I succeeded in creating a Tulpa

[MysticOnion]

When I did this - it took quite a long time and I wasn't doing it knowingly. I had no idea that I was creating such a thing but when I read about Tulpas I realised what I was doing.

The Tulpa I created was a tall man who would wear a dark suit, he had long-ish dark hair and wore a silver ring on his right hand and a pentagram around his neck. He could also shape-shift into a serpent. He had a lot of knowledge and qualities that I myself didn't have. The Tulpa eventually began to manifest on his own and it was as though he did have a life all of his own. At first it was just psychics that picked up on him but later other people began to see him around me - they would just casually mention it or something. Like "Who was that guy you were with?" When I know I was on my own.. that sort of thing.

At first when I realised he was a Tulpa I concentrated to make him stronger because I really wanted to see if I could do this and actually give him life. He had a whole range of his own emotions and he started to be able to communicate with other people. He began to refer to me as his "mother" and it seemed to me that he was communicating and interacting with others without me having to be around. He was a huge energy drain as well and during his existence I was plagued with terrible nightmares and irrational fears, yet at the same time he was able to accurately predict events in the future such as Earthquakes including locations, number of dead, that sort of thing.

Eventually because the Tulpa started to rebel and was getting a bit out of my control I had to draw the energy back to myself and sort of destroy him, though I feel now he is not actually destroyed. His energies are now part of me again.

What do you think of this? Is creating a Tulpa possible or was I simply... hallucinating?

I am not schizophrenic I assure you - I have an open mind and I like to experiment with things and dabble in the occult here and there. This was an interesting experiment for me.

[Godsnmbr1]

Crazy people never think they're crazy. Remember that.

[eight bits]

Crazy people never think they're crazy. Remember that.

While there is wisdom in that, sane people rarely believe that they are crazy, they just acknowledge the possibility more readily than those who are less sane.

The most famous tulpa report from a Westerner, of having made one rather than simply an anthropoligcal study about Eastern beliefs, is from Alexandra David-Neel, searchable and all over the web.

I've read some of her stuff. Crazy wasn't the first thing that popped into my head. Alternatively, if she is a liar, then she is an especially good one.

So, I think that something happened. I don't know what. I'd like to hear more, please.

[MysticOnion]

Crazy people never think they're crazy. Remember that.

Well if it was just me experiencing it then I'd probably think I was a little crazy or something - however the phenomenon was witnessed by several psychics and at least three of my friends, so it does seem to be more than that. This would then have to fit into the category of a group hallucination - except that I never actually told these people I was intending to create a Tulpa. This was done intentionally - I admit it wasn't at first, I was simply imagining the character and what he'd look like and I knew that was imagination and fantasy - to create the actual Tulpa I knew what I was attempting to do and it was a deliberate experiment. I do not know what would have happened if I had continued to manifest this thoughtform into reality, whether or not he would have become real enough to pass for an actual person, and I have no idea what he did on his own without me around - except that one of my friends apparently had several conversations with him. She did say of course that she didn't know if she was dreaming or what, but that the man could shapeshift etc, and described him perfectly to me. So in that case he wasn't as real as you or me, but was able to infiltrate dream states etc. I feel that he could have taken on a more stable reality if I had let him. He certainly had a personality and could affect reality in subtle ways.

Since drawing the energy back, I no longer suffer from nightmares or irrational fears and I have a lot of energy in myself that I didn't have before when I was using it to manifest the Tulpa. Also I suffer from psoriasis and that too has cleared up a bit since I drew him back.

There may be a dozen rational or irrational explanations for this - but I did experience it and I feel I was able to create a very real Tulpa.

[ODIN-X]

"He began to refer to me as his "mother"."

"I had to draw the energy back to myself and sort of destroy him."

That is very poor parenting skills.

[Sho_Sho]

Reading this post made me feel like I was drunk!

I wish I had an imagination like that.

[Moonie2012]

So you..."made" a person (no small feat). Other people could see him, yet you didn't take a picture of him, write down his predictions, or try to prove his existence in any way.

Then you post about it here very nonchalantly, as if it were just "one of those things" that happen from time to time.

Right.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Moonie2012

[bleedingelite]

When I did this - it took quite a long time and I wasn't doing it knowingly. I had no idea that I was creating such a thing but when I read about Tulpas I realised what I was doing.

The Tulpa I created was a tall man who would wear a dark suit, he had long-ish dark hair and wore a silver ring on his right hand and a pentagram around his neck. He could also shape-shift into a serpent. He had a lot of knowledge and qualities that I myself didn't have. The Tulpa eventually began to manifest on his own and it was as though he did have a life all of his own. At first it was just psychics that picked up on him but later other people began to see him around me - they would just casually mention it or something. Like "Who was that guy you were with?" When I know I was on my own.. that sort of thing.

