Khollan Vafa : اخوان صفا: Zoroastrianism in China

Ad by Honeywell Aerospace

We get tech support right the first time.

Time is of the essence when you need tech support. We strive to get you the best solution the first time.

2 Answers

Zartusht Ashavan, I am a Zoroastrian interested in the history of religions

Answered Sep 6 2018 · Author has 479 answers and 837.1k answer views

Q: What is the history of Zoroastrianism in China?

Thank you for this question about Zoroastrianism in China, or the religion Hsien-Chiao (“Worship of the Heavenly One”) of the Prophet Suluzhi (Zarathushtra) as it was known in China.

It seems that the first Zoroastrians, Sogdians, established Zoroastrian colonies in China during the early 4th century CE, although trade contacts between Iranians and Chinese existed even earlier. During the 6th century CE Zoroastrianism became an officialy recognized religion in the northern China. The first Zoroastrian temples for Sogdians were established (on...

Related QuestionsMore Answers Below

Matthew Nghiem, Middle Kingdom enthusiast

Updated Jun 3, 2019 · Author has 88 answers and 2.8m answer views

Introduction

Zoroastrianism first came to China by way of the famous Silk Road during the early 4th century, having been brought over by a successive series of Sogdian merchants.

The Sogdians were an Iranian peoples who excelled at trade and commerce and so had wished to completely dominate trade all along the Silk Road. Based on this logic, they founded a series of settlements and trading outposts in Northwestern China near what is today Dunhuang (敦煌市), thus beginning the history of Zoroastrianism in China.

The “Sogdian Deities” (粟特神祇白畫), a 10th century Chinese painting which depicted the Zoroastrian concepts of “Daēnā” (Revelation), left, and “Daēva” (Personified Evil), right:

Prompted by subsequent influxes of immigrants to Dunhuang, China’s first Zoroastrian fire temple was constructed during the 4th century in order to appease the Sogdian faithful, who by that time had quickly become a significant force within the Middle Kingdom, both in terms of commercial (eg. a Chinese customs register had recorded a Sogdian involvement in no less than 80% of all incoming trading caravans) and non-commercial importance, and so by this logic could not be ignored by Chinese authorities forever.

And in the context of a Zoroastrian influence in the Middle Kingdom, this was a good thing. For despite being a monotheistic religion similar to say Christianity, or its future rival Islam, the faith strongly disapproved of proselytization. There were no missionaries operating in China to that extent, unlike with Nestorianism - another faith popular amongst the Sogdians - which was comparatively more aggressive in its efforts to convert the unbeliever. Mazdaism therefore, mostly grew proportional to the amount of foreigners who immigrated to China, rather than from conversions to the faith.

Zoroastrianism During the Tang Dynasty

With the advent of the cosmopolitan Chinese “Golden Age” the Tang Dynasty (618–907) however, Zoroastrianism begun to finally pick up after hundreds of years of relative dormancy. Spurred onward by the great tolerance of the Chinese State to that extent, foreigners from all over came to live in the Celestial Empire, leading to either the introduction or further spreading of all faiths, whether old or new alike. Zoroastrianism was to benefit greatly to that extent, when waves of Sogdian and Uyghur faithful then came to China, in order to trade and live both.

This was such that by the heights of the Tang Empire during the mid-700s, entire sections of China’s most cosmopolitan cities, came to include ethnic based quarters designed specifically to cater to their needs, amongst which cultural and religious matters were of paramount importance.

A funerary couch from northern China depicting a Zoroastrian rite, in which a soul can be seen crossing the “Bridge of the Requiter”, which separates the world of the living from the world of the dead:

This “foreignization” of China’s metropolises was most noticeable amongst the Chinese capital, Chang’an, whereby the city’s entire Northwestern district, the Yining Quarter (義寧坊) was comprised significantly of Sogdian and Turkic immigrants. The same albeit to a lesser extent, proved true also for the capital’s East-Central district in addition. Thus in accordance with Chinese tolerance and multiculturalism, the Imperial Government eventually authorized the construction in Chang’an of no less than four Zoroastrian fire temples.

Three came to be located in the city’s northwest, whilst the last was built in the capital’s center-east. In addition to this, two fire temples were also constructed in the Tang secondary capital of Luoyang, and were promptly joined by further places of worship in Kaifeng, in addition to a number of other cities along the road to the Chinese Empire’s northwest. Indeed, per one claim, Northern China alone at one stage was purported to host no less than 29 Zoroastrian fire temples. By that stage, Mazdaism could not be said to be neither small in adherence nor influence therefore.

