The rise of Zoroastrian fundamentalism?

The incipient rise of Zoroastrian fundamentalism in the last quarter century can be traced to the 1981 Anjuman Committee elections. The orthodox elements in the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) under the chairmanship of the late B. K. Boman-Behram denied Parsi women married to non-Parsis the right to register as voters on the electoral roles of the BPP.

The Bombay High Court upheld the women’s right to register. Nine years later when a young Parsi woman married to a Hindu tragically died in a car accident and her family in accordance with her wishes had wanted her body consigned to the Towers of Silence, the then chairman of the BPP Dr Aspi Golwalla, in consultation with some other trustees, denied the family the permission to do so. Subsequently the Punchayet conceded that Parsi women married to non-Parsis who continued to practise the Zoroastrian faith could be consigned to the Tower.

But members of the orthodox camp pressured the High Priest Dastur (Dr) Firoze Kotwal to issue a declaration terming interfaith marriages as ‘adulterous’ and the children of such unions ‘illegitimate.’ Though there was an outcry deriding Kotwal’s remarks, his views were echoed by a younger priest in Nagpur two years ago. Addressing a gathering at the Nagpur Parsi Gymkhana function, the speaker again termed such offspring illegitimate though he used a nastier term.

But the real test for the orthodox came when the BPP trustees, bowing to the pressure of notable Parsis who complained about the unhygienic condition at Doongerwadi due to the non-existence of vultures, granted permission for a bungli to be built on the Doongerwadi grounds for funeral rites of those opting for an alternative mode of disposal.

The orthodox camp backed by the High Priests coerced the Punchayet to put the decision on hold. It was only the introduction and subsequent success of the solar concentrators that has put the issue of disposal on the back burner, so to say.

Flushed with their victory over their opponents, the orthodox camp then decided to focus on the rising interfaith marriage phenomenon in the community. One in three marriages are outside the faith. They coaxed the High Priests into issuing their infamous resolutions to derecognize Parsis married outside the faith and their progeny.

Here the orthodox camp clearly overstepped their bounds and the public outcry both from within and without the community was so virulent that three of the six High Priests retracted a portion of their statements, thus reverting to the status quo.

For some time the orthodox camp laid low. When the reelection of Minoo Shroff was due, they didn’t put up a candidate to oppose him. Shroff wasn’t viewed as a thorn in their side.

But BPP trustee Dinshaw Tamboly was another matter. A man universally respected for his charitable work; a person who has rendered and continues to render assistance to countless men, women and children, not to mention institutions and trusts, appeared the least likely to incur anybody’s wrath.

Though his views may be more liberal than others’, they are not very different from several other trustees who have sought reelection and won.

Tamboly’s World Zoroastrian Organisation (WZO) connection was harped on as the body accepts non-Parsi spouses as members as well as the progeny of such unions. Yet BPP trustee Dadi Engineer, a senior office bearer of the WZO was elected unopposed over a year ago.

Then what is it? Tamboly was one of the prime supporters of the solar concentrators. He was also opposed to the implementation of the aviary project to breed vultures proposed by orthodox scholar Khojeste Mistree and his supporters. Tamboly stated that the aviary project was financially unviable and would divert much needed community funds from other deserving causes. Though the Punchayet stood by its commitment to proceed with the aviary project, funds forthcoming, in hindsight Tamboly’s opposition proved prophetic. Ornithologist Jemima Parry-Jones, who specializes in the breeding of birds of prey, noted vultures were dying of Diclofenac poisoning, a common drug consumed by humans and livestock. She advised against proceeding with the project to breed the vultures at Doongerwadi. Jones was introduced to the Puncha­yet by Mistree so her antecedents are beyond doubt.

The idea of solar concentrators was mooted and pursued by Dr Homi Dhalla, a firebrand orthodox leader of the early 1970s. No one could term him a reformist or a liberal. Yet his orthodoxy was questioned by speakers and a section of the audience at the Samast Anjuman Meeting at Rustom Baug called by the BPP to acquaint the issue of disposal. When it came to a divergence of views the orthodox elements even blindly turned on their own. By examining the problem dispassionately, Dhalla was able to evolve a solution that is now being used all over the country by anjumans and may one day be used by members of other faiths who wish to conserve wood and electricity.

