

>>18696995
>Have you ever lived in a small town?
Sorry, I guess I was indeed overlaying my experiences onto yours. I apologize.

I'm from a big city, where you will never see the same person twice again, and almost none of one's friends ever know each other.

I can definitely see the small-town issue, though.

>>18696930
Yeah. I get what you're saying; I was originally sceptical with how you phrased it in your original post.

I know that it's not really possible to keep a tulpa completely hidden, since they have social needs too...

In a way I think it's sort of awful for them, not being able to physically manifest to socialise with other people.

>>18697023
Yeah.
I'm not that guy, so I don't know where he lives, but if he's in a big city, you're right, but in a small town, I'm probably right.

>>18697023
This. I live in the Seattle area. As much as I try to avoid it, from time to time my tulpa will say or do something that gets a reaction out of me or causes me to turn to it in the real world and say something instead of just mentally projecting like I usually do. On more than one occasion, someone's caught me in the act.

Wonderful thing about Seattle though, there's a rampant problem with the mentally ill. A few years ago the local sanitarium shut down and threw a bunch of schizophrenics out in the streets without any support. If you start talking to someone that isn't there they'll just assume your one of them.

No one gives a shit, no one bats an eye, nothing comes of it. Even though I try really very hard to keep this thing under raps the truth is I could probably be open about it in public and no one is liable to give a shit as long as they don't know you personally.

File: 1467297467036.jpg (47KB, 690x461px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 690x461px

>>18695607
>>18689244
/x] contrary to popular belief is not for roleplaying, take it outside.

It's all bullshit. This whole tulpa thing. What a wimpy way to cope with the world and make up for being a lonely faggot. Just sell your thousands of unopened obscure anime shit and invest in a lifesize fuck doll. At least then your loser ass has something to put your dick in. The thing wont talk to you but why you would want any woman to talk in the first place is beyond me. I bet your vacuum sealed holographic charizard signed by the voice actor of..idk the fucking pokemon narrator is worth something now.
Imaginary friends. Tut....

>>18697109
I'm increasingly convinced this is just the same guy posting this whiny bullshit over and over again instead of paying attention to what's being said.

Let me guess, you have some sort of real life mental illness and you're offended that people would do this to themselves willingly? Because that comes up a lot in when talking about tulpas and it's one of the many reasons why I've distanced myself from the community.

Like I've said before in this thread most tulpamancers are just lonely autists trying to make a mentally damaged fuck doll sure. But it's POSSIBLE to use it as a form of mental discipline (much like learning how to lucid dream) to improve your life.

>>18697130
Did you just assume my gender?

>>18697130
But he is on to something. I'm starting to see the faggotry in all this. too.

>>18697162
Doesn't give him an excuse to respond with his (sorry, zer's) own faggotry.

That being said, hey buddy, I'm not going to defend the tulpa community at all. It's incredibly toxic and filled with some of the worst subhumans you'll ever meet with... probably around like a solid 60% of them just roleplaying being monstergirls.

The other 10% being religious or metaphysical nuts that get way too into it and the next 10% becoming mentally unhinged nutcases. I've met very, very few people that seem like rational, level headed people that are accurately practicing this art the way the ancient Tibetan and subsequent practitioners have.

I actually lament pretty often about how the crowd that is naturally attracted to Tulpas has ruined its reputation when traditionally it's had such a cool, rich, and respected history. There's a lot of people in the past that have practiced something very similar to tulpas but haven't ever disclosed much about it for reasons that should be obvious. If you want a good account of what that's like in a historical context, read Der Steppenwolf.

But enough with this pseudo-intellectual bullshit I'm spouting. Bottom line, yes, a great deal of it fast becoming faggotry. I'm not going to argue otherwise.

>>18697200
>accurately practicing this art the way the ancient Tibetan and subsequent practitioners have.
Aside from the very few people who were doing this kind of thing before it got big, pretty much no one is "accurately practicing a Tibetan art".

It's all FAQman's bastardised form of the practice that is what you see people doing. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. The fact that the modern practice isn't really historical doesn't make it any less effective for those people who do use it reasonably.

That being said, I'd venture to say (and hear me out on this one) that the tulpa community is actually one of the better communities out there for this type of "occult" bullshit. Within that community, there's a strong culture of accurate documentation of observation regarding this kind of thing, which is a lot more than you can say about a lot of communities. And, as far as the nuts and roleplaying faggots, they stand out like crazy, potentially moreso than in other communities.

Not trying to say that those guys are the kind of people I'd like to hang out with on a regular basis, but you gotta give some credit to what they're doing with the practice, trying to document it and generally make it more accessible to anyone who may want to learn about it.

>>18697516

This is something i find interesting, are you a native english speaker? Over the years i've found out that english based communities have the highest quantity of roleplayers and trolls, by a HUGE difference.

I visit regularly korean, spaniard and catalonian communities about the occult and they're like a whole different world from x/ and paranormal forums in english. This could be attributed to the fact that there's a lot more people in x/, but even then the proportions don't add up.

I'm curious about how would be other communities in different languages.

>>18697641
What I was trying to say was that since they stand out so much, it's easy to pick them out and ignore everything they say.

