Why does the same phenomenon have two names?
When researching Mother Goddess Worship, readers often encounter two parallel phrases: 'Mother Goddess Worship belief' and 'Đạo Mẫu'. These two names are not just a matter of wording. They reflect two different views on the nature of the phenomenon, and behind them lies a decades-long academic debate among Vietnamese researchers.
This article presents that debate without taking sides. First, it is necessary to distinguish two levels: the legal level, where the State has provided a clear definition, and the academic level, where researchers have not yet reached consensus.
How does the 2016 Law on Belief and Religion distinguish the two concepts?
The Law on Belief and Religion No. 02/2016/QH14, passed by the 14th National Assembly on 18/11/2016 and effective from 01/01/2018, separates belief and religion into two distinct legal concepts1. Article 2 of the Law provides terminology for both, and this is the most important legal basis when discussing the naming.
According to the Law's definition, belief is the faith and activities expressing faith that people believe in and admire, not belonging to a specific religious organization. Religion is a form of belief with an organizational system, including leaders, doctrines, canon law, rituals, and followers. In short, the distinguishing feature lies in whether there is an organization, doctrine, and recognized community of followers.
It should also be noted that the Law not only addresses religion but also places beliefs, including ancestor worship and honoring those who contributed to the country, within the scope respected and protected by the State1. This is an important point: classifying a phenomenon as a belief does not mean it is treated as lesser than a religion.
Why have researchers not reached consensus?
Among researchers, some authors argue that Mother Goddess Worship has gone beyond the framework of a simple folk belief. They argue that it has a pantheon, a hierarchical system of deities, its own rituals, professional ritual performers, and a large community of practitioners, meaning it meets the elements commonly used to identify a religion.
The opposing side argues that these characteristics are not enough to establish religious status in the strict sense, because Mother Goddess Worship lacks a unified written doctrinal system, lacks a centralized church organization, and retains very high local and variant diversity. This is the view of a significant portion of researchers, though not always expressed in separate written works.
The point to emphasize: this debate mainly takes place among Vietnamese researchers, and to date there have been few comparative studies placing Mother Goddess Worship alongside national religions elsewhere for comparison. This is a gap in the evidence, which should be stated clearly rather than filled with speculation.
Nguyễn Quốc Tuấn 2004: a mixed national religion
One of the most cited arguments is by Nguyễn Quốc Tuấn in the article 'Mẫu Liễu Hạnh through the lens of religious studies' published in the Journal of Religious Studies in 20042. The author states clearly that he does not use the adjective 'folk' to describe this phenomenon, because in his view that term implicitly lowers its status.
The central argument of the article is: if considered according to the aspects of expression of a religion, Mother Goddess Liễu Hạnh worship is no different from major religions. The author calls it a 'mixed national religion', meaning a religion formed locally, not purely original, built by borrowing techniques and methods from various traditions.
According to Nguyễn Quốc Tuấn, the image of Mother Liễu is a deliberate composite of Buddhism and Taoism, with traces of Confucianism but not prominent2. He also rejects the argument classifying Mother Goddess Worship as shamanism, stating that between mediumship and the soul journeys of shamans there is nothing to prove they are one, except that both involve a supernatural entity2. Regarding the legendary origin, the author proposes a personal hypothesis that Trạng Bùng Phùng Khắc Khoan could be the author of the story, and acknowledges this as his own question awaiting colleagues' answers2. This is level B evidence, to be read as a contested proposal, not a repeated conclusion.
Ngô Đức Thịnh and the name 'Đạo Mẫu'
The name 'Đạo Mẫu' is associated with the work of Ngô Đức Thịnh, 'Đạo Mẫu ở Việt Nam', published in 1996 and later expanded and reprinted as 'Đạo thờ Mẫu ở Việt Nam' in 2012. Vietnamese researchers consider this the foundational work on the topic: it surveys the pantheon of Tam phủ and Tứ phủ, along with mediumship rituals, văn chầu, the system of temples and shrines, and festivals.
According to the summary of the work, the author argues for viewing Mother Goddess Worship as an indigenous 'đạo', a view that has been debated. It should be noted that this is a bibliographic source, meaning we know what the author says at the summary level, and should not attribute additional numbers or conclusions that the summary does not contain. Nevertheless, a leading researcher choosing the word 'đạo' in the title helped popularize this name.
Liễu Hạnh and Phật Mẫu Man Nương: where Buddhism and Mother Goddess Worship receive each other
Another line of argument does not focus on the word 'đạo' or 'belief', but on the relationship between Mother Goddess Worship and Buddhism. Nguyễn Hữu Thụ in 2009 compared two legends: Phật Mẫu Man Nương and Thánh Mẫu Liễu Hạnh3.
According to the author, in Man Nương, Buddhism encountered the Vietnamese tradition of goddess worship during its early introduction; in Liễu Hạnh, the encounter took place between Buddhism and Mother Goddess Worship in the 16th century3. The formation of the Tứ Pháp temple system is read by the author as a milestone in the transition from 'Buddhism in Vietnam' to 'Vietnamese Buddhism'3.
