LAUSR

The World Council of Churches invited a number of guests of other faiths to participate in its Eighth Assembly, which took place in Harare, Zimbabwe, in 1998. Our main participation was in the Padare (a Shona word for “meeting place”). These were workshoplike gatherings in which we addressed and discussed various themes. At one of the Padare sessions, with the intriguing title, “My God, Your God, Our God, No God,” Prof. Wesley Ariarajah, during the question time, asked me about the relevance of the Hindu doctrine of the “ishtadeva” for our understanding of religious pluralism. I cannot recall the brief answer that I gave to his question, but I remember not feeling contented with my response, and his question has remained with me ever since. The ishtadeva teaching plays an important role in most Hindu discussions of religious pluralism, and it is used as an interpretative lens for understanding religious differences. It may have significance, beyond the Hindu tradition, for our understanding of and response to religious pluralism. The nature and presuppositions of the doctrine of the ishtadeva are not usually critically assessed, and this may be a good opportunity to do this evaluation. To begin with the term itself, “ishtadeva” is Sanskrit for “chosen God.” Choice, of course, cannot be exercised when alternatives are absent. The ishtadeva doctrine is meaningful in the Indian context where religious pluralism has had a long history and where different Godforms were available for choosing. From among these, a person chooses one that becomes one’s ishtadeva. The most popular ishtadevas today include Shiva, Vishnu (espe-