“We need to improve...”

Apropos a reference to my "liberal opinions and reformist actions” vis-à-vis my brother, Burjor Antia’s "traditional stance” and his opponents trying "hard to leverage this issue against him in the run up to the BPP (Bombay Parsi Punchayet) election — without success” (see "We need to improve our image,” Parsiana, February 2003), it may surprise many to learn that there is really and truly the same spirit guiding us both — that of serving the community as best we can. A spirit that was deeply ingrained in us by our guru, the late Dastur Khurshed Dabu and the training that we both received at the M. F. Cama Athornan Institute, winning the Best Boy Medals and other honors.

In our stronghold of Bombay, Burjor was inclined by our own very traditional upbringing to adopt a "traditional stance” as the best way to ensure the survival of the community there and it has its own merits. Whereas I who have lived much more than half my life in the USA was awed and thunderstruck by the difficulty of adhering to traditionalism here in North America; trying to be a Zoroastrian and inspiring our children to be proud Zoroastrians. All my siblings and I had known the riches to rags experience when our father’s stock broker company, perhaps one of the few Parsi companies outside of Bombay, folded and the only solace we found was in religion, which has been facile princeps in our life, no matter how great a height we may have achieved in our individual profession.

Being a well informed priest who had studied Avesta-Pahlavi and won essay prizes from the K. R. Cama Oriental Institute, etc, a rare commodity here, I faced the challenge of serving the community, almost always at the expense of my own professional work, family duties, leisure time and finances. Not only did I perform religious ceremonies but also set up the framework and foundations for religious organizations, wrote articles on religious subjects, lectured and bought scholarly books on Zoroastrianism, etc. I was often denounced by many at first but most of them have, with the passage of time, now realized that it is difficult to survive here by adopting a "traditional stance.” We can only survive here by adapting to the circumstances as best as we can. Zoroastrianism is as relevant to our times and climes as to any other.

I found Dabu much more adaptable to our times. His advise was pragmatic and sympathetic to our milieu here when I wrote to him in the 1960s from here. As I have often stated before, I would prefer to live in the earlier times when we did not face the challenge of modernity, but having been faced by the challenge, I have done my best to keep the flame of Zoroastrianism alive on this continent. For anyone to exploit this situation for their own selfish ends and hold it against Burjor is as un Zoroastrian as it could possibly be. About 20 percent of Parsis live in North America and my mission is to see we do not lose them in one generation or two. It is a very formidable task to which few in Bombay seem to have given serious attention and to make it a campaign issue instead of showing some consideration for our situation is thoroughly uncalled for. Many Parsis in India itself are regretfully marrying out of the community. Our children and grandchildren in North America too are most likely to marry out of the community. Would the BPP trustees prefer to see them lost to the community and, if so, is it really in consonance with the teachings of Asho Zarathushtra who aspired to spread his religion over all the seven continents known to mankind then? While BPP trustees could and should safeguard the interests and intent of the trusts assigned to them in India, their higher calling should inspire them to understand our situation, instead of exploiting it. My brother Burjor’s mission and mine may vary, but we both try to deal with the challenges we face as best as we can. Let history be the judge.

ERVAD KERSEY H. ANTIA

Chicago, USA