Talk:Syrian Malabar Nasrani

Need of a new section - Archaeological Findings

I think this article needs a new section detailing the archaeological findings like Muziris,various plates and roman coins discovered of earlier trade.I request readers opinions.I can come with a draft.

Maharshisy , 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No proof for semitic ancestry for St. Thomas Christians in Kerala

It's quite absurd to assume that the earliest Christian communities in Kerala were all converted Jews. Is there any proof for your forged story? The official view of the different churches in Kerala contradict this view and the Syro Malabar church has been in progress with Genetic Profiling of the community members. I'm quite surprised that how the contents of this page have been changed drastically from the Year 2004 to the current version. Please don't forge history to satisfy your egos. You can prove that Jewish settlements were already established in Kerala long before Christ. But is it a proof for your story? No historian can out rightly reject traditions and legends of the local community while their own history is the matter of consideration. Bible was written centuries after Christ, but still considered historically valid document. Old Testament is full of traditions of the Jewish Community and still historians refer it vigorously. Vedas, Ramayana and Mahabharata can't be denied historical significance while Indian History is under consideration. Then why the traditional beliefs of the community under consideration have been denied a space in the history without any valid justification. Your story is just paving the way for a contemptuous designation "Migrated Christians of Kerala". All the references you indexed here say different aspects and possibilities, but you hand-picked one side of the story crookedly to fabricate the history with some malicious objective. So I have modified the document to give a space for the traditional beliefs of St. Thomas Christians in Kerala.

Ashley Thomas(ash.simple@gmail.com)

DNA evidence of jewish descent of Nasranis

For latest research on Nasrani heritage and Jewish descent. Please refer to research by Dr Mini Kariappa, of Department of Anatomy, Jubilee Mission Medical College, Thrissur. Dr Mini Kariappa has done DNA analysis of syrian malabar nasranis and found evidence of Jewish descent amongst the Nasranis. She presented her reserach on september 5th 2011 Please read current research before being believing in ancient legends of Brahmin conversion. It is time to give up on casteism.

There was a link of her interview in the malayalam language that was published in a malayalam language newspaper in Kerala. Here is the link http://www.manoramaonline.com/cgi-bin/MMOnline.dll/portal/ep/malayalamContentView.do?contentId=10033956&programId=1073753770&channelId=-1073751706&BV_ID=@@@&tabId=11Robin klein (talk) 21:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Your reference again contradicts your theory

The thesis of Dr.Mini suggests that the ancestry of Bhattacharyas, Aiyars, Aiyangars, Chitpavan and Saraswat brahmins-who altogether constitute more than 60% of the entire brahmin community in India- also could be traced to Jews. But many of the communities mentioned above have conducted independent Genetic Profiling and DNA analysis which they have uploaded in Wikipedia itself. These analyses very well suggest that they belonged to Indo-Aryan ethnic group. If Dr. Mini found Semitic genes in the genome of these brahmin communities along with Syrian Christians of Kerala , it well suggests the traditional belief of the latter community. Inter marriage between different ethnic groups in the earliest Syrian Christian community caused some Semitic genes to be mixed in the Syrian Christian genome. Let's wait for the outcome of official research being conducted by Syro Malabar church, since Dr. Mini was not an expert in that field. Until then, the tradition holds the lime light. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.72.195 (talk) 08:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

No my logic does not contradict the theory as proposed by numerous researchers. But your logic does show your casteist intentions. Besides it is interesting to see how despite evidence of Semitic descent you call it unsupported. While there is no need of any citations or evidence for numerous of your claims. Well if your casteist intentions make you happy then let it be. Your words betrays your casteism Robin klein (talk) 09:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

* And your Jewish version is not racist? Other than Menachery, who are the other researchers? Can you give any official website suggesting you view? How silly you call many of the given data as evidence?

