"Breaking the Cycle: Remembering our Nature"

Music. Hello, everybody. Welcome to another episode of Green Knight, where we are discussing breaking the cycle.

And it's a current topic, but I've developed it over time, over the last five years since I've been doing the podcast. So this is about breaking the cycle right so let's get into it it's hard it's hard hitting, um can you handle it this is about what you have to do to operate at full capacity it's not what you think there's plenty of talk out there about becoming your optimal self But this ain't that. This is about perception. If your vision is impaired, then you are incapacitated.

This message permits the restoration of your senses to full potency, but hearing it will not turn the light on. It only puts your finger on the switch. You have to flip the switch. There's a reason no one does it. You have to be courageous. There is some urgency that we do, though, because each of us realizing the full capability of our innate perception will break the cyclic pattern of our civilization and restore it to its full potential.

To retrace my steps as I settled into a cogent explanation of this over the last four or five years, listen to the other episodes of Green Knight. Um green knight two words capital g capital k on spotify or apple or any platform right and follow and support challenge yourself to take this in to break the repeating cycle of conflict we must identify its root cause and address it directly otherwise we're just treating symptoms the cause of conflict is division.

But what is the cause of division? We collectively agree that division is the result of human nature. We see ourselves as innately adversarial, and therefore division and conflict are unavoidable. But can it be verified that division and conflict are innate to human nature? Could it be that the perception we collectively have of ourselves is substantiated by the outward expression of that shared perspective.

How we see ourselves informs our choices as we interact with each other and is confirmed by the results of that behavior. This presents as a cycle, a self-fulfilling iterative loop. This points to the distorted perception we have of ourselves as the cause of division and not our nature. We are identifying the root cause of the never-ending cycle of human conflict with the intention of removing it and stopping the cycle. The cycle repeats because we see it as natural and unchangeable.

But what if our nature does not result in division but is actually the opposite? What if division is induced artificially? Humans are principally adapted to the discovery, preservation and application of knowledge preservation of knowledge requires cooperation the value of knowledge in its application and its benefits are not realized in isolation only when it is shared people live by exchanging energy and information with each other. Within the medium of our technological capability.

This exchange exists because we work together in the preservation, accumulation, and application of knowledge. The continued survival of humanity has been entirely dependent upon the unity of purpose to collect, preserve, and apply knowledge. Our nature cannot be the cause of division, because our nature is unity, because the accumulation of knowledge that is particular to our species would not have come about if conflict was the original mode. Right?

We are identifying the root cause of the periodic pattern of human conflict with the aim of dislodging it and breaking the cycle. We have established that division is the cause of conflict, but that division does not happen by default. Instead, we see that our natural mode of operation must be cooperative, and therefore division must have been introduced and be unnatural. What is unnatural can only be introduced artificially.

This is simulation. The simulation of division triggers a chain reaction of defensive response that self-confirms division and builds a static consensus. What everyone believes to be true within the operational bounds of society is confirmed by the choices informed by that belief.

The general preconception of the selfish intent of others sets the initial condition for every interaction, and the aggregate of interactions taking place between people manifests as the pattern that confirms the belief. This is a vicious circle of a belief informing the behavior that confirms the belief, culminating in the self-fulfilling iterative pattern of our civilization. Each of us clearing our perception from this distortion will adjust the conditions

of human interaction. Then, on aggregate, the general pattern will change. The belief that human nature is the cause of division has deeper implications. It boils down to an unquestioned belief that division underlies all things. An unquestioned belief that everything is separate from everything else. That people are separate from reality. And people being conscious implies that also reality exists separate from any conscious awareness of it or perception of it. A certainty that reality is

divided from the mind, right? Because the mind is the seed of perception. But the world cannot be confirmed to be independent of mind, because its existence cannot be verified without an awareness of it. And the mind or consciousness cannot exist without a reality to perceive. They require each other. There is no mind without a perceptive relationship with things. Similarly, there are no things without being noted by an awareness.

Proponents of the belief in the division of mind from reality, the mainstream view, argue that the universe produces consciousness in biological beings over a long passage of time, suggesting that consciousness exists as a result of the prolonged development of a complex configuration of matter arriving after the universe was in existence and confined to a particular location therefore independent in time and space separate from everything else a localized position of consciousness

a localized seat of consciousness, and a later introduction after the universe was already existing, right? So that is their argument. They would go on to say that this separation would not violate the necessity for a relationship with objects to populate an awareness, right?

