Talk:Mandaeism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Religion (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Iraq (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Assertion not supported by reference[edit]

Text - There is some suggestion made by some authors that Mandaeanism was formed post-Christianity as opposed to pre-Christianity, contrary to what the Mandaeans themselves claim.[11]

Reference - 11 - Etudes mithriaques 1978 p545 Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin "The conviction of the leading Mandaean scholars – E. S. Drower, Kurt Rudolph, Rudolph Macuch – that Mandaeanism had a pre-Christian origin rests largely upon the subjective evaluation of parallels between Mandaean texts and the Gospel of John".

A skilled author could actually make the claim that Judaism was formed post-Christianity and support it but the above quote does nothing of the sort. It asserts that authors that Mandaeanism was formed post-Christianity but it is unsupported by the provided reference!

I suggest that it is removed or edited — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.25.109.197 (talk) 13:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Removal of inflammatory references[edit]

"...but reject Abraham, Moses and Jesus of Nazareth."

Mandaeans face enough sectarian violence without drawing more hatred towards them, based on someones interpretations of the religion.

I don't see anyone listing all the negative interpretations of texts associated with Islam, or any of the other religions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csc300h (talkcontribs) 19:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Don't blank information referenced to reliable sources. If you have counter-references claiming that the information is incorrect or contested, they can be considered for addition as another viewpoint. "IDONTLIKEIT" is not a valid reason to blank references. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Lack of References[edit]

Could someone provide references to the various sections mentioned. There seems to be a severe lack of references in some areas (in particular to citation or qoutes).

-Bill

Sun June 3, 2007

Out of curiosity I keyed "Mandaean" to see what is available about this group. I found this entry in Wikipedia. I started reading only to stop very abruptly early in the narrative when I read something to the effect that the group is now extinct. Being a Mandaean myself and of priestly lineage -although I never adhered to religious rituals - I was totally taken aback by that statement.

The Mandaeans are not extinct, although they are scattered all over the world in small groups. There is also a strong resurgence of interest in the rituals, and language. You will find us everywhere. My relatives are in the United States, England, Sweden, France, Poland, Russia, NewZealand, Australia, Germany, Spain.

Why did we leave Iraq? Someone here asked that question. I very strongly recommend that that someone should enlighten himself or herself on minority conditions in that country since the invasion.

Those who are interested in knowing something about us, I would refer you to "The Mandaeans of Iraq and Iran" by Drower. For additional information on the myths -I recommend her translation of "The Secret Adam". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deshneh (talkcontribs) 02:02, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Opening Paragraph[edit]

"Most Iraqi Mandaeans have since fled the country under the threat of violence by other Iraqis and the turmoil of the war."

Why are they under threat of violence, and what other Iraqis are we talking about? Christians, Yazidis...or Muslims? The people and ideology responsible for this persecution should not be glossed over in this way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.179.230.10 (talk) 10:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes why (in the name of God)? I think there are not sources available for providing an explanation. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 07:21, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

False Messiah[edit]

more biography about false messiahs--Yolycool (talk) 15:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Asia Times online article[edit]

"Mandaeans in struggle for existence". __meco (talk) 21:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Request for Translation[edit]

With regard to "anush utra" do we know what this translates to? (Beyond utra meaning, in essence, angel/messenger of god) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.190.11.237 (talk) 10:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Orientalists?[edit]

Terms of abuse are undesirable, even if they were invented in the twentieth century; and Nicolas Siouffi was an Oriental; a Syriac Orthodox employed by the French. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Why do you consider the purely descriptive term "Orientalist" to be a "term of abuse" and therefore undesirable, and at the same time employ the term "Oriental" to describe Siouffi? How does Siouffi's religion preclude him from being an Orientalist? 64.131.213.1 (talk) 00:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


From Gnosticism article[edit]

Is this correct:

Among the Mandaeans Jesus was considered a mšiha kdaba or "false messiah" who perverted the teachings entrusted to him by John the Baptist.[1] Still other traditions identify Mani and Seth, third son of Adam and Eve, as salvific figures.[2]

