The role of comparison and the comparative method in religious studies In the study of religions or the so-called religious studies, including comparative studies in religion, religions are studied academically and according to their texts. These texts are treated as historical documents and thus are compared from a historical, geographical, literary point of view, customs, traditions, convergence, and contradictions between these religions. The basic purpose of religious studies, according to Freiberger, is to better comprehend and theorise religion. And comparison as a research strategy is so profoundly integrated in most research methodologies. In his book, Considering Comparison (2019, Oxford University Press), he proposes a comparative methodological frame. He contends that the comparative technique aids in both evaluating existing comparative studies and producing new ones.Freiberger finds that comparison is a distinct method for expanding knowledge of religions or a certain religion . He refers to the previous comparative studies in the field of religion, which sometimes did not distinguish clearly between comparison as a method and its concrete application. This has contributed to the general idea that comparison in social and religious studies as a method is problematic. Therefore, Freiberger tries in his book to reconceptualize and recover the method of comparison, in theory and practice, for the study of religion. Freiberger claims that comparison is a distinct technique in the sense that comparative studies frequently share a similar structure. Freiberger advises referring to comparison as a second-order approach in contrast to other, first-order techniques, such as philology, which is usually also essentially comparative. In this regard, writing history is typically a second-order process, thus it should be stressed that this is not exclusive to comparison. Writing about history typically requires assembling data from first order procedures, therefore its scope is broader than that of these approaches. To be cautioned, however, that a comparison based, for example, on naïve and unreasonable interpretations of sources threatens to render the comparative exercise invalid from the outset.The contributions of Paden may also be seen as a significant source of inspiration for Freiberger's own strategy that decontextualization is important for comparison in certain ways. It was asserted that comparison unites civilizations, traditions, or faiths. Freiberger provides a fair exposition of these arguments, but he draws the conclusion that while these critiques are insightful and significant, they are less useful if one views comparison as a generally conceivable endeavour. There are possible problems that might arise with comparison studies. To begin with, Let us start with the question about comparison and if it is necessary to be abstract and thus to portray what is being compared correctly. And if the two compared subjects are comparable or incomparable, or if they are constantly distinct from one another and have no relation to one another. This also might brings to mind the distortion which can happen if anything is taken too far outside its original context or if a general pattern is imposed before any descriptive investigation, such when an attempt is done to identify the essence of religion. Another problem is the limitations; as the comparative study as an approach has limits. Let’s take the comparative theology, when one studies the faiths other than their own. One might position himself as impartial and detached of their starting position. But the risk of bias would stay. This would also lead to another problem, as it is important to be aware of how to select the what is being compared. If they are tangible, concepts, or some other less tangible qualities. Taking into consideration that these options are always constrained by the experiences that person has had up to that point in their life. According to Freiberger, the goal and objective of comparison in religious studies is description and classification. Descriptive techniques, or what we call the heuristics or the hermeneutics, this can also be seen as the technique of de-familiarizing the familiar. This technique in my opinion is based on and influenced by the Hermeneutical theory and this is problematic as it is subjected to different individual perceptions. As comparison appears to give a logical framework for analysis as A is introduced, then B is introduced, and finally similarities and contrasts between A and B are pulled out. This form results in essays that list rather than argue. According to Freiberger, comparing entails looking at both similarities and contrasts. He does bring up an intriguing issue regarding the expression “apples and oranges”, which is frequently used to allude to two items that are either too different or too similar to be compared. But when we say “apples and oranges,” what we truly want to convey is that two items shouldn't be squeezed into one category. It is only the improper declaration of sameness with regard to one specific category that is at issue, not the impossibility of comparison across all categories. The common component that will be used in the comparison is described as the tertium comparationis by the author. Tertium refers to the perspective from which two things are being contrasted. He makes use of the notion of pre-comparative tertium and foreknowledge to test whether or not a certain category will behave as we anticipate. The comparativist's circumstances, or the individual doing the comparison, include personal, cultural, and intellectual considerations, such as education or affiliation with a certain school of thought, which have a significant impact on the entire procedure. The objective is reflexivity, or active contemplation on things that could have an influence on the scholarship, even if it is evident that one cannot prevent this. In order for the comparison to function and make sense, it may be necessary to make a few minor adjustments while one conducts the study. For this reason, the category that will be utilised in the comparison must also be adjustable or able to be modified. Freiberger concludes with the illuminative mode and the taxonomic mode, which he believes are the most promising for comparative investigation. A specific historical fact is illuminated by the illuminative method. Reciprocal illumination is the term used when this is done in both directions. The taxonomy mode categorises religious objects, but the categories that are developed to do so are contrived and can thus be seen as abstractions, and their utility and application are further debatable. References: Hedges, Paul (Paul Michael). Understanding Religion : Theories and Methods for Studying Religiously Diverse Societies. Oakland, California: University of California Press, 2021. Web. Freiberger, Oliver. Comparison in Theory: A Scholar-Centered Approach , Considering Comparison: A Method for Religious Studies. New York, 2019; online edn, Oxford Academic, 16 Nov. 2022.