American Journal Of Philological Sciences
124
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue 03 2025
PAGE NO.
124-127
10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue03-31
The emergence and spread of Manichaeism as a cultural
phenomenon
Shaknoza Rakhmanova
Junior Researcher of the Institute, Uzbek Language, Literature and Folklore, Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences, Uzbekistan
Received:
27 January 2025;
Accepted:
28 February 2025;
Published:
29 March 2025
Abstract
:
This article explores the literary tradition that developed on the basis of Manichaean teachings, tracing
its evolution and cultural significance. It highlights how Manichaean-inspired poetry, while deeply rooted in early
Turkic literature, transcended regional boundaries and became a notable part of ancient world literature. The
study also examines the perspectives of the renowned scholar Al-Biruni on Manichaeism, emphasizing the
credibility and depth of his insights. Through this analysis, the article sheds light on the spiritual, cultural, and
historical impact of Manichaean literature across diverse civilizations.
Keywords:
Literature, Manichaeism, Mani, doctrine, belief, Al-Biruni, Turkic poetry, religious movements.
Introduction:
Sources covering the life and activities of
Mani Mani, whose original name was Surayk and who
became the spiritual leader of the Manichaeans, was
born on April 14 in the year 216 CE. [1,24] His father,
Fatak, was originally from Ecbatana (modern-day
Hamadan), which was historically the capital of the
Parthian Kingdom and later of the Sasanian Empire.
Known for his remarkable voice, Fatak gained fame
within the society of Ctesiphon, one of the ancient
cities of the region. At the time of Surayk’s
(Mani’s)
birth, his father was a member of the Mesopotamian
Baptists, a Judeo-Christian religious movement led by a
prominent spiritual leader of that era named Elchasai.
This figure succeeded in spreading his ideas across the
Persian Empire, reaching even the borders of Rome.
There are several theories suggesting that Mani may
have been inspired by Elchasai’s fame to start his own
path. In his mission to spread his beliefs, Mani not only
traveled widely but also drew upon sources from
Hebrew traditions. Additionally, he expressed deep
reverence for their patriarchs
–
Adam, Seth, Enoch,
Idris, and Shem.
The French scholar Isaac de Beausobre (1659
–
1738), in
his comprehensive study The History of Manichaeism
and Its Destructive Influence, presented several pieces
of evidence suggesting that Mani considered himself an
apostle of Jesus Christ. According to Beausobre, Mani
modeled his own mission after that of Nicotheus and
Paul. He had memorized the “New Testament” part of
the Bible, but he rejected the “Old Testament” and
denied the prophethood of Moses. [2, 37] According to
available information about Mani's life, he lived with
his mother, Maryam, until the age of four. Afterwards,
his father Fatak entrusted him to the care of the clergy
so that he could thoroughly study the teachings of the
Baptists. Even before reaching maturity, Surayk began
to oppose certain rules of the church. Eventually, at the
age of 24, he left the temple. A year later, he declared
himself to be Mani Hayya (in the Syriac language, “the
Living Spirit”).
It is known that during this time, the ruler of the
Sasanian Empire, Shapur I (240
–
273 CE), supported
Mani’s activities. As a monarch, Shapur needed new
ideas and a new religion to govern the empire
effectively. In an effort to free the people from the
long-standing influence of Zoroastrian clergy who had
kept them under pressure, Mani managed to spread his
teachings across vast territories. Facts related to the
biography of the Manichaean leader are also found in
three books published in ancient Egyptian (Coptic)
language. The texts composed of praises and hymns
primarily provide insight into the final years of the
sect’s leader. For example, in the Kephalaia, Mani does
not go into detail about his missionary journeys, but he
does recount the early years of his activity and his
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
125
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
relationship with Shapur I. In the Psalms of Mani, there
is an elegy written from the perspective of his disciples,
describing the tragic death of their spiritual guide.
Compared to Mani’s other writings, The Sermons
of the
Manichaeans is more biographical in nature. According
to this text, Shapur died in 273 CE and the throne
passed to his son, Hormizd I. He, too, supported Mani’s
role as a religious leader in the empire. However, the
young king’s reign did not last
long. Power soon passed
to his brother, Bahram I.
Bahram, who disapproved of Manichaean ideology,
began persecuting the followers of the faith as soon as
he ascended the throne. By nature, Bahram was a man
fond of hunting and warfare
—
both of which were
prohibited under Manichaean law. To him, Mani
appeared to be an insignificant man who neither
hunted, nor fought, nor practiced medicine. The king
ordered that Mani be thrown into prison. After Mani's
execution, Zoroastrianism was able to restore its
former dominance. Kartir, the chief of the Magi, was
well aware that Mani's ideological views contradicted
centuries-old Zoroastrian traditions and had the
potential to completely disrupt Zoroastrian society. For
this reason, the Magi supported Bahram’s actions.
These events are extensively described in the chapter
titled On the Crucifixion in The Sermons of the
Manichaeans.
