- #1
sneez
- 312
- 0
i read a lot recently about mysticism as means to knowledge.
What knowledge specifically can it bring?
Can ppl accept this "knowledge" even when its for them not reachable/verifiable, either due to the fact that majority of ppl don’t meditate, or because they cannot reach that level in mediation.
Whats the difference between a scam person claiming arriving at knowledge by some mystic method and from "true" mystic if we have not way of comparing it, only accepting it based on emotional level of how well it fits our internal rendering of world?
Can we have some hindu guru of mysticism meditating and returning with "knowledge" about "unknowable" just like we some scientists which advance course of knowledge?
on what basis should we accept accounts of new "knowledge" arrived at by mystics?
Is it objective knowledge? or subjective? (ie, is it different experience for different ppl?)
or I am a missing the point all together?
What knowledge specifically can it bring?
Can ppl accept this "knowledge" even when its for them not reachable/verifiable, either due to the fact that majority of ppl don’t meditate, or because they cannot reach that level in mediation.
Whats the difference between a scam person claiming arriving at knowledge by some mystic method and from "true" mystic if we have not way of comparing it, only accepting it based on emotional level of how well it fits our internal rendering of world?
Can we have some hindu guru of mysticism meditating and returning with "knowledge" about "unknowable" just like we some scientists which advance course of knowledge?
on what basis should we accept accounts of new "knowledge" arrived at by mystics?
Is it objective knowledge? or subjective? (ie, is it different experience for different ppl?)
or I am a missing the point all together?