My view is open - unless otherwise proved, you can't change the official history of concerned churches. I do not disagree that there were Semitic people among earliest christian community in Kerala. But it will be absurd to believe that all were Jewish converts. If your "All-Jewish" version is not racist, then what else? Even the ministry of Christ would become invalid if only Jews were baptized in India by His Apostle. Cochin Jews still keep their Jewish traditions, rituals and culture upright while the Syrian Christians uphold Indian culture to a great extend. If Syrian Christians were 100% Jews, their reference group could never have been changed like this. Your theory is full of Faults Mr.Robin. Please try to comprehend the complexity of Nazrani History. -Ashley

POV edits by Ashleypt on the page Syrian Malabar Nasrani

I have to say that User:Ashleypt is not accurate when he says that there is only one editor with whom he is involved in a dispute. There are other users as well who have reverted his POV edits. Please see the history of the article [[1]] Other editors involved include User:SpacemanSpiff and a user without an account 117.201.250.33

Ashleypt has been deleting references and adding his own ideas and now incorrectly stating that there is only one editor with whom he is involved in a dispute. He has further stated there is no proof yet about Nasrani descent. However I should state that the latest in research concerning Kerala Malabar Nasrani heritage proves Jewish origin as long hypothesized. For latest research on Nasrani heritage and Jewish descent. Please refer to research by Dr Mini Kariappa, of Department of Anatomy, Jubilee Mission Medical College, Thrissur. Dr Mini Kariappa has done DNA analysis of syrian malabar nasranis and found evidence of Jewish descent amongst the Nasranis. She presented her reserach on september 5th 2011. There was a link of her interview in the malayalam language that was published in a malayalam language newspaper in Kerala. Here is the link http://www.manoramaonline.com/cgi-bin/MMOnline.dll/portal/ep/malayalamContentView.do?contentId=10033956&programId=1073753770&channelId=-1073751706&BV_ID=@@@&tabId=11

Ashleypt is trying to promote a casteist idea of nationalist supremacy that aspires to assume a 'supposed' superiority of the supposed elite 'Brahmin' hierarchical casteist society by trying to state that the Nasranis are brahmins. I should remind you that the Malabar Nasranis were persecuted in the Portuguese analogue of the Spanish inquisition known as the Portuguese Inquisition with the Portuguese burning hundreds of Syriac documents. Kindly see to it that Wikipedia does not become a platform where people propagate age old casteist ideas. Ashleypt does not give any support for stating the legends of brahmin descent saying that these are long held ideas. Denying and even brushing aside the latest DNA results. The latest DNA result shows the admixture of Jewish diaspora and local keralite society within the Malabar Nasranis. Which has always been stated in the article. In fact he distorts the admixture with local people as admixture with Brahmin, which is incorrect and at the root of the problem. Again to repeat. The article has always maintained that the Syrian Malabar Nasranis are an admixture of local South Indian Malabar people and the Jewish people just as latest DNA results support. However Ashleypt is in the attempt to remove the mention of local admixture and make it seem as brahmin. Ashleypt is not concerned or interested about the admixture of Jewish diaspora with the local keralite society within the Malabar Nasranis. Instead his real interest is the supposed 'Brahmin superiority'. Ashleypt is introducing pov to the page Syrian Malabar Nasrani and started an edit war. Several editors have reverted his edits yet he insists on adding those pov. He does not sign his talk and edits pages without logging into his account. thanks Robin klein (talk) 13:36, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mr.Robi Klein, can you show any usage "converted brahmins" or something like that, in the main article as modified by me? More over it's our tradition, and even if I mention anything like that, I think, there is nothing wrong in it until it's proved wrong. Dr. Mini Kariappa's research confirms our traditional beliefs as she found genetic resemblance of Syrian Christians with many prominent brahmin sects in India.

--Ashleypt (talk) 11:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

• • Dear Mr Ashleypt there is a passage where you have mentioned ....."a multilingual and multi-cultural society was existent in Musiris in which the elite Dravidians, clergy-class Aryan-Brahmins......", so there is implication of "converted Brahmins". Besides what do you mean by elite Dravidians. Are you saying that non elite dravidians were not allowed to join amongst the midst of 'Aryan-Brahmin'??