But despite the orthodox genesis of the solar panels, the opposition venom was directed at Tamboly. First orthodox spokesman Noshir Dadra­wala chose to oppose him. Dadrawala who once edited the WZO journal, Hamazor, was miffed with Tamboly for supporting the Punchayet’s decision to hand over land for building a bungli for those opting for cremation or burial. Strangely enough Dadra­wala chose The Bombay Samachar to announce his candidature rather than the Jam-e-Jamshed to which he was and is a regular correspondent. The Sama­char’s ‘Parsi tari arsi’ column is edited by noted solicitor Berjis Desai whose father, Minoo was once the Gujarati daily’s editor. A member of the CER (formerly the Committee for Electoral Rights and subsequently the Committee for Economic Revival) and honorary secretary of the Association of Inter-Married Zoroastrians, Berjis would logically have been the last choice as a confidante for a mem­ber of the orthodox camp. But Dadrawala had fallen out with the Jam-e-Jamshed editor Rusi Dhondy and hence the preference for the Samachar. Dadrawala had also helped edit the CER newsletter many years ago.

But when Dadrawala realized that Parsi politics is vicious and unrelenting, he stepped out of the fray and in his stead came Yazdi Desai.

A relatively unknown person in community circles, Desai represented the fundamentalist state of mind. Unlike the High Priests and Dadrawala, Desai had made no notable publicized contribution to the community except some e-mails two years ago denigrating the then BPP trustee aspirant Maneck Engineer and his employers, the house of Godrej. One of Desai’s well-wishers was former BPP trustee Rustom Tirandaz whose relations in the Pun­cha­yet with Tamboly were strained. The Tirandaz camp were sore at Tamboly for not supporting Tirandaz’s reelection bid. Both Tamboly and Tirandaz reside in the Mancherji Joshi Colony at Dadar and are prominent social workers.

The fundamentalist camp knew they had no chance of winning so they used the opportunity to mudsling at every individual or institution they viewed as liberal. Desai and his supporters took on all comers. They threatened to have the Jamé closed down, demanded Tamboly provide proof of his disbursement of charitable funds under the Evidence Act, sent a legal notice to Jamé columnist Ruby Lilaowala...

Desai also moved the charity commissioner’s office to delay the election, thus causing considerable uncertainty and inconvenience to voters and the Punchayet administration. Not that more time would have resulted in a victory for him. The object was to obstruct and delay the inevitable.

Thus the orthodoxy of Desai and his supporters indicates a new and disturbing trend in Parsi politics. The voters of course whole heartedly endorsed Tamboly. The community by and large votes for middle of the road candidates, not extremists.

Trusteeship is an honorary office. There are no perks, no house, salary, car, conveyance and often — no respect. The community is exceedingly fortunate that so many good peoploe come forward to serve unselfishly. Then why malign them personally?

If the orthodox wish to shake off the image of ‘a lunatic fringe’ as their detractors term them, they have to move to the midstream. The Labour Party in Britain was once written off as the ‘Loony Left.’ When it forsook its archaic socialistic policies, Labour came to power.

The extreme orthodox group’s agenda has normally been a negative one. Oppose all change and attack those who propose it. The building up and strengthening of community institutions is ignored. Even some of the orthodox institutions are in disarray, unable to enunciate a clear-cut action plan. The orthodox have not been able to even sustain a publication espousing their point of view. They have no publicly announced agenda for reforming moribund institutions.

But of late they are trying to enter the main stream. The formation of the Traditional Zarathushtrian Trust, the resurgence of The Parsee Voice, the candidature of both Dadrawala and Desai, are all indicative of a trend to work within the system. To that extent their efforts are positive and need to be encouraged. After all they are as much a part and parcel of the community as the non-Parsi spouses and the children of interfaith marriages whom they consider outcastes.

We are too minuscule a community to keep anyone out. Everyone has to be made welcome. That is the key to survival.