Yiey mao belief in southern Vietnam origin, characteristics, and the process of reconstructing indigenous cultural traditions
Multidisciplinary Science Journal January 16, 2026 DOI: 10.31893/multiscience.2026456 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Ethnography Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Population | Khmer community in Southern Vietnam practicing Yiey Mao belief |
| Topics | Buddhism Shamanism |
| Keywords | Indigenous Syncretism linguistics Worship Ethnography Modernization theory Premise Spiritualities Anthropology Aesthetics State computer science Agency philosophy Participant observation Ethnic group Identity music Cultural identity Folk religion Spirituality Modernity Negotiation Gender studies Ethnology Faith China |
| Key findings | Argues that Yiey Mao belief persists through three transformations: Buddhicization integrates folk spirituality into Theravada Buddhism, sacred space shifts from village to public/touristic settings, and heritagization constructs cultural legitimacy. The belief sustains collective memory and expresses women's spiritual agency, demonstrating indigenous religion's creative adaptability. |
Abstract
This paper examines the Yiey Mao belief among the Khmer in Southern Vietnam as a vivid example of how an indigenous religion adapts and endures amid modernization and globalization. Drawing on the anthropology of religion (Geertz, Turner, Tambiah, Eliade), the study interprets Yiey Mao as a dynamic symbolic system that negotiates between tradition and modernity, the sacred and the secular, ethnicity and nationhood. Based on ethnographic observation and document analysis, the research identifies three main dimensions of transformation. First, the Buddhicization of Yiey Mao belief reveals the mediating role of Khmer Theravāda Buddhism in integrating folk spirituality into an orthodox religious framework. This syncretism both legitimizes the cult and preserves its indigenous roots. Second, the reconfiguration of sacred space and ritual practice reflects a shift from local village worship to more public, even touristic, expressions. These new ritual forms, though shaped by spectacle, enhance communal participation and reaffirm Khmer cultural identity in a pluralistic context. Third, the heritagization and touristification of the cult illustrate the collaboration between the State and local communities in constructing cultural legitimacy—transforming Yiey Mao into both intangible heritage and a cultural brand of the borderlands. At a socio-cultural level, Yiey Mao belief serves as a religious mechanism of identity and cohesion. It sustains collective memory, nurtures communitas, and expresses the spiritual agency of women through the figure of the sacred feminine. Ultimately, Yiey Mao represents a “living religion”, continually reinterpreted through cultural negotiation and ritual innovation. Its persistence demonstrates the creative adaptability of Khmer culture and affirms that indigenous religion, rather than a vestige of the past, remains a vital moral and spiritual foundation for community life in the contemporary Mekong Delta.