“What distinguishes us”

I refer to Mehlli Bhagalia’s response to my letter "What distinguishes us” (Readers’ Forum, Parsiana, September 21, 2007).

I would like to inform Bhagalia that I am not a scholar of our religion like him — at the most I can pass off as a student. I am an engineer by training and profession and do not believe in any religion which demands blind faith. To me, facts, reality and truth are of paramount importance. Bhagalia is free to have his own opinion about Dr Maneckji Dhalla, which I do not share.

In my letter I had questioned D. Wadia’s statement that "there is no such term as ZOrOastrian religion.” The significance of two capital ‘O’s has not been explained by Bhagalia. Wadia claimed that our religion is "Mazda­yasni” founded by "certain highly evolved souls” (thousands of years before the advent of Zarathushtra) who laid down "certain laws.” I had asked for the scriptures to support this statement and questioned what these "certain laws” were. Bhagalia fails to give specific answers but asks us to read Ervad Masani’s book. I request Bhagalia to quote the answers from that book and the basis on which Masani makes such statements.

As per my understanding, when we say "Mazdayasni Zarathushti” religion, Mazdayasni (Mazda worshipping) is used as an adjective to Zarathushti. We would be most happy to learn the views of scholars of our religion on this.

Wadia claims that Zarathushtra did not establish any new religion but "revived” the Mazdayasni religion. Can he or Bhagalia support this statement from any of the scriptures and give a specific answer whether the Amesha Spentas (and what they stand for) are not Zara­thushtra’s unique contribution? Is Zarathushtra not the father of monotheism? Bhagalia is silent on my specific question. If he has something to offer from Masani’s book, he may kindly do so.

According to Wadia, "tarikats, mantras and kriyas have mystic science behind them” and following them is real religion. I had asked if Zarathushtra is supposed to have "revived” the old religion, where has he mentioned this? Bhagalia fails to give a specific answer to this. My statement, "The Gathas focus solely on human behavior and leading a good, wholesome life based on truth, righteousness and wisdom” remains unaddressed by Bhagalia.

I had contested Wadia’s statement that everyone’s goal of reaching union with the Almighty could be achieved only by following the religious tarikats, mantras and kriyas. Questioning his right to speak on everyone’s behalf (calling it presumptuous) I had asked on what basis he could certify this. Bhagalia is silent on this. Therefore, what Wadia has written can at the most be passed off as his personal opinion.

I had very specifically asked on what basis a baby is supposed to be ‘born in a religion’ as claimed by Wadia. Bhagalia is silent on this. He is also silent on the reality of lakhs of people adopting Christianity, Islam and Buddhism every year and leading a peaceful and productive life. What have Wadia and Bhagalia to say about this?

I have just come across the following write-up by Dr Jehan Bagli, a scholar of our religion: titled "Religion of Asho Zarathusht and Influence through the Ages.”

"Who is/is not a Zarathushti soul?

"The answer to these questions depends on one’s conception of what Ahura Mazda is, and how extensive is the Divine dominion? In general, Zarathushtra in the Gathas recognizes Ahura Mazda as the creator not only of the world but, of the universe (Ys. 44). This should necessarily cover all the races of mankind. Indeed in the ending khshnuman of every single Yasht and all the Nyaishes in Khordeh Avesta we recite: ‘Ahura Mazda khodae avazunie murdum Mardum sardegan, Hama sardegan Hambayeshte vehan. Ahura Mazda, Lord beneficent to mankind and to all races of mankind and to entire creation of the world.’

"This clearly explains that all human beings are the creation of Ahura Mazda irrespective of their religious belief. The venerated sacred fire is an incarnation of Ahura Mazda in this physical world. Why then can’t human beings (other than those born of Zarathushti parents) who are devoted to the teachings of Asho Zarathusht commune, in front of a representation of the Wise Lord Ahura Mazda who is responsible for their creation?

"Nowhere in the Gathic scriptures or Avestan texts of later origin, including Khordeh Avesta, do we learn about the soul of a Zarathushti being created different from those of non-Zarathushti human beings. At no place in any of our prayers do we notice that the Wise Lord is discriminatory in the creation of humans, and causing the souls of the followers of the ‘First Prophet of mankind’ to be different.

"Yasna 55 dedicates all the physical and spiritual elements of human beings without any discrimination, to the Gathic hymns, implying the égalité of all humans.

"Atash Nyaish (Ys 62) verse 9 that starts with the words: Aat yezi-she aem baraiti tells us that, ‘if anyone who offers, with true devotion, fuel or bundle of fragrant dried twigs, to the Fire of Mazda, will receive blessings from the Holy Fire.’ There is no discrimination implied in these profound verses. It does not say, ‘if any Zarathushti offers…’

"It is therefore not only difficult to comprehend, but extremely confusing to the follower of Zarathushti faith, when people speak of disintegration of ‘guiding light of a soul’ of a non-Zarathushti who appears in front of a consecrated fire. If Ahura Mazda, the God of Zarathushtra, is the creator of entire humanity, the very existence of the notion of non-Zarathushti souls is open to question. To think that the vision of a non-Zarathushti soul will in anyway vitiate the consecrated fire is to denigrate the power and strength of that incarnation of Mazda. A consecrated Fire demands the highest reverence, for it has the potency and the strength to disseminate the enlightenment of Ahura Mazda and no human of any genealogy can take that away from it.”

Of course Bhagalia will label Bagli also as having come under Western influence!

Bhagalia has gone to great lengths to discredit Dhalla, misquoting him in some instances. This is a cheap trick played by politicians — to discredit a person and then imply that all that he has said is to be ignored. Well, he is free to have his own personal opinion. The reason I like Dhalla’s writings is that he has supported all his statements with references from the scriptures (as given in the footnotes) and has been totally honest in his lifelong study of our scriptures. His autobiography bears testimony to his honesty where he has openly confessed how his views on religious ceremonies, etc changed during his study period in America.

Lastly, I wish to convey to Bhagalia that I am neither reformist nor orthodox — I belong to no camp. I like to think of myself as a person with some common and practical sense. I am a Parsi since my parents were Parsis — I can neither take credit nor responsibility for it. I was initiated into the Zarathushti religion at the age of eight or nine and asked to wear the sudreh and kusti. I, however, became a follower of Zarathushtra at the age of 61 when I read Zoroastrian Theology by Dhalla and translations of the Gathas by Dastur Kanga, Dr Taraporewala and others. To me religion is a way of life and nothing more.

KERSEE KABRAJI

Poona