But, yeah, I'm a native English speaker, and I unfortunately don't speak any other languages (well). That's interesting that there'd be more LARPing faggots in English-speaking places than other places, though. Do you have any guess as to why that may be?

>>18697516
I'll grant you that, yes, a fair amount has been well documented by the community. Personally though, I feel that this more speaks for the validity of tulpas as a concept rather than the competency of the general community. I firmly believe that if different people were leading discussion in these circles we could potentially be in a far more "respectable" position. (If only for our own personal integrity, as I don't seriously believe that the mainstream will ever see tulpamancers as respected. At the very least though I'd be nice to be seen simply as an oddity rather than a joke that can be openly detested by most of the online community.)

As for FAQman and the rest of the more well known members of Tulpa.info, it's been a mixed bag. On one hand this bastardized form has given rise to interesting new applications like possession. On the other hand, a lot of the self appointed "guides" have become a sort of dogma in their own right where only a few community members in the hierarchy have been privy to taking part in discussion of concepts and teaching methods. The rest of the plebs are just expected to be content with their soulless-dead-eyed-mass-produced-fuck-doll that those guides allow them to crank out without putting any thought into the mental or spiritual process.

I never followed a guide in making my tulpa. I never made a wonderland, I've never dabbled in possession for the sake of my own sanity, and I've only rarely blocked off time for forcing sessions. She kind of happened on accident as a matter of fact, with the original spark that former her slowly being fostered and allowing her to develop her own appearance and personality over years. That's how having a tulpa should be, like raising a child. Not like assembling a piece of IKEA furniture.

I've really had no interest in trying to influence it or change it for the better. I'm far more content to enjoy the companion I've made for myself and just gawk at the community from a distance.

>>18697830
So, I might be speaking from a bit of a dated perspective. I haven't been around any of the tulpa.info people in forever, but I was there for the very first threads where it all began on The Board That Shall Not Be Named. I'll also make it clear that FAQman was a guy that I have a good amount of respect for.

>On the other hand, a lot of the self appointed "guides" have become a sort of dogma in their own right where only a few community members in the hierarchy have been privy to taking part in discussion of concepts and teaching methods.
Well, at least the way it used to work, from an outside perspective it may have seemed like that, but it made sense internally. Based on who the people who were being recruited into the community were (read: bronies and furry assclowns), most people did nothing to contribute, and as such nobody spoonfed them. However, if you read the material and had real questions on it, it always felt really easy to go up to FAQman or whoever and, well, ask about it. I don't think it was so much a hierarchy as much as "people who want to learn" vs "people who want to LARP".

>The rest of the plebs are just expected to be content with their soulless-dead-eyed-mass-produced-fuck-doll that those guides allow them to crank out without putting any thought into the mental or spiritual process.
See, I don't think that the spiritual aspect is necessarily important. FAQman made it a point to keep spiritual stuff out of his teachings of the practice so as try to encourage as much scientific observation of the phenomenon as possible. I think that that's a perfectly reasonable way of doing things. It doesn't necessarily make it "mass produced", the fact that it's not spiritual at all. And as far as the fuck doll thing, the one single greatest piece of advice that was given (after "don't tell anyone" ) was to not try to have sex with a tulpa. In a way, I think FAQ was a bit overly puritanical in that regard, actually.

(cont.)

( cont from >>18698093 )

>That's how having a tulpa should be, like raising a child. Not like assembling a piece of IKEA furniture.
That's how it was always intended to be. The guides were always intended to be guides, andf flat out said that there's no One Method that works for everyone. While it was all written in the standard "4chan infographic imperative" style, I wouldn't say that the guides were intended to be followed to the letter.

>I firmly believe that if different people were leading discussion in these circles we could potentially be in a far more "respectable" position.
And, after all those previous points, here's where I'd like to wrap up. I think that FAQman and the inner circle he picked up were solidly the best possible people to have sparked the modern tulpamancy practice. They ingrained a really solid respect for the scientific method in their work, and infused a certain respect for methodical documentation within the community that I've never seen in any other "occult" community.

That being said, I think that the reason why tulpamancers are seen as the bottom of the barrel that they are today is because of where the community started out, and the resulting followers that FAQ picked up, not because of FAQ and the inner circle guys. Everyone jokes and makes fun of tulpamancy because they see /mlp/ attached to it, and think of the autistic bronies and lonely manchildren that resultingly practice it. And that's why everyone thinks tulpamancers are such a joke, I'd say, not because of the people who worked to pull that community together.

I really wish that that wasn't the unfortunate reality; it's a very interesting practice that I think has a lot of merit to it, when looked at as a practice and not as some of the people who practice it.

>>18687072
Trying to prove Tulpas are real (or even they are sentient) is like trying to prove other people is sentient. You cant never be sure at 100%.
I have lurked at the tulpa forum and they all talk like if they were real, so I guess is something subjective

>>18698238
Life is relative to your perception of it. If everyone in the whole world had schizophrenia, we would see it as normal, and those without it would be weird. Nothing in the whole world is 100% for sure other than my consciousness, since I'm writing this. So if one were to perceive their Tulpa as a real entity, then they are.

>>18687072
Can you change yourself with tulpamancing?

