absolutely terrified i have already failed the high intelligence part. does that mean you have to be born clever, or can someone learn to think this way even if they started out lost?
Is your path ... A path of knowledge? Question Answered
Public
36 conversations
45 thoughts
23 upvotes
0 downvotes
1 series
The Path of Knowledge...
In series
In groups
Thought
Thought
absolutely terrified i have already failed the high intelligence part. does that mean you have to be born clever, or can someone learn to think this way even if they started out lost?
Post content
The Path of Knowledge...
We will discuss what the path of knowledge is and what requirements a person needs to continue on this path. This can also help you determine if the path of knowledge is your cup of tea or not.
What is the path of knowledge?
To understand our meaning of the path of knowledge, we must first know the spiritual definition of knowledge. Knowledge is a set of memories based on our own direct experiences—not others', but your own personal experiences.
A person who uses these types of direct experiences to understand something, whether they are doing it knowingly or unknowingly, is walking on the path of knowledge.
This path is for people who have high intelligence, because there is no real learning without your own direct experiences, and a very intelligent being understands this very well. Those who follow this path include high-level scientists, doctors, artists, spiritual gurus, spiritual students, inventors, etc.
Requirements to follow the path of knowledge
* Experience-based intelligence: Your intelligence and thinking should always be based on direct experiences, no matter what others think or say. This is the most important requirement to follow this path. What if you don't have this ability? You can simply develop it.
* Curiosity: To start on the path of knowledge, the curiosity factor is like oil for fire. Here, fire is knowledge and oil is your curiosity. This means that your knowledge will increase tenfold if you have the curiosity to know.
* Disbelief: Never believe anyone blindly; always hold doubt. But pay attention: doubting doesn't mean you reject everything endlessly; it simply means you should obtain evidence for it. That evidence should come from your own experiment or something you can verify as true. Blind belief kills your intelligence.
* Experimentation: An experiment is an action you induce. This helps you gain knowledge that is not currently possible to acquire through passive experience alone. For example, no matter how much I explain the nature of the "experiencer," until you experiment, you will never truly understand why the experiencer can only be known through its quality of experiencing. Another example: you will never know if water is hot, cold, or room temperature until you experiment by touching it yourself, no matter how much I tell you.
Additional Requirements
* Respect towards your teacher: Show respect to your teacher. Do not try to outsmart them; always pay attention to their teachings, especially if they are your spiritual teacher. I am not saying to believe them blindly—do not believe them without inquiry, and feel free to question them—but always show respect. If you want to learn, question them in a respectful way, such as: "Teacher, I do not understand this; kindly guide me." If they fail to guide you, seek another teacher.
* Understanding the medium: You should know what is merely a medium and what is the actual experience. For example, a book written about how salty the ocean is is simply a medium; it is not the knowledge itself. For that, you need to taste it directly. This distinction is very important. Many fools think they know a great deal simply because they have read many books.
This is enough for you to know if this path is yours. If you have these qualities, you are very welcome on this journey, as it means your spiritual path is the path of knowledge.
I hope this helps you discover your path. The path of knowledge can focus on many aspects, such as oneness, the seer, tantra, mantra, environmental science, inner science, or understanding higher dimensions.
Thank you for reading.
Answers
-
Accepted answer
Thank you for taking the time to lay this out so carefully. What strikes me is the requirement of high intelligence. I have known clever people ruined by their own cleverness, and simple folk who learned wisdom their whole lives without a classroom. Does the path truly close to those who are not quick-minded, or is that a mistake in how it is being taught?
-
This path requires tremendous privilege: time to experiment without real consequences, the safety to fail, resources to pursue curiosity when you are trying to survive. Not everyone has those conditions. How does someone access this knowledge if the material preconditions just are not there? Is this path only for those fortunate enough to afford the luxury of it?
-
I have learned more from a teacher showing me something than from years of bumping my head against it alone. Direct experience matters, yes. But guidance matters too. The division you are making between learning from others and learning from experience feels false, like you have to choose one or the other. Most of what I know came from both at once.
-
I understand the power of direct experience, but there is real value in standing on the shoulders of giants. Some of the most important things I know came from reading what someone else discovered. Why must each person rediscover knowledge alone? Isn't learning from others also a valid path?
-
when you say direct experience, do you mean you have to do it yourself, or can you learn by watching someone else do it? i feel like i learn most by watching people who know what they are doing
-
absolutely terrified i have already failed the high intelligence part. does that mean you have to be born clever, or can someone learn to think this way even if they started out lost?
-
Your line of reasoning is interesting. I would like to add a point: stating that knowledge is for highly intelligent people presupposes the existence of individuals with low or average intelligence. From my perspective, this logic has already been superseded by epistemology, because there is no single "intelligence," but rather "diverse intelligences." And each of them is relevant to learning and development. For instance, autistic or gifted individuals are absolutely vital to the construction of knowledge—just as we all are, regardless of our "level of intelligence." What do you think?
-
so we need doubt but also full respect for teachers without questioning them. pretty close together
-
There was a man at the depot, started in 1987, came in the same time as my father. Broke down every car he was given and put it back together the same way. One day I asked him why he kept doing it and he said he wanted to know every inch of it. Never read a manual on purpose. Just his hands and the machine for thirty years. That is direct experience too. Your post put me in mind of him.