I think the attempt to claim that Syrian Christians as Bhrahmin convert sounds pathetic and does not fit with the Christian tradition of humility and against lords and feudals.
Why will someone want to be called a Brahmin – A community that oppressed Dalits/Dravidians for so long?
I would rather you try to call yourself Jews.

I take seriously your sentiments on the historic injustices perpetrated against the Forest-Dwellers/Dravidians/Dalits by the Aryans; it can be said to be a form of racial and cultural genocide. However, this begs an inevitable question: If your premise is–sadly–true, should Nasranis of today who are centuries and culturally removed from that period in point, time, and place, feel culpable and guilty for the sins of their forefathers/mothers? Are we accomplices in their treachery? It is a deeply moral question and a deeply ethical question that transcends any theology as such and offers no easy answer. Nevertheless, the question must be asked. Empirical evidence has not given us solace on our origins. For example, the dates concerning the Aryan incursion have been contested, and even the Dravidians among us are colonizers for the Dravidian script, Brahui, has been found in Pakistan. And the beat goes on…..

Dear Sophia:

You wrote: “If your premise is–sadly–true, should Nasranis of today who are centuries and culturally removed from that period in point, time, and place, feel culpable and guilty for the sins of their forefathers/mothers?”

Is sin genetic? I’m Orthodox, so I don’t believe so, and so I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my ancestors. Of course, Catholics and Protestants who accept Augustine’s concept of “Original Sin” might feel different…

I think the fact that the first local converts were Brahmans seems to
be made up. I’m pretty sure that Mar Thoma would have converted any one
if they were willing, not just upper caste Hindus. Besides the chances seem slim
that upper-caste Hindus would just willingly convert to a foreign religion.
Most of these stories seem to be made up, they are fictitious.

The problem with Sooriyani Nasranis is the fact that they are a group of people
who completely don’t know they history. Like an orphan child. Mainly due to eradication
done by the Portuguese.

HI KIZHAKKAN i know that u are try to bring you research and that is good and when i went to your knanaya pages i was thinkin that who are nasranis too and do u think we are sepereate people from like u guys claiming regarding its orgin . if i observe things in our community thing are seems so much clear to me. There can be some mix in nasrani community there but the orgin seems strong to me. if knanayas been orginal from orgins, people should be look not only fair but atleat blound, big built, a non indianized nature or a different nature from indian life syles .But i know that some knanaite are looks different but that same on nasrani populations too. i believe it the matter that what nasrani forefathers and knanaya forefathers prespectives and thier choices they made reflects on the new excisting generations. What i felt in knanayas that they are sort of being in the white side that it seemS less local mixure may be compare to some populations among nasaranis and knanayas are just being superior that they are staying more in the white side but lot of keralites looks are posted on so many knanayas individuals and still saying we are orginals seems ???

Mr.Kezhakken has enlightened us with some wonderful information about Knanaya DNA tests.

“Mr. Cyriac Thannikary appears to support the above points. It shows that Knanaya has significant similarity with other populations of Middle East and India, in addition to Jewish. Mr. Cyriac Thannikary’s project has far more authenticity, details and analysis than the DNA study done by Suzanne Mazhuvanchery whose book was officially distributed at the KCCNA convention which includes her conclusion of Knanaya heritage based on DNA study.”

Whats the information in Suzanne Mazhuvanchery book on this subject ?

“Mainly due to eradication done by the Portuguese.”

I don’t think so. We should stop blaming others for our own problems: our ancestors never committed our history in any decent, permanent form, which is why have to resort to myths and story telling. Not just us, but many communities in India: it really does seem that Indians, apart from Asoka and the monument builders of old, really didn’t care too much about history. Or perhaps society changed a lot more back then—invasions, immigration, changing trade, climate, etc—so that our ancestors were more concerned with survival than property history-writing.

Whatever the case may be, our problems with history are not due to the Portuguese. If anything they, like the British after them, helped preserve what we actually had. And they engaged in some scholarly studies of what our origins were. If they didn’t have sufficient material to produce a continuous history, that was *our* fault.

Our ancestors handed their documents, artifacts, etc. to various foreigners: whether Portuguese, Dutch, or British. The old stories of how the “evil Franks” came, persecuted us, and destroyed our glorious history, are probably just stories, exaggerated over four hundred years by various politically-minded “scholars” of our own “caste” that, by their carelessness, screwed up our history by introducing bogus theories.

I have no idea of what philip is saying. I mean I just don’t understand what your talking about. Maybe you should reply back in a logical manner.

The Romans came to England some 1500 years ago or something. But I don’t see the Brits going on saying “we have Roman blood!….”

It’s possible to have foreign blood, when it comes to Nasranis. But you should also look into your other side as well ~ the Indian side, and your ancestors from a region which has a long history.

“among nasaranis and knanayas are just being superior that they are staying more in the white side but lot of keralites looks are”

Wow, I don’t exactly know what you’re talking about here. But it seems like you are a racist. You like to be considered as less Indian. And more “white”.

@ John Mathew
So I would you explain the fact that the majority of Keralite Christians belong to the Catholic Church (Syro Malabar Church)? and the latinization of the liturgical mass?

The Catholic Church during the Middle Ages, in Europe, was no different from present day Terrorist groups. Popes were like tyrannical kings who killed Jews and others. And the main language was Latin. I don’t believe that the Nasranis had any connection with this church until the arrival of the Portuguese. And the Portuguese who discriminated Jews (ex: 5000 Jews were killed in Lisbon in 1506) obviously hated seeing the Jewish influenced version of Christianity among the Nasranis.

