Manichaeism (Group Project)

Manichaeism is indeed syncretic religion. And from the readings, in Jonas' words it appears that Manichaeism is even the most syncretic, or gnostic religion compere to the other ones. Jones claimes that status to it on the bases that Mani consciously was combining the elements from other religious traditions and merging them all together with the purpose to create the 'ultimate', or the 'universal' religion.

I think that all (or most, as more politically correct term ;) religions are syncretic to some degree, as in order for the belief system to become popular, or institutional, it inevitably have to merge with a local social traditions or/and political laws.

I think the idea that Mani was deliberately mixing the elements of popular and already trusted religions together, without trying to hide that fact, is what separates Manichaeism from other 'syncretic' religions. As most of the religions are taking the ideas from already established traditions, but changing it around a bit to compete with popular movements. From this respect Manichaeism in some sense can be compered to New Age movement. As it seems that New Age tradition is also in a similar way borrowing random elements from many popular religions without masking that fact, and combining it together to create 'something new and more profound'. From the perspective of the followers of an old, established tradition, such borrowing of separate elements is meaningless, because it means using them "out of context". Although, for those who are borrowing, it is meaningful because in their minds they are creating something 'new and better'.

For us, as scholars of religion, recognizing similarities with other traditions might be helpful for the purpose of following the footprints of possible origin of some thoughts and ideas. Or, if not an origin, then a chain of historical development.

When thinking about Manichaeism as a textual tradition, the syncretism as an 'organizing principle' helps us to divide the ideas into 17 or so different languages, and as the result to see where all those compounding elements were taken from.

The images included are: the bottom one is Manichaeistic painting, which looks very similar to a Tibetan Buddhist thangka painting, with Buddha in the middle, and the cross on his left. And the top one is the founder of Manichaeism.

Tang Dynasty: the Reflection on Schafer's Description

Schafer's "The Glory Tang Days" is written in very romantic language, describing the eighth century China as the most beautiful and magical time. In fact, as he mentioned, his references are taken mostly from Su O's writings. And Su O was describing the time almost a century before his own. And there is a tendency to romanticize the past. It feels like Schafer did the same thing, as his writing reads like a beautiful fairytale. Anyway, there is no way to find out what "actually" was happening during those times, as there is no such thing as more objective or less objective reality. But Schafer's interpretation depicts his fascination and admiration of the story (time and place) he describes. In 'reality' we don't know what actually was happening in China during Tang dynasty. But it feels like Schafer was describing his own inner beautiful world rather than whatever he attempted to describe.