S. Radhakrishnan, in 'The Hindu View of Life', elucidates Religious Experience as a distinct, profound, and transformative encounter with Ultimate Reality, which he identifies as Brahman. He argues it is the very essence of religion, preceding and transcending dogma or intellectual formulations.

Nature of Religious Experience:

1. Intuitive and Direct: It is primarily an intuitive apprehension (anubhava), not a rational deduction or sensory perception. It's an immediate, non-discursive insight into truth.

2. Non-Conceptual: It transcends the limitations of language and ordinary thought. The experience itself cannot be fully expressed in words, though it may later be interpreted through theological frameworks.

3. Transformative: This experience leads to a profound inner change, a sense of unity, peace, moral regeneration, and a reorientation of one's entire being. It is self-validating and carries an immediate conviction of certainty.

4. Universal, yet Diverse Interpretations: While the underlying experience is universal, its cultural, historical, and individual interpretations vary, giving rise to diverse religious traditions.

Object of Religious Experience:
The object is the Ultimate Reality, Brahman, or the Absolute. It is not an external object distinct from the experiencer, but rather a realization of one's deepest self's identity with the Absolute. It's a transcendence of the subject-object duality, a unity of the individual self with the universal Spirit.

Evaluation:
Radhakrishnan's account powerfully emphasizes the inner, experiential core of religion, providing a basis for religious pluralism by suggesting a common, ineffable experience underlies diverse faiths. It validates spiritual insights and elevates intuition over rigid intellect.

However, critics might argue that its emphasis on subjective, intuitive experience makes it difficult to verify or distinguish from psychological states (e.g., hallucination, wishful thinking). Its non-conceptual nature can lead to vagueness, and its universality, while appealing, may flatten important doctrinal differences between religions. Despite these critiques, Radhakrishnan's explanation remains influential for its humanistic and integrative vision of religion.