At first when I realised he was a Tulpa I concentrated to make him stronger because I really wanted to see if I could do this and actually give him life. He had a whole range of his own emotions and he started to be able to communicate with other people. He began to refer to me as his "mother" and it seemed to me that he was communicating and interacting with others without me having to be around. He was a huge energy drain as well and during his existence I was plagued with terrible nightmares and irrational fears, yet at the same time he was able to accurately predict events in the future such as Earthquakes including locations, number of dead, that sort of thing.

Eventually because the Tulpa started to rebel and was getting a bit out of my control I had to draw the energy back to myself and sort of destroy him, though I feel now he is not actually destroyed. His energies are now part of me again.

What do you think of this? Is creating a Tulpa possible or was I simply... hallucinating?

I am not schizophrenic I assure you - I have an open mind and I like to experiment with things and dabble in the occult here and there. This was an interesting experiment for me.

Okay, I'm just going to take a wild stab at what I think happened:

I think you became obsessed with a sexual fantasy to the point that your subconscious mind actually caused mild hallucinations and memory alterations.

[psychicstuff]

I made a level 20 pikkachu once... But that's the end of my story.

[ShadowSot]

Remarkable, it seems you made a walking talking copy of Harry Dresden.

Good thing you destroyed him.... the copy infringment lawsuits would have been interesting.

[MysticOnion]

That is very poor parenting skills.

What you mean is - it would be if he was a real and actual live person like my son for example.

[MysticOnion]

Okay, I'm just going to take a wild stab at what I think happened:

I think you became obsessed with a sexual fantasy to the point that your subconscious mind actually caused mild hallucinations and memory alterations.

No - the Tulpa wasn't created for sexual fantasies, he was created to help me with Magic rituals. I wanted to have a sort of magus/master so I imagined one was there to help me.

Remarkable, it seems you made a walking talking copy of Harry Dresden.

Good thing you destroyed him.... the copy infringment lawsuits would have been interesting.

Who?

[MysticOnion]

So you..."made" a person (no small feat). Other people could see him, yet you didn't take a picture of him, write down his predictions, or try to prove his existence in any way.

Then you post about it here very nonchalantly, as if it were just "one of those things" that happen from time to time.

Right.

No I didn't take a picture of him - I don't think I manifested him clearly enough to do that - as I explained, the friend who had a few conversations with him couldn't tell if she was dreaming or not at the time. I did write down his predictions yes. I didn't try to prove his existence because obviously no one is going to believe that. I assume that you don't believe I made a Tulpa either - just wondering what people think of this. I don't intend to do it again though I can tell you that.

[Moonie2012]

No, I don't believe it. How exactly does one have a few lengthy conversations (with an imaginary person a friend MADE, no less) and not know if they are dreams? Come on, she KNOWS they were dreams (if it actually happened at all).

I would like to hear these predictions, though - but only if they apply to events that have yet to happen. Saying he predicted this or that event that already took place means nothing.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Moonie2012

[Postulant]

Mephistopheles looks kinda like what your Tulpa is.

[Moonie2012]

Mephistopheles looks kinda like what your Tulpa is.

Really, have you met him?

[Postulant]

haha have i met him, yeah we go for beers quite often

[MysticOnion]

No, I don't believe it. How exactly does one have a few lengthy conversations (with an imaginary person a friend MADE, no less) and not know if they are dreams? Come on, she KNOWS they were dreams (if it actually happened at all).

I would like to hear these predictions, though - but only if they apply to events that have yet to happen. Saying he predicted this or that event that already took place means nothing.

Well to answer that I'd have to say that the conversations took place whilst she was in a dreamlike state sort of like hypnogogic - I just found it strange that she would describe him so perfectly to me - and that she wasn't the only one. The conversations etc stopped when I er.. destroyed him. Could be coincidental but interesting isn't it?

[Moonie2012]

How about those predictions?

[ShadowSot]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_dresden

Your initial description sounds like this fellow. Character from a book series I enjoy.

[Resonance]

This person (who made an uncalled for post I deleted)) -Para has a point. I'm thinking, you are completely lying about everything. You contradict yourself throughout all of your posts. First, multiple people 'saw' and 'spoke' with this ... Whatever the heck a Tulpa is. ( I know what it 'supposedly' is.) And then, you go on to say, no longer did 'multiple' people see it, but only one 'girl'. After that, you say, no longer did she 'see' it, but she 'dreamt' it. Also, speaking so 'non-chalantly' about such a feat. as this, is preposterous.

