An ancient Seer sits in his cave atop a mountain. From deep within his being where he is one with everything, the subtle impulses underlying all of life flow through him and out his vocal cords.
The ancient Seers awoke to that one Transcendental thing that is the source of everything, the source of their souls, which then allowed the song that it sings to emerge pure and unfettered from within them. The ancients called this "cognition"--the highest, yet most elusive, form of knowing.
A second form of knowing, objectivity, is popular today. We look outside of ourselves and, through observation, gain knowledge of nature. This scientific approach to knowing is obviously a very powerful tool, enabling us to understand ourselves and our world.
The third type of knowing is subjective. We think, we ponder, and we feel within ourselves to gain insight and understanding. The subjective approach was most popular long ago until objectivity and the scientific method overtook it.
But if you think about it, neither the objective or subjective approach should ever stand alone, independent of one another. Instead, they best act in unison, one supporting and deepening our understanding of the other. The objective actually validates the subjective.
For example, Steve Jobs felt that computers had great potential, but they needed to be more easily used by the average person. However, he didn't know how to do that. He first felt it as an abstract idea. And then through an objective approach, he figured out how to merge the objective reality of the computer with the subjective experience of the average person. The result was the Apple computer, now called a Mac.
Attempting to use either the subjective or objective approach to gain knowledge by itself can be problematic. The objective approach as a standalone becomes a matter of pure logic, pure intellect. But with logic and intellect, you can justify anything, and people do. The subjective approach as a standalone is usually encumbered by emotional bias, superstition, or irrational thoughts.
For example, with pure objectivity, we can make all kinds of different laws of conduct. Yet it's our subjectivity, it's how we feel about those laws that validates or refutes them. In the final analysis, objective thoughts matter little. It's how we reason, how we feel about those thoughts, that makes all the difference. We can have the thought to do most anything. But as we become more and more able to reason, we discern which thoughts to embrace and which to reject.
With reason, we reach out to that Transcendental level which lies just beyond our grasp. Cognition is that very rare and precious state when the Transcendental is not grasped, but instead wells up like a fountain from deep within us, illuminating our lives with the light of pure Knowledge.
Few people know about cognition, the first type of knowing. Though it is indeed extremely rare, cognition has, from time to time, taken place in all parts of the world: the ancient Mayans, ancient Finland, Egypt, the Himalayas, etc. But that Knowledge is as fine and delicate as Mother Nature Herself and is therefore easily lost and misunderstood. Some cognitions have been recorded and passed along through the generations. It is ours to humbly strive to comprehend them.
The most readily accessible cognitions are those of the ancient Seers of the Himalayas. Those cognitions are referred to as Vedic, meaning 'of nature'--not a religion, not a science, but the underlying principles that birthed, guide, and permeate our lives. It is said that simply listening to those cognitions brings an individual in harmony with their own true nature and all of nature.