Well I haven't independently verified that the world is round, but I "know" that it is. This is the same with Hinduism - I haven't verified all of the framework it provides, but I still know it
I guess the difference is that anyone can verify that the world is round (launch a balloon with a camera high enough and you'll see), but I don't see how we can independently verify any religious claims. You could have also used "I believe", but "I know" was the wrong choice of words.
Within Hinduism though these things are verifiable. Rishis and yogis have verified reincarnation. Though I realize to anyone outside of Hinduism that it is circular reasoning, or not valid.
> Within Hinduism though these things are verifiable. Rishis and yogis have verified reincarnation. Though I realize to anyone outside of Hinduism that it is circular reasoning, or not valid.
By itself that isn't circular reasoning, it is an appeal to authority.
It is when you are then asked why you trust what rishis and yogis say that things start to bend in on themselves into a circular argument.
A Western (specifically, Judeo-Christian) example:
"I believe X, because the Bible says so."
"How do you know that what the Bible says is true?"
"Because the Bible is the inerrant word of God."
"And how do you know that?"
"The Bible says so."
"And how do you know that what the Bible says is true?"
... etc.
By itself, the first statement is only an appeal to authority, but when you dig into the source of the authority, it (rather quickly) turns into a circular argument.
