[Ridwan]

Bumping this with an obscure topic related to my enthusiasm for obscure and extinct religions, like Manichaeism for example. I don't know much about it though in my defense not that much is known about it in the first place, but should there be anything I get it wrong below, (in hope that there will be anyone sufficiently informed running into this post) then please do tell.

Spoiler for Post-Muhammad Manichaeist revival:

One idea that has always been intriguing me is that a period, even if only briefly, where a major clash between Islam and a movement of revitalized Manichaeism takes place sometimes after the conquest of Persia. The Islamic eastward advances wasn't as smooth as it was the opposite direction, with rougher geography and all, and it was a gradual process that Dar al Islam could finally absorb Central Asia and Khurasan, boosted by the conversion of Turks that granted muslim world the highly mobile turkic cavalry into their military tradition. Nevertheless, it was a rather long way there and relatively coincidental. Turks only converted to Islam in the latest edge of first millenium, and it was a considerable period after the conquest of Persia. Manichaeism persisted post-Sassanid for quite a while east of Iraq, long enough to enable conversion of a (short-term) major Central Asian power post-Talas, and easter Persia wasn't exactly conducive under initial Islamic rule and was prone to heterodox messianic rebellions whenever the chance sprung up. So between the time of Umayyad ascendancy and Talas, frankly a slice of period which I know almost nothing about, Manichaeism could've gained better fortune vis a vis OTL ? The question of "how" is indeed the question. Subducation of Khurasan-Afghanistan region was not a very smooth process, and by the Battle of Talas Islam had just only began to assert itself in Sogdiana. Perhaps it could've gone slightly worse ? But would that be enough. Almost nothing is known about the internal state of Manichaeist church during this period, so we can't really figure how much organized eastern Manichaeians really were, but it doesn't seem to be really that well, so perhaps a political reformation would be necessary. Or perhaps we can simply have the muslims perform somewhat worse in the region to provide a breathing room and time long enough for Manichaeism to develop its relative influence in Khurasan-Sogdiana region, which will then be taken over by an opportunistic regional ruler when both the Caliphate and China start screwing themselves at home.

I'm not sure the maximum reach of this hypothetical neo-Manichaeist movement will be. Don't think they'll be able to hold onto Persia more then temporarily. Perhaps if they'd be lucky enough, they can perhaps lay a siege on Baghdad before being beaten back. All in all, I don't think this neo-Manichaeist revival will last more then a few generations as a force, but perhaps it will actually grant the religion a window to actually survive in the fringes later. What's more interesting would be about what kind of religious ferment it will cause to Greater Persia region and how it will affect Islam down the road, and whether it will make it indefinitely in North India, the last part which excites me the most, knowing how readily the north Indian Buddhists embraced Islam as the way to counter their losing ground against revitalized Hinduism IOTL, and many vital doctrinal similarities Manichaeism shared with Buddhism, by which the former was inspired anyway, but also shared the extent of politicism with that of Abrahamic religions.... And if it can pass in India, perhaps there's a real chance to survive as more then another Parsees after all...

Thoughts ?