File: AB14-to_rot.png (18KB, 1044x1044px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 1044x1044px

I really hate namefagging but with all the tulpa posts up I'm going to have to just to keep everything clear on who's saying what.

>>18698093
>>18698108
> However, if you read the material and had real questions on it, it always felt really easy to go up to FAQman or whoever

While I never personally talked with FAQman, his mod teams had this extremely cancerous "father knows best" mindset. I'll explain this point more later.

>See, I don't think that the spiritual aspect is necessarily important

I was expecting someone to mention this. Personally, I think people trying to hammer religious connotations to Tulpas were just as cancerous as some of the mods. That having been said, my personal philosophy (I wouldn't call it a religion) centers on pantheism and the teachings of classic occult works like the Kybalion.

To keep it brief, when I say spiritual I am more referring to this sort of holistic subconscious willpower that humans seem to have. If you are aware of it, and the concepts that guide it in this world, you have the potential to tap into it for self improvement. I believe that one way this can manifest is in tulpas. I also believe that the same force, arguably guides "meme magic", political zeitgeist, and the ideas that lead to the formation of many ancient pagan gods. Even ancient zionist demonology didn't literally believe in demons. Instead, demonic names, characters, and symbols were used to act as the personification of difficult-to-describe concepts and emotions where certain rituals were performed to help someone "channel" these "emotions."

I built this understanding over the last several years. Ironically, I only ever got into the occult AFTER trying to find information that would make my tulpa feel more comfortable with her existence. It's messy, hard to explain, and not something that can easily be quantified by science.

(cont.)

>>18698725
(cont...)

I'm not seeking to change anyone's religious beliefs or philosophy. It doesn't appeal to me, and I'd rather just take solace in what I've come to know from reading occult philosophers and observing the natural world.

The problem is that those same "father knows best" mods focused far too much on the quantifiable aspects of tulpamancy, to the point that they'd outright belittle anyone that seems to suggest anything that bordered on the metaphysical. I understand why they did this, the moment tulpas became anything religious or cult like was the moment it lost any legitimacy. But the whole mindset of Tulpa.info was that of an unimaginative neckbeard that failed to realise the potential that understanding a tulpa can bring.

That's what I mean when I say "traditional" tulpamancy. Not sitting on top of a mountaintop throat singing, but extrapolating the concept of a tulpa to will changes in yourself, your perception, and your unconscious self.

So much potential, completely squandered. Granted, these days I'm a lot more knowledgeable and eloquent than I was at the start of the community (please don't judge me by my hastily shat out posts here) so if I could go back as I am now I probably could have convinced at least a few people of this potential and tried to see where that train of thought might lead. But as things are now the tulpa community is damaged beyond all repair or hope of a resurgence.

>>18698681
Yes, I'm living proof of that. I was hopelessly, unavoidably awkward, out of shape, and lacked any charisma when I first formed my tulpa. Over the last few years though I've noticed a variety of subtle subconscious changes in myself brought on by conversation with my tulpa that, over time, have amounted to obvious improvements.

That's partially what I'm talking about when I refer to the "spiritual" aspect of tulpas; introspection, understanding, and self-improvement.

Thanks for sharing your view on tulpas so eloquently. Good to see someone who's not batshit insane who practices this.

>>18698766
>The problem is that those same "father knows best" mods focused far too much on the quantifiable aspects of tulpamancy, to the point that they'd outright belittle anyone that seems to suggest anything that bordered on the metaphysical. I understand why they did this, the moment tulpas became anything religious or cult like was the moment it lost any legitimacy. But the whole mindset of Tulpa.info was that of an unimaginative neckbeard that failed to realise the potential that understanding a tulpa can bring.

I've gotten this vibe from the forum too. Also the tulpa reddit.

>>18699011
>good to see someone who's not batshit insane who practices this

Likewise, dude.

How do I know my tulpa worked? I made a servitor before to make me hear when people are thinking about me and I began to hear voices. God told me she had to create it for me. What will happen now that God is dead?

File: 1460069544742.png (749KB, 1296x1080px) Image search: [Google]

749KB, 1296x1080px

>>18699178

You need to look at pictures of naked men everyday, multiple times a day. When you no longer get a hard on from looking at naked men, that is when you know that your tulpa has worked. Good luck, young padawan.

>>18699229
I already do that.

>>18699250

Do it ten times a day then. Dedication, padawan!

It's a real phenomenon it's a type of self-induced psychosis. Being self-induced it is more likely too be beneficial / benign too the individuals health than naturally occurring psychosis but is still related. The whole "sentient" aspect of Tulpas is vastly over-blown, they are literally products of their creators mind and therefor are bound too their thoughts. They are not literally an independant being with their "own" thoughts and interests. Merely a dissociated version of the sub-conscious mind. Willfully miss-understood, and not confronted as the persons inner-self.

>>18699315

Why are you posting this false copy pasta when you have pictures of naked men you need to look at?

