Conflict resolution

As a Parsi, interested in the current problems of the community and wishing to see a revival, it strikes me that decline and conflict have fuelled each other. Having given thought to issues, it occurs to me that the root cause of the community’s problems, both decline and conflict, is our relative neglect of the Gathas.

Whilst our prayers are in a dead language and science has rendered some of our rituals outdated, the teachings of Zoroaster — both philosophy and values as set out in the Gathas — are timeless. Whereas our kusti prayers are a form of communication with God, the Gathas offer Zoroastrians guidance and wisdom on leading a healthy and constructive life. We need to remember that Zoroaster was a philosopher as well as a religious prophet. His teachings go well beyond good thoughts, good words, good deeds and offer guidance on the way ahead. In contrast, our rituals and practices are a historical legacy, evolved by follow­ers of Zoroastrianism.

Unfortunately, over the years, the focus on religious educa­tion in the community has been mainly on kusti prayers and on religious rituals/practices, rather than on the philosophy and moral values of Zoroastrianism as set out in the Gathas. Whereas rituals and practices provide Parsis reason to come together for a couple of hours, before going their separate ways, subscription to and adoption of the teachings of Zoroaster provide permanent bonding between fellow Parsis. One reason for the decline of the community is a reduction in bonding (spiritual/moral/philosophi­cal) between Parsis. This to some extent explains an increase in intercommunity marriages.

There is an irrational, but understandable fear, amongst orthodox Parsis that to let go of and compromise rituals is to forsake the religion. Not so, if we subscribe to the thinking, philosophy and values of our Prophet. The Gathas are as important an aspect of Zoroastrianism, if not more important than our religious rituals and practices.

The above is relevant to the dispute concerning the disposal of expired Parsis. Using common sense, is Ahura Mazda going to judge Parsis by the way they have lived life or by the way their bodies were disposed of? With regard to developments concerning Doongerwadi, it was suggested by orthodox Parsis that ‘pragmatism is not an issue.’ As a matter of fact pragmatism underpinned the conventional method of burial. In the days of Zoroaster, and for some considerable time thereafter, the world was predominantly agricultural — the Tower of Silence was conceived as a solution to the problem of preventing agricultural land being polluted by dead bodies. The world today, especially Bombay, is almost pre­dominantly commercial or industrial.

We cannot move forward if we blindly cling to the past. In one of the Gathas, Zoroaster calls for innovation and progress. We need to apply this to rituals and practices that have been rendered outdated by developments over the centuries. This said, not all rituals and practices need to be revised. Life enhancing rituals/practices such as the navjote and wedding ceremonies and the custom of sev or ravo, on auspicious occasions, should be maintained.

It is worth making the following point on conflicts — ‘A storm in a tea cup should so be contained and not blown up into a hurricane or a tornado.’ We need to maintain perspective and subordinate differences to commonalities — a rich heritage and an ancestry to be proud of, a legacy to value, common beliefs and values, similar tastes and personal qualities. Constructively motivated dissension is worthwhile and purposeful, disagreement for the sake of argument per se, causes discord and seldom achieves anything.

Finally, if Parsis lend support to and heed those who call for unity, such as Armin Wandrewala who wrote an excellent arti­cle ("An avoidable divide,” Parsiana, January 2002), as well as those who work for the good of the community, there is hope for us.

FURROKH PANTHAKI

London, UK