However assuming consciousness is a product of reality there is no possible way to prove reality existed prior to the development of it because that requires perception. In fact, the impossibility of this has been proven. So we can't verify that reality exists independent of mind, but we can verify that reality is dependent on mind. It has been proven by Godel's incompleteness theorem. Look it up. G-O-D-E-L.

Incompleteness theorem. which states that an objective model of reality independent of perception will always result in contradiction due to the unavoidability of self-reference, the inescapability of the inclusion of consciousness. Take that in. Additionally, the very requirement for the definition of objectivity, the division of perception, is an attempt to remove the formative effects of perception on reality. Thus affirming the effect. It begins with a contradiction, right?

It intends to avoid the formative effects of perception on reality. Like Anais Ninh says, we do not see what is, we see what we are, right? So it's intended to avoid that effect, but causes the effect. It begins with a contradiction. It causes the effect because it is a perception. The condition for objectivity is a perception, is a viewpoint. And it has its effect, right? Which is what we're getting to.

So instead of operating from the condition of division, we avoid contradiction by reformulating our investigations with the expectation that reality and the perception of it are indivisible. And thus, see reality as it is, which can only be in this case, right? It can only be the ever-present synchronous arrival of awareness, the subject, and something to be aware of, the object.

The conscious observer, the self, and what is observed, everything other than the self, are a simultaneous occurrence, ever-present origin. The moment is occurring in each instant, and it is inseparable from the awareness of it. Subject and object, right? The self and the other are one thing, right? Inseparable. The belief in a reality that is divided from perception is not possible, right? Proven. But we continue, we insist.

But it is a perception in which it is imagined that we are separate and so creates a semi-alternate simulated reality that slows and reduces the simultaneity of awareness and creation to an oscillatory conflict between the distorted perception of what is separation and what actually is unity right so instead of it being an instantaneous unfolding it slows it into an oscillation right.

The division of perception confirms the inseparability of it by creating a separate reality that persists as it does entirely due to a generalized perception held by its inhabitants. So it creates what it's trying to avoid. And it creates conflict, it creates division that manifests as conflict, which we are getting into. We think we are separate, and so it is. However, the persistence plays out in the form of a repeated cycle because the inseparability of perception is always maintained.

It's impossible to do it, so it is maintained even though we insist. The condition we place on perception, that it cannot be instrumental in the nature of reality and must be separated from it to avoid subjectivity, leaves only the generation of consensus as the method for separation of perception.

True for everyone must be true independent of everyone But that's not the case Because consensus is only a widely held perception And therefore cannot meet the condition That perception be independent from the causal nature of reality. A total and complete formulation Of the causal universe that does not include perception A complete catalog of all things that does not include the compiler of the catalog could be presented to form a universal consensus.

However, this inventory of things would be incomplete without perception. Because it's there. And the inclusion of it would contradict the initial condition, which is division. So, it's a contradiction. This contradiction is the hallmark of the indivisibility of perception from the causal realm of reality while trying to operate from the condition of division.

Beginning from a position of division, the objective is to build a universal consensus, but regardless of the quantity of accumulated knowledge, irrespective of the total amassed information verified through the process of replicated observation. A universal consensus can never be achieved because the condition can only lead to contradiction. Any thesis claiming independence from perception, an objective, a so-called objective thesis, is always chained to its counter-thesis.

And this maintains the indivisibility of perception. Because if you were independent, you cannot remain that way. It's always chained to reality through the counter-thesis. Can't be avoided. We seemingly divide perception out only to have its connection preserved by triggering the opposite. We attempt to build consensus, to remove perception and avoid subjectivity. But the attempt can only ever reduce a legion of viewpoints down to a binary configuration.

A thesis and an antithesis, antithesis, the antithesis. All right, let me say that again. We attempt to build consensus to remove perception and avoid subjectivity, but the attempt can only ever reduce a legion of viewpoints down to a binary configuration at best. Thesis and antithesis, counterthesis.

The pursuit of the division of conscious perception is achieved through the establishment of consensus or unified perception, but this is a collective detachment from reality to occupy a fixed position. But reality always has more, right? There will always be more information. Perception will always dig up more. So any fixed position can only remain fixed if defended against an opposing viewpoint. Any fixed position can only remain fixed if defended against an opposing viewpoint.

In this defense, the adherents of a particular viewpoint are identified with it and see it as a defense of themselves. The consequence of this is the repeating macro-scale pattern of human conflict. The division of perception or conscious awareness from the workings of the universe while claiming to permit the verification of information does not. The advantage of knowledge verification happens regardless of whether the stipulation is in place.

