A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

So I've (somewhat slowly) begun to read Love of Knowledge, and I'm enjoying it!

Two passages stood out for me in the “How to Read This Book” chapter:

“Readers who have difficulty appreciating Time but find Space comfortable and even familiar can direct their major efforts to the study of Knowledge.”

–I am that reader. And it's interesting – earlier I had presumed that “I better tackle Time first, since that seems to be the toughest for me.” Why do I think I need to “get” what I'm anticipating will be the most difficult stuff first?

“To be truly effective, the study of Time, Space, and Knowledge cannot be burdened by a sense of obligation or frustration. If serious inquiry and study lead only to deepening confusion, it might be best to work with the ideas presented more 'lightly'; for example, by keeping a key idea in the back of the mind and bringing it to the fore from time to time to observe its effect. Maintaining a journal will assure that insights and understandings that arise in such moments are not lost.”

–So this gives me the idea to read–at whatever pace feels comfortable–and keep a little notebook as I do so, and occasionally share some of those inquiring ponderings here. But if anybody else out there is reading this book also (or has already read it) and wants to jump in, please do – and please do especially if you are an absolute beginner like moi.

Cheers, peeps,

Mary

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Hi Mary,

I felt compelled to chime in!  My intro to TSK also was with Love of Knowledge.  I remember how much I enjoyed reading it, and how many insights paralleled things I was learning from other sources too, including my meditative practice.  In fact, just reading the book became a sort of daily meditation.  It moved me creatively too, in the sense that I was moved to write a lot in my journal.  

When I finished the book I was feeling elated but at the same time somewhat down.  I didn't want this expanded view of life and these wonderful insights to stop.  That hunger drove me on to the next TSK book, and the next.  Each book is a meditation just in the reading, when you augment the readings with exercises (forgive the dramatics), it can be positively revelatory!  Points that were made in the book, which I didn't fully understand, suddenly dawned on me, “So that's what he means!” 
(:-o)

I also had more trouble with time, and had a better feel for space.  And I agree with your idea to feel comfortable with your own pace.  That itself is a feel for the space you are creating for TSK, and you're trusting in it, and its nourishing allowingness for you to move within that pace. 

Knowing what a talented writer you are, I think your journal is going to be spectacular!

Best wishes,

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Hi, Mary, 

I wanted to chime in too.  It's been a number of years since I read LOK from front to back (though only a week or so since I peeked in it for one reason or another).  It is in some ways simpler than the other TSK books, in my opinion, so is probably a good place to start; but it is also quite rich and covers many different aspects of the overall vision, on a number of different levels. 

I also found the “how to read this book” helpful, not only for reading Love of Knowledge but for all the TSK books.  (Though some of it is daunting!  The book is big enough as it is, so it's hard for me to imagine having the fortitude to read it three times in a row, keeping a different perspective in mind each time… )

Anyway, like David, I remember really enjoying the book, so I will look at it afresh just to keep up with what you post here, and may also post some passages that stand out for me.

Best wishes,

Bruce

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Thanks for “chiming in,” you guys!

David – it's a delight to see that you are a moderator here! You and Balder are both generous and gentle comrades, and I'm grateful for this encouragement and participation from each of you.

I tend to think of myself as not much of an “abstract thinker” (although Exercise One, “Drawing on the Past,” has me questioning that conclusion at the moment). I see myself as learning and grokking life through concrete stories and experiences rather than through philosophy and ideas / abstractions, which can be “slippery” for me. At the same time, though, I enjoy philosophy – but it's always seemed like a love from a distance, the appreciation of a generalist and an amateur, the wide-eyedness of the beginner.

So it was really great to read this on pg. xxvii:

In investigating knowledge, it can be advantageous to proceed as an “amateur,” not bound by “professional training.” It is possible to read, think, reflect, and observe without structuring these activites into an orderly progression that moves from a specified starting point to a specified goal by means of an approved methodology. Freed from such presuppositions, knowledge becomes available as a basic “knowingness,” unaffected by limits and boundaries.

And here's a simple clarifying point that I appreciate from pg xx-xxi:

We are partners with space through physical existence, partners with time through actions, and partners with knowledge through awareness.

The notion that “time is not only the measure for what happens, but the active intensity within experience …” – the connection of time with activity – will serve for me as one of those “key ideas” to keep in the back of my mind (and occasionally bring to the fore) as I continue reading the book.

Later,
Mary

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Hi, Mary,

Concerning the relationship of time to activity – based on some remarks by Tarthang Tulku in Knowledge of Time and Space, I sometimes find it helpful to consider the relationships among time, activity, tense (grammatical), intensity, and tension.  And analogously, you can experientially explore the relationship of space to substance and form in terms of denseness or density. 

This may sound abstract, but the exercises can bring these things home more in a “concrete,” embodied way.

Best wishes,

Balder

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Mary,

Good one.  As another beginner, I can appreciate the utility of such a reminder.  The “connection between time and activity,” a good reminder indeed.

Do you think knowledge as TSK sees it, expands in the same way as consciousness?  Are they synonymous in any way?  Does any major property of knowledge change with expanding or contracting awareness?  Is knowledge fluid?  Will it pour?  Can it be channeled.  How many ways can we find to harmonize our activities with the flow of time?  (girl, I do neeeeed some help with that.)

Hmmmm . .  .
Michael

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Hi, Michael,

Delicious questions!

