“‘No prohibition’ to...”

I refer to the excellent article by Capt Hormazdiar J. M. Desai, "‘No prohibition’ to conversion,” and applaud Parsiana for the courage to print it (June 2003). For the last 40 odd years I have been banging my head against the wall of the Parsi Zarathushtis’ ethno-religio egocentricism over this issue. I was very heartened that a person of Desai’s calibre and gumption could see beyond the protruding Parsi nose. To date I cannot comprehend how the Parsis could claim that the Prophet emerged just for them and that God’s light, Khodai nu noor, shone off their faces only!

A person who studies the Prophet’s teachings and decides to follow His word, is completely free to do so, even if a priest does or does not perform the navjote. The navjotes and baptisms into a faith are only trimmings designed by the priestly class to continue their stranglehold on the community. For the question arises, who ordained the very first priest? Was there a priestly class before that to undertake this ordination?

In this respect I am in full agreement with your reader Kersee Kabraji ("Resolution refrain,” Readers’ Forum, Par­siana, June 2003) on the subject of priests. Forget them, I say.

Your July issue on the Rivayats states, "If a wife of a Behdin commits adultery with a Behdin, the former should be put to death, etc.” What of the man who is also a party to the adultery. He can go on with his merry way frolicking with all the women? The Rivayats also mention, "Food cannot be cooked in pots manufactured by juddins. If such a pot is polished and tinned by the Zoroastrians, then this will do only out of helplessness.” Do you have Parsi kallaiwallas? Until the Tatas start making such cooking pots for the Zoroastrians, the Parsis in India and abroad seem to be immersing themselves in some unforgivable sin!

KERSI RUSTOMJI

Australia