|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interpretation and Mystical Experience |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
Smart, Ninian (著)
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
Religious Studies
|
|---|
| 巻号 | v.1 n.1 |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 1965.10 |
|---|
| ページ | 75 - 87 |
|---|
| 出版者 | Cambridge University Press |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
https://www.cambridge.org/
|
|---|
| 出版地 | Cambridge, UK [劍橋, 英國] |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 英文=English |
|---|
| 抄録 | Professor R. C. Zaehner's distinction between panenhenic, monistic and theistic mysticism will be examined. It will be argued that there is no necessary reason to suppose that the latter two types involve different sorts of experience: the difference lies rather in the way the experience is interpreted. Likewise it will be argued that the Theravādin experience of nirvana, which is interpreted neither in a monistic nor in a theistic sense, may well be identical substantially with the foregoing two types. All this raises important methodological problems, in relation to the contrast between experience and interpretation. The fact that mysticism is substantially the same in different cultures and religions does not, however, entail that there is a ‘perennial philosophy’ common to mystics. Their doctrines are determined partly by factors other than mystical experience itself. |
|---|
| ISSN | 00344125 (P); 1469901X (E) |
|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412500002341 |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 112 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2023.02.18 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2023.02.18 |
|---|
 |
Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac)での検索をお勧めします。ＩＥではこの検索システムを表示できません。
|
|
|
