“Anomaly in name”

I very much agree with Soli Master’s comments in "Anomaly in name,” (Readers’ Forum, Parsiana, March 2002) and have long objected to the widespread use of the term/description "Zoroastrian.” Some readers might consider this to be a case of much ado about nothing. However, the use of ‘Zoroastrian’ by our organizations, their leaders and our own scholars is so frequent that it has become the norm.

Our venerable Prophet’s name was Zarathushtra. Is it too much to ask that we should use Zarathushti/Zarathush­trian as appropriate? It would seem that ‘Zoroastrian’ trips off Angli­cized tongues more readily. Sadly, I believe it is also a reflec­tion of a deeper malaise — insufficient knowledge and a lack of conviction. Furthermore, children who grow up habituated to hear­ing the word are unlikely in later life to use any other.

Finally, since we are all Mazdayasno ahmi, Mazdayasno Zar­athushtrish our leaders might consider using Mazdayas-ni/Mazdayas­nian! MAHIAR G. ARDESHIR

Pinner, UK