https://open.spotify.com/track/5T8Qmcwch4KzE8uDvAKJ42?si=1cf81addaefd401f

Everyone’s hungry. Hungry for knowledge. Some more, some less. But at the end of the day, when you ask a group who wants knowledge, every single hand goes up.

Blind hands, that is.

Now, ask the same group why they want knowledge. How many do you think would have a real answer?

Zero. Absolute zero.

Why?

Because at the end of knowledge lies emptiness, so vast and so full it’s inconceivable.

Knowledge does not equal intelligence; it does not make you clever. Knowledge is simply a herd of information you’ve learned to interpret. And anyone can do that.

Get a guy, any guy with zero experience with literature, someone who hates reading, for example. Hand him a copy of James Joyce's Finnegans Wake, one of the hardest pieces of literature ever produced by man.

It explores the collective unconscious and the interplay of myth and history, something we still can’t grasp to this day. The language in the book follows such a dream-like narrative that to even try to read it, you need to know three languages— Irish, English, and German, and even then, some words are so phonetically written that it is said that to understand it, you must read it out loud.

Or, if you want to focus more on the quantity of information, hand him a copy of the Mahabharata, the whole thing, not just one division(out of 18). In Bangla, we say,

“যাহা নাই ভারতে তাহা নাই ভারতে” [jaha nai bharat e, taha nai bharat e]
(What’s not in Bharat, is not in Bharat)

Here, the first Bharat is referring to the Mahabharat, and the second Bharat translates to India, in direct translation, but when it was written, they would’ve been talking about not just the India we know today, but the entire Indian subcontinent from before.

This subcontinent was divided into three main parts: Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India. Among them, Bangladesh was the smallest. Yet if you just look at Bangladesh, you’ll find all four major religions well established, more than fifty indigenous communities with sizable populations, and even within the Bengali people, an ancient lineage that is deeply diverse. Just imagine the cultural heritage packed into this smallest piece of the subcontinent.

Now take that scale and think bigger. The Mahabharata weaves all of that knowledge, all of that cultural heritage, into a single creation. It captures so much that people call it the greatest epic of Hinduism.

Can he read these? What do you think?

Of course, he might struggle. He might get lost, he might need to look up explanations, ask people, or reread passages ten times. It might take him years to work through it. But if he keeps at it, he has a one-hundred percent chance of being able to read them. Maybe he won’t understand the work the way its author did, but that’s true for everyone. No one can see a piece with the eyes of its creator, especially something this intricate.

So then what?

Technically, at this point, he has more knowledge than most people. Not just from the books themselves, but from the resources, papers, and conversations he had to push through just to understand them. Does that suddenly make him intelligent? If so, why don’t more people do it? It’s not impossible. If anything, it’s more than possible for most people. Are they just lazy?

And what about those who spend their entire lives chasing intelligence? Why don’t they just sit down with two books and call it a day, if that’s all it took?

The more you think about it, the clearer it becomes: this can’t be the answer to knowledge or intelligence. At best, they’re just components along the way.

But that leaves the question: when exactly do you call someone knowledgeable?

The Oxford Dictionary defines “knowledgeable” as intelligent and well-informed.

We know our subject—the guy who read the books—has done enough to be called well-informed. But intelligent? What does that even mean?

The Oxford Dictionary again tells us that intelligence is the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. Okay, so our subject has definitely acquired knowledge, he’s probably mastered some amount of skills in literature as well as the languages needed to read those books, and he’s already applied them to read and interpret those works. So that means knowledgeable, right?

But wait, that sounds off. How can someone become knowledgeable by reading just two books? That has to be wrong somehow.

Okay, let’s try a longer definition. Here’s what I found from Google:

“You call someone knowledgeable when they have significant information, facts, or expertise in a specific subject, or a range of subjects, and can use that knowledge effectively to understand, explain, or solve problems.”

Woah! A lot of words there. Let’s break it down, bit by bit.

This can be split into two parts:

1. Have significant information, facts, or expertise in a specific subject (or a range of subjects).
2. Use that knowledge effectively to understand, explain, or solve problems.

We can already tell he’s well-equipped with facts and information from those books, as well as expertise in literature and multiple languages, so there’s nothing to argue there.

The second part might raise some questions, but notice the definition says “specific subject or a range of subjects.” That means if we narrow his expertise down to literature or bilingualism, then yes, he has clearly shown he can use those skills effectively to understand the books.

You could run through a hundred different definitions, but from what I see, there’s always a way to fit our subject into the conditions.

So, what do you think? Is this a new kind of knowledge paradox? Or are we just reading the whole thing wrong?

Thanks for reading Rudaiba's Thoughts! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Psst, just a quick sidenote, this is all coming from pure thought, not professional research. That’s part of why I called it A Cup of Black Coffee instead of something knowledge-related. These are simply ideas I toss around over a cup of coffee.

That being said, I love hearing different perspectives. I love contradictions. And I love a good stop-and-think moment. So if at any point you notice a mistake, see something I missed, or have an opinion to share. let’s talk!

Have a great day!

If you liked reading it so far, be sure to check out my other blogs at: https://rudaiba.substack.com/