The majority of humans naturally do not confront their sub-conscious and examine it critically. This Tulpa creation phenomenon is a form of sub-conscious acknowledgement and fostering it into a more independent entity. IMO it's not really a healthy thing, but still beyond the average humans abilities of understanding of the sub-conscious and inner ego. In the budhist traditions, a tulpa would be created in order too better understand oneself as a tool of introspection and a means too mastery over the inner-self. The untrained are utilizing these techniques improperly, while they are taking the proper first steps in this mental / spiritual exercise they purposefully fall short of learning the lesson of how to confront this inner-self and master it.

My tulpa I just created is a giant penis monster that speaks by farting.

File: 1411774327185.jpg (177KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 900x1200px

>>18699342
>This Tulpa creation phenomenon is a form of sub-conscious acknowledgement
>fostering it into a more independent entity
>In the budhist traditions, a tulpa would be created in order too better understand oneself as a tool of introspection and a means too mastery over the inner-self
>The untrained are utilizing these techniques improperly
>The untrained are utilizing these techniques improperly
>The untrained are utilizing these techniques improperly
>Purposefully fall short of learning the lesson of how to confront this inner-self and master it

This, this, a thousand times this. I'm actually going to screencap this, because it's an excellent way of summarizing my mindset on "modern" tulpamancy versus traditional tulpamancy and the problem I have with how must tulpas are used these days.

If you don't see it as a healthy thing, I can totally respect that mindset. I formed mine at a bit of a turbulent time in my life when I wasn't really thinking about the dangers that comes up when you give your subconscious it's own voice but I've managed to work with it and build a healthy relationship with it over the last few years. I'm at the point now that I've built it into a detailed, autonomous mental companion and I have no reason or desire to get rid of her.

I worked out for me. Hasn't worked out for others. I think a lot of its failings have stemmed from people failing to understand what you just laid out.

>>18699315
But what about if you're an animist and have a tulpa?

File: don'tthinkaboutit.jpg (47KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 400x300px

>>18699422
>pic relevant

Can I create a gnome tulpa

Why are tulpas always female?

>>18689244
Go rp somewhere else and fuck off

Also your tulpa is cute.

it's real

>>18701463
I have no Idea where to find it now, but somewhere in the depths of tula.info there's a survey about this. They basically found found out that about 70% of people make a tulpa that's the opposite gender to them. It's just that 4chan/tulpa.info's population is mostly guys.

>>18704053
There's also the fact that women in general have a better spot on the social ladder and don't have nearly as bad of a time fitting in or getting their needs met. Creating a tulpa is pretty much associated with wanting an astral fuckbuddy without learning to AP

Wow I'm amazed this thread is still alive. I'm the person who you had been responding to who was shilling for FAQman. I've taken up an appropriately equally edgy name to also make it easier to respond to me.

>>18698725
>The problem is that those same "father knows best" mods focused far too much on the quantifiable aspects of tulpamancy, to the point that they'd outright belittle anyone that seems to suggest anything that bordered on the metaphysical. I understand why they did this, the moment tulpas became anything religious or cult like was the moment it lost any legitimacy.
Well, your point there kinda explains itself. It may not have been an ideal practice to do so, from an ideal perspective, but there was a reason for doing it.

Aside from the pragmatic purpose of keeping crazy "occultist" types out, I'd also venture to say that there were a lot of people within the community (myself included) who simply did not believe in the metaphysical element and thought it to be completely unscientific.

I know that an argument many may put forth is that tulpas are inherently unscientific in of themselves, but I would venture to say that they are. Tulpa as something that can be tested; you tulpaforce long enough, and a thoughtform will be created. That's a very repeatable phenomenon.

Pulling the metaphysics further out than that leads into the land of unverifiable hypotheses, which is a bit part in why I think people are often so easy to throw out all of the spirituality part of it.

>So much potential, completely squandered.
I think that's a bit subjective. I don't think it takes a genius to realise that if you can thoughtform a sentient being, then you can apply the practice to achieve other things. It's just outside of the scope of what the tulpa community was founded upon, I think.

>>18698794
>Over the last few years though I've noticed a variety of subtle subconscious changes in myself brought on by conversation with my tulpa that, over time, have amounted to obvious improvements.
>That's partially what I'm talking about when I refer to the "spiritual" aspect of tulpas; introspection, understanding, and self-improvement.
I wouldn't consider that to be necessarily spiritual. It clearly is in your case, but it doesn't have to be. One of the key benefits that FAQman's guides and shit would always tout, iirc, is the ability to use tulpae for the purpose of introspection.

I dunno. Maybe I should stop bringing up the hole "b-but FAQman did it!", since that's clearly not the case nowadays, and his teachings, much like in any other "religious" kind of thing, have been since modified to suit the needs of the following.

>>18699011
wait they have a reddit now, too? I can only fucking imagine what kind of hellhole that might be...

>>18699342
>The untrained are utilizing these techniques improperly,
I really agree with this sentiment. It feels overly elitist and prescriptivist.

Who are you to say what is "proper" and what is "improper"? I think that the modern practice of tulpamancy is very different from the tradition that it branches from, but I do not believe that there is any inherent wrongness to that.

While the tools and methods used are branched from the same tree, what the goal and guiding philosophy is in both practices is fundamentally different, and it seems strange to me to consider one practice "better" than the other, when they're not necessarily competing to achieve the same task even.