Even so, the spreading of the faith on the other hand was almost certainly restricted from reaching its full potential however. The Imperial Government to that extent, despite wholly tolerating the teaching’s existence (the Chinese had recognized it as an official religion for approximately 200 years by the mid-700s), not only prohibited the Zoroastrians from spreading their religion, but also made it illegal for any native Tang citizen, to convert to the “Heaven Worship Teaching” (祆教) as the Chinese called it. Which when compared to the lack of restrictions on Sino citizens converting to Nestorianism or Islam, certainly seems unnecessarily harsh by stark contrast.

Despite a “live and let live” attitude amongst the Chinese as such, Zoroastrianism was viewed rather indifferently if not negatively for the most part by Tang citizens, who understood it as little more than “the foreigner’s religion”, and was thus “unfit” for native adherence. This is reinforced by the incriminating fact, that whilst Chinese authors wrote many books on the Nestorian and Manichaen faiths both during the Tang Dynasty, this was not the case for Mazdaism by stark contrast, which even to this day has been found to be comparatively lacking.

The apparent Chinese disregard of Zoroastrianism (perhaps counter-intuitively) was not unheard of in a tolerant society such as that of the Tang, which was certainly no stranger to the many past incidents of outright xenophobia and discrimination towards ethnic minorities (particularly in Chang’an) over the years. Foreigners inclusive to Zoroastrians, were strongly discouraged from marrying Chinese women to that extent, based on the official government rationale of “protection”.

Which was why the Sogdians and Uyghurs were even living in pre-designated districts of the Tang capital in the first place: because they had been forced to by the ethnic majority, who were quick to segregate racial minorities upon their arrival in the Chinese Empire. Even so, this did little to halt the influx of new immigrants from abroad who remained enamored with the majesty of the Middle Kingdom to such an extent, that they kept migrating to China en masse, thereby assisting in the continued growth of Zoroastrianism all the way up until the mid-8th century.

The Faravahar (فروهر), the foremost symbol for Zoroastrianism (presently thought to symbolize a guardian angel, with his two wings divided into three sections in order to represent the faith’s core teachings: “Good Thoughts, Good Words, and Good Deeds”):

Sogdian Zoroastrianism - Names, Organization and Features

Since the Zoroastrian community was mostly cut off from mainstream Tang society, few Chinese citizens knew anything of the foreign teaching save but for two facts: the first being that the faith had originated with Zarathustra (زرتشت‎) or Suluzhi (蘇路支) as they called him, the second being that fire in the Heaven Worship Teaching was a symbol for good. Hence presumably why the Tang Chinese also called Zoroastrianism the “Fire-Worshippers’ Transmission” (拜火教).

This is interesting, as initially during the Three Kingdoms Era (220–65) first, and then during the succeeding Jin Dynasty (265–420), Mazdaism was called Hutian (胡天), a title which the Chinese used to also slander the “barbarians” who dwelt north of the Middle Kingdom. By the times of the early Tang Dynasty however, this was no longer the case, and the Chinese ultimately deposed of this crude title, in favour of an entirely original character which they invented, just so they could give the teachings of Zarathustra a new name, which was that of “Xian” (祆), meaning the “Worship of Heaven”.

Which then of course went on to eventually become Xianjiao - the Heaven Worship Teaching. This was one way in which Zoroastrianism influenced Chinese society during the Tang Dynasty as such. Anecdotal literature would also suggest, that the Chinese were greatly impressed with Zoroastrianism’s ritual dances, and consequentially begun to associate the faith’s fire temples with feats of conjuring. This was another influence of the teaching on Chinese society.

Aside from that, Zoroastrianism in China much like its Nestorian counterpart, was also formally organized, and had been so since the times of the Northern Qi Dynasty (550–77). The crucial difference between the two however, was that the latter was for the most part administered by high ranking ecclesial figureheads (ie. bishops), whilst the former due to its inherent lack of missionaries courtesy of a reluctance to proselytize, meant that Zoroastrianism had to be administered more so by the secular authorities instead.

The Honglusi to that extent, which were a court of Persian established dependencies in the Northern Qi, not only acted as de facto ambassadors to China, but also oversaw Zoroastrian activities within the Middle Kingdom, via a central administrative office called the Sabaofu (薩寶府). And like their Christian counterpart, Zoroastrian operations in China were also divided into individual parishes (薩甫) for ease of manageability.

