Dino D

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dino D

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Location
  • Gender
  1. You cant escape wage slavery or be your own boss and all those other ,,great things" without making others your slaves... If everyone is ,,manager" who will do the work... We should aim for mor equal status for workers, so the differnece in being a toilete cleaner and a lawyer is not light years, but just a small one... we should be much more equal, then the need to ,,make it" will fall colapse on its own, like this thread
  2. Thx to everyone, i was abscent because i had an emergency operation... no fap and no porn continues, libido is getting better thx againg
  3. The booner in the mornings is also weak,,, as i quit porn and faping this happends more or less, if i start porn againg then everything works fine... If it needes time then its ok... however if i have a problem when i stop porn, then watchin porn is 100% not the soulutiin to go for...
  4. So I quit porn, and i do no fap more or less... and i have now a very low libido and almost an erectile dysfunction... it still works and i can have sex but the erection is soft and so on... i read about the no fap flatline... but still i also read that this can be a problem amd that nofap is maby not the right thing to do? So, any tips? Againg is this normal aftwr quiting por and after quiting or lowering the amount of ,,faps"...
  5. Youre not critical to what you say... thats non dual dogma, its then also an assumption that there is no world outside of your perception is also an assumption made from the blind belief and only belief to your perception and to nothing else... the camera(you) is now saying to me, hey you dont exist, you dont feel your body you only exist as a rendered version as a photo that i percieve with my hardware/software_counciousness... how do you dont see the falsehood in this logic and dogma...
  6. Its not important how i know, how i i know is not the most valid reference point, how i know its just subjective experience, my rendered knowing, not reality it self... and still there is 10000 evidences and mesurements and what not of how i can prove the existance of the brain when you go away...
  7. When you die its still there for me, its not important from what it is made, atoms and so on, its not made from your counciousnes because its there when you go away... i could elaborate more but thats enought...
  8. A camera takes a photo of a hammer... The camera never captures the hammer and it never experiences fully all of the properties of the hammer and how it looks (every light aspects of it) A camera captures light, renders it, and produces a software/hardware digital memory of it... A camera only experiences hes personal rendered version of the hammer A camera will never ever experience a hammer, a camera does not experience reality on an otside world directly-never A camera can only be councios of her own memmory, of her own rendered version of the hammer, or of her own counciousnes of her rendered version of the hammer The only thing that the camera will ever experience is her life is its own counciosnes, or her counciosnes rendered version of reality Its the same with humans-outside world The mistake that the camera (a human) makes is the assumption that is made of analyzing their experience, and their experience of counciousnes, or of her counciousnes experience of reality/oitside world The camera sees that her conciousnes/experience/perception in a way is not real, does not trully exists, that it is very very relative, self created and with all the other properties that the camere by thinking and inquiry concludes...(the properties of her rendered version of the outside world) and then comes the mistake: all of those propertis that the camera experiences for her own subjective experience or counciousnes (witch in the total end is -no self, nothing exist, everything just is pure awareness and so on) the camere falsy contributes to the ,,real reality" and there is the mistake... the camera mistakes her experienced rendered version of the hammer, for the hammer it self, and then because; for only the rendered version; and for the cameras counciosnes= it is realy truth that this version does not exist, that this rendered version of the hammer is in fact not the hammer, this rendered version is in FACT THE CAMERA, then the camera (the human) assumes and dogmaticaly believs that the real hammer does also not exist (because the rendered version does not and because the rendered version of the hammer is not the hammer, it is in fact the camera) and that the real hammer is also fact the camera-one with the camera and so on... The camera mistakes the rendered version and the experience of it for the hamer it self... then i take the hammer i destroy the camera... the end of the story... the same works with humans, there is no brain, we are all one, and so on... do you see the mehanics of where non duality is wrong? were is the mistake, the dogma and what in the end is a mistake and a lie, or how am I (esspecialy on this anallogy) still wrong? Leo said the brain is made out of your counciousnes, it only appers in your counciousnes and so on... I say, NO the rendered version of your brain is you, it appears in you it is in your counciousnes, and it is made of it, but not the brain it self... when i leave the room the brain is there, when i die its still there, other people can see it, you can capture it with instruments (like cameras) and so on, its also there right now evan if my unborn and unconsieved child is not evan born and does not experience it i still see the brain (just imagine a guy with open scull for this example) thats it i cant write in short....
  9. I think that you mixes up some therms and understanding here... the brain is not maid out of counciousness, the perception and our experience of somw brain is made out of counciousness not the brain itself, sou youre wringly atributing the propertis of your own experience to the outside world witch is false... It is imposibile for me to percieve anything without my counciousnes, but it is wrong to conclude that nothing exist without my counciousness. Youre making conclusions in the way that you always put you, particualy your experience (or experience of counciousness) as the one and only valid reference point, and one and only ,,mesurement tool of truth"... i day that a first person experience is not valid at all-i can have an experience of my wings, and of course thata not the apsolute truth, also my experience of the brain is not right, it is the rendered ,,version" of the outside reality or particulary of the brain witch is not evan close to the complete aspects and properties of the brain, that can as example be caught with instruments but not with my experience... One of many proves that back up what I say is that the brain, as an object in the outside world that really exists continues to exist evan when you and your counciousnes goes in the other room, when you dies and so on... other people see it and it still exist no matter how many people look at it and go away and come back and so on, also instrument can by they properties proove it, just take a vide camera, film a brain, take every lifw away for five minutes, let the camera run, come back, there is a tape of the brain existing avan as we were away... Conclusion, youre contributing the perception of the brain, and your experience of that perception of the brain, to the brain it self, and on this false assumption youre basing youre whope teachings and all of your knowledge and videos... Now you can answer like: how do youre know that there is a brain if youre not there, does the brain trully exist if you dont look at it, where doea this brain exist and so on... but thats running in circles based on the first false assumption that is not questioned or proven... Its imposibile for anything to percive and experience without counciousnes (for a human) but this does not prove that nothing exists or that there is no material world. Machins percive without counciousnes, evan does the human body, there are many perceptions and informations and proceses that take place that we are not aware and councious off, however this is not the point, prove me wrong and pls answer... i really put my strongest doubts in here with the hope that i will be debunked and that nonduality can win heh, peace
  10. And one more thing, in your girlfriend lies a sexmonster that is in prison, you have to find a way to free that... if you leave her there is a possibility that she will very fast or evan the same day find a guy and have more nasty sex with him then a pornstar... so, she is not an angel anyways... dont forget who ate the apple in heaven, it was eva or who is destroying your nerves, and how it really is to endure a womans mind for a normal man in a relationship (litle bit of fun and a man/pig perspective to chill this topic down a bit) againg peace and dont belive anything...
