“What distinguishes us”

I write in connection with Dina McIntyre’s lecture, "Zoroastrianism, A Universal Religion,” organized by the Association for Revival of Zoroastrianism (ARZ) in Bombay ("What distinguishes us,” Parsiana, April 21, 2007). The respected lady was purposely invited by the ARZ group to show community members that anybody can be accepted into the Zoroastrian religion. The ARZ seems to have forgotten that Zarathushtra preached his divine message thousands of years ago when no other religions were in existence. His message was to give divine knowledge to the then existing universe. Other religions like Buddhism, Christianity and Islam came after a gap of centuries and they claim that they are for the whole universe.

In the opening paragraph of her written lecture McIntyre states: "There are those who say that we must accept non-Zoroastrians into the religion, if we wish to survive. With due respect, I do not agree.” This is the lecturer’s own view on not to convert, which is good advice to the ARZ.

The learned lady has given evidence to show the beauty of Zarathushtra’s message. Zoroastrianism does not enjoin proselytism. In the scriptures there are no ceremonies to convert people from any religion to ours. One must understand the real meaning of Asha. The ARZ, whose main purpose is to increase the Parsi community, has not been helped by McIntyre’s lecture.

The learned lady has quoted evidence to show that Zoroastrianism is universal. Much of this evidence comes from western scholars; evidence from Zoroastrian scholars is lacking. When McIntyre came to Bangalore to teach the Gathas, I had the opportunity to meet her and after mutual discussion I gave her the book written by the late solicitor Pheroze Masani. I do not know whether she has read it or not.

Dina McIn-tyre: good advice

In her lecture McIntyre mentions Dr Iruch J. S. Taraporewalla (under whom I learnt something about our religion in the Cama Athornan Institute, where he was principal). In 1947 Taraporewalla published a book, Zarathushtra’s Gathas, in the Foreword of which he mentions, "The Gathas of Zarathushtra are admittedly the very foundation of our faith.” And so naturally there should be considerable eagerness amongst us to understand the message. Since the days of Anquetil du Perron, scholars in the West have given us various translations of these in several European languages — Latin, French, German, English and others. Based upon these, we have had a number of translations into Gujarati, and recently one by Aga Poure Davoud in Persian. In addition to these we have the traditional Pahlavi rendering of the Sassanian days and the Sanskrit version of the Pahlavi by Dastur Nairyosang Dhaval.

These translations show that the Gathas embody extremely high ethical and moral precepts. But I have always felt that these renderings lacked the inspiration that should be their chief characteristic, primarily because the translators, though profound scholars and excellent philologists, possessed the double bias of being both European and Christians. Consciously or subconsciously they could not help feeling that any message given so long before Christianity in a far off Asiatic land must necessarily be on a lower plane than their own ideals. They wondered at the fact that such high moral teachings should have been given during such a remote period. In short, they look upon Zarathushtra as a great personage living in a primitive age, and they have the ineradicable conviction that, though sublime enough for his period, the message of the Prophet of Iran is not to be compared with the later revelation of Jesus. Thus, though they admit and admire the sublimity of the Gathas, they derive no inspiration from them. Their translations evoke admiration and wonder but fail to inspire us. I was not satisfied with any of the translations; hence I have my own translation.

I request the ARZ and Parsi readers in general to read the book written by the late Roni Khan, Is Zoroastrian Religion Universal? published in 2001.

I appeal to all Parsi Zoroastrians to be wary of the mischievous propaganda of reformists and associations like ARZ. When Parsi Zoroastrians do not follow the dictates, traditions and customs, how can one hope that the so-called converted non-Zoroastrians will do so?

Dastur NADIRSHAH P. UNVALLA

Bangalore