“Resolution refrain”

In his letter "Resolution refrain” (Readers’ Forum, Parsiana, October 2003) S. Rustamji has raised the important question as to why our priests should come only from certain families and "castes” and suggested that we should also admit women priests.

In this connection attention may be invited to my article "Birth no bar to priesthood” (Parsiana, February, 2003), wherein the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Adithyan’s case has been examined. The Court held that any Hindu, irrespective of his race, caste, sex, sect or place of birth, can be appointed as priest of a Hindu temple, if he is well versed and trained in the performance of daily prayers, rituals and recitations relating thereto. The monopoly or prerogative of a select few Brahmins to perform prayers and rituals in the sanctum sanctorum is abolished.

On a parity of reasoning it may well be urged that the same principles should proprio vigore apply to the functioning of priests in our fire-temples. Hence a non-athornan (behdin), male or female, can function as a priest of a fire-temple, provided he or she is will well versed and properly trained and qualified for the purpose. The matter gains importance in view of acute dearth of qualified priests in the community.

It is a well recognized principle, custom or usage in the community that only athornans can function as priests if they are well versed and qualified to recite prayers and perform rituals and ceremonies in accordance with the doctrines of the Zoroastrian religion.

It is not clear how this principle came to be established. Our high priests and religious scholars will have to establish that this principle forms part of the religious practice recognized as an integral part of the Zoroastrian religion by scriptures and by tradition. The issue, being delicate in nature, needs to be handled tactfully with circumspection and precision by steering clear of any controversy on the subject. This calls for wide debate and discussion in the community (especially high priests and religious scholars). The trustees of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet should give a lead in the matter with a view to arriving at a consensus on this important subject agitating the minds of many in the minuscule community.

Unfortunately our priests are not well paid. That is the reason why most of the athornans, even though well trained, are not willing to become mobeds and dasturs. Consequently those who are not well educated and qualified in life practise priesthood. Besides reciting prayers and performing rituals they have hardly any knowledge of the fundamental principles of the Zoroastrian religion. When any questions are asked (specially by non-Parsis) they are unable to give any satisfactory answer and thereby cut a sad figure. This creates a poor opinion of our priests appointed on a hereditary basis. Whenever priests are ordained in future, athornans or behdins, males or females, care may be taken to see that they have some knowledge regarding our religious principles as well. This must be treated as sine qua non (most essential) before they practise priesthood. It is only then that our priests can command respect from the laity and others. This will also reduce the dearth of qualified priests felt in places outside Maharashtra and Gujarat, specially for geh sarna and other obsequial ceremonies on the death of a Parsi. If none is available the recorded tape of these ceremonies may be used for the purpose.

RUSTOM S. GAE

New Delhi