What is the difference between a skeptic and a mystic???

[krsna 3]

The skeptic says,

"I'll believe it when I see it.":eek2:

 

The mystic says,

"I'll see it when I believe it.":pray:

 

 

Skeptic, cynics, empericists, reductionists, etc... have no way of 'seeing' KRSNA due to their faulty method of approach.

 

Hare Krsna!

[theist 1]

Good one. Should be a bumper sticker.

[Guest guest]

Belief is not a prerequisite for seeing. If it were, what would be the difference between a state of delusion where one sees only what he wants to or believes, and seeing God after only believing in God? How can one be more real than the other?

[gHari 0]

 

 

<h2>Krsna Is; therefore I am.</h2>

 

 

gHari Descartes

[krsna 3]

 

 

Krsna Is; therefore I am.

 

 

 

gHari Descartes

 

 

Krsna Is Bhagavan; therefore I am His Servant.

 

 

krsna das anudas:pray:

[Guest guest]

 

Krsna Is Bhagavan; therefore I am His Servant.

 

 

krsna das anudas:pray:

 

I have a challenge for you:)

 

Can you explain what you wrote in simple words (used every day), lets say- that child would understand?

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

Just grab the dictionary nearest to you, buddy. The difference between the two will become manifest right before your eyes.

 

Haribol

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

A skeptic is of course one who suspends belief until after something has been empirically proven. The problem with this, however, is that most scientists do not fall under this category, based upon my definition. The Big Bang and neo-Darwinian evolutionary theories are still just that, i.e. theories, and have not been conclusively established by any stretch of the imagination. Mainstream scholars, though, accept them by an act of faith.

 

A mystic is a person who is attracted to and practices any of the contemplative or ritualistic traditions, or both, in which the experiential results are generally confined solely to the practitioner, or to a few select subjects. Those not privy to these mysteries can only accept or for that matter reject them by an act of faith also, because of the absence of first-hand experience.

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

On a humorous note, I think the difference between the two can be grasped by contrasting two contemporary Vaisnava practitioners. In my opinion, these two best illustrate the sharp nuance between scepticism and mysticism, even in individuals subscribing to the same fundamental philosophy. On the one hand, there is Jagadananda Dasa/Jagat, the well-known Canadian devotee and Sanskrit scholar, and on the other hand, there is Atmatattva Dasa, the South Indian sadhaka. Those in the know will see what I'm referring to. Interesting, the marked difference between these two senior Gaudiyas!

[theist 1]

 

 

Krsna Is; therefore I am.

 

 

gHari Descartes

 

LOL Yes now we have two.

[Dharma Nation 0]

Good saying. I would only state it somewhat differently. "I'll see it when it is revealed to me."

 

 

 

The skeptic says,

"I'll believe it when I see it.":eek2:

 

The mystic says,

"I'll see it when I believe it.":pray:

 

 

Skeptic, cynics, empericists, reductionists, etc... have no way of 'seeing' KRSNA due to their faulty method of approach.

 

Hare Krsna!

[osiris 0]

actually there are two kinds of mystics- you have the pessa mystic and then you have the opti mystic

[Guest guest]

If that was the case,did you See Krsna?

[Guest guest]

 

The skeptic says,

"I'll believe it when I see it.":eek2:

 

The mystic says,

"I'll see it when I believe it.":pray:

 

 

Skeptic, cynics, empericists, reductionists, etc... have no way of 'seeing' KRSNA due to their faulty method of approach.

 

Hare Krsna!

 

 

Playing with words gets you nowhere,will you believe if someone wrote another book like Bhagvat Geetha and someone like Prabupada keep saying that so and so character in that Book is the mightiest and we all should follow that?

Sai Babas devotees claim he is the supreme,as far them you are a Cynic(Anyone who doesnt accept Sai as the Supreme)?What is your answer for that?