Zikaron and Saṃskāra: Relational and Dispositional Continuity Across Shared Problem Fields
Zikaron and Saṃskāra: Relational and Dispositional Continuity Across Shared Problem Fields

Summary/Abstract: Comparative inquiry frequently encounters difficulties when concepts drawn from distinct textual traditions resist lexical equivalence yetaddress shared human concerns. This article addresses that challenge through a comparison of the Hebrew concept of zikaron and the Yogicconcept of saṃskāra. Although these concepts differ in semantic content, textual context, and practical orientation, both occ upy pivotalpositions within Continuity Architectures through which the p ast remains operative.Drawing upon Biblical Hebrew semantic analysis and comparative analysis of Hebrew and Yogic sources, the article reconstructszikaron as astructure of Relational Continuity grounded in Covenantal Remembrance, Covenantal Participatio n, Ritual Participation, NarrativeTransmission, Pedagogical Instruction, Textual Transmission, and Intergenerational Continuity. In contrast, saṃskāra is recon structed as astructure of Dispositional Continuity grounded in latent impression, dispositional tendency, causal persistence, and transformative processesoperating within citta. The comparison identifies two distinct Continuity Structures: Relational Continuity within the Hebrew tradition andDispositional Continuity within Classical Yoga.Buildingupon this analysis, the article proposes a limited form of Structural Position Analysis (SPA), which shifts comparison from l exicalequivalence toward the analysis of structural position, Continuity Structures, and Continuity Architectures while remaining grounded inphilological and contextual reconstruction. The study further argues that continuity may be approached as one of the Shared P roblem Fieldsthrough which traditions organize responses to questions concerning persistence, transmission, remembran ce, and transformation.The article contributes to Hebrew Studies and comparative hermeneutics by suggesting that meaningful comparison need not depend uponconceptual identity. The comparison indicates that traditions may remain irreducibly distinct while nevertheless becoming mutually intelligible through the analysis of structural positions within broader Continuity Architectures.

• Details
• Contents