Here are a few passages on Knowledge, as TSK presents it.  The first excerpt is drawn from Love of Knowledge.  The remaining quotes are from other TSK books.

~*~

“Deeper knowledge is not likely to make itself comprehensively known until the old understandings of space and time begin to lose their hold.  Everyday understanding confines our thinking to a space that positions and a time that conditions. But space and time alike are more complex than this, and hold out other possibilities for knowledge.

We can frame an inquiry into time and space by looking at the assumption that what is being presented here is a ‘path' to greater knowledge. In terms of linear temporality, this may be an accurate statement, but phrasing it in this way establishes a structure that puts new knowledge ‘somewhere else'. As we have seen, once such a dichotomizing structure has been established, the gap between antagonistic poles cannot be bridged. Distance is determinative: What is situated ‘somewhere else' is simply out of reach.

At the same time, the moment-to-moment structure of linear temporality cuts us off from greater knowledge in another way. The durationless moment acts as a bottleneck, choking off the free now of a time that might spontaneously present greater knowledge. As long as all expenience must pass through the moment, how can there be an opening to an understanding that is more spacious and accommodating?

When we see that knowledge need not be confined to the conventional, however, a possibility arises for understanding space and time quite differently. The rhythms of time and the allowing capacity of space respond to the quality of knowing in operation, in an interplay of intimacy. Concepts such as ‘progress on a path' reflect a particular kind of time and space in which that intimacy has been submerged into the structures of distance and separation, ownership and wanting. But the intimacy itself continues to operate; in fact the apparent ‘loss' of intimacy reflects a particular interplay of space, time and knowledge. Increased knowledge restores access to this intimacy. It reveals that the moment can be opened up, allowing space to exhibit a greater knowingness.”  (LOK, pp. 387-388)

~*~

“Consciousness is insensitive and yields only indirect, clumsy contact, because it and linear time are viscous, dense, impure. That is, they are not totally frictionless and translucent, and hence are not capable of responsiveness free from distortion and resistance. So no effective contact is available, and the overall course of life does not permit much real achievement, penetration of obstacles, or fulfillment.” (p. 48, DOT I)

“We have learned to think of knowledge as linked to distance: to standing back and judging coolly. Now we know that knowledge is something quite different. It is the love we feel for all appearance, the love that unites all appearance. It is knowledgeability without separation.” (p. 196, DTS)

“In eknosis, the superficial 'knowing outward' that starts from the perspective and narrow focal setting of the subject gives way to a knowing outward that emerges from the 'inwardness' of space. External object and physical space, subjective knowledge and mind all come together like partners in a dance, merging in mutual recognition and agreement.” (p. 39, DTS)

“Knowledge, the Great Magician, works its wonders. Through all of history, the manifestation of self-knowledge proceeds: The artist becomes the art and the art the artist. In all of space the Great Magician conjures the appearance of unconfined beauty. Unbounded momentum gives rise to experience. Though we cannot name or think or label this arising, its magical display is nothing other than our immediate presence.”  (p. 220, DTS)

“The Great Space dimension … provides the field of possibility for a kind of wide-angle lens (Great Knowledge) to be used, rather than the narrow-angle lens corresponding to the presence of a `knowing' and `doing' mind-self.”  (p. 67, TSK)

“Great Knowledge is the immediate and knowing dimension of all reality and experience. It is the interplay between the openness of Space and the expressive creativity of Time. The very way in which Space and Time set up distances, differences, finite knowing capacities, and obstacles to knowledge leaves everything directly `known'… . Great Knowledge is the interpreter and the demonstrator of this Space and Time, but it is not limited to the events which we single out as knowing acts. Knowledge is not something which knows something; it is simply the presence of reality as `knowingness'.”  (pp. 211-12, TSK)

“Great Knowledge is not the view of an individual nor is it a perspective in the way that places emphasis on a subject-object dichotomy. Great Knowledge is `everything'–subject and object, all unified in a way that involves neither parts nor a `whole', nor even a unifying process. We can call this total communion the Body of Knowledge.”  (pp. 286-7, TSK)

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Thanks Balder,

I ripped through your post just now and could tell that there were some answers to my questions within.

I'll get back to it in the morning and read for effect.

best,
Michael

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Balder,

Still reading and re-reading your post.  I see, now with a deepening fullness, what has attracted you to TSK.  When I write, especially when I write about something that lies beyond my egoic assurance, I have felt a something nearby, a mysterious guiding hand, that leads away from the encyclopedic illusion of knowledge and into the present oceanic pervasion of it - a most thrilling state of being.

best,
Michael

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Hi folks –

I'm still reading this book and still enjoying it! Just taking a good amount of time with it – and underlining stuff so I can go back to it later for yet more grokking …

Plus I've been kinda busy.

I had thought I would do the exercises after reading each chapter, but now I'm seeing that it's “okay” to spend time on an exercise at the end of one particular chapter while I keep reading the book.

I'll be back!

Mary

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

Thank you, Mary, for checking in.  I've been busy too and haven't “tended” much to this pod.  Recently I did read a couple chapters from LOK (on “interpretation” and “collective knowledge” mostly), and I've been skimming through several other books as I mull over a few papers I'm planning to write.  I'll post the “fruit” of those readings before long, I hope.

Best wishes,

B.

Re: A Beginner's Love of Knowledge

what a great find this is!  *