• • You said it is traditional belief that brahmins were converted. You also state that Dr Mini's research confirms the belief. No it does not. The work of Dr. Mini Kariappa only states that the admixture of Jewish genetic heritage could be traced amongst several ethnic communities. It only implies the extent to which the Jewish diaspora had admixture with the local people. Anything more than that is indeed personal biased interpretation. You also said that it is traditional belief regarding brahmin conversion and so there is nothing wrong to mention it. No sir that is not so. Let me remind you. The traditional belief of the church was that the earth is the center of the solar system. They persecuted the great scientist Galileo for questioning that 'Traditional' belief. However even the church apologized for the persecution of the scientist and the erroneous assumption of the sun revolving around the earth. It is important to cite latest research and replace traditional beliefs. I am glad that is also what the church has done at least in the recent past. Going by the example of the church that you have been stating so often, It is time to discard the traditional belief of casteist superiority and Brahmin conversion.

• • What do you mean by ELITE Dravidian??

• • The definition of Mapilla given by Herman Gundert "a title used to denote Semitic immigrants from West Asia" is most widely accepted around the world. Please do not forget that Herman Gundert was a scholar of the Malayalam language and wrote the first Malayalam Dictionary. There are several other definitions proposed for the term Mapilla by innumerable writers but the are not linguists who painstakingly engaged in research to write a dictionary. Please do not undermine the works of Herman Gundert. thanks Robin klein (talk) 13:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I was able to attend this meeting of Dr Mini Kariappa at Kuravilangad near Kottayam on September 5, 2011 in which she gave a detailed report of her findings on the Genetic Origin of Syrian Christians of India. The meeting was presided over by Dr. George Menacherry and was attended by a number of historians. Dr Mini Kariappa, a Doctor of Medicine, did her research in Hydrabad. Those who wish to see a very brief report (the gist of her research only) of this, please refer my edit on September 5, in this article, but that was promptly deleted the next day. If you had listened to her talk I am sure this discussion would have been different. (This note does not mean that I agree with all her findings.)Neduvelilmathew (talk) 17:44, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

---

• Meaning of "elite" in Cambridge Dictionary- "the richest, most powerful, best educated or best trained group in a society". In Sanga Age, it was Indus Valley people who dominated in Chera, Chola and Pandya Kingdoms. There is no question of non-elite dravidians as I have used that adjective for entire Indus Valley people who were kind enough to welcome all the later groups seeking greener pastures. I thing no more explanation is required for it.
• I'm again quoting Prof. Menacherry: ""When she shared her findings with me in 2005, I included a sentence about her finding that the Chitpavan Brahmins, the Tulu Brahmins, the Namboothiris and the Nazranies or Syrian Christians all have the same DNA factors i.e. those of the Jews"." Kindly visit the website which I have referred to. Prof. Menacherry was presiding the meeting and and he has put such a comment in the website supporting the traditional beliefs. So it's not my personal biased interpretation.
• Till now, we believed photons the fastest in universe. It was proved by none else, but Einstein. Now CERN claims Neutrinos are faster than photons. In such conditions, how we could believe any research in the 1st shot? I admit there is some confusion over the genetic lineage of Syrian Christians, and needs more research. So is the case with the definition of term "Mappila". That's why I prefer the merging of different projects on this subject. Let the truth come out. Till then, it's quite genuine to believe that our ancestors didn't lie. Such issues are there with many other castes/races like Nair, Namboothiri or aryan, dravidian etc. But they all stick to their traditions and proud in it even though many of their beliefs are not supported by other people. History is always like that and will remain uncertain against Einstein's belief: "God will not play dice with universe"

Dear Robin Klein and Neduvelimathew,

• Please note the view of mediator in Dispute Resolution Board: "For there to be a true scientific consensus Dr. Kariappa's research would have to be verified by other research teams and published in a scientific review or in a respected textbook. Until then it is probably best to say something like 'a study by Dr. Mini Kariappa found evidence of Jewish descent amongst the Nasranis', and not make the claim any stronger than this, as it could yet be refuted by subsequent research." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleypt (talk • contribs) 13:50, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Let me also take part in the discussion.

