Means of knowledge
The way in which knowledge is acquired is called the means of knowledge.
There can be many ways in which the experiences can be organised in the memory. The logical relations are formed in a variety of ways. Of course, some of them are meaningful and useful and some are totally random and meaningless. It depends on what means were used to form those relations. So we can immediately classify the means of knowledge into two broad categories:
- Invalid Means
- valid Means
Invalid Means
These are the ways via which one gets ignorance, rather than knowledge. Surely, there are consequences of it, that are undesirable.
They are totally ineffective. One is never very sure about what they know, if the means are invalid, they cause doubt. They are inconsistent, the conclusions vary widely. They are deceiving, and sometimes fool even the most intelligent people. And finally, they are insufficient. One can always demand more experience to establish this kind of knowledge.
Valid Means
These provide a way to organise the knowledge which is meaningful and useful, logical and rational.
The ways which are effective in gaining knowledge would be valid means. They are trustworthy. They consistently provide knowledge. These are undeniable and clear. Finally, they are sufficient, i.e. nothing more is needed to establish that knowledge.
Comparison
Differences between valid and invalid means of knowledge at a glance.
| Valid Means | Invalid Means |
|---|---|
| Meaningful | Meaningless |
| Useful | Useless |
| Logical | Illogical |
| Rational | Irrational |
| Effective | Ineffective |
| Trustworthy | Doubtful |
| Consistent | Vary |
| Undeniable | Lack evidence |
| Sufficient | Insufficient |
Examples
The list of invalids means of knowledge is very long. These are universally found. Here are some examples of the commonly found Means of Ignorance.
If you are wondering why there is so much ignorance in this world, the answer is clear now - there are uncountable ways to land into incorrect knowledge. The valid means are only a few, and usually a common man is clueless about them.
Traditionally, the following are considered valid means:
It should be obvious that everyone adopts their own set of means of knowledge for their own purposes. It can be a rational decision, or a matter of like and dislike. Sometimes it is indoctrination or influence from others. Some simply follow their teacher, and adopt his preferred means of knowledge.
So it is a completely subjective and arbitrary matter, there is no law, no authority that decides which means are the best. The choice is left to the student or the seeker.
It is completely possible that one ends up with a set of means that lead to meaningless conclusions, or wrong conclusion, or ignorance. One can only say what will be the result of adoption of certain means, but one can never force a particular means on others. One must learn from their experiences with the means of knowledge. Be your own judge.
When classifications like these are made, it is easy to assume that finally we have some valid means of knowledge, and all that needs to be done is to adopt them and proceed on the path. But it should be remembered that this classification is also arbitrary. Simply calling it a valid means does not make it valid.
So after eliminating the means that are obviously invalid, we take a critical look at the so called valid means. Here is a detailed refutation of the valid means of knowledge as they are traditionally recognised.
Valid Means of Knowledge on the Path of Knowledge
On the Path of Knowledge, the following two means of knowledge have been accepted universally.
A direct experience in conjunction with logic yields knowledge.
Everything else is ignorance, assumptions, imagination, delusions etc.
These constitute the Evidence (Skt. प्रमाण Pramaan), nothing else. The justification for adopting these means is given in the linked article above on the topic of refutation of the valid means. The definitions of these terms must be carefully studied.
Various philosophies adopt and reject one or the other means, leading to more or less uncertainty in their conclusions. The knowledge gained is completely dependent on the means of knowledge, and so the path of knowledge begins by carefully choosing and establishing proper means of knowledge.
It is seen that even these very strict means of knowledge can lead to ignorance, as there is a limit to intellect, however, we employ the intellect itself to transcend it. This is done by carefully eliminating that knowledge which either comes from invalid means or is illogical, cannot be established. We are then left with absolutely certain knowledge, but then it is found to be of negative kind.
Thus, the path of knowledge, by its very nature, leads to agnosticism and unknowability. Anyhow, the ignorance is completely destroyed.
It leads to results that are certain and permanent. In other words, it leads to the ultimate truth.
Is this wiki valid?
And that is an excellent question. The path of knowledge wiki is not a valid means for knowledge. It is merely a collection of articles. These articles point to the knowledge, merely reading them will not make the reader knowledgeable.
The wiki is a means of information, which must be converted into knowledge by proper means.
Utilise your own valid means of knowledge and critically examine each word and ideas presented here. This knowledge base must be used as a time saving device, it simply points to the essential knowledge so that the seeker can save his time, and arrive quickly on their goal.