? In ictu oculi (talk) 12:24, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

We should need citations for both sentences, although I've heard often that they disown Jesus as a false prophet. I've never ever heard that they revere Mani. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 18:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
It is correct. You can read the Mandaean text here. It also refers to Muhammad, the Islamic Prophet, as "the Son-of-Slaughter , the Arab," "the most degraded of false prophet", "the Seal of prophets of the Lie", and also says he "converted people to himself by the sword". --AxisAbove (talk) 08:07, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
  1. ^ Macuch, Rudolf (1965). Handbook of Classical and Modern Mandaic. Berlin: De Gruyter & Co. pp. 61 fn. 105. 
  2. ^ "The Gnostic World View: A Brief Introduction". The Gnosis Archive. Retrieved 2009-02-12. 

Possible origin[edit]

Recent research on Pagan Monotheism suggests a widespread heterogeneous group of 'God-worshippers' known by various names* existed in late antiquity throughout the Roman Empire. The marker in identifying Mandaeans as one such group are the Haranian Sabians, which share the name Sabian, similar gnostic beliefs and who have been identified as Pagan Monotheists.

  • Hypsistarii, Sebomenoi, Theosebeis, Caelicolae & etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.248.185 (talk) 14:53, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

"Their origin" bogus[edit]

Section Mandaean history boldly claims:

Their origin seems ultimately have been with the Ebionite Elchasai, who preached to an Abrahamic community called "Sobiai" in Parthian ruled Assyria (Asuristan).[citation needed]

I think [citation needed] is the understatement of the year, [dubious – discuss] is better, but [what'e'heck, this seems like a wildly speculative and obviously wrong statement!] is more conclusive.

It is indeed very unlikely that the Mandaeans were directly connected with any kind of Ebionites, who perused a Jesus gospel somewhat similar to Matthew. Mandeans regard Jesus as a false prophet. Their teachings and texts doesn't have anything in common with any Christian texts, nor anything of what today is regarded as Gnostic corpus (retracted by myself). They revere John the Baptist as Yahya the Prophet, and that is the only commonality. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 18:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Link[edit]

This link should be used. Many of the links provided present very POVvy (especially the gnostic ones) and slightly misleading stories. Personally I think that the Mandean story, cosmology and history stands for itself, and don't need to be shoe-horned into imagined heritages of either heretic christians (ebionites), jews, proto-theosophists or gnostics. Mandeans are Mandeans, and that should be enough. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 19:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Where's Daniel Jackson when you really need him?[edit]

Can somebody add what language "mšiha kdaba" is from...? Teal'c of Chulak kree, Mar-Vell 16:09, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Abraham & Moses[edit]

Why do the Mandaens reject Abraham & Moses?--Splashen (talk) 04:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Because they are considered Jewish patriarchs, thus connected with Judaism--Rafy talk 02:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

So? That didn't stop Christianity & Islam from taking them on. But, thanks for the answer.--Splashen (talk) 04:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, they were an obvious targets for anti-Jewish polemics by the Mandaeans, who reject the Bible as well. You can read more in my unfinished draft.--Rafy talk 15:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for sharing.--Splashen (talk) 03:21, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Mandaeans today paragraph and introductory paragraph[edit]

The Mandaeans today paragraph and introductory paragraph cover the same information. The Mandaeans today paragraph is less detailed and therefore redundant. It maybe should be expanded on or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.73.99 (talk) 19:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Coming of Age[edit]

Do Mandaens have any Coming-of-Age rites or ceremonies? If so, what are they?--Splashen (talk) 23:32, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

"Mandaean Cross" picture requires explanation[edit]

"Mandaean cross" (darfash)

The article features a picture identified as "'Mandaean Cross' (darfash)", but nothing in the text refers to any such emblem or device; nor does any other article on Wikipedia mention the "Mandaean cross" or the "darfash". If the Mandaeans employ a cross among their religious symbols, that fact would be of great interest to the history of Christianity, as well as to that of Mandaeism itself. The article should elucidate. Otherwise, the picture is merely a perplexing puzzle. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 17:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

