The Pure Self-Loop

 

Why was it so important to force a definition on the word ‘Know’? What’s wrong with ‘Business as Usual’?

If you can’t claim to know what ‘Know’ means, you have a great deal of annoying explanations to give. And this can get very tiresome. As when you teach subjects claiming ‘Knowledge’.

Subjects like Philosophy and Religion; Science and History; Logic and Law. If you are not sure what ‘Know’ and ‘Not-Know’ mean, how do you plan to hold forth on: ‘True and False’? Or: Real and Unreal. Or the meaning of the words: ‘Meaning’ and ‘Word’.

Did you make sense of this morning’s Newspaper? Have you really understood a single word on this Page? Including this very sentence about understanding a single word on this Page?

‘Knowing’ and ‘Not-Knowing’ is a distinction always and only made in a state of ‘Knowing’. You can never know anything about Knowing without being in contradiction to the act of Knowing itself.

If you can newly define the word ‘Know’, by that very fact, what you have defined is not the word ‘Know’. This is the Self-Loop in its purest form.

‘It is known by him who knows it not..’ Say’s the Kena Upanishad. Or as Lao Tzu put it: ‘The more you know, the less you understand’