A carved tomb panel (592) from the sarcophagus of a “sabao” or “caravan leader”, one of the administrators of Zoroastrianism in China:

As for China’s Zoroastrian fire temples themselves, what little we do know about them would suggest that they were constructed so that one would enter the from the west, in order to worship whilst facing toward the east. Inside the fire temples of Chang’an, each had no less than 20 high altars. An idol lay on top of each altar, and academics suspect in hindsight that some of these may have been sculptures of Zurvan, the Zoroastrian god of time (the Sogdian practice of Zoroastrianism was not necessarily monotheistic), that was infused with the Hindu god Brahma.

Similarly, the idol of Zoroastrianism’s God, Ahura Mazda was believed to have been fused with elements of another Hindu deity Indra, in addition to Mithras, the deity of the Roman religion, Mithraism. During memorial days in addition, the Zoroastrians who lived in the Tang Dynasty, were known to stew beef and mutton in a broth, which they consumed before singing and dancing with drums to celebrate.

But on the other hand, the Sogdians were also said to have practiced next of kin marriages in accordance with their Zoroastrian beliefs. This is currently disputed by one scholar however, who has noted that such an assumption, would be difficult to prove with absolute certainty since Sogdian family titles were named only after their hometowns back in Sogdiana. Regardless, from a Tang Chinese perspective even the possibility of a permanent union between two individuals of a similar family name, was enough to imply intermarriage which in Imperial China (221 BC-1912 AD) was considered to be a most disgusting contravention of basic morality, and thus naturally was condemned.

The Zoroastrians were also perceived by the Tang Chinese, to be highly promiscuous at least when compared to their Nestorian or Manichean counterparts. There was no sense of asceticism for one, which left Chinese observers with an impression that the followers of the Heaven Worship Teaching were comparatively more “sex positive”, or at the very least amorous relative to the average Tang citizen. In addition to this, at the time it was already an established conception, that ethnic minority women foremost amongst which were Sogdians (and later Persians, who fled the Islamization of the Middle-East), tended to work as hostesses in bars all across Chang’an.

The famous Tang poet Li Bai (李白), is said to have contributed greatly to the propagation of this stereotype, by making the lusty Sogdian female, a common recurring theme in his compositions. Following on from Li’s exemplar, Chinese literature henceforth came to interpret Zoroastrianism as being synonymous to adultery. A popular saying which was eventually conceived hundreds of years afterwards, “the Xian temple (Zoroastrian temple) catching fire” (火燒祆廟), was in fact based on this very stereotype of the hypersexualized Zoroastrian worshipper.

An artist’s impression of the “Sogdian Whirl”, a rigorous, twirling form of dance which eventually came to take the Tang Court by storm, and was introduced by the Sogdian peoples:

Persian Zoroastrianism in Tang China

Mazdaism in the Middle Kingdom then took a turn for the better, with the collapse of a centuries long Chinese ally the Shahdom of Sasan (224–651), at the hands of the mighty Rashidun Caliphate (632–61), during the mid-7th century.

When Islamic forces took over the last Zoroastrian empire therefore, thousands of Persian citizens in addition to the entire royal family, fled east in 637 towards Central Asia in the hopes of gathering support for their cause but alas, amongst all the great noble families of the shahdom there was not even one, brave enough to assist the dying House of Sasan (ساسان) in their efforts, to take back Ctesiphon - the Sassanid capital - from caliphate hands. By the time that the royal family had reached the eastern edges of their empire in the year 651 as such, they were entirely spent and wholly defeated.

Such misery was then only further exacerbated, when the last shah of the Empire, Yazdgerd III (یزدگرد) was brutally murdered in front of his family by a common miller, merely for his purse. Yazdgerd was survived by his son, Prince Peroz who whilst only 15 at the time was forced to take up his father’s mantle regardless as “Shahanshah” - the King of Kings (شاهنشاه‎), thereby ascending to the exiled throne as Peroz III (پیروز). The young king escaped, but a price was subsequently levied on his head, ensuring that the new shah would never be able to find peace wheresoever he journeyed to, not as long as the Caliphate had had some influence there. He desired protection, but alas where could such ever be found?

