Evaluate the nature and object of Religious Experience as explained by Radhakrishnan in ‘The Hindu View of Life’.

Nature of Religious Experience

Radhakrishnan elucidated the nature of religious experience with several key characteristics, emphasizing its distinctiveness from ordinary sensory or intellectual experiences.

• Intuitive and Direct (Anubhava): Religious experience, for Radhakrishnan, is primarily an intuitive apprehension (anubhava), not a rational deduction or sensory perception. It is an immediate, non-discursive insight into truth, akin to direct vision (dṛṣṭi). It bypasses the analytical processes of the intellect, offering a direct encounter with reality.
• Non-Conceptual and Ineffable: The experience transcends the limitations of language and ordinary thought. While interpretations and theological frameworks are later developed to articulate it, the experience itself cannot be fully expressed in words. It is deeply personal and subjective, yet carries an objective certainty for the experiencer.
• Transformative and Self-Validating: This experience leads to a profound inner change, fostering a sense of unity, peace, moral regeneration, and a reorientation of one's entire being. It is self-validating, meaning its truth is immediately evident to the one experiencing it, carrying an inherent conviction of certainty. It liberates individuals from the limitations of the ego.
• Universal, yet Diversely Interpreted: Radhakrishnan argued that while the underlying religious experience is universal, its cultural, historical, and individual interpretations vary significantly. This diversity gives rise to different religious traditions and their unique theological expressions, but the core experience remains fundamentally the same across humanity.
• Integral and Undivided Consciousness: Unlike ordinary experiences where there is a clear duality between the subject and the object, religious experience is characterized by an integral and undivided consciousness. It is a state where the experiencer becomes one with the experienced, transcending the subject-object dichotomy.

Object of Religious Experience

The object of religious experience, according to Radhakrishnan, is the Ultimate Reality, which he identifies with Brahman or the Absolute in the Hindu philosophical tradition.

• Ultimate Reality (Brahman/Absolute): The object of this profound experience is not an external entity distinct from the experiencer, but the all-pervasive, supreme, and ultimate reality. It is the ground of all existence, the one without a second.
• Identity with the Deepest Self (Ātman-Brahman Identity): Radhakrishnan, drawing heavily from Advaita Vedanta, emphasizes that the object is a realization of one's deepest self's identity with the Absolute (Tat Tvam Asi – That Thou Art). It is a discovery that the individual self (Ātman) is not separate from the Universal Spirit (Brahman).
• Transcendence of Subject-Object Duality: In this experience, the distinction between the "I" (subject) and the "Thou" (object) collapses. It is a unity of the individual self with the universal Spirit, a profound non-dual realization where the experiencer and the experienced become one. This is not a merger of two separate entities but the realization of their inherent oneness.
• Source of Truth, Beauty, and Goodness: The Absolute, as the object of religious experience, is the ultimate source of all values. The apprehension of this reality is simultaneously an apprehension of truth, beauty, and goodness, informing and transcending philosophical, artistic, and ethical values.

Evaluation of Radhakrishnan's View

Radhakrishnan's explanation is highly influential for its humanistic and integrative vision of religion. It:

• Emphasizes the Core of Religion: It powerfully underscores the inner, experiential core of religion, providing a basis for religious pluralism by suggesting a common, ineffable experience underlies diverse faiths.
• Validates Spiritual Insights: It validates spiritual insights and elevates intuition over rigid intellect and dogma, offering a direct path to truth.
• Promotes Religious Harmony: By focusing on the universal nature of the experience and the oneness of its object, it fosters interfaith understanding and tolerance, promoting a "fellowship of faiths."

However, it also faces critiques:

• Difficulty in Verification: Critics argue that its strong emphasis on subjective, intuitive experience makes it difficult to verify empirically or distinguish from psychological states (e.g., hallucination, wishful thinking).
• Vagueness of Non-Conceptual Nature: Its non-conceptual nature, while highlighting ineffability, can also lead to vagueness and ambiguity, making it challenging to discuss and categorize.
• Potential for Flattening Doctrinal Differences: While advocating universality, some argue that it may, at times, flatten important doctrinal differences between religions, potentially underestimating the unique theological contributions of specific faiths. For instance, some distinct mysticisms might not fully align with the Advaitic monistic experience.