Your statement also seems very radical in that it implies that there is "One True Method" (the traditional method) to do these things, rather than the more rational perspective that everyone's mind works slightly differently and that the practices need to be modified to work for different people.

>>18705318
>>18699342
really don't agree*. Fuck.

>>18699391
>I formed mine at a bit of a turbulent time in my life when I wasn't really thinking about the dangers that comes up when you give your subconscious it's own voice but I've managed to work with it and build a healthy relationship with it over the last few years.
I think most of us in the modern practice are in the same boat. I personally am still in that turbulent time.

But I think that's okay. I think it's unhelpful and needlessly derogatory to call the modern practice "unhealthy" because the path being taken is a nontraditional one.

If anything, I think people should be encouraged to take whatever path they may choose. I know that I personally and an extremely non-spiritual person, and I never would have entered the practice had it not been for the initial hardline "we are trying to be scientific" nature of the modern tulpa resurgence.

>I worked out for me. Hasn't worked out for others. I think a lot of its failings have stemmed from people failing to understand what you just laid out.
I think that it is very easy to misunderstand what one is getting into with this kind of thing. I know that I personally could not have begun to comprehend what I was roping myself into until that very first time that she reached out with her mind and "spoke" to me.

Being the strict realist that I am (who is frankly pretty afraid of the occult or nonlogical things), I legitimately had a nervous breakdown after that, for which I ended up hospitalised for (Of course, I played it off as having been due to stress, as any smart person would).

(cont.)

(cont from >>18705410)

It's only now that I am fully aware that she is another person, and that we are together Forever. Like, Forever, with a capital "F". That's a long fucking time when you are actually forced to think about it. Even to this day, a year later, we're still trying to work this out.

I think that, frankly, most people are not prepared for that kind of commitment, and don't have the dedication to follow through. I still question whether I myself have that dedication, but I know that we have to pull through it. I think that that's where the failings you hear about come from.

>>18705418
I get that tulpas can feel differently from their hosts on certain topics, but can they hold knowledge that their hosts are unaware of?

>>18705839
99% of the time, no

>>18706035
Do they dream? Alternatively, do they join the host's?

>>18687072
That's the question. Can I give strawberry shortcake a strawberry shortcake? Tulpas, egregores and creatures created by thought.... its an interesting idea, I think its one u gotta learn for urself. The supernatural is strange, people can live in a haunted house, and move, and the next people who move in, don't see or feel anything. I guess it depends on the person, and what kind of energy you attract to you. also in regards to a tulpa, how strong your imagination is. now u may not be able to make strawberry shortcake magically appear, pull out after a good round, drop one on her nose, and punch her in the face. but u can go online, get a strawberry shortcake doll, and suddenly with a effigy the tulpa becomes easier to create. as is the given idea. the more basis the tulpa has in reality, the more easier it is to manifest in reality.

>>18706069
In my experience (im a different anon than >>18705418 btw) , yes, both.

>>18705410
so, inside of your mind, is a girl who talks to u with her mind... r u bruce? is she caitlyn?

>>18705839
I personally don't know. I don't know how to even test this, considering that perception and mental state is shared.

The only thing that I "don't know" is what she will do/feel in the future, the same way that you don't know what another person might do/feel in the future. Other than that, all of our actual knowledge is mirrored, I think.

>>18706069
Yes, the latter. Mine is still very young, but she has appeared inside dreams. The form that she is built from was actually a person from one of my dreams, though.

>>18706083
>its an interesting idea, I think its one u gotta learn for urself. The supernatural is strange
I know this is bait, but tulpae aren't really a supernatural phenomenon per se.

>>18687072
Very real, I have had a multiple Tupla, most of them I have reintegrated into myself and one that I have had for over 10 years now. She's always an asset, correcting me on various things and helping to keep my memory straight. It's more of a shock when she's wrong really since she's really accurate otherwise.

>>18706128
I don't believe tulpa usually have access to knowledge the host doesnt possess unless used as vessels for evocation.

>>18696926

Is it possible to communicated with a Tulpa wordlessly and gesture-less? It is apart of your head after all.

File: Sulfur_Alchemy_Symbol2.png (65KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 400x400px

>>18705233
>I've taken up an appropriately equally edgy name
I'm going to blissfully hope for the best and chose to believe that wasn't meant as some sort of swipe at me. Gone by Rot for a while, name started as something completely different from it's edgy connotations.

But whatever. Cool to make your acquaintance I guess.

>there were a lot of people within the community (myself included) who simply did not believe in the metaphysical element

Not believing in something after arguments and insight is explained is one thing. Vehemently denying it or refusing to believe it because it makes you uncomfortable or doesn't conform to your "scientific" world view is another.

Tulpas, as much as people at Tulpa.info tried to "quantify" them, are ultimately an extremely personal and subjective experience bordering more on the conceptual than the concrete, or physical. Most objective, "scientific" studies that tulpa.info claimed to have supporting them at the end of the day rarely ever amount to more than essentially "raise your hand if you have a tulpa and we'll make a little tally mark for everyone that does."

