مجلة المنهل
Volume 11, Numéro 2, Pages 215-254
2025-12-31
Authors : Ghobrini Zakaria .
Abstract: Objectives: This study asks when, how, and under what constraints mystical disclosures can count as knowledge rather than mere affect or construction. It addresses the impasse between perceptualist, reformed-epistemology, and constructivist accounts, arguing for a calibrated, cross-traditional framework that can assess claims without reductionism or credulity. Method: The research employs a triangulated design: (1) disciplined phenomenology and hermeneutics to secure descriptive fidelity; (2) comparative philosophical analysis of Sufi, Christian, Advaita, and Mahāyāna sources; (3) virtue-epistemic evaluation with explicit criteria—coherence, reliability-in-practice, intersubjective calibration, defeat-management, and transformative fruits. Findings: Mystical cognition can achieve knowledge-status on a graded model—Minimal Credibility, Qualified Warrant, Robust Knowledge—when criteria are jointly met and resilient to defeaters. Multiple traditions exhibit mature doxastic practices that satisfy these conditions, supporting a pluralist realism of parameterized disclosures rather than an anemic sameness. Originality: The study reconceives ineffability and mediation as parameters, not defeaters; operationalizes a graded, virtue-regulated model; codifies responsibility conditions; and reframes pluralism as aspectual complementarity. It recommends transparent defeat-protocols, mechanism-awareness, and comparative calibration for future research and formation. Keywords: spiritual epistemology; mystical knowledge; virtue epistemology; pluralism; comparative philosophy.
Keywords: spiritual epistemology; mystical knowledge; virtue epistemology; pluralism; comparative philosophy.
Filali Billel
.
pages 1006-1023.
Selt Djihad Afaf
.
pages 70-82.
Stalin Oleksandr
.
Dolska Olga
.
pages 66-72.
Nedjari Ahmed
.
Sadi Menad
.
Tellai Jughurta
.
Serkhane Ahmed
.
Satta Tarek
.
pages 95-106.