So, please. Just *SNIP* - You can reply skeptically in a civil manner.

Edited January 15, 2010 by Paranormalcy
edited out rude remark, noted previous post unapproval

[eight bits]

Rising to the defense of the OP,

Here is the original first-person Westerner's tulpa report (from the last chapter of Magic and Mystery in Tibet, by Alexandra David-Neel):

... I chose for my experiment a most insignificant character: a monk, short and fat, of an innocent and jolly type.

I shut myself in tsams [meditative seclusion] and proceeded to perform the prescribed concentration of thought and other rites. After a few months the phantom monk was formed. His form grew gradually fixed and life-like looking. He became a kind of guest, living in my apartment.

I then broke my seclusion and started for a tour, with my servants and tents. The monk included himself in the party. Though I lived in the open riding on horseback for miles each day, the illusion persisted. I saw the fat trapa, now and then it was not necessary for me to think of him to make him appear.

The phantom performed various actions of the kind that are natural to travellers and that I had not commanded. For instance, he walked, stopped, looked around him. The illusion was mostly visual, but sometimes I felt as if a robe was lightly rubbing against me and once a hand seemed to touch my shoulder.

The features which I had imagined, when building my phantom, gradually underwent a change. The fat, chubby-cheeked fellow grew leaner, his face assumed a vaguely mocking, sly, malignant look. He became more troublesome and bold. In brief, he escaped my control.

Once, a herdsman who brought me a present of butter saw the tulpa in my tent and took it for a live lama.

I ought to have let the phenomenon follow its course, but the presence of that unwanted companion began to prove trying to my nerves; it turned into a "daynightmare." Morereover, I was beginning to plan my journey to Lhasa and needed a quiet brain devoid of other preoccupations, so I decided to dissolve the phantom. I succeeded, but only after six months of hard struggle. My mind-creature was tenacious of life.

There is nothing strange in the fact that I may have created my own hallucination. The interesting point is that in these cases of materialization, others see the thought-forms that have been created.

Like David-Neel, the OP reports awareness of the origin of the phenomenon, and acknowledges its hallucinatory character. Nothing in either report attributes to the tulpa anything which is implausible for a vivid, socially shared hallucination. Both reporters put a decisive end to their respective phenomena.

To invoke mental illness (with the pretended specificity of calling it schizophrenia, as if the critic were competent to make such a diagnosis, lol), seconded with accusations of drug abuse and outright lying, is completely uncalled for.

Edited November 7, 2008 by eight bits

[heavensblade23]

To invoke mental illness (with the pretended specificity of calling it schizophrenia, as if the critic were competent to make such a diagnosis, lol), seconded with accusations of drug abuse and outright lying, is completely uncalled for.

Oh, you're right, the first conclusion we should come to when someone claims to have created a tulpa, doesn't provide any details, and later changes their story, is that they're telling the truth.

I'm just casually reminding everyone here that you can be skeptical but still be civil - there's no need for hurtful comments. -Para

Edited January 15, 2010 by Paranormalcy
reminder about being civil

[eight bits]

I don't know, heavensblade. I claimed that I read David-Neel's report some time ago.

Q. What is most distinctive about this report you claim to have read?

A. Other people saw the tulpa.

(Which is what I would have said, if asked, before my most recent post. Cross examination continues:)

Q. Did David-Neel say that "other people" saw her alleged tulpa?

A. Yes.

Q. O rly? Would it refresh your recollection to read the report?

A. It might.

Q. (Hands the witness the report.) What is most distinctive about this report, again?

A. (Reads. Reflects.) One other person saw the tulpa. The plural referred to other reports that David-Neel had heard, not the one she witnessed herself. My apologies.

So, do you assume that I lied about having read the report, or do you think it possible that I misremembered or expressed myself poorly, or both?

The OP provided enough details that I recognized it as congruent with an existing report in the literature. When questionned, she shifted her ground, but not on the substance of the thing. The other attributes of the OP's story that, in my opinion, contributed to its sanity and credibility appeared immediately before the excerpt of my post which you quoted.

[heavensblade23]

The OP provided enough details that I recognized it as congruent with an existing report in the literature. When questionned, she shifted her ground, but not on the substance of the thing. The other attributes of the OP's story that, in my opinion, contributed to its sanity and credibility appeared immediately before the excerpt of my post which you quoted.

'In the literature' is a term doctors and other scientists use to mean something has appeared in a legitimate study in a peer-reviewed journal. It does not mean it was simply written down in a book on the subject.