^{page 435 note 1} See fine general synthesis by Lieu, S., Manichaeism in the Later Roman Empire and Medieval China. A Historical Survey (Manchester, 1986).Google Scholar

^{page 436 note 1} As quoted in al-Biruni, , The Chronicle of Ancient Nations, tr. Sachau, E., (London, 1879), p. 190.Google Scholar See article fn. 16 for extant Manichaean fragments.

^{page 437 note 1} M 42, tr. Asmussen, J., Manichaean Literature. Representative Texts Chiefly from Middle Persian and Parthian Writings (New York, 1975), pp. 110–11.Google Scholar For literary comments generally see Ghilain, A., Essai sur la Langue Parthe… d'après les Textes Manichéens du Turkestan Oriental (Louvain, 1939)Google Scholar, Boyce, M., ‘The Manichaean Literature in Middle Iranian’, Handbuch der Orientalistik (Leiden/Cologne, IV, 2, 1, 1968), pp. 67–76.Google Scholar

^{page 437 note 2a} Good example in Kephalaia, ch. I (‘On the coming of the Apostle’, i.e. Mani), where the writer compared the coming of all previous apostles with farmers, and their churches with particular months of the year during which the farmers harvest, and then moved on from this parable to list some of his predecessors, namely Adam, Enoch, Sem, Buddha, Zoroaster and Christ, Jesus. See Kephalaia, ed. Bohlig, A., Germ. tr. by Polotsky, H. J. (Stuttgart, 1940), p. 12Google Scholar; also fn. I here.

^{page 437 note 2b} Zoroaster is mentioned a couple of times. First when in connection with Mani's own burial, there is description firstly of the suffering of Jesus, and then notice of Zoroaster's funeral – i.e. the theme being that all Messengers of Truth face suffering and rejection. See Manichäische Homilien, ed. with German, tr. by Polotsky, (Stuttgart, 1934), pp. 68–70.Google Scholar Another pat t of the Homilies dealt with how in their respective times Jesus had expelled false doctrines from Jerusalem, and Zoroaster had done so at Babylon (see Manichdische Homilien, p. 11). Interestingly enough similar Manichaean stories about Zoroaster are found in Uighur Turkish material, where Zoroaster (Zrōšč) was described as being in conflict with sorcerors or demons at Babylon. See Jackson, A. V., ‘Studies in Manichaeism’, journal of the American Oriental Society, XLIII, (1923), 15–25, esp, pp. 16–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 438 note 1} M 7 tr. Asmussen, , pp. 47–9.Google Scholar

^{page 438 note 2} Tr. Yoshida, Y., ‘On the Sogdian Infinitives’, journal of Asian and African Studies, Tokyo, XVIII, (1979), 181–95, at pp. 187 and 195.Google Scholar

^{page 438 note 3} Sims-Williams, N., ‘The Sogdian Fragments of the British Library’, Indo-Iranian journal, XVIII, (1976), 43–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar, text (Fragments 5 and 6) tr. P.50.

^{page 438 note 4} Henning, W., ‘The Murder of the Magi’, journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, (1944), 133–44, text tr. p. 141.Google Scholar

^{page 439 note 1} Kephalaia, p. 7.

^{page 439 note 2} Kephalaia, ch. cLN, tr, in Lieu, , op. cit. p. 61Google Scholar, ‘He e.ho has his Church in the West, he and his Church have not reached the East: the choice of him who has chosen his Church in the East has not come to the West … But my hope, mine will go towards the West, and she will go towards the East. And they shall hear the voice of her message in all languages and shall proclaim her in all cities. My Church is superior in this first point to previous churches, for these previous churches were chosen in particular countries and in particular cities. My Church, mine shall spread in all cities and my Gospel shall touch every country’.

^{page 440 note 1} M 5794, tr. Asmussen, , p. 12Google Scholar, which starts off like the previous Kephalaia text ‘the primeval religions were in one country and one language. But my religion is of the kind that it will be manifest in every country, and in all languages, and it will be taught in far-away countries’.

^{page 440 note 2} Ibid.

^{page 441 note 1} M 95, text tr. Asmussen, , pp. 79–80Google Scholar, being part of the Govishn ig griv zingag (‘The Speech of the Living Self’) hymn cycle.