And then he remembered: the alliance with China - for nearly 800 years to that extent, the various Chinese states had been extremely welcoming to the Persian imperium. Peroz’s own sister in fact, had been married off to the Chinese emperor prior to his own birth. And what of its power? Such that it even rivalled that of Rome or Constantinople itself according to his own father. Therefore, if there was only one place left where his life could be spared from a series of never ending assassination attempts, and the remnants of his people made safe also, it could only be with the Celestial Empire, of this he was most certain.

Thus it was, that Peroz, the exiled Shah of Sasan, then made his way further east to China, where after years of travel, he finally arrived at the Tang Court in the year 670. And there, he was received warmly by the Emperor Gaozong (唐高宗).

An artist’s impression of the Battle of al-Qadisiyyah, where defeat ultimately heralded the end of Zoroastrian Persia:

A great admirer of Persian civilization, upon meeting with the shah, Emperor Gaozong embraced Peroz as if he were his own flesh and blood, going so far as to even call him “brother”.

Such kindness was then quickly returned by the exiled king, who out of respect refrained from looking directly into the eyes of the Tang sovereign. He then also promptly fell to his knees. Not to be outdone however, Gaozong quickly stepped off his throne in response, and lowering himself down to the shah’s level, said:

“You have come a long way. Have no more fears. For you are my brother and this is your new home.”

In light of this initial meeting, Gaozong not only permitted the royal family to stay indefinitely in China, but also did the same for all incoming Persian refugees which soon imminently followed, amongst their number of which were nobles, “Magi” (Zoroastrian priests) and commoners alike.

According to one estimate to that extent, the Chinese ultimately opened their borders to no less than 1 million asylum seekers from Persia for the sake of their Sassanian allies, before resettling them in cities all across the Empire, including but not limited to Chang’an, Luoyang, Kaifeng, Yangzhou and Taiyuan to name a few. This was how it came to be, that the number of Zoroastrians within the Middle Kingdom then grew rapidly, prompting additional fire temples to be constructed in southwestern China’s Quizhou and Xizhou metropolises.

Alas, Peroz did not wish to stay in China his entire life however and soon quickly revealed to Gaozong the real reason for his arrival: military assistance. But even this too, was quickly granted by the Chinese emperor, and soon the Tang Dynasty found themselves pitted against the newly risen Umayyad Caliphate (661–750) on behalf of their Persian allies. The Chinese themselves did not intervene directly, however they supplied the remnant Persian forces with military equipment in addition to an entire battalion of men, before stationing them on the Western most edges of their empire near what is today Pakistan, where Peroz spent the rest of his days perpetually harassing Islamic forces, wining battles here and there.

Ultimately, the Persians were unsuccessful in their campaign to reconquer their former homes (albeit they achieved some success in regards to the empire’s former eastern borders around Khorasan), and so were forced to remain in Tang China from that moment onwards. Then nearing death by the year 679, the king requested an audience with all who were dear to him, wishing to deliver a final speech. The entire royal family, all Persian exiles, and the Chinese emperor himself subsequently turned up in response.

Beginning his speech, the Shahanshah Peroz III looked west and proclaimed:

“I have done what I could for my homeland and I have no regrets.”

Then he faced east and confessed:

“I am grateful to China, my new homeland.”

And then at last, turning to his family and to his people, the dying king ordered:

“Contribute your talents and devote it to the emperor. We are no longer Persians. We are now Chinese.”

Then with the end of the speech, the shah peacefully passed. The Chinese honoured his achievements by having a horse ride around his corpse 33 times, as this was how many battles he was said to have won against the Umayyad Caliphate.

The Qianling Mausoleum (乾陵), where the corpses of Emperor Gaozong and Shah Peroz III rests (the inscription reads: “Peroz, King of Iran, crowned in the Tang court: Commander-in-chief of the Iranian Army, Martial General of the Right Flank Guards, Awe-inspiring General of the Left Flank Guards”):

The Decline of Zoroastrianism in the Tang Dynasty

Peroz III’s final words eventually turned out to be prophetic to a certain extent, as before long like with many other faiths, Mazdaism in addition to its followers, the Zoroastrians (and not just the Persian peoples) would find themselves wholly assimilated into Chinese culture. Buddhism which came before, and was under the reign of Empress Wu Zetian (武則天) made the state ideology of the Tang, had previously undergone this treatment. Nestorianism similarly by the 9th century, was fused with Taoist and Buddhist elements. And by the late-1300s, both Islam and Judaism had also blended into Chinese society for one reason or another.