New "Symbols and rituals" section[edit]

To give the picture of the Darfash a home, I have added a new section on symbols and rituals. Unfortunately I don't know anything about Mandaean symbols or rituals, so somebody else will need to fill up the section with relevant information. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 14:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

"AD" or "CE"?[edit]

An anonymous editor, hiding behind various IP addresses, persists in changing "CE" ("Common Era") in this article's dates to "AD" ("Anno Domini" = "Year of Our Lord"). In the academic study of religions, it has become customary in the English-speaking tradition to use "CE" for dates in the present era, and "BCE" ("Before the Common Era") for dates in the previous era, out of respect for non-Christian religions. This usage should apply throughout Wikipedia, even in articles on Christianity; but it especially should apply in articles on non-Christian religions, such as Mandaeism.

The anonymous editor contends that his or her revision is appropriate because the Mandaeans "revere John the Baptist, a Christian prophet". This overlooks the fact that Mandaeism regards Jesus of Nazareth with hostility as an apostate. John the Baptist is also a Muslim prophet, but I daresay the anonymous editor would not contend for using the Muslim practice of dating years since the Hijra. Wikipedia is not a place for religious testimony. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 15:13, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


Jayaguru-Shishya's edits[edit]

I don't know about others' responses to Jayaguru-Shishya's edits, but I think that removing what s/he thinks are 'overlinks' is way beyond what ought to be done on this article. I personally believe STRONGLY that these edits ought to be reverted because they REDUCE the utility or usefulness of this article to a newbie reader. MaynardClark (talk) 21:13, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello there! I am sorry if you feel that way. Do you have any specific edit(s) / part of edit(s) in your mind? With most of my edits, there's been a serious issue with overlinking; whether there has been duplicate linking, or then the links have been directing to a whole different article compared to what the concept is even about. Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 22:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
If MaynardClark strongly believes that Jayaguru-Shishya's edits should be reverted, he (I presume) is free to revert them, and Wikipedia policy is, "Be bold!" It is a bit shocking to see so many wikilinks bite the dust at one time, but having skimmed the article since, I can't say that I miss them. I take it most of what J-S deleted were duplicates. As long as all the arcane terms and obscure references get one wikilink apiece, I'm happy for duplicate links to go. And if the other links J-S deleted were to unrelated concepts, then the article is well rid of those, too.
I have, however, reverted two of J-S's revisions, namely the deletion of the "Symbols & Rituals" section, and the removal of the "Mandaean Cross" image from that section. The section is not really empty, because it contains that picture. I created the section to house the picture, in hopes that some knowledgeable person would fill in more information about the darfash and other symbols employed by the Mandaeans. I still think the section should remain, even though nobody has granted my wish. If the section is to be deleted, though, the picture of the darfash should also be deleted, because without any explanatory text the picture is meaningless to non-Mandaeans, and is in fact likely to be misleading, the cruciform symbol suggesting an affinity with Christianity which does not exist in fact. Maybe J-S would devote some of his or her abundant energy to reading up on Mandaean symbols and rituals, and give us some content for that section? J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 23:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
There are more than a few reference works which have reasonably long articles on this topic which could be used to help determine WP:WEIGHT and other matters in this, the main article on the topic. Anyone interested could ask for copies of such reference work articles, and other articles and works available on some of the subscription databanks currently involved in Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library at WP:RX. John Carter (talk) 01:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your proposal, J. D. Crutchfield! Actually, I'd be interested in trying to contribute to the "Symbols and Rituals" section. I think I have enough time to delve into the matter and start hunting for sources on Sunday, till that my week is pretty hectic though. Would you be interested in trying to find a source or two with me? Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 19:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the invitation, but I really don't have time for another project at the moment. If I can help with proof-reading and copy-editing I'll be glad to do that much. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 21:27, 12 November 2014 (UTC)