Their "scientific" studies and advancements were a fucking joke, and only served to make the people carrying them out feel smug and superior next to the rest of the community. More over, most were carried out not out of legitimate interest but more out of desperation in an attempt to explain something that (and this was horrifying to guys like FAQman) a modern "scientific" psychological understanding could not account for.

A lot of the "unscientific" things I was belittled for commenting on about the nature of tulpas had nothing to do with magic or mysticism but merely providing a desperately needed form of philosophical poetry to help describe and conceptualize what a tulpa is capable of, what it represents, and how we can better understand them

[cont.]

File: Molasses.png (3KB, 120x120px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 120x120px

>>18707448
Instead of anyone entertaining that train of though, or even allowing discussion of it in our own circles, most of the mods instead chose to sperg-the-fuck-out with the autistic fury that only a neck-beard-militant-atheist could. It was an absolute cancer, and just because they were too shallow to understand these concepts, or not intelligent enough to entertain an idea without believing in it, doesn't mean that they had the right to bully the community whenever anyone suggested something that made them feel uncomfortable.

If anything it just shows that they were weak minded, unimaginative, and not worthy of the sort of power and potential that a thoughtform can provide.

> if you can thoughtform a sentient being, then you can apply the practice to achieve other things
>It's just outside of the scope of what the tulpa community was founded upon, I think.

And yet if you look at the origins of tulpas in tibetan buddhism that is exactly the purpose tulpas were created to serve. By neglecting, the people over at Tulpa.info have robbed the practice of any meaning other than the typical stereotype of "well I'm lonely and I want to make a mental companion."

>Being the strict realist that I am
>(who is frankly pretty afraid of the occult or nonlogical things),

I appreciate you pointing this out. That having been said, I think it makes it apparent how this sort of fear of the occult or "nonlogical" things creates an inherent bias when having this conversation. A LOT of the old mods over at Tulpa.info had this fear of the unknown (which I think is a testament to the fact that they just chose to surround themselves with likeminded members of the community while shunning those that don't agree with them) which is completely ass-backwards.
[cont.]

File: mbos_logo_final1.png (13KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 600x600px

>>18707465
[cont.]

From what you've said, I think it's fair for me to extrapolate that you don't have a very strong understanding of the occult. Which, to me, means that if you chose to criticize it as "nonlogical" you are, in fact, speaking from a position of ignorance.

I think if most people actually took the time to study the occult and works from Hermes or Crowley they'd find that often it's just the use of personification and poetry to explain complex emotions, concepts, and natural forces and how they interact in the world. Far too many people are too inclined to write it off as "magic" or appeals from fools to otherworldly forces when it's not like that at all. I don't expect people to understand that at this point, I can only roll my eyes with the knowledge I've gleaned that I know that they are missing.

Still, to leave the occult out of the discussion of tulpas, especially given their origins and the general culture of /x/, is to leave out a huge part of the conversation. To do so because it makes you uncomfortable? Well, that just makes you willingly ignorant, which is something I simply don't have patience for. Compound that with the rampant psuedo-intellectual douchebag-ary I've seen and it makes for a special kind of shit show.

Faggotry of Tulpa.info aside however, I appreciate you sharing your experiences and conversing with me on all of this. As... "charged" as some of my posts tend to get don't mean any personal offense.

File: Phosphorus_alchemy.png (5KB, 385x385px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 385x385px

>>18707491
Side note: I just fucking realised that this isn't an alchemical symbol, it's a fucking logo. God, I'm an actual retard.

I had an imaginary friend that claimed to be a spirit of someone who passed away from about age 10 to 18. He pretty much told me everything to do and we would have conversations in my head all day.

I had a vivid imagination as a kid. I never had any friends really.

It's a fucking imaginary friend only you can see

>>18692040
Tons of people have tulpas though

If you follow it back farther than the last century you'll find that tulpas just didn't exist in the way we describe them today. Making a "tulpa" was only achievable by reaching/becoming close to nirvana. It was used to ascend to the heavenly realms and only ever described once as making actual beings that exist outside of it's creator. This creator was the Buddha alone.

That it's used to mean two separate things kind of implies that our ideas of its meaning and purpose are at least a little bit based on shoddy information. Do keep in mind that no humans are perfect and it was humans that wrote these ancient texts.

Just some stuff to think on while you're reading into all this crap, op!

In my opinion, nearly all that you'll learn from occult and religious texts are metaphors for very real and relatively mundane human phenomena. I believe that it was more of a metaphor for the oneness with all beings and things in reality that comes with reaching/becoming close to nirvana than anything to be taken literally. Some of the most interesting ideas are hidden away in some of the strangest texts.

Whatever you're looking for, happy hunting, all.

>>18707834
I think it's worth mentioning that I do believe it's possible for people to make their own "tulpas". I just also believe that they aren't so much anything magical or spiritual, but are actually a kind of self induced psychosis.

Humans are very, extremely good at convincing themselves they understand the one and only truth of all kinds of things. Sometimes to points of mind-changing extremes. I think the only thing that this implies is that many/most people are inclined to waste their time on trivial pursuits because of their survival instincts.

But again, that's just my opinion.

>>18707448
>I'm going to blissfully hope for the best and chose to believe that wasn't meant as some sort of swipe at me.
It really was not. If anything, it was a playful swipe at myself for trying to make my/your name edgy. Guess that's just my sense of humour.

