Well, as naive observers, we believe that today this approach has centers from which such spiritual or secular knowledge can radiate. I haven't met one like that these days. The focus here is on the "these days".
It used to be an approach like that, in fact, it was required, in general. Today, however, shallow but intensely inflowing "shitting of words" is the requirement.
I offered a couple of my works free of charge to 40 Islamic centers and also to 40 secular scientific workshops. The latter were universities that are ranked as the top 10 universities in the world according to the 2019 classification. Neither religious nor secular scholars were not giving any response. Excuse me, it is not true! My work was acknowledged by Reuven Rivlin, President of the State of Israel and Pope Francis. But no one from the Islamic world gave a simple sign. On the secular side, I received a single letter, which I read and understand why this silence is, why they don’t accept anything from me. There can be no question of disbelief, otherwise neither President Rivlin nor Pope Francis would have written letters of appreciation and archived my works in their own libraries. I think they asked their experts to read my stuff through in both places, as it would be a big blame for them to give their name to a substandard, crappy thing.
So, what's the explanation? The only letter I received on the secular side came from Cambridge. I don't have to say what heights Cambridge represents. Well, they wrote: “our program only accepts works from scholars connected with the university, primarily publications arising from research conducted at Cambridge”. (email is attached)

I was shocked. So, they are not about to widen the circle through which knowledge comes, but on the contrary, to narrow it. In other words, only the knowledge is considered to be knowledge what they accredit to be as knowledge. The angle within which knowledge can come, is set by them. They qualify and judge as knowledge what they consider to be useful information and anything else in the world cannot get cross that opening, so no one has any idea what other perceptions and opinions there are. And if anything is known about those, it can happen only through the subjective judgment of the scientists audited by Cambridge. I am not against filtering the literature. Naturally, a document has to be met with the conditions of a filter, and unscientific, superficial material must not be archived. But why not to include a work by an author who is not audited by Cambridge?

What about Islamic Centers? It’s the same. Nor do they allow to make people to see the whole Islam, but only the dissertation, which is the narrow opinion of the trend and sect professed by the given center! If material from another trend is included, it is archived in the collection with due criticism. Therefore, it is not the knowledge of Islam that grows stronger from generation to generation, but a kind of perception produces an ever-shrinking tube that allows only “thinkers” get trough who are no wonder they never agree.

I will also mention an exception. This is the National Széchenyi Library, who have been archiving my works for years. I hereby express my thanks and respect to them.

So, knowledge is really power, but it doesn’t matter what kind of knowledge you mean and what cradle it comes from. Today, knowledge is not a power, as it has no effect on power, but vice versa. Power alone has an effect on knowledge.