knowledge

← Encyclopedia

Knowledge is the condition of having grasped what is true — of holding something not merely as opinion or guess but as something secured. That much is widely shared. What divides the traditions that have thought hardest about it is what “secured” requires, and whether the highest kind of knowing is a matter of the mind at all.

The Western philosophical inquiry into knowledge takes its terms from Greek. The Theaetetus of Plato, the first sustained attempt in the European record to ask what knowledge is, tests and rejects a series of answers — perception, true belief, true belief with an account — and ends without a settled definition, which is itself a kind of result. From the discussion descended the long-standing formula that knowledge is justified true belief: a claim one holds, that happens to be true, and that one holds for good reason. Modern epistemology has spent much of the last century probing the gaps in that formula; the questions Plato left open are still, recognisably, the open questions.

Greek also drew a line the English word blurs. Epistēmē named demonstrable, teachable knowledge — the knowledge of the geometer or the physician — while gnosis came to name a knowing by acquaintance, a direct contact with its object rather than a conclusion reached about it. The distinction matters because the religious traditions reach almost always for the second. What the mystic claims to know is not a proposition that could be written down and checked, but a presence met. Plato himself gestured past argument toward such a knowing: in the Meno he has Socrates argue that learning is really recollection, the soul recovering what it knew before birth — knowledge as something uncovered rather than acquired.

The religious traditions sharpen the same move in their own vocabularies. The Sufis distinguished the knowledge that can be taught, ʿilm, from maʿrifa, the intimate knowing of God that comes only as a gift; Advaita Vedānta set jñāna, liberating knowledge of the self’s identity with the absolute, above all information about the world; the Hermetic and Gnostic writings treated true knowing as a thing that saves, and ignorance as the deepest affliction a person can suffer. Across these, knowledge ceases to be a possession the knower carries and becomes a change the knower undergoes.

The resemblances are real and worth tracing, and they are easy to overstate. Each tradition means something exact, fixed by its own metaphysics: what the geometer knows, what the Sufi is granted, and what the Vedāntin realises are not three versions of one experience but three differently anchored claims. The common thread is narrower than the words suggest and more interesting for being narrow — a recurring suspicion, across very distant systems, that the knowing that matters most is not the kind reason can reach on its own.

→ In the library: Plato — Theaetetus (Jowett) · Plato — Meno (Jowett) · Al-Hujwiri — Kashf al-Mahjub, ch. I: On the Affirmation of Knowledge (Nicholson, 1911)

→ Related: Gnosis · Nous · Soul · Neoplatonism