Understanding is very different than knowledge. We could learn about something in great detail, accumulate many facts about it, and yet not really understand it. To understand something is to gain the meaning or essence of something, not to merely have a catalog of facts or just naming it. Understanding also implies being able to apply your understanding. For example, if I said 5 plus 5 equals 10, but 1 plus 1 and 8 plus 8 also equal 10...how many would agree? All three statements are true, but do you have the understanding to see through the problem?

We must also be wary of our beliefs, whether based on knowledge or not. Our beliefs act as blinders and colored lenses through which we perceive the world around us. Optimists and pessimists see the world very differently. When trying to understand something or learn about it, the best thing would be detachment from the results. You do not want to have a stake in your findings. I know skepticism is hailed as the right way to research, but that can only bring us so far. It has its limits because you believe that it is not and therefore that belief is coloring your own perceptions. It is like having a believer research something, the more he researches the more he finds that substantiates his belief and he overlooks much to the contrary. The same applies to non-believers...the skeptics. "Scientific Detachment" is what we need. To just look without a care about what you see. In this way we see reality clearly without coloring our perceptions. We want to understand...see the reality of it...without tripping over the obstacles of what we think we know or our beliefs - for or against.

Also having our consciousness in the here and now is needed. We can't be attached to the past for what we find out may be very different. Also we can't be dwelling on what will be or we won't be looking at what is right now. To keep conscious and in the here and now will assure that what is perceived is the reality of the present, not an afterimage of the past or a mirage of the future.

Here is an exercise to try some time. Take a piece of fruit...say an orange...and really take a look at it. Look at it as if for the first time and you did not know what an orange was. Don't name or label it, just look at it. Weight, color, texture, smell, temperature, size, imperfections, etc...experience this thing totally with all your senses. Now slowly peel it...again experience its color, texture, smell, temperature, how much force is needed to peel it, etc. Next you take a piece...keep mindful of the experience the whole time...and then put a piece in your mouth but do not immediately chew it. What is the initial taste, texture, etc? Then slowly chew it...does it make a sound, again how does it taste, texture, etc. Keep chewing until it is liquefied. Most people swallow without fully chewing their food. Chew really well...when you think it is enough, do it some more. Does the flavor change? Keep using all your senses and see how much you can get out of this experience. What did you learn that you did not know before? Do you better understand oranges? To go further, you could go see what an orange tree looks like and experience/investigate it totally. Look at the seeds and do the same. This is time consuming, but it is amazing how much can be learned about things we take for granted. Lastly, do not merely accumulate facts...try to sense the essence or meaning.

So back to the original problem...5+5=10, 1+1=10, and 8+8=10...and all are true...how could this be? The skeptic would immediately find reasons why these are not all true, but this would get in the way from understanding the reality of it. The answer lies in letting go of the assumptions and possibly the known, and try to see the reality. Each may be true, but does 10=10=10? In this scenario, they equal each other pictorially/visually but not mathematically. So what would give 1+1 the answer of 10 pictorially...binary. 1+1=2 and 2 is represented by 10 in binary. 8+8 would give the answer 10 in hexadecimal. So each set is using a different base...base 10, base 2, and base 16 respectively. Knowledge of different bases and math skills do not necessarily mean someone would understand and solve the problem when they encounter it. This illustrates vividly the difference between knowledge (accumulated facts) and understanding.

The deepest understanding would entail trying to become one with object...presently. Knowledge is only in the past. It is only memories of what was and not necessarily of what is; therefore, knowledge does not bring about understanding. As the past and present are two different things, so knowledge and understanding are two different things; and the twain shall never meet.