  11. Many moralist here, implanting to you the feeling of guilt, shame, and what not... helo girls with the counciousnes of hollywood romantic movie fairytaless, chill and relax... nothing trully bad happend... its the girfriends false belief that thinks that cheating is somehow hurting or influencing her, thats just a belief and an illusion, evan if not... its not that big of a deal if we dont make and create a big dill of it... chill, acept, process it, let go and do whatever you want, if you think its still a sin, then dont sin anymore, forgive yourself, let go, continue... peace
  12. very nice logic with moralism, meaning, good and bad... leting go includes also leting go of all of what you explained and suggested... there is apsolutly no need to do or to fix anything, a ,,need" is also a lie, a illusion... so accept life as it is and do whatever, get conciuos as much as you can, and accept everything that happens on the way, nothing of that matters anything ... be happy. I dont think this guy did anything wrong, I dont think he has to do something about it, then geting conciuos, acepting, letting go, and ,,doing whatever"
  13. here is a advice given to me on this forum that helped me a lot... Man youre to serious... youre talking about all of this like a serious guy, like all of this is super important, like if it matters so much... budha is a laughing kid who makes fun of tense and serious guys like you, like me guilt, shame are also stupid... there are imprinted to your from family and sociaty... past does not exist, youre a good guy (a well trained obedinet producut of parents and society, who follows orders and rules) who will always feel bad if he does something wrong... what is wrong is relative... who says that cheating / having sex is bad, and talink or playing tennis not... all of what you talk is the past, so it does not exist in the now, its not real, its only thoughts that hunt your -being- right now, let go of them... if you feel bad about it dont do it any more, if you would like to do it then do it, and if youre relationship is not really for you you will get it in time, you dont need to decide right now but dont give up to fast... if you know about determinism you should know that you had to do it and that this was the only thing that could be, it was determinated, so accept it and dont beat your self up, now be conciuos about everything and live in the illusion that you will choose something from the conclusions and insidst that will happend from all of the thinking right now... look up : determinism relax, dont tell her, go with the flow, it will be what will be
  14. yea Gurdjieff Comunication is used for people to comunicate each other what they mean, (think, want, feel etc) In that seanse by defining words its not so important to conclude what the academics or science says that a word means, its more important what this word means in the context of speaking and meaning for the speaker. however, by ego (and the most inspiration i got here from echart tolle) means for me this: ego=everything that is not true, ego=everything ego= everyrthing that is a illusion, everything is illusion... the truth is GOD/nothingness/pure coinciousness/ pure awareness, ego= everything that is not nothing, in that therm everything that is not the true self, the apsolute truth is ego pracicaly speaking, if we dont go to those apsolute levels, ego is the person, the personality, the caracter example: Evan Jesus was ego, Jesus is a person, a human bing that expreses words, meaning and so on... yes he was a councious one, a enlightened one, but Jesus has to be also ego, because everything manifested in thi illusion is EGO, the truth in Jesus was not Jesus, the truth was the thing (whitch is nothing/GoD) that Jesuses teaching were pointing to... its the same truth that is me, that is you, that is everybody or in everybody-apsolute awareness... so when I use ego, I mean that everything that belongs to a person, and that is expressed as a person is ego... the guy (lets call him Jack) who claims that we should protect the earth and love each other is in the same way a ego as the guy who wants to buy a fancy new car (lets call him Johnny)... you see, Jack is ego, Johnny is also a ego,,, every person is ego (person=ego) but some are more egoic, some not, some closer to counciousness some further... evan if a person expreses purecounciousness that is still a ego that expresses pure counciousness... And yea, those masterminds like Freud had their relative or proffesional definitions and usagess for ego... and thats ok for the psyhological theory or for practical purpososes, but in this spiritual seanse I dont like to define the ego in their way, because if we do define ego as something, than there is something that is not in that deffinition that is then not a ego... so we could come to a conclusion that a person that has not got that defined ego, has no ego at all, whitch in a apsolute term can not be true, because only the aposolute truth represents no ego, a person, no matter how good, counciouss and elightened it is, is a ego... in that manner a person can never be enlightened because being enlightened means being a person... when a human being speaks in that moment its not enligtenement any more, because nothingness does not speak or have properties and so on... still the paradox is that that nothingness is everything at the same time... I dont want to go to far, I think you now can get what I mean by ego, and in the light of my first comment ego is every notion and feeling and problem that arrises in meditations, in the light of Gurdjieff ego would be all the different ,,I"s together, and every one of them individually... when tehre is NO I, no person in an apsolute way, then there is no ego, and thats enlightement... what ever ,,IS" in meditation is in that way ego, so whaever you think, feel, percive is a part of some ,,I", ///is ego