^{page 441 note 2} M 28 I text tr. Asmussen, , pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

^{page 442 note 1} Text tr. Henning, W., ‘The Book of the Giants’, Bulletin of the School of Orien and African Studies (BSOAS, 1943), 52–74, at pp. 73–4.Google Scholar As one of the seven canonical books written by Mani himself to ensure future doctrinal purity, this fragment from it has even greater interest for us.

^{page 442 note 2} Although some of the Zoroastrian figures like Mithra are nothing else but the old Iranian gods, in Strict Zoroastrian theology all such figures ‘worthy of worship’ (literal sense of yazata) were derived through various evocations ofAhura Mazda. See Boyce, M., Zoroastrians. Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (London, 1979), pp. 21–4Google Scholar for ‘the heptad and the seven creations’ doctrine in Zoroastrianism.

^{page 443 note 1} Various fragments collected by Mackenzie, D., Mani's, Šābuhragān, BSOAS, XLII, (1979), 500–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar and XLIII, (1980), 288–310, giving 9 folios of 432 ‘nearly complete lines’. Passage, tr. p. 289.

^{page 443 note 2} Tr. Ibid. p. 507.

^{page 443 note 3} Tr. Ibid. p. 513.

^{page 443 note 4} Tr. Ibid. p. 517.

^{page 443 note 5} Khvastvanift, tr. Asmussen, , pp. 69–77Google Scholar, passage (VIII A) tr. p. 73. General analysis of these related concepts ‘central to Mani's teaching’ given, together with succinct Chinese Manichaean texts, in Lieu, , op. cit pp. 8–22.Google Scholar

^{page 444 note 1} Useful synopsis of the Manichaean pantheon, complete with its various terms and figures used in different languages and cultures given in Tardieu, M., Le Manichéisme (Paris, 1981), pp. 104–7Google Scholar, from which the Zoroastrian figures have been here extracted.

^{page 444 note 2} See fn. 5 for M 7 tr. Ironically in Zoroastrianism, Sraosha was at times seen as a defender of the Zoroastrian faith against Mani's ‘false doctrines’, see Kreyenbroek, G., Sraosa in the Zoroastrian Tradition (Leiden, 1985), p. 124.Google Scholar

^{page 444 note 3} Interesting studies by Boyce, , ‘On Mithra in the Manichaean Pantheon’, A Locust's Leg. Studies in Honour of S. H. Tagizadeh (London, 1962), pp. 44–54Google Scholar; Gershevitch, I., ‘Die sonne das beste’, Mithraic Studies, ed. Hinnells, J. (Manchester, 1975), pp. 68–89Google Scholar; Sundermann, W., ‘Some Remarks on Mithra in the Manichaean Pantheon’, Acta Iranica (1978), 485–98.Google Scholar

^{page 444 note 4} Tr. Asmussen, , pp. 124–5.Google Scholar

^{page 444 note 5} Tr. Ibid. p. 134.

^{page 445 note 1} Tr. Ibid. pp. 140–1.

^{page 445 note 2} S 9 tr. Ibid. pp. 133–4.

^{page 446 note 1} M 5815 I tr. Ibid. pp. 57–8. This was part of a ‘letter’ from Mani to Mar Ammon his ‘Apostle to the East’. Asmussen sees it as a later fictitious account (pia fraus’), from the Dinawwariyah Manichaean tradition that was dominant in East Iranian and Central Asian circles. Similar sentiments are to be found in the Manichaean Pothi-Book ‘Hymn to Mani’, e.g. ‘Oh, bright Sun-God, Oh, mighty Moon-God, Like the diadem of the God, Ohrmizd (Xormuzta), Like the garland of the God, Zurvan (Azrua, Sogdian' zrw), Shining to see is my father, the Prophet Mani. Thus, and in that way, I praise and worship you… You are worthy to be carried on the flat crowns of the heads of the former Prophets. Thus I praise and worship you’. Tr. Clarke, L., ‘The Manichaean Turkic Pothi-Book’, Altorientalische Forschungen IX, (1982) 145–218, passage tr. p. 188.Google Scholar

^{page 446 note 2} Mackenzie, , Mani's, Šābuhragān, glossary, p. 304Google Scholar, for various mentions.

^{page 446 note 3} Tardieu, , Le Manichéisme, p. 103Google Scholar for Manichaean demonology in various languages.

^{page 446 note 4} Mackenzie, , Mani's, Šābuhragān, pass. tr. p. 515.Google Scholar

^{page 447 note 1} Ibid.

