Jeevan-Philip

1. What do you say of the Pahlavi crosses in south India?
The Pahlavi crosses of South India are remnants of Gnostic groups, especially Manichaeism. As one of the many pre-orthodox groups, it was a sect of gnostic Christianity (or an offshoot of Syriac Christianity of Edessa). This is not an assumption, but rather one based on material evidence uncovered by analysing archaeo-linguistic data.
The original Pahlavi cross has inscriptions and artistic representation that largely favour a gnostic origin. Unlike earlier suppositions, today we have many studies by modern scholars specialising in eastern religions, their ontological principles, artistic representations, codicological analysis, semiotic explanations, etc., to analyse the archaeological data unearthed from the socio-commercial networks.

2. You as a historian who uses an archeo-linguistic approach are sure that these crosses are Manichaean?
Absolutely; the methodology of the study revolves around the basic concept that any philosophy or religious concept requires a medium to transfer to a distant land outside its geographical origin. The medium in this case is known as the movement of people due to trade, war, calamities, administrative decisions, etc. As far as the Indian peninsula is concerned, the major role is played by the Afro-Eurasian trade network. The socio-commercial network that facilitated the trade had settlements of these religions, which certainly left their mark as archaeological remains. The comparative analysis of these archaeological remains gives us their connections with co-religionists outside the region. This study compared the crosses and other archaeological remains unearthed from the nodes (important trade settlements) and concluded that the Pahlavi crosses of South India were the creation of Manichaean settlers.

3. How do you explain the Manichaean in Malabar?
There were mainly three original Gnostic (Manichaean)settlements in old Thamizhakam which can be identified by the unearthing of three Sasanian (Persian) crosses such as those at Mylapore, Anuradhapura, and Goa. The Pahlavi crosses found in Malabar are later-day copies of the original ones the Portuguese unearthed from Mylapore in 1547 CE. Identification of these Malabar Persian crosses can be done based on the respective quality of work (cut, symbolism, and inscription) along with the history of the respective churches where these crosses have been found. Surprisingly, Portuguese or local records only refer to these crosses in the post-1547 CE period. This information persuades us to think that there were no Manichaean settlements initially on the coast of Malabar before the 10th century. To substantiate this proposition, we have another claimed migration from Persia, probably around the late 9th or 10th century at Kurakkeni Kollam (based on Tarissapalli plates), without any traces of Pahlavi crosses.

“The original Pahlavi crosses unearthed in three places were most probably the result of the Manichaean settlements, while Malabar had none, including the claimed ninth-century migration of Persian Christians at Kurekkeni Kollam.”

The original Pahlavi crosses unearthed in three places were most probably the result of the Manichaean settlements, while Malabar had none, including the claimed ninth-century migration of Persian Christians at Kurekkeni Kollam. However, the literature from the Nestorians or Portuguese times states that there were different groups of Nazranies, which are largely closed communities without any marital relations. They remained as exclusive ethnic groups like any other Indian caste-based society. For example, among Malabar Christians, the Vadakkumbagor (Northists) and Thekkumbhagor (Southists). The Portuguese and Nestorian narrations about Knai Thomas’s story discussed in chapter 9 detail the conversion of Mylapore Manichaeans to Nestorianism followed by migrations to the Malabar coast due to socio-political reasons. These groups were most likely responsible for the copies of the Pahlavi cross found in later-built churches in Malabar.

4. Manichaeism is a Christian heresy, why Mani is related to Christ and Apostle Thomas?
Prophet Mani was a member of an early sect called the Elchasaites, an offshoot of the Ebionite group of Jewish Christianity. Manichaeism postulates two ontological principles: light and darkness. The universe is divided into the light realm and the dark realm, where all souls want to be saved from the clutches of the land of the dark, which binds the souls (light particles) of living matter. Jesus has a core role in the salvation concept of Manichaeism. Manichaeism considers Jesus’ suffering, crucifixion, and death as the salvation act through which the light particles (human soul) are released from the clutches of Samsara (flesh/human body) to unite with the realm of light (God). Mani introduced himself to his followers as the Paraclete promised by the historical Jesus, thus linking his religion as the only true religion of the historical Jesus.

The apocryphal Act of Thomas, probably written by Gnostics, was known to Mani and his apostles. Mani was specifically imitating the works of Jesus, and his apostles personally undertook a journey to Turan, Sindh, in ancient India, where he converted the local king Turan Shah. Following his return to his homeland, he assigned his apostles to geographical regions for their work. He also wrote an epistle to Indians (confirmed by the Middle Persian fragment M1221). Since Mar Ammo was associated with Parthia, Bactria, and northern India, it is safe to assume that Mar Thomas was primarily entrusted with South India. The Manichaean cross unearthed in Mylapore and other south Indian places indicates that Thomas the apostle could be the very Manichaean apostle Mar Thomas. The lack of archaeological evidence parallel to Sasanian Christianity (splayed-armed crosses and other artefacts, Syriac inscriptions, etc.) supports the Manichaean apostle Thomas hypothesis.

