A recent newspaper report on a statement by M G S Narayanan stating that the claim of Christians in India about he founding of Christianity in India by St Thomas ,one of the 12 Apostles of Jesus Christ is a fabricated story, has been received by general public with a great sense of shock.it is understandable that Sangh parivar(of which MGS is considered to be a fellow traveler)makes such statements. MGS is known more as a historian than as a Sangh parivar camp follower .
It is true that there are Christian historians (mainly from western Churches )who refuse to accept that the Christian Church in India is found by St Thomas. Some of the Indian historians like Elangulam Kunjhan Pillai have also found the historical evidences inadequate for proving the legacy of St Thomas. The western Christians had a bias ,Indian Historians had a point in heir arguments based on certain methods of Historiography they followed . The only inconstancy found in their deduction is that if the same methods are applied, many of the events prior to 3rd Century AD will also fall into the same category .
However, MGS is basing his arguments in support of denying the St Thomas tradition on he following grounds:
1.There were no Namboothiris in Malabar at that time.
2.The land was occupied mainly by primitives.
3.Gondphorus was a King in Afghanistan not in Malabar
4.St Thomas had no way to communicate to he local population due to language barrier
It is very surprising how a great historian of MGS's caliber can base his arguments on such flimsy grounds
Of course it is believed that there were 4 Brahmin families among those who accepted Christian faith as a result of te evangelization of St Thomas . But they were not the only ones converted to belief in Jesus Christ, nor were the early Christians consisted of only Brahmins. Gospel of St Thomas was universal and all sorts of people joined Christianity. To say that Brahmins did not exist in Malabar prior to the Aryan occupation in the third century will mean that there were no sanathana dharmis or temple worship in Malabar prior to the Aryan occupation. Probably the Brahmins occupied a very dominant and powerful position in the society post the Aryan occupation .But the fact remains that there were sanathana dharmis and temple worship in Malabar prior to 1st Century AD.
The point that the land was occupied by primitives is partially true . It does not men that there were only primitives in Malabar prior to the Aryan occupation. .It is a settled position that foreign trade was flourishing in Malabar many centuries prior to Christ. Foreign trade cannot take place in a land where there are only primitives . For successful trading ,need of persons with knowledge of foreign languages ,navigation,. value of different commodities and.currencies are needed.. While large part of the population might be primitives , there were a decent number of educated people too .
Recently some historical evidnces were found about the existence of a King by name Gondaphorus in Afghanistan ,whose reign was in 1st Century AD .. The book Acta Thoma written in the 3rd Centaury AD states that St Thomas came to India to build a Castle for King Gondaphorus .It only strengthens the legend of evangelization in India by St Thomas .In the middle east in ancient times,India was a broad term that represented a large portion of Asia . Hence Gondaphorus being an Afghan King only strengthens the St Thomas Legend There have been discoveries of a Northern India evangelization by St Thomas .Hence , the Church founded in Malabar is the product of another mission undertaken by St. Thomas
Language barrier is the weakest of arguments put u by MGS. There was a considerable number of Jews in Kodungallur(known as Musiris at that time) .They knew Aramaic and the local language .There were also a good number of persons locally available who could handle many languages due to their trade connections .
I do not think that a scholar like MGS can make such rudimentary errors . Under what circmstances he made such statements baffles me.
It is true that there are Christian historians (mainly from western Churches )who refuse to accept that the Christian Church in India is found by St Thomas. Some of the Indian historians like Elangulam Kunjhan Pillai have also found the historical evidences inadequate for proving the legacy of St Thomas. The western Christians had a bias ,Indian Historians had a point in heir arguments based on certain methods of Historiography they followed . The only inconstancy found in their deduction is that if the same methods are applied, many of the events prior to 3rd Century AD will also fall into the same category .
However, MGS is basing his arguments in support of denying the St Thomas tradition on he following grounds:
1.There were no Namboothiris in Malabar at that time.
2.The land was occupied mainly by primitives.
3.Gondphorus was a King in Afghanistan not in Malabar
4.St Thomas had no way to communicate to he local population due to language barrier
It is very surprising how a great historian of MGS's caliber can base his arguments on such flimsy grounds
Of course it is believed that there were 4 Brahmin families among those who accepted Christian faith as a result of te evangelization of St Thomas . But they were not the only ones converted to belief in Jesus Christ, nor were the early Christians consisted of only Brahmins. Gospel of St Thomas was universal and all sorts of people joined Christianity. To say that Brahmins did not exist in Malabar prior to the Aryan occupation in the third century will mean that there were no sanathana dharmis or temple worship in Malabar prior to the Aryan occupation. Probably the Brahmins occupied a very dominant and powerful position in the society post the Aryan occupation .But the fact remains that there were sanathana dharmis and temple worship in Malabar prior to 1st Century AD.
