I was talking with a buddy about addiction. I was saying that you have to essentially give up a part of yourself to allow the urge to pass. It's s a mini ego death. We go into the definition of ego and what this means. Essentially, your ego is your attachment to a particular version of reality consisting of what you previously believed to be true, including your belief of visualization even of your fulfillment of this urge. To go the opposite way, pursuing the thing that you believed to be true could be described as a pursuit of will.

So, how would you describe the action required for the ego death? Is it second type of willpower to change your mind about a particular version of reality? Or would it be more like honesty combined with the willpower to cling to the new version of reality that your honesty produced?

In other words, the willpower must be dethroned. It's a mere soldier for your brain. It is not in control.

>>40675899 (OP)
Complete ego death cannot happen without death. That's what Nirvana is, that's what Samadhi is.

>>40676007
When samadhi occur, your brain is cleansed from any addiction you had, this is the healing parts of your sin.

>>40675899 (OP)
Ego death is merely the process of achieving disassociation of the soul, it doesn't take a profound effort if you consciously rationally put your effort into letting your worldly attachment to your mortality and the limited little world of your own body go.

>>40676259
I think soul and sol are probably the same word for a reason.

I think maybe the reason we think of our inner essence as light or fire is that these elements have the quality of overcoming their containment (and exploding in all directions), which I think is another way of saying what you're describing. The ego is the box around the soul. The soul defeats the dragon, or destroys the box, and it is free. But of course, the box is always built back, so it's this constant struggle of breaking free, and the ultimate state is such effervescence that the box can no longer adequately be built back anymore.

some interesting stuff

Hmmmmm
Interesting

I think Nietzsche was maybe a bit of a pussy. For one, he was physically weak and did nothing in life. I don't care how much he "hiked".

Why? He recognized that the death of Christianity would bring existentialist philosophy to the fold, and he recognized that an Overman would be necessary to overcome it. He just didn't recognize the overman in himself.

He was an honest pussy, I'll give him that.

I think Christianity is dead, but we have not yet revived the virility of western civilization. The only path to virility involves regular ego sacrifice. Barbaric virility involves ritual sacrifice. Civilized virility involves thoughtful, conscious sacrifice. Let's see which direction we'll go down.

I think there's a good chance that Overman doesn't come from within the West, or at least not from within a good portion of it. We may divide into factions (although I guess we already have), and a small virile minority will re-impregnate the rest with the real seed.

>>40676302
>I think soul and sol are probably the same word for a reason.
They arent. At all. They arent even from the same root language. Sol is Latin, soul is Old English and comes from the Germanic sawol.

>>40675899 (OP)
>I was talking with a buddy about addiction. I was saying that you have to essentially give up a part of yourself to allow the urge to pass.
Well, there are ways around it. If you wean yourself off nicotine over three months, it's never difficult. You just have to use a form that can be linearly tapered.

Your ego is your material self. The one you think you are, the one people think you are, the marketing spiel you use to trick people. It doesn't exist and just a mechanism archons use to make you tethered to this material hell.

It's opposite is being authentic and true.

>>40681805
you are getting there anon
https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/40392616/#40392635
i do think nietzsche recognized the role of sacrifice in will-to-power but he still may have underestimated its import:
https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/39937803/#39938966

>>40683101
What if your "true self" was just a worthless slave to some higher power? Would you still prefer it over the ego?

>>40683200
Contradiction. Your true self is sovereign. Not dependent on the perception of other entities.

>>40683216
What if it was a slave to some higher power?

>>40683223
You're starting to sound like a glowie

>>40683265
It's a simple question, why can't you answer it? Yes or no.

>>40683287
I already answered it. You're the one attempting well poisoning.

>>40683346
Yes or no?

>>40675899 (OP)
Desire is a product of EGO..
EGO is thinking Dogma composed of Schema.
To eliminate desire, you must unravel EGO.

Buddah's s teaching of meditating to achieve a state of "bliss" or "enlightenment" is actually nothing more than learning to STOP THINKING until you can ignore/endure the scary Death-Fall you experience when your EGO unravels.

It's an egoless state termed "Divine-Mind" or "Expanse-Mind" where you don't originate any thoughts of your own, BUT you experience a stream of knowings passing through you that are sourced from somewhere else instead of being sourced from you.