Öz
The concept of mystical experience is defined today as an experience of uniting with the Ultimate Reality, which is named as Absolute, God and Nothingness, in a pure and direct way. The aforementioned definition is relatively new since this concept had been used by Christian saints to mean “attaining religious truths” until about the 19th century. In the 19th century, mystical experiences were associated with psychosomatic illnesses and that mystics were considered as being part of deviant religious movements. By the 20th century, however, new academic debates emerged claiming that mystical experience was a universal phenomenon and that it could be understood independent of religion as a separate a phenomenon. Undoubtedly, William James (1842-1910) was the leading philosopher who uniquely contributed to these debates claiming that mystical experi-ence, which had been accepted as a state of illness, was a valuable element of human experience. In an age where materialistic naturalism was rising and the understanding that science and religion contradict one another was prevalent, James asserted that the idea of an individual religion against materialism, which depends on mystical experience and does not conflict with the idea of nature in his well-known work, The Varieties of Reli-gious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. This claim of James is rooted in the objec-tive/phenomenological analysis of mystic experience.
In his work, James discusses various narrations of mystic experience as a phenomenon. James’s examination of firsthand mystical experiences includes two stages. Firstly, he determines four basic characteristics of mystical experience and creates a typology based on these common characteristics. These four characteristics of the mystical state of consciousness are ineffability, noetic quality, transiency, and passivity. James considers mystical experience with these characteristics as being the mystical consciousness of the Unseen Order. He comes to three conclusions regarding the experience as the mystic consciousness of Unseen Order: 1. Experience is real for the individual who experiences it. 2. It does not have an effect on the one who does not experience it. 3. These experi-ences are the explicit proof for the existence of the supernatural. James’s work has been considered significant for the reasons that it puts experience as the proof for the super-natural and makes the experience as one of the subjects of philosophy. With a holistic approach to James’ understanding, it becomes apparent that mystic experience has a special role in his philosophy. The current study focuses on James’ mystical experience analysis.
The aim of this study is to examine how James’ explanations of mystical experience relate to his philosophy. The main claim of this paper is that James does not conduct an objective investigation based on phenomena as indicated in his research of mystical experience, but instead offers a philosophical explanation of mystical experience in the context of his philosophical system. Fort this purpose, the study consists of three parts together with an introduction. In the first part, James’s journey of thought until he wrote The Varieties of Religious Experience is discussed in relation to his studies of consciousness, his understanding of radical empiricism and pragmatism, and his orientation to religious studies. In the second part, his thoughts on mystical experience and his conclusions are discussed using his methods. And finally, in the last part, it is explained how James’s thoughts are the key determinants in determining the essential characteristics of mysti-cal experience, in defining it as “the experience of consciousness”, in positioning it as the source of religious experience, and in interpreting the consequences of experience. Thus, this study shows that his interpretation of mystical experience, -although it is important as an effort to understand the phenomenon-, is a reflection of James’ philosophy of religion, rather than being a theory based on the inner dynamics of the phenomenon. While determining the features of experience and in his conclusions, James puts his philosophical system at the centre rather than the inner dynamics of phenomena. In the present study, it is also demonstrated that James uses experience with a specific mean-ing and reference and in this way of use, experience has no relation with God, the Abso-lute or spirit and thus experience has no intellectual quality and religion that depends on this ground has a thoroughly psychological and individual character.