Perception causes verification, not the removal of it. I'm just fucking retarded if you really think about it. The division of perception or conscious awareness from the workings of the universe, while claiming it provides objectivity and permits the verification of information, does not. The advantage of knowledge verification happens regardless whether the condition is in place or not.

Right verification happens because of perception can't divide it out the condition for division of perception as a prerequisite for objectivity is intended to avoid the perceptual distortion caused by preconception but being a preconception itself the condition produces a worldview that confirms its own perspective division being that perception is indivisible from reality The condition can only be maintained in the mind and thus creates a semi-alternate reality

in which the mind detaches itself only to find that it is prevented from doing so by repeatedly being faced with contradiction. Right? It's a failure to learn. It's a developmental delay, right? And we've been rolling for 8,000 years like this. It's tired, right? Are you hearing what I'm saying?

Operation from a divided consciousness sets up a resistance to the actual nature of reality that It builds pressure until it can no longer be contained and catastrophically resets and then begins building again, right? Failure to learn. This cycle endlessly repeats in a self-iterative loop, right? It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

This pattern can be broken, but it cannot be done by taking an independent position because any stance taken relies on its counterposition to exist, confirming the condition and allowing the cycle to persist. From the perspective of division, opposition only seems to be confirmation that we are divided, but the separation of perception from reality is not possible, and the attempt is always contradicted, and unity is maintained.

Division triggers a counter-effect that maintains the natural inseparability, but it slows and reduces the process of learning which is our natural ability, right?

This is what we do naturally. This is what we are made to do. It slows and reduces the process of learning to cyclic conflict. Freaking stupid. To break this cycle, nothing external can be done that will not add to it, right? We cannot see a problem and attempt to fix it because the counter-solution will always appear. What is required is an internal transformation, right?

That adjusts one's viewpoint from a divided one to a universal one by the recognition of the indivisibility of awareness from reality, the relinquishment of any position and disillusion of attachment to a conditioned identity. This allows integrated whole perception to take place without contradiction. When we heal from the condition, our perception does not take place from a divided place.

From a divided position, and without a separate worldview, without a rigid belief system, and our awareness is no longer detached from the whole. With this, our interactions cease to be adversarial and instead are synergistic. We realize that what we think of as ourselves is not divisible from the surroundings, that self and other, right?

This isn't just like Your idea of yourself and other people, self-awareness and other everything else, are not a dichotomy in opposition, but represent a polarity, which is part and whole. This is one way to think of a polarity. It is comprehension that the whole of reality is an ever-changing constant interplay between polarities. A synchronous dance between polarities, a simultaneous unfolding, right?

There is no part if not a component of the whole, the flowing whole, and there is no whole if part of it is missing, right? We recognize that our nature as a species is to learn and that learning never stops, that when we take a position, when we choose a side, when we adopt a fixed identity, we depart from the dynamic current of the whole and initiate an internal oscillatory conflict between a divided consciousness and integration.

This internal struggle manifests externally on aggregate as the periodic pattern of conflict exhibited by the collective. Instead, we dissolve the inner conflict with the knowing that awareness is indivisible from and interdependent with the whole, and so non-local. Local awareness.

Is division. We dissolve the inner conflict with the knowing that consciousness both creates the world and is created by the world simultaneously. So, when we observe, we do so not from a divided position, from a localized position only, but from a superposition as both the multitude and the individual. In this, an individual, so we don't abandon the local perception. We only include the multitude, the superposition.

In this, an individual is granted whole perception and the potential for full realization of their unique gifts. It is not the removal of the self. It is the realization of the self, knowing the self, knowing that you are the whole thing, that you are indivisible and cannot be separate from the whole thing.

To occupy the superposition is being the simultaneous occurrence of what is and awareness of what is being the concurrent incidence of the observer and the observed navigating each moment in a synchronous continuous unfolding of the self and the other. Music. Welcome back to the last part. I had to re-record this the next day. So, welcome back to Knowing the Self, the true nature of the self.

Knowing the self disengages the individual from contributing to the general repeating pattern of conflict. This is colloquially referred to as exiting the matrix, but unlike popular fiction, outside the matrix is not a wasteland. It's more akin to an abandoned garden, in which many are now putting down roots and cultivating their gifts in preparation for its resettlement.

Knowing that consciousness is inseparable from reality because of the interdependent polar relationship is also the comprehension that a human being exists through the relationship with other humans. The condition for division is artificial isolation. Knowing the true nature of the self is the instantaneous return to the natural state.

It's just like that flipping of the switch. Humanity exists as a collective composed of individuals whose exchange of value permits both the self and the other to exist. The condition relies on consensus to form a semblance of unity out of division. But unity already exists naturally. So there's no need to create it. The abandonment of the garden was not due to the acquisition of knowledge whose application permits people to create things, because that is our nature.

That is our nature. The separation from our natural state, was the unnatural division, which reduces and inhibits our natural ability to gather knowledge to a binary oscillation of conflict between sides. Humanity naturally functions as an information-gathering unit, composed of individuals whose total combined contributions allows it to access the unknown and make it known.

This process does not stop. There's always more to learn, and so that's why we don't occupy a fixed position, which initiates the conflict. Learning never stops. To set up camp in a fixed position or belief structure is a departure from the unified flow of interdependent polarity. An individual with whole perception operating from the superposition, from both local and non-local awareness.

And not from a divided position, has a full and total cognizance of the whole of humanity being a network of individuals connected by lines of communication. The information traversing those lines is in a constant state of flux as it flows across the network of minds. This network or array is most resolute with everyone's dynamic participation.

The fluid and flexible perception of all applied in concert accelerates the collective exchange of energy and information that supports humanity's natural process of learning. And the disqualification of anyone from participating reduces and inhibits its potential. So you disqualify yourself by occupying a fixed position and identifying with an immutable belief system.

Right and also the system disqualifies almost everyone from participating creatively and turns everyone into a consumer and that's bullshit the restoration of humanity to its full operational capacity requires that people re-establish trust in their ability to perceive clearly and with that the realization that humanity's natural configuration functions as an interdependent exchange of energy and information in which each individual optimizes the operation of the whole.

The garden that humanity abandoned and to which we are returning is this natural human exchange network, right? The garden, our natural way of being, is exchange, is the exchange. This is how we live. The garden is a forest in which everyone's unique abilities combine to sustain the whole while operating in balance with the world.

Every part of it nourishes every other part, Those of us who already occupy this space through the inner cultivation of unified consciousness Are demonstrating the value of adopting this way of being by example But this example is more than just living on the fringes of the conditioned masses. The example is a demonstration of its value and efficacy.

The garden is a network, and so those of us who are here demonstrate the power of connection and combine our efforts to permit the garden to flourish and prepare the ground to receive the others. Right? Those of us who operate from the superposition, from unified consciousness, combine our efforts to prepare the ground for others. The current of nutrients flowing through the garden of the human network is and always has been information. Right?

So stay with this metaphor or analogy, whichever one, right? Our natural state of being is the garden of the human network, and the nutrients that sustains it has always been information, and knowledge is the soil. Verified information or knowledge is the soil from which new knowledge springs, and that soil is inert if we identify and fix to what we've already known, that we've already verified, right? So we can't fix our position or the soil is ruined copy?

The soil always has to be replenished with new nutrients, and that is our openness to the new. Now stay with this, right? Knowledge is the soil. Nutrients, right? The current of nutrients is information. Knowledge is the soil of the garden of the human network. And applied knowledge or technology is its produce, right? Technology is not excluded from the garden, because technology is the medium by which we exchange value, which allows humanity to live the way it does. We can't abandon it, right?

Technology is the fruit of the exchange, and this fruit nourishes and replenishes the bonds of the network. Copy? The bonds connect people.

Those of us who currently occupy the garden have to come together in the creation of a center that supports a garden center that encourages participation by providing access to the tools required for everyone to plant their own seeds and cultivate new sources of value for the betterment of humanity and the world, right? We have to come together to prepare the ground. We have to create the infrastructure that will allow people to join, to access the garden, to access a natural state.

We have arrived at the critical juncture where there is an opportunity to change the narrative and exit the cycle. When we recognize our nature, interdependent cooperation, Trust and develop our individual value and the ability for whole perception. We will design our tools to complement our collective capability to learn by facilitating maximum exchange of value.

Despite most people not being capable of hearing this message, the restoration of the garden, the natural state of human exchange, will be so valuable relative to the current configuration that it will attract everyone. People become what they behold by interacting with this center, right? This garden center, this exchange facilitation hub that I am proposing would reset people's operating systems.

By interacting with it, it would reset their operating systems and restart at full optimized capacity, then civilization will transform into its optimal state at an exponential rate. We can create this, and it will in turn create us. Alright, love you guys. Stay tuned for more Feminine. Music.