Despite (More accurately, because of) the fact that I disagree with you, I have been enjoying having this talk because you're willing to actually have a conversation on this matter, and it's giving me a new perspective.

>Most objective, "scientific" studies that tulpa.info claimed to have supporting them at the end of the day rarely ever amount to more than essentially "raise your hand if you have a tulpa and we'll make a little tally mark for everyone that does."
That's not what I'm referring to as being scientific. I'm referring to the people tried this stuff out, documented what they were doing, and then documented their observations. That's inherently a scientific process. Yes, it doesn't provide an explanation to why these things work right away, but it's a great step in the right direction.

Science isn't about contriving an explanation for the unexplainable. That's why religion and spirituality aren't science. Science is about models. It's about taking observations regarding the workings of things and using those observations of reality to create models that have predictive validity. The great thing about those models is that sometimes the broader models end up explaining the narrower ones.

And, as such, it's the documentation of the tulpa-making process that I consider to be scientific in nature.

>>18707465
>And yet if you look at the origins of tulpas in tibetan buddhism that is exactly the purpose tulpas were created to serve. By neglecting, the people over at Tulpa.info have robbed the practice of any meaning other than the typical stereotype of "well I'm lonely and I want to make a mental companion."
Well, that's, um, exactly what they're trying to accomplish. There isn't a greater goal for using the practice in most of these people, and why should there be?

Yet again, I would ask, who are you to dictate what people should and shouldn't do with the practice?

Sure they might be taking the "meaning" out of practice, but it seems like that's kind of the point. People "achieve meaning" in their own ways, and it seems pretty prescriptive to say that they have to do things the way you are doing it or they're wrong.

>Vehemently denying it or refusing to believe it because it makes you uncomfortable or doesn't conform to your "scientific" world view is another.
I don't believe things that I don't have evidence for. I don't consider myself a vehement denier in the face of evidence.

If I was, then I still wouldn't believe in tulpa. The reason I believe tulpa exist is because I have one.

I have as of yet not gotten any evidence to point to tulpae being a spiritual phenomenon, and as such I don't believe that they are. Ultimately, I don't know why tulpae exist and thus I try to rationalise them into my understanding of the universe that exists already. I will freely admit that I don't have any better way to approach the situation.

>I think it makes it apparent how this sort of fear of the occult or "nonlogical" things creates an inherent bias when having this conversation.
I think that having a certain fear of the unknown is very natural, but I would agree that, unlike those mods say, it is important to try to overcome it. What may seem to be occult or nonlogical may have a rational explanation for it just on the other side of the hill.

>>18707491
>From what you've said, I think it's fair for me to extrapolate that you don't have a very strong understanding of the occult.
I don't. But that's fundamentally what the word "occult" means. The word refers to things that are supernatural or mystical. And, "supernatural" refers to force that is beyond scientific understanding of the laws of nature.

This is semantics, though, since I consider my worldview to be based on a scientific understanding of the universe around me. My goal is to take those things that I don't understand and properly explain them, at which point they are no longer occult.

>Which, to me, means that if you chose to criticize it as "nonlogical" you are, in fact, speaking from a position of ignorance.
Well, I am open to things that are "nonlogical" but can be tested and evidenced as true.

Perhaps this is a difference between me and the tulpa mods, who, as you seem to describe them, selectively chose to accept tulpae into their worldview while denying other things from existing? I am not exactly sure what you are getting at by stating that I am in a position of ignorance. I think we both know that there are things out there that exist that we don't yet understand.

I criticise things that don't have evidence for them or otherwise cannot be tested. I don't see a reason to believe things if they cannot be proven to exist or otherwise affect the universe somehow.

>>18707491
>To do so because it makes you uncomfortable? Well, that just makes you willingly ignorant, which is something I simply don't have patience for. Compound that with the rampant psuedo-intellectual douchebag-ary I've seen and it makes for a special kind of shit show.
To wrap up what I was saying, I think we can agree on this point. I wholeheartedly think that ignoring things that exist because they make one uncomfortable is wrong.

That's one of the big things that annoys me about "the scientific community". People are willing to discredit stuff like tulpae without even attempting to test it, because it makes them uncomfortable.

However, that doesn't mean to me that tulpae must fundamentally involve the occult. I believe that, since they exist, there must be a method of deducing a rational explanation for them, even if such a method does not yet exist. I am curious as to whether you believe there is any issue with that line of thought.

>Faggotry of Tulpa.info aside however, I appreciate you sharing your experiences and conversing with me on all of this. As... "charged" as some of my posts tend to get don't mean any personal offense.
I mean, while I started off there and respect people like FAQman, I don't consider myself to be one of those faggots. No offense taken, this is a great conversation.

>>18691110
Hi. You're still doing this then? It's time to move on, anon.

>>18707465
>neck-beard-militant-atheist

Did the poor godless people hurt you? Did they tip their fedoras and make you feel insecure?

>>18689244
Roleplay or real you imaginary fucker?

>>18709523
looks like a larping faggot to me

ignore larp posts

do not reply to larp posters

>>18709565
Thanks Papa Decay

>>18707834
This guy gets it.