Zoroastrianism to that extent was not exempt from this wave of pro-Chinese assimilation. It was however perhaps accelerated to an extent, with the outbreak and conclusion of the infamous An Lushan Rebellion (755–63) on the other hand. In that particular case, an overly ambitious Tang general who had foolishly been given control over 40% of China’s 500,000 strong army, rebelled against the Imperial Government thereby launching the entire country into civil war. When the conflict had ended, 36 million or almost half the population were dead. Predictably for those who had survived, these few were not in a forgiving mood thereafter and so quickly found a scapegoat for the cause of the Rebellion: foreigners.

Indeed, on that premise they pointed out that An Lushan (安禄山) himself was a foreigner of Sogdian and Turkic descent. When you let immigrants into the country that was what they did, the Tang people came to argue. They destroyed Chinese greatness, ruined Chinese culture and murdered Chinese people. Was there any good reason for them still to remain as such? No, there was none.

In the ensuing decades which followed therefore, Tang racism accelerated and foreigners became less and less appreciated with each passing decade. Thousands upon thousands of Arabs and Persians were indiscriminately murdered during the Yangzhou Massacre (760) to that extent, based on this rising Chinese hatred for all things foreign. Once open as such, the Middle Kingdom was now closed.

And in the context of Zoroastrians, this had a rather desperate effect on the adherents of the Heaven Worship Teaching, who sought to escape harm’s way by any means necessary. Bucking social stigmas therefore, many Zoroastrians attempted to marry Chinese women in order to gain acceptance under the “New Regime”. Subsequently, they downplayed their foreign heritage and begun to adopt elements of Chinese culture in their practice of the Zoroastrian faith, a trend which was to only intensify with each passing year over the next 12 centuries of the religion’s on and off presence in the Middle Kingdom. Further attacks eventually also convinced 3,000 Zoroastrian Magus to become laymen.

An 8th century Tang clay figurine of an ethnic Sogdian Zoroastrian priest:

The efforts of the Zoroastrians to assimilate into Tang society ultimately did not pay off however, and this was quickly made clear post the assumption of Emperor Wuzong (唐武宗) to power in 840. Prompted by Confucian intellectuals such as Han Yu (韓愈), who were concerned at the effect that foreign religions foremost amongst which existed Buddhism were having on social harmony to that extent, Wuzong subsequently led a great crackdown on foreign religions in 845 AD.

This event eventually became known as the “Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution” (會昌毀佛), so called because it initially only targeted Buddhism. Given however that the emperor himself was known to be a devout Taoist and thus a staunch advocate of native Chinese values, this could never strictly be the case however and so ultimately was not. In time, a case was made against the other foreign faiths of China also, foremost amongst which were Manichaeism, Nestorianism and Zoroastrianism, thereby forcing Emperor Wuzong to move quickly against them, when he extended the fury of the Imperial Court on these particular religions too.

Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism were in this way mostly ousted from Chinese society henceforth, whilst Nestorianism on the other hand was sent into a 400 year long decline. Islam meanwhile had kept a low profile, and was thus spared. From Tang records which existed at the time, the Chinese claimed that the State persecution of Zoroastrianism and Christianity was wholly “legitimate” in nature because both teachings were considered to be merely Buddhist derived heresies, and were thus fit for persecution to be extended towards under the scope of the edicts, which had proclaimed:

“As for the Daqin (Nestorian) and Muhu (Zoroastrian) forms of worship, since Buddhism has already been cast out, these heresies alone must not be allowed to survive. People belonging to these also are to be compelled to return to the world, belong again to their own districts, and become taxpayers. As for foreigners, let them be returned to their own countries, there to suffer restraint.”

The subsequent decades during the last years of the Tang Dynasty were even worse however for the followers of the Heaven Worship Teaching, with the advent of the infamous Guangzhou Massacre (879), in which anywhere from 120–200,000 Muslim Arabs, Persians, Jews, Zoroastrians, and Christians were murdered by the Chinese rebel leader Huang Chao (黃巢), as recounted by the Baptist missionary magazine (1869):

“Foreigners have at different periods settled in China; but after remaining for a time, they have been massacred. For instance, Mohammedans and others settled at Canton in the ninth century; and in 889, it is said that 120,000 foreign settlers were massacred.”

An artist’s impression of Huang Chao and his rebels rallying together shortly prior to the slaughter of thousands of foreigners including Zoroastrians, during the Guangzhou Massacre (廣州大屠殺):

Zoroastrianism During the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Era

Despite all the troubles which had been inflicted onto it during the last years of the Tang Dynasty, Zoroastrianism continued to survive well into the Five Dynasties, Ten Kingdoms era (907–60), albeit now merely as a shadow of its former self.

Lacking the benefits of both a unified and cosmopolitan China as was the case under the rule of the Tang, “sinicized” Zoroastrianism - the likes of which was practiced until as recently as the 1940s, - was further improved upon during this period of civil infighting. The gods of Sogdian Zoroastrianism were eventually infused into Chinese Folk religion in this way.

Even so, what is believed to be the world’s earliest surviving Avestan manuscript written in the Sogdian language, a Zoroastrian prayer called the “Ashem Vohu”, has its origins in this Chinese historical period. The text itself was written in standard 9th century Sogdian using the Avestan script, with Zarathustra addressing God supreme. The preface to the text on the other hand, which is comprised of only two lines was written in a dialect which is similar to that of Achaemenid Old Persian. Notably, the manuscript precedes the next earliest Avestan texts (which were found in Iran and India) by no less than 300 years.

The Ashem Vohu - the world’s earliest known Avestan manuscript in Sogdian (discovered by a Taoist monk at Dunhuang, in 1900 and today housed at the British Library):

Similarly, the “Princess Jun Zhezhe Letter”, another artefact relating to the Chinese Zoroastrianism also dates back to roughly around the Five Dynasties, Ten Kingdoms era, and according to the British Library which currently has the relic in its possession, “…provides rare evidence of Zoroastrianism in tenth century Dunhuang.”

The letter itself was written by a Uyghur noblewoman to her friend Madame Sikong, mistress of the North House, which according to a book published by the British Library “mentions lighting a fire in the Zoroastrian Fire Temple in order 'to bring prosperity along the road’.”

The letter written by Princess Jun Zhezhe as can be seen in the British Library to this day:

Either during the 5 Dynasties, 10 Kingdoms era or prior to it in the Tang Dynasty, some scholars have proposed that Zoroastrianism may have possibly also spread to both Korea and Japan from China.

With regards to the former for instance, a series of burial tombs dating between the 7th and the 9th centuries was recently uncovered in the Korean peninsular’s southeast, which contained a series of sculptures resembling that of ethnic Sogdians. Whilst this by itself does not conclusively prove that Zoroastrianism was transmitted to Korea via China, or even transmitted period, certainly does however leave open that very possibility.

In the case of Japan on the other hand, one particular scholar has attempted to prove that certain words in Old Japanese language were actually Pahlavi loan-words. Following on from this assertion, the scholar reasoned that the Sassanian refugees who came to China seeking the intervention of the Imperial Court, must have reached Japan also. In recent times, the theory has become so popular in Japan, that renowned author Seicho Matsumoto even adopted in his historical fiction novels. Similarly, others interpret the existence of a series of mysterious remains, to mean that Ancient Japan must have had Zoroastrian roots some time in the past. Still, current Japanese academia has yet to endorse such allegations.

Zoroastrianism During the Song, Yuan and Ming Dynasties

Mazdaism continued under the Song Dynasty (960–1279) also, but by then had assimilated into Chinese culture to such a degree by the 1100s, that it was now barely recognizable relative to the original Sogdian interpretation.

Still, there were a few advantages of sinicized Zoroastrianism, one of which was the adding of new converts amongst the native Chinese, which lay in stark contrast to the Tang Dynasty decades prior in which the faith had been viewed as most inappropriate for a Chinese citizen to take up. Now rather, even members of the Imperial Family were purported to have adopted the Zoroastrian faith. Thus eventually, Chinese Zoroastrianism was recognized by the Imperial Government as just another native religion, and was thus given legal parity with the Middle Kingdom’s “Three Teachings” (三教): Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism, the national ideologies of the Song Empire.

The sinicization of Mazdaism was also clear, when we consider how the faith came to be organized under the Song, relative to the Tang before it. Previously as mentioned, a series of foreign secular administrations, the Sabaofu were tasked with managing and organizing the faith (which was natural considering that all its adherents were foreigners). By the times of the Song however, the Chinese Government had usurped the right of foreign powers to administer the Zoroastrian faith in China, and instead placed it under the charge of the “Ministry of Rites” (禮部), which hitherto had had the responsibility of managing all religions in the Celestial Empire.

The sole exception was with one particular fire temple in Northern China however, which was managed by the Shi (史) Family, who were ethnic Sogdians. In this case, the Ministry of Rites had delegated their responsibilities onto the Shi household, but continued to support the family by giving them their permission to perform their daily rituals as required by the faith.

Even so, this in no way meant that “real” Zoroastrianism did not exist in China however, since the Song Court actually came to appreciate the faith for what it was worth, thereby permitting the Persian variant still to be practiced in the Middle Kingdom by visiting merchants, in an effort to return the Empire to its former cosmopolitan self, when it had been under Tang rule. Despite this generosity, the reality was that Zoroastrianism in China was now a dying religion. The majority of fire temples which still existed then, had really been built centuries prior under the Tang.

And so by the times of the Southern Song Dynasty (1127–1279), all mentions of Zoroastrianism in Chinese records and literature both had ceased. This was to continue under Mongol occupied China during the Yuan Empire (1279–1368) also, and it is only towards the end of the dynasty that we see the first mentions of Zoroastrianism in over 200 years. Even then however, it is an indirect mention which concerns itself with the actions of a Buddhist monk turned peasant turned rebel leader called Zhu Yuanzhang (朱元璋), who joined a revolutionary and millenarian sect called the “Red Turbans” (紅巾), which were themselves related to the Zoroastrian inspired “White Lotus Society” (白蓮教).

Zhu Yuanzhang entering the city of Nanjing (1356), during the Red Turban uprising against the Yuan Dynasty:

Otherwise, there were very few further references to Zoroastrianism from the start of the Southern Song, to the fall of the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644).

Zoroastrianism During the Qing Dynasty

Then begun the most recent phase of Zoroastrianism in China, with the arrival of Parsi merchants in 1736, courtesy of the Portuguese Empire (1415–1999). Throughout the 18th century, the Parsis immigrated to cities all along the south China coast, where they then set up ethnic communities in Macao, Hong Kong and Guangzhou. Cemeteries and Zoroastrian fire temples followed naturally in accordance with the religious needs of the newly arrived immigrants.

Like their forebears, the Parsis excelled in trade and this eventually earned them the scorn of several parties, one of which was the Qing Dynasty (1644–1912) itself who complained how “Parsis were the most crafty and greedy amongst all foreign merchants”. The prosperity of the new Zoroastrian community then only continued to draw the ire of the Chinese Government, post the conclusion of the First Opium War (1840–42), when they exploited their status as favoured subjects of the British crown, in order to acquire an immense level of wealth which came directly at the loss of the Middle Kingdom itself.

Several years after in 1847, the Parsis then further vexed the Chinese when they announced plans to construct a Zoroastrian site at Guangzhou for the purposes of ex-carnation. The Qing Chinese disapproved of their intentions however, thereby forcing the Parsis to compromise, leading them to build a burial-style cemetery with stone coffins instead. Sometime thereafter, spurred on by envy and rage, the Zoroastrians were forced to depart from Guangzhou after they were driven out by their jealous Hindu and Jewish rivals.

Subsequently, the Parsis settled in Shanghai instead, where they quickly resettled and constructed another Zoroastrian fire temple by 1866. The temple was characterized by a large gate at its north and a fire altar within. After this, the Zoroastrians were mainly left on their own to worship for the most part, now free from both trial and tribulation.

Zoroastrianism in Modern China

With the proclamation of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 however, persecution against organized religion was quickly back on the agenda, and Zoroastrianism was like all faiths whether foreign or native, singled out for express condemnation.

Fearing for their lives, the Zoroastrians of the People’s Republic quickly departed from Communist China, subsequently arriving in Hong Kong, where they were then reassured by the British authorities that the right to Freedom of Religion still existed in the port city, unlike the land from which they had just departed, where radical anti-theism and totalitarianism now reigned supreme. Shanghai’s Zoroastrian fire temple was destroyed for instance, despite attempts to preserve it during the infamous Cultural Revolution (1966–76), which had sought to liberate China from all influences of the past.

And it would only be after the Chinese Economic Reform (改革开放) of 1978, that a new wave of Parsis then felt safe enough, to return to Mainland China and practice their faith out in the open.

Which then brings us now to the modern era, where as of the early 21st century it is estimated that there are presently 3,000 Zoroastrians in existence still, in contemporary China. The current community though small, is relatively stable. However, since converts to the faith are few in number, it is believed that Mazdaism in the Mainland faces an imminent existential crisis, which is currently forecasted to arrive in the coming decades. It should be noted though that this is an issue which threatens the existence of Zoroastrianism all over the world, and not just in China.

A Zoroastrian rite being performed in contemporary Hong Kong today:

Currently, a few Chinese academics are also attempting to challenge the traditional notion that Zoroastrianism was seldom spread during its centuries long presence in Imperial China. A Professor Lin Wushu to that extent, insists that Zoroastrianism was propagated in pre-modern Chinese society as there was nothing in the scriptures which explicitly prohibited it, from being spread to unbelievers.

Indeed, to further reinforce his contention, Lin also notes how scholars during the dynasties which succeeded the Tang, frequently mentioned that there were many converts amongst the Chinese people. Another academic, Chen Yuan after examining the spreading of the faith during the Chinese Golden Age, concludes that the impact of Zoroastrian faith on Postclassical Sino society was surely “extensive”.

In other news, a tomb complex was also discovered back in 2014 around western China, which raises the possibility that Mazdaism may have in reality began in Central Asia. Up until then, it was taken as common knowledge that the roots of the Zoroastrian faith had been derived from the pre-historic Indo-Iranian religious system, and that only after Zarathustra himself had introduced the faith to what is today China’s Xinjiang province and Tibet autonomous region, that the religion finally appeared in the areas east of Central Asia.

The 2014 findings however, shed doubt on conventional understanding when it was proven firstly from the state of their remains, that the individuals who had been buried here were subjected to a Zoroastrian burial (via excarnation) thereby implying that they were followers of the Mazdaism faith, but secondly, that the bodies themselves were also 2,500 years old - the oldest of its kind in Eurasia. Chinese academics thus argued based on these facts, in addition to the discovery of no less than 7 previous tombs within the same remote western county, aside from another 30 burial chambers within the extended area, raised the possibility of a Zoroastrian faith which in reality began not in Iran, but rather in Central Asia.

Shown below, is one of the 40 tombs discovered around Western China which may prove that Mazdaism was actually founded in Central Asia, and not Persia:

Conclusion (and TL;DR)

Thus, Zoroastrianism has had a fairly long and rich history in China.

The faith which first came by way of Sogdian merchants, was then subsequently uplifted by a successive number of Persian, Uyghur and Sogdian immigrants. The Chinese tolerated the practice of the faith during the Golden Age of the Tang Dynasty, but ultimately felt as though the teachings of Suluzhi, would be best off had it remained a foreigner’s religion. This was not a problem for the Zoroastrians however, as Mazdaism was not inclined to proselytize to the unbeliever, unlike its Nestorian Christian counterpart to cite one example.

Zoroastrianism was then subjected to a brutal wave of persecutions, which begun first with the An Lushan Rebellion and peaked with state intervention during the Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution, based on the premise that the teaching was merely a perversion of Buddhism. Over the succeeding decades, aside from seeing a few prominent converts here and there, and possibly also being spread to Japan and Korea, the faith for the most part was protected and left alone by state authorities, thereby escaping all official mentions from the 1120s onward.

Mazdaism eventually returned to China however, when a wave of Parsi merchants immigrated to the Qing Dynasty around the 1700s. Communities were built and fire temples were set up until at last, the Zoroastrians drew the ire of the State, and of their Jewish and Hindu rivals, which forced them to depart southern China for Shanghai. Still, such resentment was ultimately nothing however when compared to the persecutions which was yet to come, upon the establishment of radical and unchained Communism, which ultimately drove the faith out of the Mainland, and into Hong Kong.

And there it remained (and to a degree still has) until the 1978 reforms of Deng Xiaoping, which prompted the most recent wave of Parsi immigration to begin. Today Zoroastrianism faces many existential difficulties in its effort both to survive and remain relevant, but otherwise is left alone to worship in peace for the most part, by the Chinese authorities and people alike. And there it exists to this day, a mere remnant of a former glory which once was centuries prior.

Sources

4k views · View 88 Upvoters · View Sharers · Answer requested by Ahmad Nisar

Promoted by DuckDuckGo

What's a meaningful resolution I can make (and actually keep) for 2020?

Gabriel Weinberg, CEO/Founder DuckDuckGo. Co-author Super Thinking, Traction.

Answered Dec 13, 2019

You've likely made a resolution in the past that turned out... well, let's just say it didn't turn out so well. 😞

Not this year!

My recommendation? Resolve to take back control of your personal data online. Most people believe that control of their personal data is broken, but don't know ...

(Continue Reading)