WI: Manichean Persia?

A lot of searching hasn't found much on this topic, so, here goes:

Manicheaism made a decent shot at becoming a globe-spanning universal religion like Christianity, Islam, or Buddhism - it had adherents as far west as Rome and as far east as China. So, what happens if it manages to take over Persia sometime between its founding and the formation of Islam, and thus develops an actual power base? The method that comes most to mind is by the Hephthalites conquering Sassanid Persia and it coming to power that way (given the excellent Rise of the White Huns TL), but I'm sure there are other paths it could have followed.

Thoughts? It seems like an interesting way to avert the common "no Islam means Christianity reaches the Indus" cliche. Are there any TLs on the subject?
 
I'm kind of assured that a lack of Islam, or at least a lack of islamic expansion east of the Tigris, could result in a Persia that adopts either Manichaeism or a reformed version of Zoroastrianism.
 
I do not believe that Christianity can become the dominant faith going east anywhere. I in fact have supported the opinion that the majority of Arabia would remain pagan with Jewish minorities as opposed to Christianity and that Iran would remain entrenched in the very strong Zoroastrian state structure.

Contrary to popular belief, Manichaeism was not a religion developed as some byproduct or heresy of Zoroastrianism. It differed considerably from Zoroastrianism in most ways except both agreed on a sort of basic dualist principle and that Zoroaster was a prophet of some sort. However, other than that, it developed nothing like it. The actual source of Manichaeism was what? The answer is Christianity mainly and then an admixture of Greek Gnosis along with mixes from Buddhism and Zoroastrianism. It's main features however hinge entirely upon Christianity and the literature distributed during the early Christian era which became widespread in the Syriac world. Mani like previous Gnosis writers saw the world as evil in its nature, not because of original sin, but because it was created by a fallen god or demiurge who was either blind and insane or utterly evil. This god is then mirrored by the true deity of perpetual light who was represented himself in the image of Jesus who died ont he Cross and has reinvented himself as an avatar in the body of Mani. This religion was like many influenced by Christianity and Gnosis was almost created to fit the era of religious change and strife in the Greek and Syriac world of the day.

Whereas in Iran, Mani is faced with a staunch and powerful ethnic faith, fresh from a revival of its doctrines and purity by the new Sassanid dominion. The situation is thus dire for Manichaeism, it has to face an entrenched and powerful ideology in Iran and then catch up to the gains made by the mainstream Christians and their various offshoots such as the Manichaen relatives in the Gnosis sects and of the Arrians. There is a reason the Manichaen religion essentially ceased to exist in the west by the 11th century, it was due to the fact that it had to beat out Christianity, usurp Zoroastrianism or flee to the east. It did the latter in otl and by the Abbasid period, the Manichaens whose base was in Baghdad area and previously Cteshipohn was eradicated by the Abbasid authorities. While, the stronger Christian and Zoroastrian faiths remained prevalent in Iran and the Syriac world (which Manichaeism lost in).

However, Manichaeism did survive. It was a religion that continued to recreate itself in some ways and meld to different believes in the west. Many Shi'i groups especially of the Ghulat and Nizari derive heavily from Manichaen thought, especially in regards to avatars and millennialism, which may also have its origin in Mesopotamian mythology. Then most famously, the Manichaen belief found new grounds in Anatolia as the Paulicians, in Bulgaria and Bosnia as the Bogomils and finally as the Cathars in France.
 
Last edited:
Top