Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
First you say to look it up on the Internet(modern), then you say my Daoist practices doesn't fit in under the modern umbrella. I even proved it was in my first message to you. That's why I said, you don't know what you're talking about.
Name a practice, technique, anything, or debate the actual Daoist practices I mentioned. You sound confused, lost, and talking in circles to play the "I'm always right" game. I've been talking about tulpas as they are...I don't know what the modern equivalent is because I never learned it online. You say the modern is wrong...okay, I take your word for it because I don't know. But I'm talking about tulpas at its original root word from Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhism. Is it that hard to admit you didn't know their is a Daoist equivalent? I don't need to hear/read you're wrong, but you're taking shots at me to replace the feeling of what you feel. You don't know, and it's fine. Or prove I'm wrong..define the thing, describe the where and why. Boom, then it's a good argument. If you can't do that, then it's just talk, and self soothing. Over 300 words and it only takes less to prove me wrong...like I did you.
Buddy it's literally like talking to the wall with you. You don't understand what tulpamancy refers to in a modern context and refuse to do yourself a favor and look into it. I'll just assume you don't speak english, because the only other explanation is that you're trolling.
As entertaining as it is to watch the spiral I have better things to do. I won't be reading or responding to any of your messages in the future, enjoy your time on the forum.
Buddy it's literally like talking to the wall with you. You don't understand what tulpamancy refers to in a modern context and refuse to do yourself a favor and look into it. I'll just assume you don't speak english, because the only other explanation is that you're trolling.
As entertaining as it is to watch the spiral I have better things to do. I won't be reading or responding to any of your messages in the future, enjoy your time on the forum.
ahathoor define it. That's what he was talking about, described it, and the folks here. I never said I didn't look it up eventually.. being here I been looked it up. But that's not where I got my info on practicing. We're talking about practices. That isn't a technique. If you create a tulpa dog and walk it everyday it doesn't mean it's not a tulpa. It's using it in a way it wasn't intended for. Like evocation was a practice to bless meals and the farm, then at some point change to demons for monetary gain....it doesn't mean it not evocation. So when you say modern tulpamancy, that's not a practice. When talking about Daoist practices, an original tulpa and fulu ritual magic is the same thing. I defined it many many times...now you know how the wall feels lol.
See what I did there. We've been talking for a while and bringing up modern tulpamancy doesn't make any sense. If you want to walk a fulu talisman, it's weird, but it doesn't mean it's not a fulu talisman. Again it's a lame tactic to focus on a part of a message you can try to take shots with. Try again
Post automatically merged:
When I first came to this thread, I asked about what tulpamancy was. Did research on it, and left it alone. Right now it's not on my priority list. But interesting enough to try one day....with modifications of course.
There are those who feel that it's a pathway to mental health issues... Where's the research that supports that narrative?
Saying it's not a tulpa is also incorrect because it is using the exact same process to create it.
There is research on tulpamancy with documentation from psychologists, anthropologists, and neuroscientists. Rather than finding the creation as a sign of psychosis or dissociative disorder, researchers who have surveyed and interviewed members of the tulpamancy community report distinct mental health and cognitive benefits instead.
The research:
Tulpamancy has been around long enough to have over a decade of research.
As it stands, there's more research to support the theory that it can be beneficial. As far as we know, there are zero cases showing an impact to mental health towards Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID)(what used to be known as multiple personality disorder). For those with preexisting conditions, the evidence shows it's still safer than staying in your own house.
With anything occult it's good to practice precautions, regardless. I'm not saying there's isn't any cognitive effect, there is. But it's not what many are thinking when they read into the tulpamancy topic.
If you watch the original practice of deity yoga:
-The disciple meditates until their concentration is absorbed by the being.
-while sitting in front of the picture, will shift their focus within and without, continuing imaginative exercises.
The difference is what it being used for. Spiritual oneness vs spiritual creation. I use the word creation loosely here. "Nothing is new under the sun." In many myths, the gods breathes life into wood/clay/dirt/ash... gives it an intelligence, then lastly an identity. Deity yoga being reversed in its intention here. The same ol' dirt, giving it's force to another.
The point: it's a dumb argument to link tulpamancy and mental health without real research or evidence. It's a bias, not a fact. To say it's not a tulpa is ignorant of what a tulpa is (a concentrated imagined being). The difference of creating an imaginary being to bring good vibes to a home, vs walking a talisman on a cord down the street...vast separation there. Tulpamancers aren't doing either one of that. I get the concern, but it doesn't come from knowing... It's merely thinking one knows.
In the occult circles, mental health is a very real thing. Want to know what practices have been linked case over case? Meditation, trance, mediumship, ritual magic, occult cosmology, high-stakes divination, fasting, sleep deprivation, rhythmic hyperventilation...small list, and each can lead to psychosis or other.
This is why forums exist. Not to just share, but to build support. Throwing ideas to the fringes doesn't stop the idea. If there's malignancy later, it festers alone if no outlet exists. No one practice is worse than the other if the result can be the same.
If it's been around this long, it has benefits someone is reaping. Fake practices don't have depth, and a catalog of successful experiments. Most businesses can barely hold on for 5yrs, let alone a decade.
Well this certainly has been an interesting topic to read through seeing the opinions expressed so far. I had wondered for a bit if what I was dealing with was potentially a tulpa of some sort, but I was also under the impression such things had to be crafted with deliberate intent and time. So part of me was also thinking a young child at the age of six wasn't just gonna spawn one on their first go at playing with imagination.
I'm starting to lean more towards I just got into a trance state and was tapping into some kinda hypnagogic like vision, since I later in life learned how to see this again while learning about scrying. Though I have heard people describe some paranormal entities looking similar to what I saw, which was a shimmering heatwave mirage-like affect overlaying what I was physically seeing.
I'm glad to see that the Jungian anima and animus was brought up. I've been circling that idea for a bit since that's where things seem to be leaning towards. Most of my interactions often occurs in dreams and synchronicities. I kinda also stumbled upon Active Imagination and there's also the fact a lot of his ideas seem to be fitting given she was also sporting four variations in her appearances. But I am also still open to the idea of it being something akin to the daimon, HGA, qareen, or fylgja (familiar).