The Russian scholar E. B. Smagina, after studying the
historical records of Mani's life, categorized the existing
sources into three groups. She included in the first
group numerous religious texts housed in Christian
church libraries. According to her, the biographical
information found in this group of sources is unreliable,
as the evidence has been distorted or fabricated [2,
343] .
The Arabic sources that contain more reliable
biographical information about Mani are classified as
the second group in Smagina’s categorization. For
example, relatively detailed accounts of his birth,
childhood, and youth can be found in Fihrist al-Ulum by
Muhammad ibn Ishaq, better known as al-Nadim.
Smagina also considers the works of al-Biruni to be
trustworthy. In particular, Al-Athar al-Baqiya (The
Remaining Traces of Past Centuries) provides a precise
date and location for Mani’s birth. [4, 119].
The teachings of Manichaeism
At the heart of Mani’s worldview lies a central idea:
prophets operated within the cultural and traditional
frameworks of specific regions and peoples, which
inevitably shaped their teachings. As a result, Mani
concluded that earlier religious doctrines were one-
sided and incomplete. This belief led him to attempt a
reformation of the core concepts found in
Zoroastrianism, Gnosticism, Judaism, Christianity, and
Buddhism.
Mani sincerely believed that, following the spiritual
paths of Buddha, Zoroaster, and Jesus, he was the final
prophet for the last generation of humanity,
proclaiming a universal religion that could unite all
nations and values. He envisioned a single, all-
encompassing faith adapted to the traditions and
worldviews of different peoples and regions. This
doctrine endured on Earth for a thousand years,
functioning in some regions as a religion and in others
as a movement.
Manichaeism emerged in Central Asia, particularly
within the Uyghur-Turkic Khaganate, during the second
half of the 8th century. Although it was declared the
official religion of the Uyghurs, it did not remain
dominant among them for long. According to Arab
sources, after the fall of the Sasanian Empire, the
influence of Manichaeism sharply declined across Iran
and many other countries. However, the sources also
note that in the 10th century, Samarkand became a
center of Manichaean activity. Mani’s disciple, Mar
Ammo, was responsible for promoting the faith
throughout Central Asia.
According to the syncretic system developed by Mani,
the world around us is the scene of a relentless struggle
between two opposing spiritual forces
—
Good and Evil,
Light and Darkness. This concept mirrors Zoroastrian
dualism, where Light and Goodness represent the
spiritual realm, while Darkness and Evil belong to the
material world. In Manichaean belief, the first realm is
ruled by Light (God), and the second by Darkness
(Satan). Humanity consists of two elements: the soul, a
child of Light, and the div, a child of Darkness.
Therefore, humans must aid the Light in its battle
against Darkness. In this cosmic struggle, matter is
ultimately doomed to destruction, and the spirit will
triumph.
Manichaean doctrine regarded this world as a domain
of evil, placing great emphasis on pacifism
(nonviolence)
and
renunciation
of
material
possessions. Followers were expected to donate one-
tenth of their wealth as charity, pray four times daily,
and abstain from lying, murder, theft, adultery, greed,
sorcery and belief in it, and idolatry.
The faith spread widely among the lower classes, as
they viewed the realm of Darkness as a metaphor for
the oppression of the ruling elite. For them, worshiping
the Light meant resisting tyranny and contributing to
the ultimate victory of the spirit.
Because Manichaeism integrated elements from all
previous religions, it was believed to be directly based
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
126
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
on the written commandments of the “Prophet”
himself.
Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism
As previously mentioned, there are similarities
between Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism. For
example, both teachings refer to Ohrmazd (Ahura
Mazda) as the god of goodness, while the force of evil
is called Ahriman in Zoroastrianism and Shemnu in
Manichaeism. However, the differences between these
two belief systems are far more numerous and
significant than their similarities.
One key distinction lies in their attitudes toward the
human div. Mani regarded the human div as a
creation that serves evil and essentially declared war
against it. In contrast, Zoroastrianism encourages
prosperity through honest means, while Manichaeism
considers a life of poverty to be the path to salvation.
Zoroastrianism promotes the idea that each person
must choose between good and evil. One of the central
symbols of the religion is the Faravahar, which
embodies the phrase “I choose.” In Manichaeism,
however, no such moral choice exists: a person can
either unite with the Light or completely reject it.
According to Manichaean doctrine, the soul
—
created
from Light
—
is not responsible for human sins; only the
div, born of Darkness, bears that burden.
This particular teaching contributed to the rapid spread
of the movement, as unlike Zoroastrianism, Judaism, or
Christianity, Manichaeism did not require deep
repentance or lifelong confession of sins. In those
religions, recognizing one’s transgressions and daily
repentance are central practices. For the Manichaeans,
the only true sin was forgetting the soul and failing to
recognize the Light
—
essentially, refusing the path
offered by Mani. Followers believed themselves to be
free from guilt beyond that one transgression.
Manichaeism attracted many merchants, traders, and
suppliers who traveled along the Silk Road. These
individuals were typically clever, well-educated, and
influential, and they deeply desired a way to be freed
from their perceived sins. Thanks to their support,
Manichaeism spread as far as the eastern territories of
the Roman Empire during the 3rd century, where
communities of Manichaeans emerged in major cities.
