The article analyzes the genesis and transformation of the concept of “religious experience” in the philosophical and theological heritage of V. S. Solovyov. It is proposed to reconstruct the content and meaning of the concept of “religious experience”, initially perceived by V. S. Solovyov, later reworked by him in the context of the general logic of the history of Russian religious studies. In the course of the study, the authors raise the question of whether the concept of “religious experience” is possible in the works of V. S. To comprehend Solovyov in the theoretical space of the revealed contradiction of two positions: as a historical and philosophical phenomenon and as a semantically organized concept of fundamental importance for Russian religious philosophy. As a result, it is shown: the influence of the existential experience of the thinker on the formation of the semantic diversity of the concept of “religious experience”; the presence of polemical potential in the genesis of this concept, since V. S. Solovyov uniquely reworks the ideas of Yu. F. Samarin and P. D. Yurkevich. The fundamental importance of the ideas of Yu. F. Samarin andP. D. is shown. To understand the origins of the spectrum of meanings of the concept of “religious experience” in the ideological heritage of V. S. Solovyov. To this end, the characteristics inherent in a purely personal principle in the form of a “personal revelation” are revealed, which is the basis for accepting religious experience as the most reliable. In the late period of his work, the philosopher uses a method of describing religious experience as an experience of feelings, the authors of the article suggest that this is an original approach to the transformation of the system and the ideological heritage of the famous thinker F. Schleiermacher, which has a theological significance. Within the framework of the proposed methodology, the thesis is expressed that the ideological content of the concept of “religious experience” is not only the basis for defining related concepts such as mystical experience, but also has a cognitive potential in its meaningful meaning in relation to individual religious experience. Thus, the fact of the transformation of F.’s ideas is uniquely presented. Schleiermacher in Russian religious studies, namely, the possibility of understanding the nature of “religious experience” is stated based on the meanings given by the author himself (in our case, Solovyov) to the experience of experience that changes a person’s worldview. This shows the value aspect of the “religious experience”.