The point that the land was occupied by primitives is partially true . It does not men that there were only primitives in Malabar prior to the Aryan occupation. .It is a settled position that foreign trade was flourishing in Malabar many centuries prior to Christ. Foreign trade cannot take place in a land where there are only primitives . For successful trading ,need of persons with knowledge of foreign languages ,navigation,. value of different commodities and.currencies are needed.. While large part of the population might be primitives , there were a decent number of educated people too .
Recently some historical evidnces were found about the existence of a King by name Gondaphorus in Afghanistan ,whose reign was in 1st Century AD .. The book Acta Thoma written in the 3rd Centaury AD states that St Thomas came to India to build a Castle for King Gondaphorus .It only strengthens the legend of evangelization in India by St Thomas .In the middle east in ancient times,India was a broad term that represented a large portion of Asia . Hence Gondaphorus being an Afghan King only strengthens the St Thomas Legend There have been discoveries of a Northern India evangelization by St Thomas .Hence , the Church founded in Malabar is the product of another mission undertaken by St. Thomas
Language barrier is the weakest of arguments put u by MGS. There was a considerable number of Jews in Kodungallur(known as Musiris at that time) .They knew Aramaic and the local language .There were also a good number of persons locally available who could handle many languages due to their trade connections .
I do not think that a scholar like MGS can make such rudimentary errors . Under what circmstances he made such statements baffles me.
Many naysayers are there but for the followers of Orthodox faith in India, it is indisputable that St. Thomas came to India and founded the Christian faith here!!
ReplyDeleteIt is to undermine this church that such articles are written by even renowned scholars!!
1. തോമാശ്ലീഹാ കേരളത്തില് വന്നതിനു തെളിവില്ല എന്നത് കൊണ്ട് മാത്രം വന്നില്ല എന്ന് പറയാന് കഴിയില്ല
ReplyDelete2. വവരണം എങ്കില് വരാന് ഉള്ള അവസരം അന്ന് ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു അതുകൊണ്ട് തെളിവില്ല എന്ന ഒറ്റകാരണത്താല് അത് തള്ളിക്കളയുന്നതും മൌഡ്യം ആണ്.
3. ഒന്നാം നൂറ്റാണ്ടില് കേരളത്തില് ക്രിസ്ത്യാനികള് ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു എന്നതിന് തെളിവുകള് ഉണ്ട്.
4. അത് എങ്ങനെ സംഭവിച്ചു എന്ന് ,തോമാശ്ലീഹാ ഇവിടെ വന്നിട്ടില്ല എന്ന് മസില് പിടിക്കുന്നവര് പറയണം.
5. ഒന്നാം നൂറ്റാണ്ടില് ഉണ്ടായിരുന്ന ക്രിസ്തുമതം കഷയിച്ചു തുടങ്ങിയപ്പോള് അതിനെ ബലപ്പെടുത്താന് വന്ന ഒരു ജൂതന്റെ ചരിത്രത്തിനും രേഖ ഉണ്ട്
അതുകൊണ്ട് തോമാശ്ലീഹാ ഇവിടെ വന്നെന്നോ ഇല്ലെന്നോ പറയാന് കൃത്യമായി ആര്ക്കും കഴിയില്ല .
ഇവിടെ വിഷയം നമ്പൂരിമാരില് നിന്നും പരിവര്ത്തനം ചെയ്തു എന്ന് മേനി പറയുന്നതില് ആണ്.
സത്യത്തില് താഴ്ന്ന ജാതികളില് പെട്ടവര് ആയിരുന്നു ആദ്യകാല ക്രിസ്ത്യാനികള്. പിന്നീട് ഉള്ള പല നൂറ്റാണ്ട് മുതല് നമ്മള് ഉയര്ന്നവര് എന്ന് പറയുന്ന നമ്പൂരി,പിള്ള,നായര്,മേനോന് ,പണീക്കർ, പോറ്റി, കര്ത്താവ്,അയ്യര്,...സമുധയക്കാര് പരിവര്ത്തനം ചെയ്യപ്പെട്ടിട്ടുണ്ട്.