Functional Equivalence as Comparative Method: Reimagining Cross-Traditional Research Through Religious Emotions

Religious emotions are central to spiritual life, yet comparing them across traditions has proven methodologically intractable: universalist approaches risk cultural reductionism, while radical particularism renders comparison impossible. Despite extensive scholarship on individual traditions, no framework exists for rigorously comparing religious emotions without either flattening theological differences or abandoning cross-cultural dialogue. This study asks: Can functionally equivalent concepts of spiritual despondency be identified across Orthodox Christianity, Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism despite lexical and theological incommensurability? Applying Eugene Nida’s functional equivalence theory, we conducted four-dimensional semantic-functional analysis (cognitive origins, moral valuation, doctrinal associations, transformative practices) of Orthodox homilies and canonical Chinese texts (Analects, Mencius, Pāli Nikāyas, Laozi, Zhuangzi). Although no direct lexical equivalents exist, we identified functionally parallel concepts—Orthodox unynie (уныние), Confucian you 忧/ bi 蔽, Buddhist diaohui 掉悔/ hunchen 惛沉, Daoist sangzhi 丧志—that occupy analogous structural positions: all diagnose problematic inner states obstructing ultimate goals ( theosis / ren / nibbāna / ziran ) and prescribe graduated transformative practices (prayer/ritual/meditation/non-action) following parallel logic (recognition → diagnosis → intervention → restoration). Functional equivalence offers a methodological third way between universalism and incommensurability, enabling rigorous cross-cultural comparison while preserving theological integrity. This framework has practical applications for interfaith dialogue, religious translation, and multicultural pastoral care, and provides a replicable model for comparative studies of other religious concepts.