^{page 447 note 2} Ibid. pass. tr. p. 301. The Middle Persian S 9 (see fn. 1) contained similar graphic descriptions, e.g. ‘Angry became Āz, that evil mother of all demons … of the dirt(?) of the demons and of the filth of the she-demons she made this body, and she herself entered it … she created the body and prison and fettered the grieved soul … firmly she fettered the soul into the fraudulent body; and she made it hateful and evil’. Āz was known in Zoroastrian demonology, but originally more as the spiritual failing of ‘Wrong Mindedness’, see Hinnells, , Persian Mythology (London, 1973), p. 52Google Scholar, where she is the evil counterpart to Vohu Manah ‘Good Mind’. Manichaean usage invested her with the extra qualities surrounding in particular concupiscence. This Manichaean adjustment of Āz then seems to have made its ways into Zurvanite Zoroastrian literature of the Sasanian period, a transmission discussed by Zaehner, R., The Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism (London, 1961), pp. 223–33.Google Scholar

^{page 448 note 1} Widengren, G., The Great Vohu Manah and the Apostle of God. Studies in Iranian and Manichaean Religion (Uppsala, 1945)Google Scholar, for respective usages.

^{page 448 note 2} M 221, tr. Asmussen, , pp. 35–6.Google Scholar

^{page 448 note 3} Boyce, , Textual Sources for the Study of Zoroastrianism (Manchester, 1984), pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

^{page 449 note 1} Tr. as Fragment 4 in Sims-Williams, , ‘The Sogdian Fragments …’, pp. 46–7.Google Scholar Interestingly enough there is another fragment (13, tr. Ibid. pp. 56–8) which having the similar distinctive form of cursive is seen by Sims-Williams, as (p. 46)Google Scholar ‘in fact probably the work of the same scribe’. This is a broken-off account of the Iranian hero Rustem fighting against demons, which indicates Manichaean willingness yet again to use popular Iranian figures, be they of Zoroastrian or ‘secular’ origin.

^{page 449 note 2} Gershevitch, Appendix, following Sims-William's, preceding main article, pp. 75–82.Google Scholar

^{page 449 note 3} As tr. in Boyce, , Textual Sources…, p. 57.Google Scholar

^{page 450 note 1} Text tr. Henning, , ‘Sogdian Tales’, BSOAS (1945), 465–87, at pp. 476–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 450 note 2} Ibid.

^{page 450 note 3} Menog i Khrad, ch. 2, tr. Boyce, , Textual Sources …, pp. 82–3.Google Scholar

^{page 450 note 4} Text tr. Jackson, , op. cit. p. 21.Google Scholar

^{page 450 note 5} Boyce, , Zoroastrians–, pp. 68–70Google Scholar, 112–13, 117–20, 122, 160–1, for general comments, idem.Textual Sources…, pp. 99 for Zurvanite texts.

^{page 451 note 1} Manushchir, an ‘orthodox’ high priest of Shiraz and Kirman, upbraided his Zurvanite-inclined brother Zatspram in these words, ‘You should know that were to speak in the assembly of the Tughazghuz (i.e. the Manichaean sympathizing Uighurs) you would find few to contradict you’. Epistles of Manushchir 2.1.12, tr, Zaehner, , op. cit, p. 194.Google Scholar

^{page 451 note 2} E.g. Middle Persian and Parthian M 801 hymn, ‘You are beaming, cheerful picture, like the sun, you leader of the truth, of the same form as God Zurvan’, tr. Asmussen, , p. 67.Google Scholar

^{page 451 note 3} Yasna 30 verses tr. Boyce, , Textual Sources …, p. 35.Google Scholar

^{page 451 note 4} See fn. I.

^{page 452 note 1} See fn. I, passage (I C) tr. pp. 69–70.

^{page 452 note 2} E.g. Fracarane Creed ( = part of rasna 12) verse 4. tr. Boyce, , Textual Sources…, pp. 57–8.Google Scholar

^{page 452 note 3} See fn. 1.

