Atmasphere, when René Descartes postulated the often quoted and often misinterpreted "cogito ergo sum" he assumed only the very content of the sentence - "I am actually thinking, consequently I exist". It was no statement to explain behavior - rather connecting the process of thinking with physic and psychic existence of the person stating.
As such it calls at least for a certain degree of "realizing" to be able to reflect on ones own process of thinking and to be able to draw any consequence from this discovery.
But indeed - the thinking or the thought per se is not simultaneously "being". But "being" is most likely a (if not "the"...) conditio sine qua non for "thinking" ( assuming that even the most complex "learning" computer is actually only counting 1 and 0 and is not thinking in the way we define it ).
I think ( a risky word in this context...;-) ...) that Descartes phenomenal statement - which marked the awakening of the spirit of humanism - is not philosophy. It is much more. It is the self-recognition of the human spirit. Beyond knowledge. Beyond religion.
There are a lot of us out there today who have gained a lot of "knowledge", but many of them are not actually aware of their own existence and the inherent consequences.
I am a bit familiar with Jiddu Krishnamurti's thoughts ( at least the one printed...) and I can not agree that
Knowing that your consciousness exists in a state of true Being when thought is silenced is actual knowledge.
Knowledge in the sense of enlightenment or "satori" (as in Buddhism ) is an ( if fascinating, kind of conciliatory and tempting in a religious sense ) egomaniacal human error.