4. What are the three requirements for a stipulated point of comparison/analogy?

We have now
covered three of the world’s major religions: Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Choose two of
those traditions, and write a short essay fulfilling the requirements of a stipulated point of
comparison/analogy. (Extra points if you address all three of these traditions!) Write about any
similar characteristic, topic, theme or practice which you find of interest.

When comparatively analyzing a pair or set of given religions, it is important that the
stipulated point of comparison is used to do so. Adhering to the stipulated point of comparison
(or analogy), requires those making these comparisons to compare like parts of any given
religions, for example, comparing one creation story to another. This way of comparing also
requires that a reason for this comparison is given, readers should not have to infer the intention
of a given comparison. It is also important that equal weight is given to parts of a religion that
are similar as well as different.
Buddhism and Judaism lend themselves well to comparative analysis. One of the things I
find most fascinating about Buddhism is it’s ability to persist for thousands of years while having
limited change in belief without a primary focus on religious texts. Of course, Buddhism has
religious texts, it has for the majority of the religion’s history, but Shakyamuni Buddha’s
founding teachings were taught orally, in fact there is an academic consensus on the fact that all
early Buddhist traditions preserved any “text” via oral transmission. Today, Buddhist oral,
memory based, chant is still a sacred act and is practiced by monasteries around the world.
It is worth asking why a religion as globalized and widespread as Buddhism still makes
an effort to maintain an oral tradition. To answer that it is important to understand the possible
reasons for why Buddhism was originally an orally transmitted tradition. Shakyamuni Buddha
taught in 6th century India, where writing was generally exclusively for the higher castes. It is
known that Buddha opposed the caste system. By making his teachings oral and without text,
they might have been largely outside the caste system, as anyone could recite them to anyone
else.
When we turn to Judaism, we see a religious tradition that is deeply rooted in preserving
its history and teachings through written sacred text. Sacred text is inseparable from the Jewish
tradition, it has a place in almost every important holiday and ceremony, and I believe is at least
in part responsible for Judaism’s ability to preserver through multiple diasporas over the course
of nearly four thousand years without drastically changing. An obvious example of the
impotance of text is the Torah, but I would like to focus on the Talmud, as it not only contains
sections related to the Torah, but also a section dedicated to discourse about Jewish tradition
where generations of Rabbi would discuss the contents of the Talmud, it’s implications and
possible interpretations. The Talmud helps distill the idea that Judaism not only values written
text as a means of preserving tradition, but also as a means of stimulating discussion based on a
primary source.
While Judaism emphasizes the importance text it makes a point to have readers of the
text understand that while the text is permanent, it’s meaning may not be so fixed. This is a way
in which Judaism is similar to Buddhism. Buddha taught that nothing was permanent, not even
his teachings, and the Talmud makes it obvious that discussion and changing ideas are as
important as preserving tradition. Just as important to understand why Buddhism is based in an
oral tradition, it is important to ponder why Judaism might hold such reverence for a text based
tradition. The Jewish people throughout their history have gone through multiple diasporas and,
I believe, for their tradition to survive it was important to write down as much of their history
and as many of their traditions and beliefs as they could. The seemingly academic importance of
text in Jewish practice might stem from a need to make sure as little as possible was lost if and
when their tradition was under threat.
Through comparing how tradition is preserved in Judaism and Buddhism, it becomes
clear that there is no one correct way for a given religion to preserve there teachings and
traditions. Oral transmission in Buddhism allowed it to persist and thrive for thousands od years,
just as text-based transmission did for Jewish practice. It is important that no one way of passing
on tradition is regarded as more valuable than any other, if it is made clear that a tradition can
survive with an oral tradition just as well as one focused on text, maybe we can prevent
hierarchical thinking regarding other ways of passing on traditions. For example, the Incan
people preserved traditional information through a knot-based tapestry like system. And this is
no less valuable than information preserved via text.