A notable point in the article is the description of the pantheon arrangement: at Tứ Pháp temples, the statue worshipped in the central position is not that of Shakyamuni Buddha but those of the goddesses of Clouds, Rain, Thunder, and Lightning, seated in a niche and made larger, while statues of Buddha, Arhats, Bodhisattvas, and Vajra are smaller and placed to the side3. The author also notes an observation about village temples in the Red River Delta today: the Mother Goddess altar often becomes a separate compartment within the temple structure, and the reason given is that the Mother has taken refuge in the Buddha, thus bearing the name Phật Mẫu3.
For the question of this article, this data shows that Mother Goddess Worship and Buddhism have received each other at a structural level, not just at the level of followers. But it does not automatically resolve whether Mother Goddess Worship is an independent religion, because a phenomenon within the space of another religion can still be classified in various ways.
The time of origin and the limits of evidence
Cao Thế Trình in 2020 further discusses the time of origin of Tam phủ Mother Goddess Worship4. Through analyzing variant legends, the author notes that this type of story often has very high variability, and differences across each teller or telling are common4.
There is a variant fixed by specific time markers, such as the Mother being born in the year Thiên Hựu, i.e., 1557, and the Tiên chúa composing poetry with the Phùng family just returned from a mission to China, according to official history on the 15th day of the 12th month of the year Mậu Tuất, i.e., 11 January 15994. The author also mentions the Cảnh Trị era, from 1663 to 1671, when the king considered the Tiên chúa a demon and sent Vũ Lâm soldiers to destroy the temple4. Regarding the Tiên Chúa appearing in a dream to force people to build a temple at Sòng Sơn in the first half of the 17th century, the author considers this quite reasonable4.
This is level B evidence: an academic proposal with arguments, not yet a conclusion accepted by the entire research community. For the question of this article, this further shows why classifying Mother Goddess Worship as religion or belief struggles to reach consensus: even the date of formation is still being discussed.
Table comparing viewpoints
| Proposer | Year | Proposed name | Main argument | Evidence level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam | 2016 | Belief (per Law No. 02/2016/QH14) | Belief is faith not belonging to a specific religious organization; religion has organizational system, doctrine, canon law, rituals, and followers | A |
| Nguyễn Quốc Tuấn | 2004 | Mixed national religion | Mother Goddess Liễu worship meets all aspects of expression of a religion; should not use the adjective 'folk' | B |
| Ngô Đức Thịnh | 1996, reprinted 2012 | Indigenous 'đạo' | Survey of Tam phủ, Tứ phủ pantheon, mediumship rituals, văn chầu, temple system, and festivals | A (bibliographic source) |
| Nguyễn Hữu Thụ | 2009 | Does not address classification, focuses on Buddhism and Mother Goddess Worship relationship | Man Nương and Liễu Hạnh are two milestones of intersection between Buddhism and goddess worship and Mother Goddess Worship | A |
| Cao Thế Trình | 2020 | Does not address classification, discusses chronology | Legend variants have different time markers; caution needed when dating | B |
The trend of indigenous belief revival and broader context
The question of whether Mother Goddess Worship is a belief or a religion is not purely academic. It lies within a broader context: the global trend of reviving indigenous beliefs, and in Vietnam the resurgence of Mother Goddess Worship practices since Đổi mới.
According to Cao Thế Trình, Tam phủ Mother Goddess Worship mainly belongs to the merchant class; when the economy shifted to market mechanisms, both worship facilities and mediumship and spirit possession activities exploded4. On the state management side, the author expresses concern that the boundary between belief and superstition in mediumship activities is assessed as very fragile, and also warns about the commercialization of spiritual activities4.
Here it is necessary to distinguish two things. The first is the classification question: what type does this phenomenon belong to. The second is the practical question: how do activities take place and how should they be viewed. The two are related but not identical. A phenomenon classified as a belief can still have great vitality and scale, and conversely, some people calling it a 'đạo' does not automatically change how the law classifies it.
On the side of the practicing community, many insiders call the place of worship a 'đền' or 'phủ', call the ritual 'hầu Thánh', and identify themselves as 'con nhang đệ tử'. How they name their own practice is noteworthy data, but it cannot be used to conclude the academic classification question.
Conclusion: an open question
There is no academic consensus on whether Mother Goddess Worship is a belief or a religion. Legally, the 2016 Law on Belief and Religion has provided definitions distinguishing the two concepts, and current legal texts use the phrase 'Mother Goddess Worship belief'1. Academically, figures like Ngô Đức Thịnh and Nguyễn Quốc Tuấn propose viewing Mother Goddess Worship as a 'đạo' or a national religion, while another portion of researchers still regard it as a folk belief2.
It is noteworthy that this debate mainly takes place among Vietnamese researchers, and to date there have been few international comparative studies placing Mother Goddess Worship alongside national religions elsewhere. This is where evidence is lacking, and stating that clearly is more honest than choosing a side in advance.
For general readers, the practical approach is to recognize both names and understand that they belong to two different levels. When speaking of law and procedures, use the Law's terminology. When speaking of the nature of the phenomenon in an academic context, state clearly which viewpoint is being followed, as this is a contested issue.