>>18708253
tl;dr response to everything you've posted it seems like and disagreement between you and me comes down more to personal philosophy rather than either one of us being factually right or wrong.

I respect that, and I really have no reason to try and change your or anyone else's opinion on the matter. I have no interest in teaching others my philosophy on tulpas, and I'm not going to try to become some sort of cult leader. I agree that, inherently, the occult doesn't NEED to be tied to tulpas (despite the fact that we are discussing this on a board made for that sort of thing, or the potential insight it could provide.) I'm not trying to build any sort of dogma.

The problem I have is that Tulpa.info never offered the same understanding and courtesy in return. At the end of the day my grievances boiled down to the following:


>Instead of anyone entertaining that train of though, or even allowing discussion of it in our own circles, most of the mods instead chose to sperg-the-fuck-out with the autistic fury that only a neck-beard-militant-atheist could.
> It was an absolute cancer, and just because they were too shallow to understand these concepts, or not intelligent enough to entertain an idea without believing in it, doesn't mean that they had the right to bully the community whenever anyone suggested something that made them feel uncomfortable.

That father-knows-best mindset I've talked about was just childish refusal to understand someone else's philosophy and mindset. Worst of all they did that without giving it any critical thought while assuming that anyone "below" them simply werent as "enlightened by their own intelligence." As someone unquestioning of that, yeah, you probably had a grand time over there. For everyone else, it sucked dick.

>>18710207
>I respect that, and I really have no reason to try and change your or anyone else's opinion on the matter. I have no interest in teaching others my philosophy on tulpas
That seems a rather grand statement from someone who is so willing to come in and say that the way other people practice tulpamancy is wrong.

>As someone unquestioning of that, yeah, you probably had a grand time over there. For everyone else, it sucked dick.
Nowhere in my posts do I advocate to submitting to anything unquestioningly.

But then again, I'm not the person telling other people that what they're doing is wrong because "they're not following the tradition", with no reason given as to why the tradition is important. Projection much?

>>18711180
damn you just toasted that guy

>>18711180
>That seems a rather grand statement from someone who is so willing to come in and say that the way other people practice tulpamancy is wrong.

First of all, I just openly said that I respect your philosophical differences here, don't make me regret giving you any ground by trying to act respectfully, dick. If this is the way you're going to operate when I try to diffuse a situation then fuck it you're gonna get the full experience from here on out.

Second when I say I'm not out to teach people my philosophy, I don't think you get what that means. If I REALLY wanted to teach people my methods or "win people over" to my side then I'd be posting guides and getting the word out. Instead I'm content to just shitpost here and offer my opinions whenever they were context appropriate.

>I'm not the person telling other people that what they're doing is wrong because "they're not following the tradition"

Jesus, you're really hung up on that aren't you? I'm going to take a shot in the dark here and guess that you just don't like being told that your little hobby version of tulpamancy is a bullshit bastardization of its original purpose.

As has been said repeatedly in this thread, you are free to do that, I don't give a shit. But in doing so you're diluting the purpose and original meaning behind it and just turning into a bad joke. This whole "tradition or purpose be damn, I just want an imaginary friend" is what filled the community with weebs and horse fuckers.

You are free to do whatever you want with your tulpa, but I am free to tell you that what you are doing is fucking stupid and devoid of meaning. Having a tulpa just to have a mental companion without putting any more thought into it is like using a nuclear bomb to dig a hole. It works, sure, but that's not what nukes are made for.

>>18711510
In what world?

>>18689370
i was born the day after that gif. noice

>>18689419
I get a weird pedophile vibe from Putin.

>>18711933
mods

>>18711747
>First of all, I just openly said that I respect your philosophical differences here,
The fact that "you said you respect my philosophical differences" is good and well but it rings hollow when your entire point of view is that other peoples' points of view are below yours and deserve no respect.

>don't make me regret giving you any ground by trying to act respectfully, dick.
I respond to condescending hypocrisy as I see it. Not my fault if you get testy when I tell it like it is.

>I'm going to take a shot in the dark here and guess that you just don't like being told that your little hobby version of tulpamancy is a bullshit bastardization of its original purpose.
I, uh, kinda said that myself in one of my above posts. Modern tulpamancy doesn't have the same purpose as the original tradition, and it is branched off of the Buddhist practices. But you can keep projecting your anger onto me if you'd like.

>You are free to do whatever you want with your tulpa
Apparently I should not be, since if you had your way, everyone would follow the practice as you say they should. The traditional way.

>but I am free to tell you that what you are doing is fucking stupid and devoid of meaning.
Glad to have the thought police here to tell me what I am and am not allowed to take meaning out of. It might have been bad indeed had I been able to have an independant thought from that of Your Majesty.

>I don't give a shit.
Clearly you do, or else you wouldn't be here complaining about the fact that I and other people have these thoughts.

I do think you had some interesting points to think on in your original postings. But at this point you've kinda descended into the land of the same kind of blunt retardation that you're accusing others of having.

>>18712052
Are you going to mention anything about Tulpas or are you just going to bitch about how you got your feelings hurt?

Seriously, everyone stop getting triggered and derailing this thread.

>>18696995
This.