5. Why did Manicheans write the Acts of Thomas, what was their interest? Is that a book anyway related to south India?
We have no clear indication of the author of this book. It could be a member of any Gnostic sect, such as the Bardaisanites or Manichaeans. Dr. Werner Sundermann states that the Manichaeans valued the Acts of the Apostle Thomas, and probably it was the Manichaeans who were responsible for the book in the form we see today.
Mani was attracted to India as a destination for his missionary work since his early activities were mainly concentrated on imitating the religion of Jesus. Mani sent two of his missionaries to Deb in India, probably a port, to continue his work. Deb is identified as an estuary of the Indus, attested as Daibul, in modern-day Banbhore, 55 km west of Karachi, Pakistan. He preached among the Baptist communities that had settled in these areas, just as Jesus’ apostles had done before them.
The geographical location in the Acts of Thomas suggests a northwest Indian orientation to the story. Since the content and philosophy of the Acts of Thomas suggest a dramatic expression of Gnostic activity rather than any Christian proselytization, church historians are cherry-picking the most appropriate portion of Thomas’ act to extend the apostolic origin to the church in South India. Other than this imaginative story, the acts of Thomas have nothing to do with South India.

6) What do the writing and symbols of the Pahlavi cross indicate?
Considering the complexities of translating a logogrammatic dead language like Pahlavi and the various readings from the Canara Brahman (1562 CE) to Shilanand Hemaraj (2014 CE), a more logical approach to these Pahlavi inscriptions is required. In my opinion, the Shilanand Hemraj translation is more appropriate when we consider the representation of symbols (semiotic approach) engraved in the bas-relief structure. His objection to earlier translations is very appropriate since an object of community veneration could not have such an advertisement for the man responsible for the construction of the structure. He translates it as
My Lord (is) Messiah and Life-giver, who (be) praised always for saving.
Crucifixion the Lord endured for redeeming us.
This translation is perfectly corroborated by the semiotic explanations of the bas-relief structure. The unique-looking cross with its curved ends and globs & bud-shaped structures depicted in a fly-wing or spread-wing arrangement (wrongly identified as lotus) and adopted from Sasanian symbols (a prestigious symbol of Sasanian Kings) represents Jesus, who has an important role in Manichaean salvation. The descending dove represents the prophet Mani, the paraclete once offered by the historical Jesus. The two Makaras (representing the creatures of the realm of Dark ) that are seated on beautifully crafted two capitals and the arch formed by pearls escaping out of the Makaras’ mouth, which represent human souls entrapped by creatures of the land of Dark perfectly symbolise the Manichaean scheme of salvation (Parinirvana) based on its principles.
This is again corroborated by the Manichaean hymn scroll H19 kept in the British Museum, in which Manichaeans prayed to Jesus to save their souls from creatures like Makaras.

7. Why are you researching the ancient history of Christianity in Malabar?
Since my childhood, I have been ta-ught the stories of Syriac Christianity, including its origin through the apostolic work of St. Thomas. As time passed by, I was not quite sure of these stories as a consequence of the growth of my logical mind. By the time I reached university, besides my selected science subjects, I had picked up a unique interest in the history of human societies, especially in India. My interest in history guided me to related or supporting (in the study of history) subjects like archaeology, linguistics, genetics, etc., which helped me understand the history of human society based on more logically explainable evidence. The stories of Syriac Christianity haunted me all my life, partially as a result of the questions raised by secular historians based on modern historiography, which forced me to study the origin and development of Christianity in Malabar. The objective of these stories could be sociological than historical.I think they are myths created to protect certain social needs.

8. What do you say of the unbroken tradition of Syrian Christians of their Christian faith to Thomas the Apostle?
Faith is one thing and historical verification is another. St Thomas the Apostle is believed to be the father of faith. We are Christians first and St. Thomas comes only after that primary faith in Christ.
My study was basically to understand the veracity of the claims of Syriac Christianity regarding its origin and development. The material evidence (archaeological and linguistic) concerning Syriac Christianity fails to provide us with any trace of Thomasian, Syriac Christianity before the 10th century in South India. So, there is nothing like an unbroken tradition of Syriac Christianity or their faith in Thomas, the apostle.
Why did Europeans and Nestorians brand Nazranies as Christians of St. Thomas? Western scholars’ standard rhetoric is that the Christians of Malabar revered Thoma more than Jesus himself and categorically reported that they ranked him first. It is quite possible when considering European encounters with different groups of Christians from Malabar. The Nestorians, or Europeans mostly favouring Thekkumbhagam (Southists), were responsible for this misconception, which originated from the belief of this group that they were the children of Thoma, the merchant. When the encounter between Nazranies and the Children of Thomas Cana took place under the supervision of Nestorian prelates, Thomas Cana’s story was also absorbed under the Nestorian brand. Gradually, this imagery penetrated the subconscious mind of the Nazranies as designed by the prelates of Persian Christianity, which had their hagiographies associated with the St. Thomas legend in Fars and North India. The Thomas Cana legend gradually dissolved into the Saint Thomas legend of Persian Christianity, ultimately evolving as the patron saint.