1. First, There was no caste system at the time when St.Thomas was here for conversion.There was Indo-Aryans (Who possess R1a genetics) and dravidians (who possess L type genetics)
2. Maggi Kariappa's study proves that Majority of Syrian christians(with the exception of Thekkumbhagar,a.k.a knanayas who possess L type genes) possess R1a genes, which is also shared among chit-pavan brahmins,ayyars and ayyangars (There is no cast-ism here)
3. The science says the truth(here genetics). R1a is the genes possessed by many others too. Like most of the sikhs, Some tribes of Tibet, Some peoples in Russia. All recent studies proves this theory and narrates it as Aryan Invasion of India.
4. The study was conducted by using y-DNA tests which narrates only the Fathers side. But m-DNA tests says about the mother's hereditery.

111.93.111.243 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC).

Cochin Jews

There is no mention of Cochin in any records before 1341 AD. Most probably Cochin was formed only after the floods in 1341 AD. So there is no chance for Cochin Jews become Nazrani. Paradesi Jews came to Cochin much later. In the first century, there was a Jewish Community in and around Muziris and they had their own Synagogues. Like other disciples, St. Thomas also preached in these synagogues. So the names, Cochin Jews and Paradesi Jews are deleted. I doubt very much that the Cochin Jews and Paradesi Jews ever joined the Nazrani or Christian groups. To make this clear only the name Jews is added. Neduvelilmathew (talk) 04:24, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mathew, I appreciate your views. It's quite illogical to assume that the earliest Jews in Kerala were Cochin Jews. Both are different communities. So let's just mention them as Jews.

Also I have removed some casteist statements from the portion under Caste Status. I believe those statements if included could deteriorate the beauty of the article. --Ashleypt (talk) 09:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of concerns like this, the problem with this article and St. Thomas Christians is that they both cover the same group, but they try to draw artificial distinctions between the "Nasrani" and the "St. Thomas Christians". They're synonyms, but the articles have become so confusing that no one has taken the initiative to clean them up. Until they are merged and completely rewritten, the articles will remain in the same poor state.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Dear Cúchullain, the idea of two articles is to have a page dealing with the community as a single ethnic group Syrian Malabar Nasrani and another to deal with their myriad religious variations within the broader frame of Saint Thomas Christians. This is done for a lot of different people who have a single ethnic identity but variation in religious and historical practices. E.g. Parsi dealing with the Parsi people as a single identity and Zoroastrianism dealing with the long diverse history of the people with diversity across Iran, Asia Minor and India. This happens also with pages like German Culture and Germany, and Jews dealing with the Jewish people as a single ethnic group and Judaism dealing with the diverse and long and complex history of the Jewish religious practices across the Jewish Diaspora. The same thing is the case with Syrian Malabar Nasrani and Saint Thomas Christians. thanks Robin klein (talk) 14:46, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I am aware of the stated reasons for having two pages, but they don't hold water. Everywhere besides Wikipedia, wherever "Nasrani" applies to India, it is a synonym for St. Thomas Christian. Our articles are totally redundant. Even worse, the term "Syrian Malabar Nasrani" is an uncommon construct that appears virtually nowhere outside of Wikipedia.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:52, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, the term is not an ethnic one; "Nasrani" (or "Nazrani") simply means "Christian". "Malabar" just refers to the region. And "Syrian" is just thrown in there to emphasize the connection to the Church of the East – ie, the St. Thomas Christians.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:03, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

It's better to move the article to Saint Thomas Christians. I came to observe the article Syrian Malabar Nasrani while searching Nasrani in Wikipedia and later on I was surprised to see another article Saint Thomas Christians with some contradictory contents on comparing both. In India, both the terms Saint Thomas Christians and Nasranis are synonymous and as Cúchullain stated the term Syrian Malabar Nasrani is an artificially formed name. But I would like to clarify that in India, the term Nasrani is exclusively used for Syrian Christians of Kerala only, not for all Christians and it should be considered as an ethno-religious group. The confusion could be avoided using Disambiguation page. If it is moved as suggested, we could concentrate in improving a single article on Nasranis, including the ethnic aspects as suggested by Mr. Robin. --Ashleypt (talk) 09:56, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