“Not just us, but many communities in India: it really does seem that Indians, apart from Asoka and the monument builders of old, really didn’t care too much about history.”

Like who?

Indian history is ages old, its just that most Indians don’t care to look up who we were.
Everything that came from Buddhism or even Western philosophy (which influenced Christianity)
was all there ages ago in Indian Philosophy.

Aadu Thomas:

Go and read some actual history and come back. I’ve read the same garbage by various partisan historians, that depict the Syrian Christians in one of a hundred “noble ways” and decry the “foriegners” who came and destroyed our “purity”. Then I grew up, and started looking at the sources. Obviously you have not done either.

Regarding your “points”: Go read some actual history. Check teh SRITE project for a scholar’s point of view. Or you can read any of the old works about our history.

“I don’t believe that the Nasranis had any connection with this church until the arrival of the Portuguese.”

Well you can believe in whatever fairy tales you wish, but it is a fact that we were Nestorians, then CHALDEANS, and then the Portuguese came. The Chaldeans were Catholic. These are facts supported by cold hard evidence. No fairy tales or propaganda here.

“And the Portuguese who discriminated Jews (ex: 5000 Jews were killed in Lisbon in 1506) obviously hated seeing the Jewish influenced version of Christianity among the Nasranis.”

Many Christians hated Jews for various reasons at various times. The Roman Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Jacobites, Nestorians and Protestants have all hated Jews at one point in time.

Stop reading fluff and look for history that is supported by actual evidence. It would at the very least make you look less idiotic, and at best would enlighten you.

For your latter post:

Yes, many things were in Indian Philosophy, and Indian philosophy was very advanced. The only problem is that if one tries to actually *date* the ideas, one runs into incredible difficulty. It’s nice to be “proud” of your history (if being proud of another’s accomplishments, rather than your own, is your personal thing), but one should first be sure of what your history is. That is, one should look for history that is supported by evidence, not just some bigoted Priest’s distortion. Nasrani history is *full* of the latter.

Dear Aadu Thomas: (RE: Anti-Jewish Sentiments)

For a small sample of anti-Jewish sentiment in the Syriac Churches, you can go to http://www.archive.org and peruse various Syriac books. I’ll leave it to you to do a detailed study, if you’re so interested.

But as one small example, you can read
“THE HISTORY OF THE LIKENESS OF CHRIST, AND OF HOW THE ACCURSED JEWS IN THE CITY OF TIBERIAS MADE A MOCK THEREOF IN THE DAYS OF THE GOD-LOVING EMPEROR ZENO.”
which is found in a Syriac text with title: “The history of the Blessed Virgin Mary and The history of the likeness of Christ which the Jews of Tiberias made to mock at”.

The text has two volumes, one Syriac and one English.

I believe this text is common to both Syriac traditions.

You can also check the West Syriac rite. I know the Shimmo has some anti-Jewish comments (“cursed people of the Jews”), and have heard (but not verified, since I don’t know Malayalam too well and have not seen the Syriac sources) that some of the Good Friday hymns express anger at the Jews.

The point: the Western R.C. are not alone in expressing anti-Jewish sentiments. I know the Wikipedia article on the Nasranis speaks about how the R.C. came over and obliterated the old “Jewish Christians” in Malabar, and replaced it with an anti-Semetic version of Christianity. I think this is not a *fact* but is a bit of distortion and creative story writing (e.g., since when did the Persian Cross become a “Nasrani Menorah”!?!). The reports of Diamper and most scholars say that we were Nestorians and not primitive Judeo-Christians as some Protestants and revisionists would have us believe. And if we were Nestorians, we were most certainly not too dissimilar from the Portuguese, Latins, Greeks, West Syriacs, etc., with respect to the Jews. Perhaps it was our Indian tolerance that caused us to not go around killing them?

But of course, the Syriacs and Greeks were dissimilar from many of the Latin and Slavic European nations (Orthodox and Catholic) who engaged in genocidal pogroms against the Jews. I think the Eastern/Oriental way of doing things was to just argue and write polemics and diatribes; not to actually go out and massacre people. Well… not quite. Let’s not forget the battles of the Melkites against the Jacobites, Jacobites against the Nestorians, Nestorians against the Jacobites, Jacobites against the Maronites, Maronites against the Jews, and so on…

Just reporting some data.

These are very good effort to make people aware of the history. I have one question that is bothering me for a long time. When was the day of worship in Kerala when St: Thomas estabilshed the churches?

Correction, It sholud read What was the day of worship?

Dear Titus,

Based on the evidence I’ve seen, we can not make assertions about what happened anytime before the 10th century, at best. To be conservative, the earliest documented evidence pertaining to the Kerala Church starts from the 16th century, with one 13th century document supposedly in existence. If you want to go into details on this evidence, there are three main sources:
1) SRITE,
2) the works of the Portuguese who were in close contact with us during that era, and
3) the works of the Maronite Assemani family.
For 1) and 2), if you know English you’ll be okay, though for 2) Portuguese can’t hurt. For 3) you’ll probably need to know Syriac and Latin.

If you want to know what was the case as of the 16th century, you can read the proceedings of the Synod at Diamper, available online at Google Books.

If you want to know what was most likely this case if the Church of Kerala was indeed part of the Church of the East for its pre-15th century history (which is likely, given what evidence we do have), you can go and study the canons and faith of that Church.

If you want to read myths that tell you *exactly* what St Thomas did when he came in AD 52, you can read any one of a number of possibly bogus stories concocted by Kerala Church “scholars” over the years. This is the least satisfying route, intellectually, but may help you to go to bed at night if you enjoy fiction over fact…