This comes from the comments on, The Importance of Finding Out for Yourself. Could it be that understanding through knowledge is not enough? That “knowing it” is not the same as “living it”?
Do we “understand” through what we know? One’s definition of that word might be “to grasp with the intellect,” which would seem to imply, seeing with knowledge. But if one sees through intellect, or knowledge, what is being seen, other than a memory? If that is the case, then knowledge, and understanding, can only take us back to what we already know, and cannot reveal to us what is beyond it.
So, if we are in agreement so far, then what is to be done? There are several questions one could go into at this point; perception, understanding, knowledge, seeing, the “I” movement, and so on. I would take all of them, and more, in turn, and question them; find out what is at the core. I usually look up a word in a reputable dictionary to see the etymology and the various meanings. Then I see how it relates to memory, action, movement, stillness, etc.
But when I relate these things, I do not start from the idea that I am right. Or that I have the right idea that everything should be compared to. It is more of a matter of seeing how one’s mind works. How the knowledge contained therein is used, accessed, and stored; how our prejudices dominate over all things.
It seems daunting, and diligence IS needed, along with a certain amount of sincerity and seriousness. But if it is what you are interested in, go for it.
The time will pass anyway, so what would you like to do with it?