NO, Moving this is an impractical idea. The contents are too huge and is not all the same in both the articles. In any case it is not possible to put all information on the same page. If at all one of the pages could be forked as an sub article of the other. Which is already the case. Besides the term Nasrani is the ethnic term for all Saint Thomas Christians. Even Geroge Menachery has a volume called as Nasranis and another set of volume titles Saint Thomas Christian Encyclopedia. The two terms are distinct though with lots of overlapping themes. thanks Robin klein (talk) 10:08, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I think it's not proper to differentiate the term "Nasranis" as the ethnic name and Saint Thomas Christians (Marthomma Christianikal) or Syrian Christians (Suriani Christianikal) as corresponding religious group. All these terms are interchangeable in any context as far as Kerala's religious and ethnic landscape is considered. --Ashleypt (talk) 10:41, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am not making the differentiation. Wikipedia is not a place for original research where I or anyone else can try and make any differentiation. I am refering to the works of George Menachery. He has published a volume called Nasranis and also has set of volumes called Saint Thomas Christian Encyclopedia. They both are distinct though as I said have overlapping themes. thanks Robin klein (talk) 10:56, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

In terms of India, "Nasranis" and "St. Thomas Christians" are synonymous. "Nasranis" isn't an "ethnic" term any more than St. Thomas Christians is. And "Syrian Malabar Nasranis" is a made-up term that barely exists outside of Wikipedia.--Cúchullain ^t/c 12:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

A few minutes before, I contacted Prof. George Menachery over Phone( His Num:+919846033713) and asked his opinion on this subject. He was so kind to intimate me that both the terms Nasranis and Saint Thomas Christians are same in meaning and could be used interchangeably. For clarification you could contact him over EMail: kunjethy@yahoo.com. --Ashleypt (talk) 12:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

The real solution is a merge, rather than a move. It will be a huge undertaking, but it needs to happen.--Cúchullain ^t/c 12:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

How we could initiate it? Any procedures? --Ashleypt (talk) 13:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge notice

I have started a merge discussion at Talk:Saint Thomas Christians#Merger proposal.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

If the article is going to be merged then one has to remember that probably hundreds of article link to syrian malabar nasrani. A lot of pages would loss link unless every link is restored.

All though I would say that a much better and appropriate thing to do would be to move Syrian Malabar Nasrani to Nasrani Mappila or Malabar Nasrani as a more distinct ethnic term than a term involving religious variations like saint Thomas Christians. thanks Robin klein (talk) 14:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

There wouldn't be a problem. If the page were merged, "Syrian Malabar Nasrani" would remain as a redirect to St. Thomas Christians, as would all the other redirects that currently point here.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Again on second thoughts would it not be better and appropriate to merge both Saint Thomas Christians and Syrian Malabar Nasrani to a page like Nasrani Mapilla or Malabar Nasrani or just Nasrani as Nasrani is the traditional appellation for the said people. thanks Robin klein (talk) 15:10, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Let's keep the discussion in merger discussion section. I've replied over there.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Support: The name Syrian Malabar Nasrani is vague, especially for a non-Malayalee. The word Syrian is misleading; the word Malabar is an anachronism and the word Nasrani is unfamiliar to many. Wikipedia articles are read by people all over the world. But the name Saint Thomas Christians (not St. Thomas Christians) is specific and more suitable for a worldwide publication. So, I support the merger. Neduvelilmathew (talk) 18:00, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

(Just a note that have added own Support on correct, target page. User above may wish to copy across) In ictu oculi (talk) 07:30, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Overkill

What ever the outcome of the current merge discussion, will someone who has had a fair involvement with contributions to this article please read WP:CITEKILL. I realise that is an essay rather than policy but, honestly, the number of citations being given in this article for simple, often single sentence, statements is ludicrous. I cannot think of an instance here where more than two citations would be required, - Sitush (talk) 13:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)