Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Manacheans, wasRe: Gnostic claims to Paul of Tarsus for PMCV

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Hey Thomas, thanks for all the info. I am looking in to the Quanzhou angle to see whether this looks like perhaps a wide liguistic sweep (like the page
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 7, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey Thomas, thanks for all the info. I am looking in to the Quanzhou
      angle to see whether this looks like perhaps a wide liguistic sweep
      (like the page concerning Bush's "Manichaeism" *lol*), or if there
      is something more there. It would certainly be an important link,
      and an interesting study.

      PMCV

      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Leavitt" <thomas@t...>
      wrote:
      > Hmm... the Gnosis Archive has a page on Manicheanism that
      references it
      > surviving up to the present century in the "Orient".
      >
      > http://www.gnosis.org/library/manis.htmv
      >
      > Unfortunately, I can't recall, at this point, exactly where I
      heard that
      > either.
      >
      > It may not be correct... the Catholic Encyclopedia, which
      unfortunately
      > seems to be the primary source for most site's information about
      > Manicheanism, says that:
      >
      > Within a generation after Mani's death his followers had settled
      on the
      > Malabar Coast and gave the name to Minigrama, ie "Settlement of
      Mani".
      >
      > ... someone may have assumed that they continue to survive there.
      >
      > This article,
      >
      > Mani: Gnostic Prophet of Dualism
      > http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/040712mani.html
      >
      > on a Mormon site of all things, says:
      >
      > says: "Manicheism was most successful among the nomads of Central
      Asia,
      > where it was declared the official religion by the king of the
      Uigur Turks
      > in 762, and survived until the sixteenth century."
      >
      > Unfortunately, without citing a source. However, the authors seem
      to be
      > reasonably authoritative.
      >
      > According to this essay, "During the Yuan (Mongol) period
      Manichaeism
      > experienced something of a revival in China, only to be outlawed
      as a
      > heretical Buddhist sect under the Ming legal code of the fourteenth
      > century."
      >
      >
      http://depts.washington.edu/uwch/silkroad/exhibit/religion/manichaeis
      m/essay.html
      >
      > the source cited here is (1) Richard Foltz, Religions of the Silk
      Road
      > (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999).
      >
      > Another essay states:
      >
      > "It survived in Southern China as the "Religion of the Venerable
      Light"
      > until the 17th century e.v."
      >
      > http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/religion.htm
      >
      > again, without footnoting a specific source (though a list is
      appended at
      > the bottom)
      >
      > I dug farther, and found this item on Manicheanism in China (the
      Iranians
      > seem, logically enough, given the tradition's origin there, very
      eager to
      > claim Manicheanism as theirs, and to document its history).
      >
      > It ends with this item (lots of good/interesting stuff before it):
      >
      > http://www.iranica.com/articles/sup/Manicheism_in_China.html
      >
      > The religion probably finally died out in the first decades of the
      > Twentieth Century. The temple on Hua-paio Hill, termed by the local
      > worshippers as a chao-an (ca'ao-an) i.e. a "thatched nunnery", is
      still
      > used as a Buddhist temple where Mani is worshipped as a Buddha with
      > special powers. UNESCO made the site of the Manichean chao-an a
      World
      > Heritage Site in 1991 as a unique relic of an extinct world
      religion.
      >
      > There is a Manichean temple in Quanzhou, China, and this guy
      >
      > http://www.amoymagic.com/Quanzhoupage.htm
      >
      > claims that "the Persian Manichean religion survives today only in
      > Quanzhou", although it is not clear from other entries whether
      actually
      > means there are practicing Manicheans there... on the other hand,
      as a
      > resident foriegner, he appears as likely as any non-native to know
      that.
      >
      > Other data:
      >
      > Mani and Manichean seems to be a common word in India, without any
      direct
      > relation to the religious tradition of that name.
      >
      > ... on balance, I can't find any evidence to support the
      conclusion that
      > there are Manicheans practicing today that have a direct line of
      > historical descent. On the other hand, the religion was very
      widespread,
      > Central Asia is still very much "off the grid", so who knows what
      may
      > survive in pocketes as a local traditionnnn that no Westerner has
      ever
      > become aware enough of to investigate?
      >
      > Regards,
      > Thomas Leavitt
      >
      > P.S. On a political note, here's an interesting rebuttal to claims
      that
      > Bush's worldview is "Manichean".
      >
      > http://hnn.us/articles/7202.htm
      >
      > This is kind of amusing... apparently, an author has listed Mani
      as the
      > world's 83rd most influental person in history (right ahead of
      Lenin).
      >
      > > Hello pmcvflag
      > >
      > > On 03/06/05, you wrote:
      > >
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> Hey Mike
      > >>
      > >> Well, I was aware that Malabar was one of the later outposts,
      but last
      > >> I heard it was still around the 1500s when they were last
      > >> spotted there. If you are talking about some new discovery that
      I had
      > >> not heard about, I am unable to find anything about it.... and
      no one
      > >> else I know seems to have heard about it either. Can you give
      us some
      > >> more info? It would certainly be extremely interesting.
      > >
      > > I wish I could, but some guy at church was talking about a
      journal
      > > article he had read, and I was not part of the conversation. My
      > > older son Tom may know something too. I'll cc: him in on this,
      just in
      > > case. Not being into Manacheanism that much, I did not retain
      > > much of what I heard or read about it.
      > >
      > > Regards
      > > --
      > > Mike Leavitt ac998@l...
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.