^{page 452 note 4} Exemplified in the Great Bundahishn, ch, 34 concerning the final resurrection of the physical body and generally the good renewed physical creation of Ahura Mazda, tr. Boyce, , Textual Sources…, pp. 52–3.Google Scholar

^{page 453 note 1} Mackenzie, , Mani's, Šābuhragān, p. 511Google Scholar; the Parthian M 2 II described of that final victory of Good how ‘the earth, the dwelling place of the enemies, we have overthrown and filled up and above we have built the light fundament of the New Aeon’, tr. Asmussen, , pp. 135–7.Google Scholar

^{page 453 note 2} M 16 passage tr. Jackson, , op. cit. p. 17.Google Scholar

^{page 454 note 1} Sims-Williams, , ‘The Sogdian Fragments of Leningrad’, BSOAS, (1981), 231–40, passage tr. p. 238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 454 note 2} A Manichaean Psalmbook, ed. and tr. Allberg, C. (Stuttgart, 1938), passage from psalm 255 tr. Part n, pp. 14–18.Google Scholar

^{page 454 note 3} M 6031 passage tr. Asmussen, , p. 55.Google Scholar

^{page 454 note 4} See study by Hinz, W., ‘Mani and Karder’, La Persia nel Medioevo (Rome, 1971), pp. 485–99Google Scholar for this confrontation.

^{page 454 note 5} Psalmbook, psalm 241, tr. Part n, pp. 42–7.

^{page 454 note 6} Manichäische Homilien, see fn. 1, passage tr. p. 26.

^{page 455 note 1} Scott, D., ‘Manichaean Views on Buddhism’, History of Religions XXV, (1985), 99–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Klimkeit, H.-J., ‘Jesus' Entry into Parinirvana: Manichaean Identity in Buddhist Central Asia’, Numen, XXXIII, (1987), 225–40.Google Scholar

^{page 456 note 1} One particular additional facet does immediately present itself: namely whether Mani and/or later Manichaean writers used the Zoroastrian concept of the future saviour (Saoshyant) in connection with Mani's own coming. We have no material still extant on this, but given Manichaean use of analogous Christian (e.g. the Coptic styling of Mani as the Paraclete) and Buddhist (e.g. Parthian styling of Mani as the Buddha Maitreya) future saviour figures, then a similar adoption from Zoroastrianism would be more than logical.

^{page 456 note 2} Renwick, A. and Swinburn, I., Basic Political Concepts, (London, 1980), p. 152Google Scholar for a wide definition, namely ‘Politics has at its roots conflict between individuals, or groups, about how problems are to be resolved and the methods to be used’, i.e. (p. 11) ‘the process of solving conflicts, whether at home, in schools, or at a national level, is a political process. Groups, individuals, and nations may have different ideas about what type of change is necessary’. Thus politics is not just to be found at a government level, but wherever differences between peoples or (e.g. religious) groups are to be found. As such terms like ‘authority’, ‘legitimacy’ are political concepts found throughout society, and illustrated in our present study. See also Weber, M., The Sociology of Religion (London, 1965)Google Scholar, passim, for considerations on concepts like ‘authority’ ‘legitimacy’, etc., across religious boundaries.

^{page 456 note 3} Frye, R., ‘Notes on the Early Sasanian State and Church’, Studi Orientalistici in Onore di Giorgio Levi Della Vida (Rome, 1956), vol. I. pp. 314–35Google Scholar; Klimkeit, H. J., ‘Manichaean Kingship: Gnosis at Home in the World’, Numen, XXIX, 1 (1982), 17–32, esp. pp. 18–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar for ‘Manichaean kings in Iran and adjacent areas’.

^{page 457 note 1} See specifically Chaumont, M.-L., ‘L'inscription de Kartir à la Kabah de Zoroastre’, journal Asiatique, CCXLVIII, (1960), 341–80Google Scholar; Brunner, C. J., ‘The Middle Persian Inscription of the Priest Kirder at Naqs-i Rustam’. Studies in Honour of C. Miles (ed. Beirut, D. Kouymjian, 1974), pp. 97–113.Google Scholar More generally see Scott, , ‘Zoroastrian Responses to Hinduism, Past and Present. The Interaction of Religion and Politics’, Temenos, Helsinki, due to be published in 1988.Google Scholar

^{page 457 note 2} In a theological sense Manichaeism represented a schism and reformulation on different principles of Iranian dualism that had developed in the shape of Zoroastrianism. Krejci, J., ‘Religion and Civilisation. Iran and China as Two Test Cases of Mutual Inter-dependence and Development’, Ching Feng (Hong Kong, 1976), pp. 3–11Google Scholar, for an interesting study of the various permutations available (and rejected) by Iranian Zoroastrianism.