Editorial Viewpoint
On the fringes
The Eighth World Zoroastrian Congress brought to the fore the widening gap between the liberals and traditionalists. While the past congresses nearly always ended with unanimity and pledges of cooperation this Congress saw the orthodox firm in their resolve to block the formation of any world body not based on race.
Normally one side or the other could be persuaded to see reason. But the battle lines had hardened. What brought about this change, this extreme dichotomy of views in a community that once prided itself on its ability to sit across a table and resolve all contentious issues?
There is no easy or obvious answer. The Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meeting in Ahmedabad last December saw the schism erupt with a fury. Never before had a meeting under the auspices of the Federation or the Bombay Parsi Punchayet witnessed such scenes of physical and verbal disruptions. How did it happen?
No doubt orthodox leader Khojeste Mistree helped ignite the division but why did so many anjumans and individuals support him?
Mistree's absurd claims based on the fictitious figures presented by the World Christian Encyclopedia must discredit his claims to scholarship. Any literate Parsi would know 2,00,000 Zoroastrians do not exist in India nor 3,00,000 in Afghanistan.
Yet Mistree based his entire presentation in Bardoli on these mythical figures. He frightened the gullible small town Parsis with glib talk.
Mistree's contentions that there in no recorded history of conversion in Zoroastrianism is nonsensical.
Read the words of Justice Dinshaw Daver in the historic Petit vs Jeejeebhoy judgment of 1906: "The conclusions which I have arrived at on the evidence before the Court are:
-That the Zoroastrian religion not only permits but enjoins the conversion of a person born in another religion and of non-Zoroastrian parents...
-That, although conversion is per-missible by the religion, there are certain conditions which the candi-date must fulfill before becoming eligible for admission. The conditions are that it must first be satisfactorily established that he or she in applying for admission, is animated by a good object and actuated by pure intentions, in other words, that he or she seeks admission from religious convictions and not from other considerations; and further, that the candidate is in all other respects fit to be admitted to the Zoroastrian faith.
-That such an admission of a person born outside of the religion is only permissible if it is established that by such admission 'no harm of any kind would be done to the Zarthosti Mazdiyasnans themselves.'
-That the ceremonies necessary to be undergone by the candidate for admission, are (a) navjote, (b) burushnum, and (c) a repetition of the investiture ceremony of navjote after burushnum.
-That only those persons who have undergone these three ceremonies are entitled to the full rights and privileges of a Zoroastrian."
Mistree's assumptions that the Parsi community is not dwindling but merely migrating to other shores is one more example of his fallacious arguments. With no authentic statistics to present on migration he belittles the findings of demographers and social scientists who point out the Government of India censuses are a warning signal to the community that it is following suicidal policies.
And now similarly, the falsehoods are being spread even about the funding of Parsiana.
Even though 95 percent of our income comes from advertisements and subscriptions, a case is made out that a foreign hand funds us.
Due to the wide base of financial support (over 3,000 subscribers and around 300 different advertisers) Parsiana is able to follow an independent editorial policy.
Yet the traditionalists insist that one cannot be a liberal on account of his/her beliefs. We are liberal only for financial gains.
The absurdity of the ar
Normally one side or the other could be persuaded to see reason. But the battle lines had hardened. What brought about this change, this extreme dichotomy of views in a community that once prided itself on its ability to sit across a table and resolve all contentious issues?
There is no easy or obvious answer. The Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meeting in Ahmedabad last December saw the schism erupt with a fury. Never before had a meeting under the auspices of the Federation or the Bombay Parsi Punchayet witnessed such scenes of physical and verbal disruptions. How did it happen?
No doubt orthodox leader Khojeste Mistree helped ignite the division but why did so many anjumans and individuals support him?
Mistree's absurd claims based on the fictitious figures presented by the World Christian Encyclopedia must discredit his claims to scholarship. Any literate Parsi would know 2,00,000 Zoroastrians do not exist in India nor 3,00,000 in Afghanistan.
Yet Mistree based his entire presentation in Bardoli on these mythical figures. He frightened the gullible small town Parsis with glib talk.
Mistree's contentions that there in no recorded history of conversion in Zoroastrianism is nonsensical.
Read the words of Justice Dinshaw Daver in the historic Petit vs Jeejeebhoy judgment of 1906: "The conclusions which I have arrived at on the evidence before the Court are:
-That the Zoroastrian religion not only permits but enjoins the conversion of a person born in another religion and of non-Zoroastrian parents...
-That, although conversion is per-missible by the religion, there are certain conditions which the candi-date must fulfill before becoming eligible for admission. The conditions are that it must first be satisfactorily established that he or she in applying for admission, is animated by a good object and actuated by pure intentions, in other words, that he or she seeks admission from religious convictions and not from other considerations; and further, that the candidate is in all other respects fit to be admitted to the Zoroastrian faith.
-That such an admission of a person born outside of the religion is only permissible if it is established that by such admission 'no harm of any kind would be done to the Zarthosti Mazdiyasnans themselves.'
-That the ceremonies necessary to be undergone by the candidate for admission, are (a) navjote, (b) burushnum, and (c) a repetition of the investiture ceremony of navjote after burushnum.
-That only those persons who have undergone these three ceremonies are entitled to the full rights and privileges of a Zoroastrian."
Mistree's assumptions that the Parsi community is not dwindling but merely migrating to other shores is one more example of his fallacious arguments. With no authentic statistics to present on migration he belittles the findings of demographers and social scientists who point out the Government of India censuses are a warning signal to the community that it is following suicidal policies.
And now similarly, the falsehoods are being spread even about the funding of Parsiana.
Even though 95 percent of our income comes from advertisements and subscriptions, a case is made out that a foreign hand funds us.
Due to the wide base of financial support (over 3,000 subscribers and around 300 different advertisers) Parsiana is able to follow an independent editorial policy.
Yet the traditionalists insist that one cannot be a liberal on account of his/her beliefs. We are liberal only for financial gains.
The absurdity of the ar
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive