Lifestyle of Kerala Syrian Christians

thanks for keeping us updated about every aspect of nasrani way of life.

Sad that most of the life style is becoming extint.

Dear Jackson,
Thanks for your detailed comments. I have interacted with lots of Nasranis but few are really interested in our heritage but for people like you, Xavier, Ampravil Achayan etc.. We have to stay connected (and bonded). We need a commen Vision and our heritage must be ‘Jesus Centered’. If He is not in the center, then we take up a ‘laughable’ cause.

In me there is no problem to keep Jesus in the center and move forward with a Hebrew heritage. But I notice that many Nasrani’s may have a problem here. Simply believing in our Nasrani heritage will not be enough. I dream about a day when the center/main branch of the menorah will be a clear cut cross.

Even if we may not achieve further forward steps, let us atleast hold on to what we already have. I strongly believe that we have to stay in touch and even bond.

You know, I am crazy about the Menonites and the Amish and the Hattarites I always believed that they are exceptionally very good people. Just this morning I was told by a white Canadian that they are ‘good people’. There is decadence all around here in the west, but these people are like roses blooming in garbage. I can not possibly imagine anyone else in this world who can live so buitiful lives. I shake my head in wonder as to how can people live such pure lives? Maybe those in Bhutan can be considered as challengers.

Dear Jackson,

A few months ago, I was introduced to a new phrase ‘Progrssive Revalations’. It means the Christian/Spritiual levels attained by an individual based upon God revealing to him truths step by step. We are unable to take in the full truth as we ‘can not handle’ it. So slowly year by year or generation by generation the truth is told to us.

I think this Nasrani matter has also been a Progressive Revelation to us. An average reader of this forum has now some knowledge of what did and did not happen to our history. I further suspect that the bigger fishes are yet to be caught.. The big fishes may get away but let us try….

Why don’t we make the ‘most illogical and unscientific and absurd and uncool’ thing of actually praying for atleast one big fish to be caught. I going to do this and why don’t you? Remember that the Glory is for Jesus.

Dear Anoop,

Please advise your support for the claim of Brahmins/Namboothiris meeting St. Thomas at Palayur. I do certainly admit that there is a strong tradition regarding a Namboothiri heritage. But remember that it was a tradition to give ourselves some local identity and place in highly/extreme casteist society as in Malabar.
A few weeks ago, I notice in a Wiki page that somebody with bad intentions had stated Nasranis as ‘casteless’ in sanskrit. In Hindu India, the effect of ‘casteless’ is the same as ‘outcaste’. You may then ask as to how the ‘Malabari Jews’ survived? They were much smaller in number for any comparison.

Dear All,

Since this Palayoor conversion topic has emerged let me put forth some facts apart the age old ‘stories’.

First of all the conversion of Hindu Brahmins at the Palayoor incidence by St. Thomas is more of a misinterpretation by vested groups, of another incident which is supposed to have actually taken place.

Anoop, I don’t know if u are from Thrissur area u may be knowing what I am going to put forth and if you are from another native then do read up on the following, before we come to conclusions. Read it across denominations.

Arthattu St. Mary’s Church or THE PALAYOOR CHATTUKULANGARA CHURCH

The present Arthatt St. Mary’s Orthodox Syrian Church is believed to be the pioneer Christian Community founded by St.Thomas in the first century A.D. The prominence given to this church by the early historians, circumstantial evidences, and the later historical records bear witness to this tradition. Palayur or Paloor is listed as the place where St. Thomas established a Christian Congregation.”The facts about the present Palayur is not suitable to connect the St. Thomas mission. But some vested groups deliberately connect the present Palayur with the St. Thomas mission from the second half of 19th century onwards . It is either by lack of historical mind or a deliberate and organized attempt to propagate anachronism.”

Some facts about Arthatt and Palayur

1. The Church at Arthat is dedicated to St. Mary, The Mother of God, while that of present Palayur, to St. Kuriakose, a Saint who lived around fourth century A.D, and was introduced to Malankara only in the fifth century. It is impossible to buildup a church in first century by St. Thomas, in memory of a fourth century saint in anticipation. But it is more reasonable to believe, the Church at Arthat which was dedicated to St. Mary, as a permanent monument of St. Thomas mission.

2. The present Palayur village is on the sea level, and during the formative years of Christian era, was believed to be, under the sea. The nearness to the sea, the sandy soil, and the presence of oceanic fossils also bear witness to this fact. But Arthat is the first high land from the sea level in the Palayoor region, which was known as Jewish Hill or ‘Juda Kunnu’.

3. The sentiment towards Arthat still exists in the minds of believers irrespective of denomination; and there are seven churches of different denominations at the small village of Arthat itself. There is no such sentiment towards the present Palayur.

4. There are several random references in many historical books about the St. Thomas connection of Arthat Church. (For e.g. ‘Sakthan Thampuran’ by Puthezhathu Raman Menon, III Edition P. 291)

5. When Tippu Sulthan turned against the prominent ancient Churches of Malabar, he burnt the ancient Church at Arthat, but the Church at present Palayur left unmolested. This shows that Arthat was the prominent Church of this region even in eighteenth century i.e at the time of Tippu’s invasion.

6. Francis Buchanan (1800 A.D), and Claudius Buchanan (1806 A.D), two Anglican Delegates who visited Kerala to enquire the position of the St. Thomas Christians in nineteenth century had visited many important Churches of Kerala including that of Arthat. But it is to be noted that they never visited or even mentioned the Church at the present Palayur. However there is a reference about the Chavakkad cross church, which was under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Arthat Church. This shows that even in the 19th century there was no such claim associated with the present Palayur.

Now read on the following and one will understand what actually was the Palayoor miracle by St. Thomas of throwing water in the air or was it a different version, corrupted later.

Emergence of the name ‘Chattukulangara’

There is an historic legend behind the origin of the name Chattukulangara to the ancient Palayoor. Palai-ur or Paloor was the ancient name of this region. When the apostle St. Thomas reached Arthat the people were reeling under the onslaught of a drought. They had tried to dig a pond. But though they dug a deep and wide area they could not get a drop of water. St Thoma understood their frustration and anxiety. He walked down to the center of the site and with a whip (Chatta) he struck the ground, water gushed out and the place has always had abundant water since then. The words Chatta + Kulam that is whip + pond later became the name of the town – Chattukulangara.

Due to various reasons like religious persecution, changes in the politcal and econoic policies of the ruling authority, business and commercial purposes, numerical growth of the Christian community etc., there took place a number of domestic migrations from the Chattukulangare Angadi (Baazar). This domestic migration caused the growth of the church to the neighbouring provinces.

Origin of the Nazrani Village- Kunnamkulam

The people of Chattukulangara who were scattered about by the attack of Tipu settled down in the regions of Kottapadi ,Kunnamkulam, Pazhanji, Chelakkara, Angamaly, Kuravilangadu etc. The feudal lords of Kunnamkulam welcomed the traders from Chattukulangara. They Participated in the development of Kunnamkulam town in all means. The trade links between Tamil and Kunnamkulam brought the influence of Tamil on the region Kunnamkulam is said to be derived from the tamil form Knnamkulagarai which means a place having Kunnu(Hills) and Kulam(ponds). The name seems appropriate because on the limits of the town lie Aduputty hills on the east ; Kizhoor hills on the west; mission hills on the south and Prokulam hills on the north. The several ponds are Eenjakulam, Ayyamkulam, Padinjarekulam ( Western pond) and Thorakulam. Some of this ponds have been filled up to construct new buildings. The town built by the settlers from Chattukulangara is in the shape of a cross. The base of the cross is the Eastern Bazar and the other arms of the cross are constituted by the West, North and South Bazars. In each arm of the cross there is a church. St Thomas New church on the Eastern arm. St Lazarus old church in the west, St Mathias Church in the south and St Lazarus church ( Chiralayam Church) in the north. These four arms were the hub of commercial activities. The place was dined with godowns and full of traders.Hundreds of bull carts lined the roads to load goods. Today these places are quieter. Better facilities became available in the parayil region which has now become the trading center of Kunnamkulam.

Online Ref: http://www.malankaraorthodoxchurch.org/historyofkkm.htm

The above extract is from the Kunnamkulam church history provided by the Malankara Orthodox Church’s official website. The place Kunnamkulam/Palayoor/Arthattu in North Thrissur was and is a prominent Syrian Christian centre and was once a flourishing trade centre for both the Jews and the Nasranis. The Palayoor Market and the Jewish Hill (and synagogue?) even today here are living testimonies. Brahmin settlements in Palayoor are famous but of not a very early date atleast not as old as the St. Thomas time.

The pond wherein the miracle of St. Thomas took place is not actually a Brahmin pond of Hindus but one used by the Jews of the area of the time, ‘Judakulam’. And the name Kunnamkulam is itself derived from the ponds and the Kunnu (Jewish Hill) in the area. Arthattu is a place at Kunnamkulam. And Palayoor is a nearby place wherein the miracle is not actually supposed to have occured. This becomes from the above explained tradition and history of the place. Note that there is Jewish pond even today at Payyangadi, Kannur maintained by the archaeological dept. which is extreme North Malabar.

Another important point is Kunnamkulam is the place where the first Jewish Christian settlement took place in 1st cent. AD who were settled by St. Thomas himself following the migration (I dont have a written evidence but this topic was dealt with earlier). These Jewish Christians were predominant traders in the area and later under Islamic and Tipu’s assaults were dispersed and persecuted.

Few points for discussion:

1. Let us hold for now the Namboothiri conversion at Palayoor is true. How come a foriegner (St. Thomas) was first of all, allowed to enter an area (pond) wherein Hindu Brahmins were taking bath. Didn’t they care for their ritual purity then ?

2. How could St. Thomas preach the gospel by doing just a miracle of throwing water in the air for the sake of converting people ? Doesn’t it go against the teachings of Christ who never performed a miracle just to console people and convert them ! how could his disciples do that ? Infact Christ when was asked for a sign to prove He was God’s Son refused to give a sign to the Pharisees/Scribes. Then how will Thomas do it if the incident doesn’t have a more meaningful purpose and another truth !

3. The pond that is described is most probably the pond used by the Jews of the region wherein another Jew (St. Thomas) was surely allowed. And the ritual bathing that the incidence describes is the ‘Tebilah’ which is a Jewish ritual bath (Ref: Bosco Puthur, ‘St. Thomas Christians and Nambudiris, Jews and Sangam Literature’, 2003). And the throwing of water in the air miracle seems to be the ‘Chattakulagara’ incidence by St. Thomas as described above. Similarly the Brahmins that seem to be converted are none other than the Jews present at the spot then and surely must have included the Priests and the Levites among the Jewish community. It goes beyond logic and common sense that Thomas will ignore Jews and his own people and instead go to the gentiles and that too specially and exclusively the Brahmins alone. Was he casteist, surely not !

4. If still everything else including the Church authorities of the area seems false and still supports the Namboothiri conversion myth then the incidence and the miracle atleast for me is not in the spirit of the teachings of Christ. Surely gentiles also must have converted later knowing this incidence but they must have been very few and Brahmins still rarer. If it is otherwise then we terribly lack a single evidence other than stories and some Kudumbacharithrams which mention the same.

Thus what seems true is that there has been a translational error and still worse, a misinterpretation.

Dear Anoop,

Well I guess you are not aware of the project details. There are surely 27 samples and it’s not conclusive but of course a good starting indicator. Now let me explain.

Of all the samples only the Knanaya samples are all of ‘L’ haplogroup and this is not a Jewish result which says that Knanayas are genetically not Jewish as per the samples till now. There are 8 of them and not a single Knanaya is showing any Jewish ancestry result even faintly. And it’s another myth that Knanayas are Jewish exclusively.

Then the other samples… Those are NON-KNANAYAS / Northists and their results are perfectly Jewish. Many of these have Jewish Levite matches (the R1a samples) and the J2 samples. Some J2’s are having Cohen gene markers which means they are Israelite Priests Aaron’s descendents. Not a single Knanaya has yet been tested as R1a or J2 Jewish. How do u explain this ? The non-Knanayas are having the Jewish DNAs. The R1a and J2 samples u see are all non-Knanaya samples.

Similarly u asked if any person of Pakalomattam heritage has been tested. YES.

Mr. Jacob the project administrator is of a Pakalomattam heritage and branch. And his result is J2 with Cohen marker which is exclusive for Israelite Priests. Now co-relate things if u can.

And of all the 27 samples not a single sample till now is related to the Indians/Brahmins/Namboothiris. Almost all are middle-eastern/Jewish/Hebraic. And u should also be aware that alomst all these 27 samples (families) had Namboothiri/Brahmin origin claim. Now they may be stunned to see their ancestry as largely of Israelite Priestly origin. That Knanayas still are far from any Jewish results sounds illogical but is true as broad daylight.

Dear Anoop,

The presence of Namboothiris is disputed at that time, but yes there are reported to be Brahmins in South India, in Kerala and Tamil Nadu of course. The society was not rigid as we see today and caste system was fluid. Buddhism was the dominant religion then and there were Dravidians and Aryans too. Iyers and Iyengars are known to have come in the BCs but does Syrian Christian History claim origins from them ? NO. the converts surely must have included Brahmins and other loacl castes but few. The community was strengthened in folowing centuries by various migrations of middle-easterners.

The language then was tamil, yes. Malayalam developed only in 1000 AD. Sanskrit was used only by the Brahmins. Aramaic/Hebrew in liturgy used by us today may have been our language at home too but in society Tamil was surely used. There are words common in Tamil and Hebrew. Then came the influence of Sanskrit. The sound ‘zha’ is an archaeic Sanskrit contribution and non-keralites cannot pronounce it. But that this is ancient sanskrit sound, was an info given to me by my Maharashtrian Brahmin friend who can easily pronounce it. He also said this Sanskrit sound is not in use in today’s sanskrit. There are comments by historians who explain Syriac had a vast influence when languages were developing in ancient India and Kerala bcoz Syriac/Aramaic was the lingua franca of middle-east in those early times and India had contacts with the same for trade, hence the influence.

Thanks for that info,another thing I felt compelled to ask is that Keralites resemble ethiopians the most.
Since you might have access to their genetic info…can u please check if there is a relation here.
Thanks again for all help.

Dear Anoop,

From what I know, Keralites do not have connections with the Ehopians. The Ethopians are a handsome people and their colour is ‘gorgeous’. If at all you see some crinky hair amongst the Nasranis, they are not Ethopian but middle eastern.

Calgary has now lots of Ethopian Orthodox Christians. They are comming here from Ethopia every day. I read in the article Ampravil Achayan sent that the Falasha (black Ethopian Jews) are not genetically Jewish from the very early years. They are certainly Jewish but not from the ‘Exodus or Davidic’ years. They converted to Judaism about 1500 years ago.

***

Guys younger to me can certainly call me only by name and no suffix like ‘Achayan’ to be added. Don’t take me seriously about the Achayan matter.

Dear Jackson:

Regarding the possible non-Jewish origin of the Knanaya … this may not be as surprising as it seems. I’ve read an anthropology paper that investigated the Northist-Southist divide by looking at old attitudes of both the Northist and the Southists regarding the other. And what the author found was symmetry: *both* groups claimed to have authentic Semitic origin, and accused the other of being from “polluted” stock. The author even reported that in the old days, the Northists would not allow their kids to even play with the Southists on account of this pollution!

I don’t know why, at the present day, it is only the Southists that claim Semitic heritage, but I’m not surprised by the genetic results since the Knanaya story only dates to the 17th century.

Dear Anoop,

I think you have it in reverse regarding Peter and Cephas!

You say:
“You are right when you say that Cephas is the hebrew version or Syriac version of the name.I mean to say that they just didnt transport the sound to the sister language ,instead they found the word meaning Rock
in the sister language and assumed that as that as the version of Peter.Thanks for the suggestion.”

Since Jesus and his Apostles spoke Aramaic, I think the correct order was:
1. Jesus referred to his disciple Simon as a rock using the Aramaic word “Cephas/Kephas”
2. When Greek Gospels were written, instead of using the original work “Cephas” they translated Cephas (rock) to Greek–Peter. I don’t know if Peter was used by the Greeks as a proper name before this (does any culture have the name “rock” as a proper name? … Maybe the Italo-Americans with “Rocky Balboa…”).
3. Peter becomes a major name in Greco-Roman Christianity, and via intercourse with the East, Patros/Boutros, etc, becomes a major name in the East along with its original form, Kephas. Although, I don’t see many people using Kephas any more, I do know many of the Syriac fathers used the name in its original form.

John

Dear Anoop,

Your assumption that one needs Brahmins to do priestly duties is not correct. There are many occassions where Nairs, Harijans, Ezhavas etc. do the priestly duties. Do you see any Brahmin in any Ezhava function doing priestly duties?

At school, they make us believe in ‘Stereotypes’. In real life we have to spend a lot of energy and shed lots of tears to ‘DE-LEARN” what we learned at School.

I wonder why the organizers of this site dont approach the metropolitans of the Major Churches of Kerala with these findings and ultimately do a better funded and scientifically better analysis of our anthropology.
Otherwise this will end up like a free for all.
About the tests, cant these tests be conducted in india,

Dear Jackson,
Reading your comment I understant that there are more than 1 Cohen DNA find in the Syrian Christian data base. I think there are only Jacob and his brother who according to Jacob and you are Cohen.

Jacob did the test for his brother to confirm the ‘quality’ of his own test result. We are satisfied about that but the fact is that we can for practical reasons consider that there has only been 1 Cohen find out of 25 or so though recordically there are 2 out of 25 or 27. Am I correct?

Dear George

U are right and let me put it this way that till now only the Manakalathil family members are tested to be Cohens, whoever it is, hence it is considered as a single family sample. But let me also say that some other J2 samples are also somewhat, though not perfectly, matching Cohen Modal haplotype. Hence it may say that the J2’s are not any other middle-eastern J2’s but Hebrew/Jewish J2 type. Thus they can be considered as variants of the CMH. There is no perfect Cohen sequence that we can say is perfectly Cohen from Aaron but if minor variations exist between samples then they are close matches though not perfect Cohens indicating some distant relatedness in origins. As of now we cannot be sure as the samples are very few to draw such co-relations or state in terms of percentages. Similarly when we get more J1/J2 samples with Cohens then it becomes more confirmatory that there are considerable Cohens among us.

Let me say another genetical statistic, that in any ‘general’ Jewish population in any part of the world, Cohen Levites (thus Aaronites) form approx. 5% of the Jewish population, as per research on different Jewish groups. Similarly there is a Levite Modal Haplotype shared by Ashkenazi non-cohen Levites of R1a haplogroup origin and variants of this also are seen in the Levite Jews. Similarly the R1a samples of our Nasrani database is closely/perfectly matching this LMH of Ashkenazi Levites, as the sample may be.

Read the link below on more info about Cohen and non-cohen Levites.

http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts-cohen-levite.html

So also I read a couple of research articles which state that the Cochin Jewish maternal heritage is predominantly Indian/Asian as any other Indians which is also seen in our results by the predominant M* haplogroup (mtDNA) which indicates admixture. The maternal results are almost similar for Nasrani samples too as of now with M* type mtDNA. The R* haplogroup mtDNA in our results is an exception of non-Indian maternal heritage. R* is near-eastern in origin.

Dear Alphy,

I guess you are from Thrissur dist. near Ashtamichira-Thazhekaad because the family name ‘Koonthily’ is found in this area of Thrissur. Well my family and relatives are close to this place at Chalakudy.

Well I also have one of my paternally related family with the family name ‘Meledath’ at Koratty-Chirangara. They too use either the above family name or ‘Meledath Illam (House)’ or simply state their family name as ‘Illam (House)’. But I have never heard or known, of them claiming any Namboothiri ancestry/claim. In the sense, the term ‘illam’ used may be to denote the english word ‘House’ , the latter is generally used today. Thus illam may have been used by such families in ancient times to denote some priestly descent (Hindu/Jewish). Similarly I have also stated earlier that many such families related to mine and others from the region strongly claim Jewish ancestry/heritage while many others recently have newly found Namboothiri claims. These Brahmin claims are seen in many ‘kumbacharithrams’ without a single evidence and only derived from legends and folklore. So also there are Syrian Christian families which have family names common to other Nairs and Namboothiris and also Muslims around in Kerala but that does not necessarily indicate common origin/ancestry.

Similarly the term ‘illam’ is derived from the sanskrit word ‘Alayam’ meaning abode/house. The term ‘illam’ is also used in Sri Lanka to denote a House/Family/Home. So it is not something exclusively for Namboothiris/Brahmins, though generally used by them only today in Kerala.

Dear Jackson, Thank you for your informative reply, its good to hear that you are from close by Chalakudy. and Yes I am from Thazhekad and from the Koonthily Tharavad. I never heard my grandparents mention anything about Brahmin lineage. I do know that our ancestors where ‘nattupramanikal’, and one of my great-great grandfather was gifted gun by the Kochi maharaja to maintain law and also had kalari foot soldiers. He acted as the judge and held court in the immediate area and was assisted by a Nair. But that is more recent history of maybe 400-500 years back. About ancient past I don’t have much information.

But I do know that the Thazhekad sassanam gave special rights and privileges to two merchants. I had couple of questions regarding that, perhaps you or others in the community could help me answer them

1. I see different dates for the Sassanam, the dates I read varied from 340-360 AD to 800 – 1024 AD and some show it even later, what dates do you think they belong to.

2. The order gave rights to the two merchants, Irvi Chathan and Chathan Vadukan, of Manigrammam. What and where is manigrammam. I had initially thought that Manigrammam was a place, but some notes I read point to it being a Traders guild, and was not unique to one city but was found in many cities. Other similar guilds existed like Anjuvannam, Nagarattar, Aihole and Nanadesi in South India. Do you have more information on them?

3. What differentiated these guilds from each other, was it their trade speciality or ethnic composition.

4. From one of your posting, I gather that Manigrammam guild consisted of mixed backgrounds with both Christians and Hindu Chettiars. Do you have more information on this?

5. Was the Anjuvannam guild exclusively for the Jews or were others communities also part of it?

Thanks for you contributions.

Dear George,

Near East = Middle-east + few more surrounding countries/region.

The distinction between near east and middle-east is very thin and often overlaps. Near eastern region stretches from Anatolia (Turkey) in the West to Caucasia in the North to West Persia (West Iran) in the east to Jordan/Egypt in the South. Arabia is excluded. Thus it is an extension of middle-east minus Arabia. The map can be seen below. R type mtDNA originated here and is thus exclusively non-Asian/non-Indian in origin as against M type. However R and it’s sub-branching types (B, F, J, K, etc.) is seen largely in Europeans (~75%) and Middle-east people (except Arabs).

Thus if R* is seen in our community it indicates a middle-eastern maternal lineage also in addition to M which is Indian/South-Asian. M* mtDNA is found Iran and eastwards into India. Check the maps and charts of various mtDNA and Y-DNA lineages and distribution/origin below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Near_East

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R_(mtDNA)

https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html

But what does some meant by indian there is noting specifically we can say is indian.dravidians hypothesis says they similar to samaritian race disappeared in middleeast long time ago. In north india there is Aryans who are iranian or German in orgin. Only somekind of aborginals found in india i think are negrotoids people and then all migrated one and aborgianal mixed to became lot of indian like people. There should be dna to know the difference of aryans dravidians negrotoids syrians westasians and jewish or israelites. based on family history says as brahmin stories there are many evident pesian or middleeasten looking people even in my family and in many family branches and nobody doesnt know anything like knanaya but eveybody believe in st thomas as it orgin

Dear All,

Another thing I missed on the L hgp. discussion. There is a sample of some ‘Kollenore’ tested as L in the Nasrani database and he is a Northist from Trichur. But the surprise is his L is almost perfectly matching the two Knanaya L3 samples (just with one marker negligible difference of the 12 markers) and far from the other Northist L’s (L1). When we get atleast a 10 or 11 marker match (of total 12) to another sample the two samples are considered related in origin/stock. So we have for a surprise (in the long list of surprises) a Northist L ‘almost perfectly’ matching a Southist/Kna L. Thus this non-Kna sample is also from all probabilities L3 if classified. Now that is something very striking that we missed ?!

Dear Philip,

I have not so far heard of Inidan Aryan’s being German in origin. From the little I know for long, the Aryan”s are originally from Central Asia, one branch migrated to Persia, one continued further south to India. While all this was happening, there was migration from Central Asia towards Germany.

It seems a large fresh water lake was drying up and this drove the migration. There are ofcourse other theories about Aryan migration. The old concept of ‘Aryan Invasion’ to India is not as popular as before, it is now ‘Aryan Migration’. Also, there are insuffiicient gentic proofs to support Aryan migration from Central Asia towads Germany, Persia and India.

The Aryan Invasion theory was popular with the Britich because they wanted to kind of justify their presence in India. The Aryan Invasion theory gave a background to this. The white man came years milliniums ago and now the white man has come again, the white man has always been superior to the blackman, blackmen, accept you fate.

Dear George
I just wrote it because i had different kindsof information regarding Aryan . one thing that lot of them ofcourse saying indo european or sanskrit to it eurpean language connections. Some say yes like i heard now aryans are just the iranian exist there before muslims there. But i have questions out of that iranians or aryans who are parsis? I heard some thing nazi group or hitler group belived in aryan supermacy. I wrote in the above comment as may be iranians or germans in orgin. But some say there is lot of people in eastern europe to pakistan area are of aryans. I met some Bosnians in a work place they look exactly like hindi people even once they told once that they were indians. so all these ideas get twisted i think aryan may have eupeon connections. I think boby deol or sanjai dutt have some german or eastern european looks than those iranian middleeastern people just opnion

As of now in Indian society, ancestry testings and studies are largely considered with some ‘stigma’ attached and some really get very critical including supposedly wise people ! So also genetics and Biotech is just in it’s infant stage in our country coz of lack of Govt. funds, support and encouragements to researchers, scientists and students of same. I have experienced all these and u also may be hearing and reading them. But genetics has of course started with disease detection studies in India.

Also when a lay Indian hears the word “DNA” he either is not aware what its is or connects it to paternity dispute cases, Criminal offenes like rape investigation or something like that. Hillarious, because these are just a branch of genetics a fraction called ‘Forensics’. But they are not to be blamed it is the Govt.’s duty to encourage and bring such things to the forefront of professional fields or we will all still be as mysterious as we were 2 centuries back. And India lags on this scientific front and therefore we don’t have any good and reliable institutes to do similar studies wrt ancestries and origins. All is sponged in the West. But hopefully things will be better with some really good centers like RGCB gaining momentum. Also note that the Human Genome project is not at all an Asian/Indian contribution hence this problem for us as of now.

Hi Anoop,

Thanks for sharing that famous Genghis Khan’s info. There are plenty of people with this Genghis khan “fellow’s” genes in them across Central Asia, North India, China, etc… He was a Mongol king. And from his related people and clansmen we got the Mughals of India. Similarly plenty of men on earth today as per geneticists carry his signature genes… all a result of the Invasions of the Mughal/Mongol rulers and conquerers upto Europe too (as is proved from the incident u narrated).

About the Northeast Christians having Jewish roots as far as I have read from the Jewish info they have not yet proved to have a genetic evidence because they have refused for any kind of genetic testings it seems. They converted to Judaism based on traditions and claims and have not yet been genetically proved. Anyways that’s another case.

And even if we are proved to have Jewish roots we don’t have to commit that ‘Historical Blunder’ of going back to Judaism. Never atleast for me !!! As a Christian we have Jesus as our master and Saviour whom the Jews reject and hence spriritually they are not our brethren but the gentile who accepts Christ is. Mind that statement and divisions on such lines I completely call weird like converting to Judaism or something like that. Nevertheless the fact that we have Jewish/Hebrew roots should make us more responsible ‘Christians’ to protect and guide our gentile brethren better and be perfect Christians as we inherited from the apostles and forefathers and stop living with excuses as most of our community members are doing, that is the ‘crux’ of this entire matter and discussion !!!

Hi Sungeo,
Our intention here is to verify the DNA results at hand, draw inferences and finally scrutinize the claims and theories.

1. “There is not doubt that we are a mixed community and you should accept that we do not have a homogeneous history.”
Assuming that the usage of “we” is to refer to Knanaites, the sentence is incorrect. The Knanaite claim has been that they are the descendants of 72 families from outside Kerala (origin varies with version – from Israel to Lebanon) and that the community has been endogamous ever since. But the four Knanaite samples available so far has mtDNA result as M*. Claim and result do not correlate. From the maternal side *all* Knanaites (from the samples) are Indian and most likely Southern Indian.
Since you are familiar with the Assyrian Familytreedna project already, you might point out that there is one M* result there. But that is because an Indian joined the project. Please check the geographical distribution of the samples from their page.
How come Assyrians don’t have a single M and all Knanaites have M?

2. “I can see a Thomas Kuzhiamplavil in Syrian Christian DNA project. His DNA is tested as L. I know the history of Kuzhiamplavil family. They claim that their first century convert was a Namboothiri. They also claim that their first century feminine side was Jewish.”
There is L1, L2 and L3. L1 – South Indian, L2 – European, L3 – ???. Most(4) of the L3 results in ftDNA project are Pakistanis. Check the names in YSearch. Rest are Knanaites.
Whatever be the claim, their results does not suggest either. Most likely they are native Indian or if you really want to stretch it too far, Arab tribal.

3.”Check out the results of Nairs here: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/nair/
They also have J2’s and R1a’s.”
Nair J2 is not Cohen Modal. Nor are their R1a Levite. This has already been discussed.

4. “Check out the results of Jewish DNA as well and see how wide and varied their DNAs are.”
Diverse yes, but L no. But definitely Cohen Modal J2s and Levite R1as.

4. Regarding occurrences or L1(Sub haplogroup L found mostly in Indian and extremely rarely outside) in Knanaites. How do you explain this? Will you attribute their ancestry to a Konkani or a Tamil worker(reference to profession is uncalled for)? Please check once with Raju Makil (note the family name) and Sundeep Abraham once, before you do so.

5. Regarding occurrences of L3 in Knanaites. Most of the other L3s are from Pakistan. This is the only area that needs to be investigated.

6. “And research should be done in a research institute like Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Biotechnology”
The mismatch in the results as compared to the claim of Jewish ancestry is glaring. Too far obvious and too far aligned towards South Asian origin.

From the samples seen so far, maternal ancestry of Knanaites is Indian, typically Southern Indian. Significant part of paternal ancestry is also Indian, typically Southern Indian. The rest of the paternal ancestry clusters with other Northists, Pakistanis and Arab tribal but not anywhere near that of any of the Jewish results.

To generalize and come to a conclusion, we need more samples. So we want the KANAIM project in ftDNA to be opened up. But this project, in spite of having 13 valuable samples, has not revealed it’s results to the public. The project has been around for years, if I remember correctly. This secrecy, along with the four samples that we have seen so far makes myself very very suspicious. The reason that results are hidden *could* be that the results do not conform to the lofted claims in the project “Background” or “Goals” pages. I am assuming that you are a Southist. Can you please contact and request Sundeep to open up the results? We want to see the truth and nothing else.

regards,
Kezhakken

Dear Sungeo:

What you’ve written is interesting: especially the part about the possible Manichaean origin of the Knanaya.

However, when you report that the Knanaya were baptised and brought into mainstream Christianity by the Portuguese, I have one seemingly conflicting point:

Anjilimoottil Itty Thommen Kathanar (the partner of Thomas Archdeacon, or Mar Thoma I, of the Koonon Cross Revolt) was reportedly a member of the Knanaya community. I find it hard to believe that a person baptized and brought to Christianity by the Portuguese would be such a strong advocate of rebellion. Would a new convert have East Syriac expertise (as would be required of a priest in those days)?

Now, I’m not disagreeing with your premise of conversion: it’s fascinating and I’m interested in exploring this. Perhaps the Manichaeans were brought into Christianity by the Nestorians — that would make more sense to me since both were avid users of Syriac, as well as shared a common culture rooted in Persia.

However, one further sticking point (for me) is that the Manichaeans were anti-Jewish (viewing the Hebrew God as separate from the “Christian”/Manichaean God—sort of like George!, although they viewed the Hebrew God as being an evil god) … it’s hard for me (but not impossible) to believe that they would switch from an anti-Jewish to a pro-Jewish mindset.

As an aside: I once read a book by a British writer in the 19th century (I’ve been trying to dig that up again so I can cite it, but I’ve been unlucky so far) which discusses a parallel community of people who lived along side the Syrian Christians and who the author describes as being practitioners of the occult. However, this community was reported to exist in places like Kayamkulam and Kollam (a good place for Manichaeans since those areas used to be strong Buddhist zones). As well, the book discussed how the community was absorbing itself within the Nair community and the Syrian Christian community, giving up its former practices.

Interesting premise you have there Sungeo,methinks that the Knanayas could have come from
North India.They came at around 300Ad.As archeologists think that Pakistan and the like were converted
by St Thomas ,these people could most probably have come from there.Analysing their DNA ,I believe its possible to pinpoint their location of Origin,correlate with other Dna matches in Pakistan ,maybe we could
come close to the Kingdom of Gondapheres.
The only fallout would be how to accomodate our St Thomas tradition with the above

Dear Sungeo,

I too don’t reject the Brahmin tradition held but what is the actual meaning/origin behind this word claim ‘Brahmin’ is what is not understandable. Brahmins mean Priests in local language and Priests are not exclusive for Aryans/Hindus.

Well, there are many families claiming Namboothiri heritage specifically but on what basis ? Oral folklore or Kudumbacharithrams written not before 16th or 17th cent. AD ? Then is that an evidence is what is unacceptable. If we knew exactly that we are of Brahmin/Namboothiri descent then we should be carrying all those ‘hallmarks’ of a Namboothiri also. But apart from a caste consciousness and some attitudes and few external Hindu customs we don’t have any other evidences to support our claims and hence cannot infer we are so. Caste consciousness was seen in all communities foreign to native India. If we have families claiming so strongly a Namboothiri/Hindu Brahmin descent then they should also provide other details like the Gothram, Griham, Vedam-type, Desam, Pravaram, etc. before conversion but I dont’ think any Nasrani can provide that. If some family can then we can verify the Brahmin claim because if they hold and pass on their Brahmin origin claims for generations they should also have passed the other details. Where are these evidences ?

Similarly namboothiris have very specific and rigid customs and practices and also their phonetics/language etc. all which I have described earlier in detail, which is simply not seen in majority Nasranis. Why ? Where is the PIE accent and nasalization styles in Nasranis if they are Namboothiris ? Why can’t many of them even pronounce Sanskrit properly which distinguishes an Aryan/Brahmin from all other castes ? Don’t tell me all these things were lost after conversion but just the oral claim remained.

Another thing u mentioned is Nasranis were bestowed with privileges. That thing itself proves we were “made privileged”. Had we been Hindu Brahmins we wud have been ‘inherently privileged’ and there wud not be a need to ‘grant privilege’. Or were they ‘outcasted’ becoz they converted and then restored with privileges ? If that is so then how true is your statement that Hindus would still consider us “equal” to Brahmins. They would abhor us as per caste rules if we would have been majorly from converts from their stock ! The term ‘bhrashtu’ is very horrific and translates to ‘excommunication’ after breaking from the community for whatever reasons among the Brahmins. Still another tradition claims we were considered at par with the Nair nobility in society. So does that make us Nairs ? So nair or namboothir… what are we exactly ? Some others say that in earlier times we would perform a ritual bath if polluted by Nairs. Why so if we are from the same stock of Nairs ?

Similarly note that most Nasranis had been professional overseas traders/merchants well in contact with different kinds of people. And for Namboothiris (or for any Brahmin group) it is a TABOO to even cross seas for whatever reasons specifically trade and only today is this scenario changing slowly due to modernization because trading was a profession of the Aryan Vaishya caste only. Another point which dismisses Namboothiri/Brahmin claims. I have never read of Namboothiris/Brahmins as expert traders/merchants but yes of Nasranis it’s true.

Therefore read that statement carefully wherein u have said… “And Hindus too have traditions where we were GIVEN equal status to Brahmins.”…… probably the answer lies there in the word “GIVEN” and not “Inherited”. And ‘Given’ also means it happened over a period of time !

Some nasranis have attitudes of been some white superior race completely foreign to Indian culture which is another weird thing. I have personally heard some Roman Catholics (RCSC) saying in ignorance they are from Rome/Romans hence called Roman Catholics… another example of sheer ignorance. How long should we allow this, is upto this generation to decide sensibly !

Which is the first reliable historical work/source or document or anything like that before 16th or 15th cent. AD that says the first converts were Brahmins from Pakalomattam, Shankarapuri, etc. so that we can count it as an evidence ? Then where did we get these from ? We can find the truth if we really want to. It’s not about criticism but about not been fooled/blindly-led. Age of Feudalism is over and we no longer have to listen to influential and power holders who are most probably the first creators of such myths. Go to a poor Nasrani family and ask him his origins. He will either dismiss the topic or be least interested in such myths and will most probably know in his mind the lost version of the truth. It is money and power that defines things in society over time, which creates and invents new theories (which clearly lack logic) for self-recognition and also which probably gave us the new definitions, for nobody to question us as our community prospered.

So note the “wide swingings” in claims over different periods in history to suit local lavour and as per local social make-up. Of course there have been some converts into the community in later centuries till today from Hindus and these have evidences but what about the majority claimers who are early Christians ? Where from is the “source” of these claims and How and when and from where, is the question that continues to be unanswered !!

Dear Sungeo,
I know that you are one of the writers of articles in this column and so are far ahead than us regarding knowledge of many thngs.

The presence of Cohen and Levite DNAs usually or must mean that other Semetic or Jewish DNAs must also be available in the results tested. In our case J2s seem to be there. But as you pointed out, how do one know that these are Hebrew/Jewish/Israeli.

I understand that the J2s (non Cohen ) now available are not having any matches with with the Jews. This may be because our J2s are very old. The matching ones would have been destroyed years ago. The second destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 72AD alone resulted in the massacre of 100,000 jews (this fig. seems too high, so I must confirm it).

A legend and belief that is fairly strong and timetested is that we are descendents of the black Malabari Jews who were in Malabar since about the time fo Solomen. In which case our J2s will be very old. I have tried to get my hand on the DNA results of the black jews but have failed. Perhaps Jackson or Kezakken with their contacts and knowledge can try.

We have so far spent a lot of energy bashing the Namboothiri heritage and generally have discounted it. Now we can take up ‘Armenian’ heriatage, as you may want.
Now, I must tell you that 99% of the Nasranis would not know ‘what is Armenian’ heritage means or who are Armenians. I suspect that those in Chennai will know more about Armenians than Keralites. Because there is a very important commercial street in Chennai called ‘Armenian Street’.

Again there is the thought now that the Knites are not of Jewish or Hebrew heritage. This may be true from the DNA side. But remember that the Jewish Rabbis and traditions hold Jewishness to come from the mother’s side. The K’nites may be from Parthia and their mother’s Jewish.

Dear Jackson,
Thanks to you on behalf of all of on this forum.

Dear Sungeo:

I think I found one source:
1911 Britannica article on Manichaeanism:
“But even in the 15th century there were Manichaeans living beside the Thomas-Christians on the coast of Malabar in India (see Germann, Die Thomas-Christen, 1875).”

Anymore?

Dear All,

The first and foremost thing that is to be understood is that we cannot just look at the DNA project and it’s outcome/results without studying our History, Traditions, Cultural and religious background and our Heritage. First we must be having a good knowledge of the rest of the part before we jump to genetic studies of a community. Because genetics is there as a ‘support’ for traditions and culture and never the other way so the latter is more important but not complete without the former (genetic data). Well let us keep aside genetics for sometime and analyse certain things…. (I will come back to this)…

Now looking at our history, traditions and lifestyle (both religious and cultural) since early times (not recently invented ones) we get a common, inevitable and most evident bottomline almost in all of these that our Hebraic/Jewish/Semitic heritage is very strong (or strongest). Similarly no one can deny the Judeo-Christian roots of our community and it’s origins even before Christianity was established in the West. So who were these first followers who accepted the Messiah, for whom Thomas came looking for and baptized ?

There is not a single statement in the entire Church history or writings that says Thomas was ever called a ‘disciple to the Gentiles’ (not even faintly) as Paul is called so (Book of Romans, NT). Why so, if we say Thomas baptized so ‘many pagans’ in his mission (atleast in India) ? Thomas is indeed called an apostle to communities in Persia and India in early church writings. But where is it written/held that he evangelized predominantly gentiles/pagans. And if an apostle of Christ is to go to Persia and India why will he go if there are no first of all Israelites in these places and thus in accordance with the commissioning by his Master Yeshua who says “to go rather first to the lost sheep of Israel”. Lost then means Israelites were lost in spirit and not physically and thus to be restored back to Yahweh thru’ Christ. Indeed some pagans may also have accepted Christ surely coz the covenant was extended indeed later !

And if God was the one who dispersed and scattered Israel in various nations, will He also be not the One who knows where they are, and send his messengers to seek them and restore them back ?!!This is a very good eye-opener for unbelievers to see God’s plan better.

Dear Jackson,

Now I too believe that we are of Hebrew/Israeli/Jewish heritage. But that does not deter me seeking answers to some questions.

I do find some Greek influence amongst the Jacobites/Marthomites and wonder where did it come from. When Buchanan came to Travancore seeking the Syrian Christians, he too observed and wrote very briefly about Greek Christian influence amongst the Jacobites in their worship services.

I do not know how this came abou, the influence is there but very limited. Perhaps it can be attributed to the fact that Greek culture prevailed in the then civilized world .Even super mighty Rome was greatly influenced by Greek culture.

Anyway, fi you can find an answer to this, please let us know. When the Jacobites/Marthomites bishops are consecrated, they use a Greek word while they lift the Bishop who is seated on a throne (?). Ofcourse, the word Jesus and Christ are all Greek too! But how did the Greek influence creep into the worship service?

isn’ that Stoumen Kalos” and “Kurieleison are syriac or aramic? I saw the these in the grossary at the back of marthoma aradhana kramam . a page the says aramic or surani words and it’s malayalam meanings next to it.

Dear John,,

Thanks!

“Also, many (if not most) of the Church fathers were Greek or from Hellenized civilizations — hence the names of our bishops are often Greco-Roman.”

I have noted that most of our bishops have Greek based names like ‘Cooreleous, Thadeseous, Alexander, Irenius, etc.. I am pretty certain that the Jacobite church of the Middle East was ofcourse of Jewish/Hebrew origin, based on what Dr. Grant has written. That part of the world was highly Hellinized and I presume that our Church fathers were of Jewish/Hebrew in stock but with Hellenized names. Your valuable comment please.

Also I wonder what the names of the bishops of the grand old lady (Nestorian) church ‘The Church of the East’ were? Were they also Hellenized? If not inconvinient can you please give some sample names.

Dear George:

The Jacobite Church is a descendant of the Church of Antioch (the other main one being the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch; there are others that claim descent from the Church of Antioch as well–they are all Catholic). Antioch was an interesting part of the world where various cultures mixed, the Greeks, Romans, and various Semitic peoples (including the Jews). I think they mixed, not only culturally, but also genetically: remember, Alexander the Great (the progenitor of Hellenism) was big on mixing peoples together, and that resulted in people being less mindful of “caste” or “purity”. Probably that was how the Jews started to become a mixed race (which is another thing that makes the Knanaya claims so laughable: racial “purity” never really existed except in the minds of people like the Nazis, etc.).

Now for the early Church fathers, remember one thing: that era was after Christianity became a Gentile religion—it was after the era of the Jewish Christians (the Jewish Christians having lost the battle to Gentile Christianity). So the fathers of the Church (the “One Apostolic Catholic/Orthodox Church” of the Nicene Creed) were of many races: mainly Greeks, some Syrians (Assyrians/Arameans), some Romans, some Ptolomeic Egyptians, and probably some descendants of Jews. They were not solely (or even mainly) Jewish Christians, in general. That is why, in some of my earlier posts, I harp on the fact that it is funny that (1) some Nasranis like to amplify Jewish/Hebrew heritage while (2) belonging to Churches that are descendants of the very people that destroyed (or at least reduced) Jewish Christianity.

Dr. Grant was referring to those members of the Assyrian Church of the East (Nestorians) that were stuck up in Urmia. They are not the only Nestorians, but perhaps they were a special community of Nestorians that claimed some kind of origin from Jewish ancestors. Similarly, the Jacobites consisted of many different groups of peoples, including the Assyrians and the Arameans (who are not Jewish—they were the descendants of the ancient conquerors of Israel who—among other things—replaced Hebrew with the foreign language Aramaic.

Now, for the names of the Assyrian Church of the East’s prelates, you’ll be happier to know that they are from a far less Hellenized culture … some did come from Greek-speaking areas, including their hero Nestorius. And they certainly revere the early Nicene fathers who were predominantly Greek (with some Syriacs, and a few Romans too). But, since they were in the anti-Greek anti-Roman Persian Empire, they were free from Greek-envy. So some of their fathers’ names are: Mar Babai (their great teacher), Mar Isaac, Mar David, Mar Joseph, Mar John, Mar Simeon … you get the picture: bona fide eastern (non-Greek) and Old Testament names. You can surf the web for “Catholicos-Patriarch of the East” to find a list of names. You will definitely be happy when reading them.

Although the names don’t point to a genetically Jewish origin, they do point to a culture of people who really liked the Old Testament. The Assyrians felt they were the descendants of people like the Ninevites (people whom YHWH was angry with), and rather than be ashamed of such a pagan past, they honored it and took it upon themselves to atone for the sins of their fathers by rigorously observing fasts like the Rogation of the Ninevites (us Jacobites and the Syro-Malabar Catholics continue to observe this fast: I personally observe it even more rigorously than Lent…).

Dear John,
Impressive! thanks!
Your observation that the Nestorians that Grant was dealing with were perhaps an isolated tribe is difficult to accept as I believe that Grant was clear about the church and people he was after.
But I will pursue the matter.
I suspected that the COE did not have ‘Hellinistic names for the church fathers. YOu seem to agree with my suspicion. I have also seen the names you have listed as names of the fathers of the COE. But we need some strong debate on this.

It may also mean that the names of the church fathers of the Marthoma Church have today names that were allien to us before the Portugeese came.

It may be time now for the Marthomies to go back to ‘Mar Babai (their great teacher), Mar Isaac, Mar David, Mar Joseph, Mar John, Mar Simeon for the naming of their future bishops.…and I am not sure if the Yacoba and the Orthodox folks will desire it for their bishops.

I wonder what the names of the Bishops of the Chaldean Church of India are?

Dear Philip,
In my opinion (I believe that it is shared by many in this forum) is that the Nasranis of Malabar are not only of the original stock that was physically around St. Thomas in about 52AD but includes folks from small to large waves of immigrants/refugees from the Middle East and Persia. Most famous of the refugees being ‘Knai Thomas and his group and Mar Sabor.

Many (even Syrian Christians) do wrongly believe that the name Syrian Christian is related to the country Syria. We as a community have a long way to go to know our own heritage. I am now forced to agree with an unpopular judgement upon the Nasranis made by a cousin‘… the Nasrani does not use his brain…’.

Please note that the black Malabari Jews were Aramaic speakers and the refugees who came in were also probably Aramaic speakers.

Dear George:

That is why I keep on arguing with you that the Mar Thomite Church fathers did not intend to go back to First Century Christianity! They merely re-wrote the Orthodox faith along the lines of the Protestant Reformation. If they wanted to go back to pre-Portuguese Christianity they would have done like the Church of the East in Kerala and revert to the East Syrian rite — but they did not! They kept the West Syrian rites, customs and names and just made it compatible with Protestant/CMS teachings.

Anyways, I don’t want to debate this. How about you do this: next time you are in Kerala, purchase a Taksa (the Priest’s text) for the Mar Thomites and for the Jacobites and for the Nestorians. Compare and contrast them. I have done this (I never trust people or even books—I always go to the source). Then you can find the roots of why I’ve written what I’ve written. If I ever make it to Calgary I’ll bring all three with me and look you up and I can show you the differences and similarities in person if you like.

The bishop of the COE in India is named Mar Aprem. But Greco-Roman names are not foreign to them, e.g., Timothy is a name of their great patriarch of the 12th century (I think). And Tim is a Greek name.

Also, to be clear, the Greco-Roman names are not alien to us: they are the names of Universal Church Fathers. That they were Greek or Roman or Egyptian or Syrian does not make them foreign.

Dear Philip:

The term “Syrian” refers to the fact that the rites of our church belong either to the East Syrian or West Syrian traditions (the use of Syrian liturgies, language, and customs). The term does not, generally, connote anything more than that.

Of course, many of us Syrian Christians descend from peoples who come from the Middle East (Assyrians, Arameans, Jews, Arabs, etc). Mar Andrews came in the 17th century from the Middle East with his brothers; his brothers married locals and fathered two major Orthodox/Jacobite families (Mar Gregorios of Parumala descends from one of these families). Another Mar Cyril came from the Middle East in the 19th century; his brothers married local Indians; one of his descendants is a bishop in the Mar Thomite Church. There were probably several other cases of this too. Going back further, we have Mauravan Sabrisho who came from Persia/Middle East with several colonists—many of the Syrian Christians in Kollam, Kallada, Kundara descend from them. Then there was Thomas of Cana who supposedly fathered a gigantic segment of the general Syrian Christian community (recall Sungeo’s comment that originally, it was the majority Northist community that claimed legitimate descent from Thomas of Cana).

To repeat, the term “Syrian” does not refer to the nation Syria. It refers to the Syriac language whose speakers cover a large area of Mesopotamia, including Edessa (the classical center of Syriac culture), TurAbdin, Urmiah, Tigris, Antioch, and of course India. The original speaks of the Syriac language were the Assyrians and the Arameans.

People, especially in Kerala, are fast and loose with the details … they seldom do any research into anything (especially “missionaries” … who have depressingly low levels of intellectual ability) and so make silly, absurd claims like “we came from Syria” and so on.

The “head office” of the Syrian Orthodox Church (the “Jacobites”) used to be in Antioch in the distant past, but has since migrated. It’s currently in Damascus, I think. The “head office” of the Assyrian Church of the East is in Chicago. All other Kerala Syrian Churches (there are five) have their “heads” in Kerala, having split from the former two patriarchates over the last five centuries. And of course to be complete, my buddies, the Manichaeans (so-called “heretical” Syrian Christians, it can be argued) are all dead or have converted to mainstream Christianity.

Dear John,

Personally I don’t give importance to either ‘East Syrian Rite’ or West Syrain Rite. We need ‘Rites’ and I am of the opinion that we should ‘re write Rites’ as per the progressive revelations given to us by Yahoweh. This may mean editing it as often as is neccessary.

With all respect to my Marthoma forefathers who created the Marthoma Church (from a certain perspective only) I don’t think they had it in them the vision to follow the ‘First Century Christianity’ in it’s depth of meaning and practise. They only had a vague picture that it is wiser to follow First Century Christianity than the Angiican Church.

The warning words of our Metropolita telling Rev. Buchanan ”….. don’t touch (meddle) with our dignity’ would have been’ screaming in Prof. Kaithayil and Prof. Malpan’s and the other elders ears. They would not have sold themselves to the Anglcians. Yes!! They would have admired many things of the Anglicans but not to the extend of selling their identity (like Easow) to the Anglicans.
There is a clear line between admiration and selling ones identity.

You mentioned about some ‘court documents’. If ture, it is truly sad, that when people or churches go to court, they do a lot of things that are wrong. Court documents may say a lot of thing which do not have a direct bearing on the central issue.

It is now upto us, to built up the fallen walls Nehemiah did it, did he not? I want to believe, that is what we are doing. Remember that we love and respect our forefathes but also remember that they were not perfect This realizatin is key to the whole issue. In case you stick to your views that all that our forefathers did was right, then we will not reach anywhere.

We have to make them proud by being better than them. Every father desires his sons to be better than himself and not dogmatic aping of all what they did. You need to be traditonal, while at the same time improving upon traditions.

I even suspect that there is jealousy between a mother and her daughter, but never a jealousy between a father and his sons.

So let us builtup and repair the broken down walls, meaning let us be daring to have a new Rite and to renew our heritage and traditions.

Dear BGfromNZ:

I think we have to separate *creed* from *genes*! We all follow creeds foreign to India—as far as we know, there is no natively Indian creed! Everything the Nasranis follow comes from the Syriac peoples.

There is some evidence that our “patriarchal” DNA comes from the Middle/Near East, as Jackson and others have mentioned. Plus I do believe that the stories surrounding Mar Gregorios’ ancestry and that of Mar Cyril of the Mar Thomite Church are correct — after all, these immigrations and marriages happened in the last 4 centuries and have been well recorded (as far as I can see). And there are some indications of large migrations of people from the Middle East in the 8-10th centuries (I don’t believe that Thomas of Cana came over earlier than that — I think a lot of Kerala Church history dating is bogus…). And there are some indications of conversions and mixing between the Jewish inhabitants of Kerala and the Syrian Christian community.

*All* of these things would have left an impression on our gene pool, although I don’t think it would make us look any different in general.

If I understand genetics properly, when I examine my “patriarchal” DNA, it is telling me who my father’s father’s father’s father’s … father is. It isn’t telling me anything about my closer relations: my mother, or my mother’s mother or father, my father’s mother’s mother or father, and so on. My point: just because my patriarchal DNA says I am J2, or I have the Cohen Modal type, or am a North Indian Brahmin, or whatever, does not mean too much with respect to who *I* am and how *I* look because that patriarchal DNA ignores far more relevant data: my mother’s DNA and my close ancestors that are not in my patriarchal line.

For example, suppose John has a Black Mother and a White father. His Patriarchal DNA would read that he comes from one of the “European” types (those Near Eastern peoples who went westward), but *he* would probably look like a fair black person. And if he goes and marries a Black, and his son marries a Black and so on, then his great-great-grandson (via the pure male lineage) would still have a “White” patriarchal indicator, yet probably look as black as black can be.

*That* is obviously what happened to us! *One* single Assyrian, or Jew, or whatever, came over, had some fun with some native girls (as sea-men are prone to do), or maybe married a local Aryan/Dravidian/Munda/Adivasi girl. In doing so, he left his mark on his descendants — all of his male descendants (via the male line; son, son’s son, son’s son’s son) would have a J2 or R1a haplogroup, while looking just like the natives.

So we are obviously not Assyrian; however, the odds are, after several generations of mixing around, many of us have Assyrian patriarchal DNA and Indian matriarchal DNA. And, patriarchal societies being what they are, we all inherit the religion of our Assyrian ancestors.

Personally, my search for my ancestors is out of a desire for knowledge, not identity. I know who I am … even if my patriarchal DNA said I was Chinese or Sudanese or Jewish or whatever, the most I will do is thank that distant relative for his contribution to my genetic makeup, and continue on my merry way living the way my mother and father (far far closer to me than that fore-father!) taught me. Which is *exactly* what the general Malayali Syrian Christian does. He may go to the Church of his ancestor (or some schismatic faction related to that Church), all the while following the local Indian culture and customs that his recent ancestors lived according to.

By the way, as far as I know I never talked about people “looking” Assyrian, or white, or whatever. I was talking about the creeds and rites of the Syrian Christians in an earlier post. And I mentioned that there is some evidence of migrations from the Near/Middle East. But I fully recognize the single important fact that, regardless of the foreign origin of the migrants, there descendants were “diluted” via inter-marriage with Indians, so that now, several generations later, their descendants are more likely to look Indian and not Assyrian. Just like the Cohens in Africa look more like Africans than European or Palestinian Jews—because no matter who their fore-father was, their fore-mother was an African as were many of their recent ancestors.

Dear John,

No conflict between First Century Christianity and ‘Editing’our Rites’.

I will not blame you one ounce if you don’t see things as I do, in fact, I admire the way you snapped onto it.
The last divinely inspired Christian word is yet to be said. One of the greatest of all Christian acts was the abolition of slavery. That is why, way back I wrote in this forum that the ‘Gettysburg Address must be included in the Holy Bible’. (some may think that I am pro American).

Our NT is weak about anti Slavery. I suspect that many early Nasranis/Christians did have slaves. But it took us another 1800 years to fully admit that slavery is a sin.

Just last month the Pope called the usage of plastic bags a sin. But 30 years ago, the same Pope would have gone around shopping with plastic bags in his hands. That is why I marvel at the Catholic Church. She is orthodox and yet not hesitant to reform.

Reformations are acts of the Holy Spirit. It need not happen only to good and pious persons. The NT clearly tells us that the Holy Spirit came to all people. The key words to understand this issue is ‘Progressive Revelations’. In the fullness of time, Yahoweh will open our eyes to many things written and not written in the Bible. Yahoweh also said that in the last days, he will write his law upon the hearts of men’. This means further revelations from Yahoweh superseeding the Bible will come.

Now it can be legitimately argued (mostly by the conventional /established churches) that this will create chaos with every group claiming that Yahoweh has revealed certain things to them but not to others. There will not appear to be a uniform Christian Code,
Confirmed, that this will happen. But let us be brave for the Holy Spirit is no fool.

Dear George,

One of the main things I’ve learned from my interaction with people on this site is that the question of what the Nasrani is is highly variable — some believe that the Jewish culture is at the center (like you), others believe that it is Catholic/Orthodox Christianity (which is *not* Jewish), others believe that it is the synthesis of Middle Eastern religion and culture with Indian culture, and so on.

To say that Hebrew culture is at the “main tap root” of the Nasrani is representative of only one opinion. I’m sure many of us grew up hearing our parents illustrate ethical concepts from the Ramayana, and Mahabharata, in addition to the Bible. I know I did. I don’t think any Israeli would have.

I find the Hebrew origins to be fascinating, especially since I’ve always been enamored by the Old Testament. However, our community is an Indian one not an Israeli one. Our religion is Christianity, and not Judaism.

When I said that Gentile Christianity “won the war” I meant that modern Christianity (Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Protestant) is Gentile Christianity. Jewish Christianity died out, along with Gnostic Christianity, within two centuries after Christ.

Now, the issue of whether there is come mechanism behind all of this, is not something I’m concerned with. I respect Jackson for his knowledge of genetics and history, but I found his comments to be too “other-worldly” for my taste.

I don’t believe that there is a chosen race. I’ve read history, and my understanding is that the Jews and their religion is a descendant of earlier polytheistic religions. I personally believe there is One God out there somewhere, and that he has talked to all peoples. I don’t believe that he singled out the Jews, but I do believe that the Jews believe that they are a chosen race. I don’t care about what they believe though. I believe that the essential truth of monotheism has come out throughout history as people come to realize that there is One force out their somewhere that makes everything work and that loves us. This is where I’m coming from. I’ve synthesized science and spirituality into something that is consistent to me. So myth-driven talk (about chosen races, etc) is something I can’t accept, nor do I feel aligned with them.

Anyways, I don’t want to argue or debate this, because it’s in the realm of opinion and not fact. Just wanted to state mine…

Dear George

It’s wonderful to know that Jews/Nasranis have a particular behavioral pattern. The best choice you have is to keep away from those crook seniors. Having said so let me explain a little. From my point of view, the Marthomites here in New Zealand are a super sect who does all these hospital and rest home shit and vomits cleaning. You hardly find any other sect of Indians doing that. Did you mean that?

Contrary to what I have said, the truth is that I have some sort of lineage to your cult. One more thing you have to understand is that far-off from these this forum, there is an out side world with successful Indians (Christians, Hindus and Muslims). John speaks rationally just because he is among that populace.

George another fact is that what Hindus and Muslims perceive about Nasranis. Go and have a exploration on that. When they send their kids to a SF college in Madras or Banglore, the first advice for them is “be careful, there will be students from Pala and Kottayam.

I have noticed from your comments that you are always inconsistent and wavy. Because technically your versions are not compatible to shoot against some rationally erected comments. Perhaps you seem to be a retired man spending your good time on this forum, just judging the time you spent here. I do write when in office(tea or lunch time) or away from home (from my PDA), frankly I have a restraint from my family when linking to “Religious Blogs”. I also do write technical blogs related to my profession (IT analyst working for the Government)

Any way nothing grumpy, pleased to see all these fine people here.

Cheers

B. George

Dear BG,

YOu missed my point.

I believe that the Bible is inspired by God and written by the hand of man. Since it is written by the hand of man it has inconsistencies. and limitations.
Some take every word of the Bible as the truth in all ways, some take the spirit of what the Bible says. Anything that contradicts the core, ie. ‘ Love your enemy, do good that hates you’ is against the spirit of the Bible. This is the key sentence to judge by.

Yes! the Bible may have been altered (intentionally or unintentionally) ever so slightly but the spirit of it has not changed. It is now established that the book of Isaiah that we have today and what was circulating 2000 years ago is almost identical. Isaiah contains the great prophesy ‘… unto us a son is born, unto us a child is given and he shall be called Eternal God, Evelasting father…..’

We Nasranis don’t have to worry much about Bible alterations – intentional or unintentional. We gave the world the Bible and we gave the world Christianity. From the practical point of view, there is no difference between what we gave and what is circulating now. Our instinct, heart and guts tells us this.

But a tribesman from Vietnam may think that the words in the Bible have been subsequently altered by people since it was written. He is entirely new to the Bible and hence this apprehension. To such a tribesman (either living in the natural or concrete jungle) we have to witness in person and explain. As a Nasrani, it is your responsibilty, more than a gentile christian. You know well that the Gospel of Matthew as read by our very early forefathers and what is now circulating is practically the same.

Anyone who rejects the Bible on the grounds that it has been manipulated is just finding a reason to set the Book aside. Read the Bible and best of all listen to a Jew read the N.T.

I always talk about Jews because they are key to many good things.

Dear Philip,
Some days ago Jackson wrote to me or to us all that it is all wrong to say that Middle Eastern people are all fair and sharp featured. Those in the Gulf know that there are many middle eastern people who look just like Malabaris. Even many Persians look like us. But I will admit that most are fairer.
When the Hebrews came out of Egypt, they would not have been fair skinned as the Egyptians themselves would have been dark skinned.

An interesting point regarding our appearance is that we are growing taller. In 1974, I was 6feet 3inches and the tallest human in a radius of about 100 kms. In 2006 April when I left Doha Marthoma Church, I was pushed back to 4th place and if my son is counted then to the 5th place.

We intially thought that Nasranis are short. But better food and living conditions are making us taller.

Dear John,

Please would you advise about below,

You had a few days ago commented that ‘all the while, you were aware of our Hebrew/Jewish heritage, but you wanted solid proof of it and hence…..’.
Now it appears to me that you are saying that ‘…we are a mixed community of Jews, Arabs, Armenians etc…’. Can you please clarify!

Dear George:

Regarding my comments that you asked me to comment on … I think that a lot of different civilizations and peoples contributed to the genetic makeup of all of us. As you know, various peoples have come to Kerala in the past including the Arabs (as demonstrated by the Muslim Mappila community, as well as the Kufic inscriptions on our own cheppads), Assyrians/Arameans (as demonstrated by our East/West Syriac religion), Armenians (a more recent group of allied co-religionists who probably came over as merchants), the Chinese (as demonstrated by our use of Chinese boats—junks, hats, and pots—the “Cheeny Chetty”), the Portuguese and the British (I’m sure we have some of their DNA floating around … it’s inevitable), the Mundas, Adivasis, Aryans and Dravidians, as well as others.

So — yes, quite likely our community is a mixed mess of genes from around the world, much like many communities that lived on the “highways” or “cross-roads” of ancient times. Remember, with DNA testing—as far as I understand it—we can only examine at most our “patriarchal” and “matriarchal” lines. So, we can tell who our father’s father’s father’s … father is and our mother’s mother’s mother’s … mother is— but we can’t branch off and check in on any other arbitrary ancestor.

For example, although your patriarchal marker is J2, there’s no stopping your mother’s father from being Cohen—you can’t test for that, because the lineage of your mother’s father is neither in your matriarchal or patriarchal DNA (… again, I’m no expert, this is what I understand from a cursory reading of the subject). To test for that, you must get your mother’s father’s son’s son’s son tested, for example.

So although (1) our religion is Syriac and (2) our culture has a good dose of Hebraic traditions (immersed in a sea of Hindu and other traditions) and (3) our patriarchal DNA indicates J2 or Cohen, that still does not exclude genetic contributions from other peoples and races.

And just because our religion is Christianity with a dose of Hebraic traditions, we can’t discount philosophical influences from others either. (After all, religion is inherited purely on a patriarchal basis, so for example, although my mother is of Mar Thomite origin, I carry no influence from that). For example, some old Churches in Kerala have astrological signs on them (unless they’ve been destroyed by renovations). Perhaps that’s a Manichaean influence. Other Churches have feast days that are exclusively vegetarian — another possible Manichaean influence. Who knows what soup of influences make up our people!?!

Dear John,

Thanks!
I will agree that we are a ‘mixed group’ but only to a limited extend . In the hpothical case, my mothers brother’s son is represented in the tests results with Jacob. It is not neccessary that my DNA should show the paternal lineage of my mother.

But as heavily discussed, there appears only low mixture in patriachal genes are concerned. Biologically it is good if there have been Arab, Persian, Hindu etc. mixture as that may help us free from diseases and perhaps helped us reach the stage of atleast 6 million today.

The German Jews who were pretty orthodox, had their ‘mother’s DNA’ poorly represented by Judaism.

Please would you advise what is a ‘cheppad’ in your ****’Kufic inscriptions on our own cheppads
*****.
What has happened to your DNA test results? This DNA business is really like opening a can full of worms!

Dear George:

By “cheppad” I was referring to our copper-plate cheppads, which supposedly contain Kufic inscriptions (Kufic script was the predecessor to Arabic—it is the missing link from the Syriac script to the Arabic script, so to speak) in addition to Hebrew ones.

I believe our people are mixed—many of us (if not all) many have a J2 or Cohen ancestor, but these people married native Indians eventually! They had to—to prevent an undesirable inbreeding problem (and natural sexual drive being what it is) they would eventually have started to take wives from India. The Assyrians and others in the Middle East were likely not a bigoted as modern Malayalis are: I’m sure “inter-marriage” was not the big bad evil thing that modern irrational Malayali parents make it out to be.

Plus, go to Church and look around: our people have a variety of shapes and sizes and are inhomogeneous.

Dear All:

Re: the Synod at Diamper and the “Book of Persian Medicine”

Supposedly the Synod outlawed a book called the “Book of Persian Medicine”.

Can anyone confirm this and has anyone seen this book?

Thanks.

Dear All:

Re: Pahlavi inscriptions on the Mar Thoma Crosses

Does anyone know whether any Syrian Church used Pahlavi?

I’m trying to investigate the claim that the Mar Thoma Crosses are Manichaean. This claim is often made by the anti-Chaldean faction of the Syro-Malabar. Similar claims are also made by Protestant groups who wish to discount Indian Christianity.

I personally don’t care—I want to know the truth and will revere the crosses regardless. Does anyone know whether either the East or West Syrian Church used the Pahlavi script? Some Jacobites claim Pahlavi was never used by the East Syrian Church, and so ipso facto the crosses are West Syrian: such over simplifications may satisfy some Jacobites but I am not convinced.

All I know is that the prophet Mani claimed to be the Paraclete and Manichaean and Christian iconography often drew the Paraclete as a dove — which the Mar Thoma cross has at the top. That and the Pahlavi inscriptions (if any of the Syrian Churches or quasi-Churches used Pahlavi, I would bet on it being the Manichaeans) makes me think the claim has something to it.

The “Christian” tone of the Pahlavi inscriptions need not be proof against Manichaeanism: remember, the Manichaeans (like all good Gnostics) held themselves to be the true Christians and of course revered Christ.

Any input would be welcome!

John Mathew said
” although your patriarchal marker is J2, there’s no stopping your mother’s father from being Cohen—you can’t test for that, because the lineage of your mother’s father is neither in your matriarchal or patriarchal DNA (… again, I’m no expert, this is what I understand from a cursory reading of the subject). To test for that, you must get your mother’s father’s son’s son’s son tested, for example
If I understand genetics properly, when I examine my “patriarchal” DNA, it is telling me who my father’s father’s father’s father’s … father is. It isn’t telling me anything about my closer relations: my mother, or my mother’s mother or father, my father’s mother’s mother or father, and so on. My point: just because my patriarchal DNA says I am J2, or I have the Cohen Modal type, or am a North Indian Brahmin, or whatever, does not mean too much with respect to who *I* am and how *I* look because that patriarchal DNA ignores far more relevant data: my mother’s DNA and my close ancestors that are not.

These points i want to emphasis and i feel these points are important

Dear BGfromNZ:

Thanks for providing the link to the book by Easo: I had never seen that before. I want to get a copy of that book at take a look at who he cites for proof for these very interesting theories.

I think Church historians in Kerala have been pretty lazy … most works I’ve read seem to start from a post-Portuguese standpoint and then extrapolate backwards according to their own biased position.

Does anyone know if there are any genetics studies of the Chettys of Tamil Nadu?

Dear George:

I don’t want to argue about this (I prefer you argue with BG…), but I wanted to make one point. You mentioned “caring for the handicapped” as one of the Eastern/older virtues. I beg to disagree… there may be various differences between the old world and the new world with many positives from the old being absent in the new. But, let’s give the modern secular scientific rational world it’s due: in terms of taking care of the weak and feeble, the modern attitudes of decency far outweigh the old attitudes (still prevalent in older parts of the world) whereby the sick and handicapped are thrown away into “colonies” on the outskirts of society. You do *not* see this in the west.

Also I don’t agree with you about sexual “sins”: people have been doing the things you say for a long long time in the east and west, in ancient and modern times. For you to say that things are worse in the new world is only an indication of the freedom people get in the new world. There is no superiority in the east on this. People in small-town rural Kerala may be less promiscuous only because everyone’s eye is on them—not because of any inherent moral or cultural superiority. I’ve personally seen cases where men and women from “nice, ancient, strongly religious” families in Kerala move down to the U.S. (where they are free) or Madras (where they are free from the eyes of society) and start to do the *very* things you speak of. Finally, the movie “Fiddler on the Roof” is a movie that was about the pogroms that the Jews faced. It was not a historical movie discussing the sexual habits of Jewish females in medieval times. If you want to discuss that, you should look at sociological works, and not films. By the way George, if you had grown up in the West, you would know that Jewish girls have long been famous for those same “special” skills that you referred to in your post to BG.

Cuckoldry, adultery, premarital and “adventurous” sex (i.e., Kama Sutric-style activities) have *long* been a part of human society. Again, read a little history to see that the same things you see going on now have gone on throughout history. Just because village boys and girls don’t do it under the eyes of their community in Kerala, doesn’t mean they won’t do it when no one is looking. If you want to enforce virtue, you need a police state—but would you really want to live in that?

At the end of the day, if you raise your kid properly, he or she will be “virtuous” whether in the East or in the West, whether in Mavelikara or in Bangalore. And there are virtuous girls in *all* societies. But, just being a Nasrani and going to Church and speaking Syriac and believing you’re a Hebrew descendant does not necessarily mean your kids will turn out alright. In my observations of Malayalis in the West over the past 20 years, I’ve noticed a lot of contradictory things which leads me to believe that far more work is needed in raising a kid than simply adhering to traditions and culture. Many of the girls that I knew growing up that came from highly traditional homes ended up with the most “adventurous” sexual lives, while many of the non-religious girls ended up living normal lives. There is no guaranty that living the Nasrani lifestyle (whatever that is: it’s been in flux for the past two millenia) will result in excellent children that never have sex except when told to do so.

Dear John!

Author also states this information in Appendix B (Periods of Biblical Imortance after Christ)
40AD
St. Thomas visited the Palace of Gondaphorus along with Habban

48AD
St. Thomas returned from North India to Jerusalem at the time of ascension of St Mary.

52AD
St Thomas arrived in Kodungalure(other names: Muzris, Muchiry,Maliankara,Santrok,Antropolice,Moyri Kotta) via Socorta. There is one section of people whe believe that he came to Kodungaloor in 68AD along with Jews when Jerusalem was attacked by the Roman kings. However the tradition of Syrian Christians is that he came to Kodungaloor in 52 AD.The Jews migrated along with St Thomas were believed to be those settled in Chattukulangara(Kunnamkulam). Those People constructed the Kunnamkulam Arthattu Church.

72AD
St Thomas was killed in 72AD at Calamina in the land of Mazda(Masdai) on the coast of Persian Gulf in Arabia. This place was part of Greater India as already stated earlier. There is a StThomas Dayara and also church in the name of StMary at Calamina. This place is a port between Oman and Behrain in the island of Muhrak(Aruthus or present Arath). This is the place where King Mazda had his palace on the Arabian Coast in Persian Gulf. Bar Ebraya Catholicose of Persia and India (1225-1286AD)who was on the throne of StThomas for 22years recorded ” Mar Thoma was killed on the hill near Calamina. The dead body was buried in Calamina itself”. Alexander Severesus writes “St Thomas was killed with a spear made up of pine wood at Calamina. He died out of the wound at abdomen and was buried at the same place.” Calamina is a Persian word.

These were the information sources of his book

1 Christian Church by Rev.Fr.Inchackalody, Trivandrum 1954.

2 In the steps of St Thomas by Rev.Fr. Herman D’Souza,M.A.Med.Phd,

3 The secret Doctrine Vol.1&11,Theosophical University Press,

4 The lost years of Jesus Christ by Elizabeth Clare Prophet, 1987

5 Sugandha Nadu Nasrani History by Mr P.V.Mathew ,Cochin, 1984.

6 The Christians of Kerela by Mr Antony Korah Thomas, Malaysia, 1993.

7 Kanikunnam -Plathanam family history by Rev Fr. Iduculla, M.A, BD, GST, BEd.Menayathil, Ranny, 1993

8 Family Histories of Vadakedathu, Thumpamon by Mr Jose (Alexander Jacob), I.P.S, and also Thazhamon family, Ayroor by MrCherian Kurunthottiyathu.

9. The Cochin State Manual by Mr. C. Achutha Menon ,Government of Kerala,1995.

10 Mattancherry Palace by the Director General of Archiological Survey of India,New Delhi, 1997.

11 The Christian Churches in Kerala by Mr. K.U.John, November1995

Cheers

BG

Dear BG and John,
Well, I see that you don’t see what I see. Both of you talk only of parents influence on chldren. True, that is important but it is not all. Mordern Nuclear Family concept conditions our minds to think the family means ‘Father, mother and chldren’. The child (for that matter everyone) needs a much wider circle.

There is an English saying ‘You need a village to make a boy into a goodman’.
Majority of the Nasrani’s are today ‘nuclear family members’ hence it is understanable that they can’t think outside the ‘box’. It is not just this adult generation that is at fault, but even their parent’s generation. The problem has not been sufficiently addressed and hence insufficiently understood. For the vast majority of the Nasrani’s the thought process is ONLY NUCLEAR FAMILY.

The first point for recovery from an illness is to admit the illness. If you insisit that there is no illness, then there is no point trying a cure.

Dear John,

You see, we are not the only fools. Our parents have also been very foolish. Many of them do not still have an idea what are traditons. When I say, we have to follow traditions, we have to often go back several decades or even centuries and get hold of it.

The OT is a remarkable book. For it does not shy in finding faults with the fathers. It is commen to read in the OT ‘… for our fathers sinned against you O God…..’
When many of us have not seen good traditions, then how can we ever follow good traditions. We seems to have the task of building up the broken down walls of Jerusalem right from the foundation!
Without a clear vision of the walls and the city, there is no point in discussing tradtions. The vision must come first.

Dear George:

I would have loved to have lived in a setting where I could be with my grandparents and uncles and so on. However, it was not to be. And so, instead, I was raised by my parents alone.

And personally I feel that there was, in the end, no problem with that. My parents loved me and taught me all they knew and we had a very close family unit. My parents were simultaneously my parents, grandparents, uncle and best friends — I’m sure it was very hard for my parents to achieve all roles, but they did so. The nuclear family is not a choice, often, but a result of economic necessity. And *many* people have adapted to make it work. Similarly, many lazy people have expected their community or their village to help rear their kids only to end up disappointed, far too late. In the end, the more *robust* solution is for the individual parents to work hard at child-rearing and not expect other relations in the village (who often have conflicted interests and jealously, despite blood relationships) to pick up the slack.

You have pigeon-holed me into someone who hates or at least is ignorant of tradition, culture and history: that is far from the truth. My position is this: there are many ways to raise children. Even if you have a village to help, if your parents don’t care or are lazy, there is no point to the village sometimes. However, regardless of the method of child-rearing, if one’s parents are devoted, the child will turn out alright. The essential ingredient is the parent: the village is a bonus that can help. It can also hinder. There are many cases of how too many inputs have screwed up individuals.

Nothing is foolproof George. And quoting an often used English cliche does not amount to a proof of anything. I’ve seen people from India, Italy, China who have been utterly messed up by toxic family and village politics. And I’ve seen people raised by single parents who have turned out very well.

Anyways, I’ll stop debating here because the issue is multi-dimensional and nonlinear and there’s no point to discuss this further.

Dear BG,

When we debate or try to put forward an idea, we need not neccessarity have to practise it. We think about it, discuss about it. I am debating not preaching, if that will help.
You are seeing me as a preacher and not a debater. I can debate with you about the evils of the dowry system and yet take dowry on a personal level.
I surrender on this subject.

Dear Admin:

Thank you very much for your thorough responses to my queries—and for referring me to the 1925 conference! I will definitely try to dig up the proceedings of the 1925 conference to enlighten myself further, before asking old questions that may have been answered already!

Thanks!
John

Dear John,

Apologise if I am seen trying to corner you into a ‘pigeon hole’ called ‘anti traditions’. You are certainly for traditions.

Dear Admin
I dont hate “nasranis”. Definitely I cant tolerate the attitudes of many… firstly I want to eliminate the Namboodiri story, second the self glory attitude and thirdly I wish we could be more compassionate with other sects and classes. Except this forum I see daily how our people are suffering in different parts of the world, hospital jobs, driving taxis and buses…even in India when the price of ruber was down.

Regarding youtube and wiki comments, it was a time when I was a profound reader of “hamsa” and “Christian aggression” which did influence me a lot. Many of the websites say nasranis are “paraya converts” which is not believable either.

Also most of the world famous rationalist and atheist are nasranis… I did not accept your calamina story just because I have gone through this book. Whome should I believe? I see the profile of Easo more acceptable. I think the author’s family is well versed in Vedic Mathematics and Syrian history. When rest of the history he wrote is perfect, why did he make a mistake of 72AD and Mylapore.

Dear All,

I had sometime back wanted to know as to where the name ‘Mani’ (as in our Kerala Congress leader K.M. Mani) come from. It looked suspiciously same to ‘Mani’ of Manichaeism. K.M. Mani is from Pala and there are plenty of Marthomites going by the name Mani. I was then wondering if the name was from ‘Hinduism’.

From Wikipedia, titled ‘Manichaeism’ I read as follows,

“Mani is a Persian name found in all three Aramaic dialects and therefore common among its speakers’.
Since it is Wikipedia, I am unable to accept it at it’s face value.

Dear George Achaya!

I think admin too said that there are no relevant data to support manichaesim in Kerala.

********Catholic Encyclopedia ************************
History in the East
Notwithstanding the bitterest persecution by the Sassanides in Persia as well as by the emperors at Rome, Manichæism spread very rapidly. Its greatest success was achieved in countries to the east of Persia. In A.D. 1000 the Arab historian Al-Beruni wrote: “The majority of the Eastern Turks, the inhabitants of China and Tibet, and a number in India belong to the religion of Mani”. The recent finds of Manichæan literature and painting at Turfan corroborate this statement.

Within a generation after Mani’s death his followers had settled on the ****Malabar Coast ****and gave the name to Minigrama, i.e. “Settlement of Mani”. The Chinese inscriptions of Kara Belgassum, once thought to refer to the Nestorians, doubtless have reference to the existence of Manichaeism.
The great Turkish tribe of the Tuguzguz in 930 threatened reprisals on Mohammedans in their power if the Manichaeans in Samarcand were molested by the Prince of Chorazan, in whose dominion they were very numerous.

Detailed information on the extreme Eastern Manichæans is still lacking. In Persia and Babylonia proper, Manichæism seems never to have been the predominant religion, but the Manichæans enjoyed there a large amount of prosperity and toleration under Mohammedan rule. Some caliphs were actually favorable to Manichæism, and it had a number of secret sympathizers throughout Islam. Though not numerous in the capitol, Bagdad, they were scattered in the villages and hamlets of the Irak. Their prosperity and intimacy of social intercourse with non-Manichæans aroused the indignation of the Puritan party amongst Mani’s followers, and this led to the formation of the heresy of Miklas, a Persian ascetic in the eighth century.

Dear Admin,

I was wondering what your opinion of W. Germann’s allegation (as reported by the 1911 Encyclo. Britannica’s article on Manichaeanism found at: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Manichaeism) that Manichaeans lived beside the St. Thomas Christians in the 15th century? Does the Synod of Diamper make any reference to Manichaeans? How about the “Book of Persian Medicine” that was (supposedly) denounced at Diamper?

I understand and have read that in the Middle East, Gnostic Christians, Manichaeans, and Bardaisanites were persecuted by Christians and Muslims (with the Church of the East taking a dominant role thanks to its dominant position in the East). However, since in Kerala the Christians were, after all, a minority in a sea of Buddhism (in early times) and Hinduism (both of which were probably not hostile to Manichaeanism), I don’t think the Christians would have been in a position to severely persecute the Manichaeans. Moreover, being allied speakers of Syriac, perhaps the Manichaeans would have been seen as being somewhat close to us and hence it would not have been wise to actively persecute them (after all, minorities often stick together, until they become strong enough to fight!).

I’m not speaking from authority, obviously (just “brain storming” as George Mathew puts it!). But I think there might be more to this than meets the eye. I don’t think the Persian crosses are Manichaean, however, since like you mentioned, (1) the inscriptions seem very Christian (although, the Manichaeans had some Christian beliefs) and (2) Pahlavi was also used by Nestorian/Jacobites Christians (thanks Admin, for pointing this out!). But I also think that the absence of Manichaean monuments in Kerala is not proof against Manichaeanism either: after all, Christian monuments in Kerala haven’t been dated that far back, and the existence of our manuscripts also only goes back to the 13th century (as far as I can see from the SRITE project). Also, Buddhist monuments have turned up in Mavelikara after being buried in paddy fields for several centuries—perhaps there are similar buried Manichaean monuments…

Dear George,

If you go to Google maps or Google earth and see the terrain of Muharraq island you will see that it is pretty flat with no hills. The neighbouring island of Bahrain (called Awal in the olden days) has an elevation at Jebel Dakhan at a height of 122m. I am not familiar with the topography of Qatar, but Bahrain does have a depression right in its middle, which used to be a lake/sea. Many belive that is how Bahrain(land of two seas) got its name, its an island surrounded by sea, with a sea inside it.

And yes Bahrain had several oasis in around the island, being fed by an underground aquifier. It used to be called the land of a million palm trees. Infact the aquifier had so much water that in the olden days fresh water used to spring out from the shallow sea bed around Bahrain. And people used to collect the fresh water in goat skins from the sea!! But now with excessive use of ground water, brackish water has started to seep into the aquifier, and many of the lush palm gardens are dying. Some also belive Bahrain to have been the location of the Garden of Eden.

Dear All,

These discussions are great and intellectually stimulating!

I had been told that I am a SyrChr Nasrani but was in dark as my family never followed it seriously or told such interesting stories except when I read kudumbacharitram several years back when I was a college student and also at the time I got married (bride has to be a SyrChr!). I am from Protestant backround and married an Orthodox girl. There were some upheavel in my immediate family because all were Protestents or Brthern types. I just could’nt understand at that time.

My avid interest in History and Christian History brought me here and this is a good find.

Great place.. Keep the discussions flowing..

NSC,

I have also been in ill informed about my SyrChristian roots as I belong to a non-denomational church and grew up (and still reside) in an arab land where i did not see our culture being practiced however I still have a lot of marthomite relatives (including a few achens on both sides) but these articles have been very helpful since I have been able to understand why so many things are done in a peculiar way in my family.

I have a ‘Kudumbamcharithram’ book on our extended family but sadly it’s in malayalam though I will make an effort to decipher it as much as possible.

To add something intresting, my dad has often been mistaken to be a middle eastern person due to his face shape and color.. he has a long square face and fair skin..

Keep up the good work, it’s quite intresting to know the past!

GTJohn

Dear Jackson,

Thank you for your words of caution. I can see that there is a lot of speculation around here but for me, what intrigued me is how so many traditions are being still carried on .. like how my dad always said that I should be called Thomas (his father’s name) and not by my first name. I found that peculiar till i read on this site that it was a tradition…eitherways, I will post back if I find some intresting tidbits!

Regards
GTJohn

Note:
Indo-Israeli Relations. – Wikipedia

The world’s first Jewish-Hindu-Muslim interfaith leadership summit,spearheaded by Hindu and Muslim organizations in India and Jewish organizations in Israel, as well as the American Jewish Committee, was held in New Delhi on February 2007. The chief Rabbi of Israel, Yona Metzger, was actively involved in the dialogue, together with Swami Dayanand Saraswati. They stated that “The Jewish and Hindu communities are committed to the ancient traditions of Judaism and Hindu dharma respectively, and have both, in their own ways, gone through the painful experiences of persecution, oppression and destruction.”, among others.[44] Mertzger quoted:

“For thousands of years we have marched on parallel causes and have now built bridges of cooperation between the two religions. Jews have lived in India for over 2000 years and have never been discriminated against. This is something unparalleled in human history”.[45]

many of the things doesnt beat correct.for eg: grape wine made by nazarenese? LOL!ofcourse,now a days most syrians do make wines in their houses.

I read all the discussions on Knanaya. I felt there was some kind of reluctance from all to go beyond the claims in a historic level. I felt the people here know the answers but don’t want to give details. Other than Kezhakken everyone seems to hide more than what they say. Who are Knanaya ? Why do they do forgery and make all claims ? Why the northists side with them ?

Dear BG

That has nothing to do with what I am trying to find in historic level. Anyways thanks for your time. I eagerly waits for a united church. I dont want that at the expense of zealot faith our forefathers kept alive during those odd days. In a historic level there do are evidences for Namboodhiri ancestry. Not elaborating as it has nothing to do with Knanaya history. Any thoughts on historic level ?

Biju John: “….Now u guys want to connect you with Jews since they dictates the economy of America and America is ruling the world….”

Right. This is the way world moves. When some thing is more useful/relevent we all try allign to that by finding reasons/data. That doesnot mean people are cooking data. People just concentrate more on that point of veiw because they wanted that.

Biju John

You have got the history of the Black Jews vs White Jews in Kerala quite wrong. The former (Black Jews) were the first ones to arrive…during King Solomon’s reign or possibly following the destruction of Solomon’s temple at Jerusalem according to their tradition. They formed a thriving community of merchants and traders. Their leader Joseph Rabban was given a charter of privileges and rights around the 9th cent. AD. Following certain internal quarrels as well as adverse political events in Malabar such as the Muslim takeover of the spice trade, persecution by the Portuguese and Tipu Sultan’s invasion, they fell on hard times.

The White group arrived much later around the 16th century. The 2 groups quarreled at some point and remained separate.

I guess those numbers (if indeed they are accurate) don’t tell everything.

Some Useful links-

Kottayil Kovilakom-Manorama

Maldives Royal family

Where can I find the PDF file of Holy Qurbana Kramam of Marthoma Sabha?

Wow Dinesh, and you have done such indepth studies of these rarely seen cochin jew or jews of maharastha to be a expert on what a jew looks like huh?(sarcasm if you didn’t get it) Oh these pariwar types such frustrated pathetic little trolls. Go do something creative, idiot and stop being a bother on decent people’s pages.

Dear Mr. Dinesh Varma,

Your opinions are accepted in all logical sense but I have certain things to add to your “opinions” and make u ponder on certain similar aspects u raised…..

1. The ancestry of Nasranis: No, not all are Jews, not all are Hindu converts, not all are middle-easterners, etc. etc….. Nasranis are a heterogenous community with varied origins and many even mixed down the centuries of the above mentioned groups! We DO NOT maintain casteism when it comes to marriage alliances like the Hindu castes. So its logical a Nasrani is not a ‘puritarian creature’ by lineage. No ethnic community on earth for that matter can tace back to a single racial group for that matter, scientifically and historically. So whatever view is said is part of the truth, not ‘THE truth’.

Yes, so…. there are converts from all above mentioned groups of “human creatures” among the Nasranis. No-one is desperately “inventing” anything here. This site and such efforts are to unearth facts and not promote stories that makes people happy. You may take a thorough tour of this site and learn things for yourself if really interested since I read somewhere in your earlier post u are interested in Kerala Christian history. So yes, all thats around here is a part of that “history and heritage”…. like it or not Mr. Varma!

2. Whatever the caste was in the long distant past of whichever Nasrani descendent, today its irrelevant, so no one takes offence here on that, neither is anyone proud to meaninglessly boast of being a ‘tharavadi’ (though we all do like an occasional pat on our backs for something not of our making).

We all know how ‘tharavadi’ people are in today’s society and its the character/spirit of an individual that renders him ‘tharavadattvam’ or ‘kulamahima’ and NOT his genetic lineage. The latter is a distorted casteist disenlightened theory. Sorry to disagree. Its like the Vedic definiton of a ‘Brahman’. The one who “knows” the ‘Truth’ (Brahman, the Supreme) is a ‘Brahman’….. irrespective of lineage and virtue of birth. U should be knowing this atleast and all the other stories attached, which I won’t go into detail, with the Vedic scriptures. Rest of the definitions are made by societies and men for “feel-good” factor.

3. On your comments of Indian-ness: An Indian’s Indian-ness is not determined by his lineage or community heritage and history. Nasranis today from India, as any other community member in India, would still be valid holders of an Indian passport, if thats the criteria of “Indian-ness” !! I don’t know how else does a person’s lineage affect his “Indian-ness” or alienate/associate him. Childish thought I believe. Its determined from his/her contribution to that history and to the Indian society he/she lives in.

Now a question for you Mr. Varma……..

You got “angry” because u read about our middle-east connections and heritage (which is as much part of us as our Indian heritage). Tell me why do the so-called upper caste Hindus all over India (which includes the Varmas and Nambudiris in Kerala) are so proud about their “Aryan” heritage ??? Aryan just means ‘noble’ in Sanskrit which was distorted to mean a ‘race’ in casteist Indian society later. And as we all know, the Indo-Aryans are migrants into India in early Vedic history. So does your pride/association/claim of being of Aryan descent diminish/increase your “Indian-ness” ?? I could even see that pride in ur statement when u were explicitly stating your relation to the Tripunithura royal family. Just by virtue of birth isn’t it ? So now think and say what defines “Indian-ness”! So when the Aryan castes in India were/are linking themselves to ‘Indo-European’ or ‘Indo-Aryan’ migrants, should someone get “angry” ??? Definitely not. Its part of History.

Unearthing history is a part of learning and preserving it for better understanding of one’s past and heritage which forms a part of one’s identity. Its not as u said “some people are ‘trying’ to find links”. Its a learning process which was lying dormant otherwise.

Whether knowledge/facts make someone angry or happy is not the aim of this approach or this site or all those concerned here.

Hope the above “opinion” of mine has pacified your “anger” and kept your interest still going in Kerala Nasrani history with all its shades and dimensions. Thanks and Good Luck !

Jackson

It is really a great blessing that ‘the ancestral ways’ of Nazrani Christians are highlighted for the public. i Congratulate the organzers and expect the continuation. God bless you.

it’s great to know about all this website