Ishta-deva
|
|
In Smartism, a denomination of Hinduism, an ishta-deva or ishta devata is a revered aspect of God chosen by a devotee. In such a concept held by Smartas, different aspects of God are held to be equivalent.
According to some commentaries on the Bhagavad Gita, the devotee will receive deliverance from ignorance and divine wisdom from their deity and come to perfection by practicing bhakti yoga regardless of the form worshiped. Vaishnavites however, disagree and believe that Lord Krishna himself stated that worship of deities other than Supreme Lord, Vishnu, are incorrect as such worship would only lead to temporal benefits, rather than mukti, which Vaishnavites believe that only Vishnu can grant. For example, Lord Krishna said: "Whatever deity or form a devotee worships, I make his faith steady. However, their wishes are only granted by Me." (Gita: 7:21-22) Another quote in the Gita states: "O Arjuna, even those devotees who worship other lesser deities (e.g., Devas, for example) with faith, they also worship Me, but in an improper way because I am the Supreme Being. I alone am the enjoyer of all sacrificial services (Seva, Yajna) and Lord of the universe." (Gita: 9:23)
| Contents |
Murti
The chosen deity is typically seen as a murti — an icon or representation of a deity such as Krishna, Ganesha, or Shiva. Usually a person worships this ishta-deva, prays to it, or dedicates their actions to it. It is believed that the human mind needs a concrete form to understand the divine that ultimately can never be defined. Just as one can understand the abstract concept of a color only after one has seen a concrete form, one can only realize the deity through a form of murti.
Misunderstanding from outsiders
The ishta-deva concept has confused outsiders, and made Hinduism to be misunderstood as polytheistic. This view is only a view of Smartism, the only denomination of Hinduism that holds this view strictly. Only a Smartist would have no problem worshiping Shiva or Vishnu together as he views the different aspects of God as leading to the same One God. It is the Smarta view that dominates the view of Hinduism in the West. After all, Swami Vivekananda, a follower of Ramakrishna, along with many others, who brought Hindu beliefs to the West, were all Smarta in belief. Adherents of Smartism (e.g. Smartas) are monists, and conceive of multiple manifestations of a single God or source of being. Hindu monists see a unity, with the personal deities being equally valid to worship. Accordingly, this Smarta concept is a specialized type of monotheism, termed monistic theism. Vaishnavism and Shaivism, the other major denominations of Hinduism, on the other hand, however, conform to a Western perception of what a monotheistic faith is. For example, a Vaishnavite considers Vishnu as the one true God, worthy of worship and other forms as subordinate. See for example, an illustration of the Vaishnavite view of Vishnu as the one true God, at this link (http://www.dvaita.org/docs/srv_faq.html#othergods). Accordingly, many Vaishnavites, for example, believe that only Vishnu can grant the ultimate aim for mankind, moksha. See for example, this link (http://www.dvaita.org/docs/srv_faq.html#hell). Similarly, many Shaivites also hold similar beliefs, as illustrated at at this link (http://www.sroutasaivasiddhanta.org/2-1.htm) and at this link (http://www.sroutasaivasiddhanta.org/2-11.htm).
Disagreement within Hinduism
Other denominations as well as sects of Hinduism don't strictly hold this belief. For example, Arya Samaj worships only the formless Brahman, in particular, Nirguna Brahman. Other denominations, such as the monotheistic faiths of Saivism and Vaishnavism, respectively hold Shiva and Vishnu to be the only ultimate reality, although those faiths recognize other manifestations of the singular god as emanations or lesser deities subordinate to this one supreme being. For example, Shaivities may recognize Vishnu to be a manifestation of Shiva but accord Shiva the status of being the only ultimate reality. A Smarta, on the other hand, would consider Vishnu and Shiva to be the same but different aspects of only one supreme being. (See Adi Sankara's commentary on Vishnu sahasranama.) Vaishnavites may hold the same belief of other manifestations as Shaivites, thus viewing Shiva as a manifestation of Vishnu but hold that Vishnu is the only ultimate reality. The distinction is a subtle difference but noteworthy.
However, the monotheistic nature of Saivism does not necesarily contradict the concept of ishta-devata. It is the view of Saivites, like most Hindus, that Shiva can be approached and experienced through many paths. A certain deity or aspect is seen to choose and be chosen by the devotee, embracing them in lifestyle and vibrations, subtly guiding them to the ultimate reality. A devotee moving towards Shiva through the worship of Ganesa, Shiva's son, supposedly receives blessings and guidance of a much slower and kind nature than a devotee of the more destructive aspect of Rudra.
ISKCON and new religious movements
The Hare Krishna/ISKCON, organization, which is part of the traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavism denomination would accord Shiva the status of a demigod rather than another equivalent aspect of Krishna. However, there is a controversy about whether ISKCON is indeed part of Hinduism or whether the organization is outside mainstream Hinduism. Some even consider ISKCON to be a cult. They, unlike Vaishnavite denominations consider Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to be an avatar of Krishna but worship Krishna, like many traditional Hindu adherents, as their preferred Ishta-Deva.
Other new religious movements related to Hinduism (see Contemporary Hindu movements), many of them cults, have more contentious views, including a tendency in modern times to place their guru as ishta-deva. This is of course an unpopular view both in the minds of orthodox Hindus, as well with outsiders who often misunderstand this phenomenon as a tendency common within Hinduism.
Swami Tapasyananda of Ramakrishna Mission, on commentating about this phenomenon, said:
- The avatar doctrine has been excessively abused by many Hindus today and we have the strange phenomenon of every disciple of a sectarian Guru claiming him to be an avatar. Christianity has therefore limited the Divine Incarnation as an one-time phenomenon. The theory has strong points and equally strong defects but it surmounts the gross abuse of the doctrine indulged in by many Hindus.
Thus, if followers respect and revere the guru, it is only proper if they are using him as a conduit to Krishna, and respect him as a teacher.
However, Swami Sivananda has said that a guru can be likened to God if he himself has attained realization and is a link between the individual and the Absolute. Such a guru, according to his definition and interpretation, should have actually attained union with God, inspire devotion in others, and have a presence that purifies all. Such a case is limited in contemporary times.
As early as the seventeenth century, the great Vaishnavite saint, Raghavendra Swami, in his last speech before departing from the mortal world, warned about the dangers of fraudulent gurus by saying:
- "The search for knowledge is never easy. As the Upanishads say it is like walking on the razor's edge. But for those who have strong faith and put in sustained effort and have the blessings of Shi Hari and guru this is not difficult. Always keep away from people who merely perform miracles without following the shastras and yet call themselves God or guru. I have performed miracles, and so have great persons like Shrimadacharya. These are based on yoga siddhi and the shastras. There is no fraud or trickery at all. These miracles were performed only to show the greatness of God and the wonderful powers that one can attain with His grace. Right knowledge (jnana) is greater than any miracle. Without this no real miracle can take place. Any miracle performed without this right knowledge is only witchcraft. No good will come to those who perform such miracles and also those who believe in them."