Aim/Purpose
This study aims to explore the dynamics of interreligious dialogue (IRD) among Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, and Christian leaders in Sri Lanka and the Philippines using Ludwig Wittgenstein’s concepts of language games and rule-following. It seeks to: (1) analyze how religious traditions function as distinct yet overlapping language games; (2) identify barriers to effective IRD (e.g., political exploitation, historical grievances); and (3) develop context-sensitive strategies to foster interreligious harmony in pluralistic societies.

Background
Asia’s religious diversity presents opportunities for enrichment but also challenges due to linguistic, cultural, and doctrinal differences. Colonial legacies and nationalist projects have exacerbated tensions, transforming religious identities into political markers. Existing IRD models often overlook micro-linguistic barriers, assuming religious concepts are universally translatable. Wittgenstein’s philosophy offers a framework to address these gaps by emphasizing contextual meaning and communal practices over abstract definitions.

Methodology
The study employed a qualitative narrative inquiry design, engaging 18 religious leaders (10 from Sri Lanka and 8 from the Philippines) representing Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, conducted both face-to-face and virtually, and analyzed using thematic coding with a Wittgensteinian framework. Ethical considerations included obtaining informed consent, ensuring confidentiality through coded identifiers, and conducting member checking to validate findings.

Contribution
This study makes four key contributions. Theoretically, it pioneers the application of Wittgenstein’s language games to Asian interreligious dialogue, showing how terms like dharma and jihad gain meaning through specific cultural contexts. Methodologically, it innovatively blends narrative inquiry with linguistic analysis to document real-world interfaith encounters. Practically, it offers concrete solutions for peacebuilding, such as creating hybrid terms like “peace guardians” that respect different traditions while fostering mutual understanding. It contributes to the Informing Science discipline by framing interreligious dialogue as an informing process, demonstrating that effective dialogue – like effective informing – requires linguistic humility and shared practices to bridge gaps across communities.

Findings
Common Ground: Shared ethical values (justice, peace) exist across traditions but are expressed through distinct language games.
Misunderstandings: Decontextualized terms (e.g., jihad as “holy war”) fuel conflict; political manipulation and historical grievances persist.
Future Aspirations: Leaders emphasize mutual respect, youth education, and structured dialogue to counter extremism.

Recommendations for Practitioners
Linguistic Mapping: Train facilitators to analyze religious terms within their native contexts.
Hybrid Practices: Develop shared rituals (e.g., interfaith community projects) to foster organic understanding.
Power Balancing: Ensure minority voices are included in dialogue structures.

Recommendations for Researchers
Expand studies to digital platforms and longitudinal designs.
Compare IRD dynamics across Asian contexts (e.g., Sri Lanka vs. Indonesia).
Include marginalized voices (women, youth) in future research.

Impact on Society
The study highlights how grassroots initiatives (e.g., Mindanao’s peace guardians) can decolonize IRD and build sustainable harmony. By reframing dialogue as shared practice rather than doctrinal debate, it offers pathways to reduce polarization in pluralistic societies.

Future Research
Explore AI and social media’s role in shaping interreligious dynamics. Investigate meta-language games for irreconcilable doctrinal differences. Examine the long-term efficacy of hybrid language games in conflict resolution.