The movement’s clergy were
highly adaptable to
different cultures. Mani instructed his disciples to first
learn the local languages, symbols, imagery, and
cultural values of the people they were preaching to. In
Eastern regions, they even adopted shamanic elements
and deity figures to better communicate their message.
Al-
Biruni’s studies on Mani and Manichaeism
According to Russian scholar E. B. Smagina, Al-Biruni
was well acquainted with the texts of the Manichaeans.
In his book India, he refers to Mani multiple times and
includes direct quotations from his works. Al-Biruni
concluded that Mani, like Budasaf (a reference to
Buddha), Zoroaster, and Jesus, claimed the status of a
prophet. He supported this view by citing Mani’s own
words from the Shapuragan:
“Wisdom and good deeds have
always been sent down
through (God’s) messengers at different times. At one
time, they were sent to the land of India through the
messenger named Buddha; at another, to the land of
Iran through Zoroaster; and later, to the land of the
West through Jesus. Finally, in this last age, the same
revelation and prophethood were bestowed upon me,
Mani
—
the true messenger of God
—
and sent through
me to the land of Babylon...”[5, 94]
Thus, Mani proclaimed himself as the “Seal of the
Prophets,” the final messenger of
the divine.
In Al-
Biruni’s view, Manichaeism was a doctrine that
misled and diverted humanity from the true essence of
life and the path of Truth. He shared these reflections
in his book on India
—a land where Mani’s teachings
had long been propagated.
He wrote:
“Human beings are naturally prone to emotion and
misguidance; thus, they tend to avoid rational
understanding. Those who truly comprehend science
and reason have always been a minority throughout
history. People who avoid critical thinking are satisfied
with symbolic images. Followers of many religions, in
their scriptures and places of worship, began creating
idols and images, thereby drifting away from true faith.
This tendency is especially characteristic of the Jews,
the Christians, and most notab
ly, the Manichaeans.”
Through this, Al-Biruni emphasized that the
Manichaean reliance on imagery and symbols reflected
a departure from rational, truth-seeking faith. He saw
such practices as a sign of intellectual laziness and
deviation from the path of enlightenment.[6, 327]
When discussing the religions and cultures of the Indian
subcontinent, Al-Biruni referred multiple times to Mani
and the activities of his followers. He labeled those who
followed Mani as zindiqs (heretics). According to his
analysis, Manichaeans approached all matters from the
perspective of justice and injustice, casting doubt on
established beliefs. This, he argued, planted seeds of
uncertainty in the hearts of those whose faith in the
oneness of God was already weak.
Al-Biruni claimed that the ideas of the Manichaeans led
people toward dualism
—
a view that stood in contrast
to strict monotheism. Based on the evidence presented
in India, it appears that during Mani’s time, his
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
127
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
followers portrayed his life and teachings in such a
compelling and well-structured manner that they
successfully spread his doctrine across vast regions.
Eventually, some Hindus even began to seek refuge in
his teachings.
However, Al-Biruni asserted that Mani not only used
unfounded stories to promote his doctrine, but also
spread speculative ideas about the structure of the
universe. The scholar firmly dismissed all of these as
fabrications and asked for God’s protection from such
misleading beliefs. Indeed, this doctrine initially took
shape as a theology that seemed obscure and illogical.
However, over time, its founder revised and adapted
his ideas in accordance with the concepts of space and
time. Indeed, this doctrine initially took shape as a
theology that seemed obscure and illogical. However,
over time, its founder revised and adapted his ideas in
accordance with the concepts of space and time.
When we look at the period during which Mani and his
teachings emerged and spread, it becomes clear that,
to some extent, their appearance was a necessity for
the society of that time and for the Sasanian state.
Mani’s ideas, in their own time, played a role in
liberating the people from the oppressive grip of
Zoroastrian clerics, who maintained tight control over
both society and power. His movement elevated the
concept of individual freedom, which may explain why
it managed to spread across vast territories beyond the
borders of the Sasanian Empire.
The Sasanian ruler himself supported Mani, likely in
pursuit of forming a more independent and
ideologically cohesive
state, as Mani’s teachings
aligned with the broader interests of the empire. As for
the div of literature that developed from Mani’s
teachings, it can be described as a unique form of
universal human culture. Moreover, the poetry
influenced by Manichaeism holds a distinctive place
even in early Turkic literature.
REFERENCES
Gardner I., Samuel N.C. Lieu. Manichaean texts from
the Roman Empire.
–
UK: Cambridge University Press,
2004.
–
P. 328
Хосроев. А.Л. История Манихейства. –
Санкт
-
Петербург: РАН, 2007. С, 492.
Смагина Е. Б. Манихейства по ранним источникам. –
Москва: РАН, 2011. С, 524.
Бируни, т. I, с. 211—
213
Abu Rayhon Beruniy. Tanlangan asarlar. 1 jild. Т.: “Fan”
nashriyoti, // 1968, 241-b.
Беруни. А.Р. Индия. –
Москва: Ладомир, 1995. –
С.
730
