I think what separates Manichaeism from other syncretic religious traditions is that other syncretic religious traditions have a tendency to refute their syncretic origins and profess to be a "pure" or "revealed" religious innovation. These exclusivist religious schools feel that an addition to their faith or an amalgamation with another faith would corrupt or distort the "truth" of their religion and are thus hesitant to be part of, or admit to syncretism. For example, both Judaism and Islam have been interpreted as having syncretic elements, but both religious schools refute these conjectures despite any plausible academic evidence in favour of maintaining their "pure" and "truthful" titles.
In contrast to exclusivist traditions that refuse to acknowledge their potentially syncretic orgins, the mythological religions of Classical and Hellenistic Greece and Rome both openly describe their schools of thought as syncretic. They admit to sharing and variating eachother's traditions, as well as adopting traditions from Persian, Anatolian and Egyptian traditional sources. To the religious innovators and followers of mythological religions of Greece and Rome, syncretism was a means to reduce potential inter-religious tension and hostility.
Manachaeism, in this context, neither refuted or professed its syncretic nature. Manichaeism aimed to present the complete version of teachings that were deemed to be corrupt, distorted and misinterpreted by the followers of its "ancestors" Adam, Zoroaster, Buddha and Jesus, and as Manichaeism was diffused, it also amalgamated dieties, spirits and themes from various religious scriptures.
Colourfully illustrated Manichaean iconography.
Elicti writing from a Manichaean book found at Turfan, Turkestan.

Why do you think followers of Manichaeism (the few who at least claim to be reviving the teachings of Mani to this day) accept Mani's take on cosmology and the universe? When the 'composite' nature of the religion is clear, then what would possibly motivate a follower to still believe in it other than sheer ignorance or lack of education?
ReplyDeleteSo, corrupt, distorted, and misinterpreted previous traditions were amalgamated to create a new 'pure' tradition, that's quite interesting :)
et merci beaucoup pour votre comment. C'etait tres gentille de toi :)