Islamic Tradition and Authority of Religious Experience: An Analysis of Ghazali's Account of the Epistemic Status of Taste Compared to Alston's View on the Epistemic Legitimacy of the Religious Experience

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Encyclopedia of the World of Islam, Tehran. Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Mofid university. Qom. Iran

Abstract

 
 
Citing religious experience to justify belief in God, and more importantly, gaining knowledge about God and His attributes and actions, is one of the important theories proposed in the analytical philosophy of religion in favor of theism and justification of belief in God. Relying on the authority of the religious experience and emphasizing its epistemic aspect, Alston attempted to define a basis for justifying belief in God and prove the validity of this type of experience by citing the similarities between religious experience and sensory experience. Contrary to Alston's theory, William James emphasizes the emotional aspect of religious experience and attends to its practical impact on improving the life of the experienced person. In his definition of religious experience, James referred to examples of the Islamic tradition and specifically to Ghazali's view. Rejecting James' views, some contemporary scholars argue that, religious experience has no definite meaning in the Islamic tradition, and that this kind of experience cannot be found in al-Ghazali's views. Likewise, Ghazali stresses that Alston's theory of religious experience has no representation in the Islamic tradition. In the present article, studying Ghazali's works indicates that what he referred to as "taste" can be a specific example of religious experience, and in particular, its epistemological aspect, and that in this respect, it is in full agreement with Alston's view.
 
 
 

Keywords

References

1. Abbasi, Babak, (2008), "Situation/Circumstance", Encyclopedia of the Islamic World, Vol. 12, supervised by Gholam Ali Haddad Adel, pp. 440-446. Tehran: Islamic Encyclopedia Foundation.
2. Alston, William P., (1991), Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious Experience, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
 3. Alston, William P., (1998), “Religious Experience”, in: Edward Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 8, pp. 250-255, London and New York: Routledge.
 4. Alston, William P., (2007), “Religious Experience as Perception of God”, in Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruch Reichenbach, David Basinger (ed.), Philosophy of Religion: Selected Readings, third edition, pp. 45-53, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Ghazali Tusi, Abu Hamed Muhammad ibn Muhammad, (n.d.), Ehia Olum Al Din, Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Arabi.
6. Ghazali Tusi, Abu Hamed Muhammad ibn Muhammad, (2001), Kimiay e Sa'adat, by Hossein Khadivjam, ninth edition, Tehran: Scientific and Cultural Publications.
7. Ghazali Tusi, Abu Hamed Muhammad ibn Muhammad, (1995), "Al Manqadh min Al Zelal", Collected Treatises of Imam Al-Ghazali, pp. 537-564, Beirut: Dar al-Fikr.
8. Legenhausen, Muhammad, (1383sh.), “Islamic Religious Experience”, in Journal of Howzeh and Daneshgah, No. 38, pp. 14- 39.
9. Martin, Michael, (1990), Atheism: A Philosophical Justification, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
10. Peterson, Michael et al., (2000), Religious Wisdom and Belief: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, translated by Ahmad Naraghi and Ebrahim Soltani, third edition, Tehran: Tarh Nou.
11. Proudfoot, Wayne, (1985), Religious Experience, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
12. Swinburne, Richard, (2004), The Existence of God, second edition, New York: Oxford University Press.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics