“The law-full legend”

In the article "The law-full legend” on Fali S. Nariman (Parsiana, May 7, 2008) it has been stated: "He refers to the jurist Homi Seervai’s observation that Zoroastrian funerals are so well organized that it is impossible to think of anything else.”

Readers are liable to interpret this to mean that it is impossible to think of any sort of disposal other than dakhme­nashini because people do not carefully analyze all statements and are prone to interpret words to mean what they would like them to mean.

The meaning of the word "funeral” is not applicable to the mode of disposal, but refers to the ceremonies, services, obsequies, procession, etc accompanying the last rites, irrespective of the mode of disposal. A reference to the Concise Oxford Dictionary will bear this out. It defines with reference to burial and cremation.

I have no hesitation in saying that my husband would never have supported or encouraged adherence to dakhme­nashini in the conditions prevalent today in Bombay. My husband died in 1996, when exposure of the conditions, photos and all, had yet to be made.

If you ask someone to describe funerals in cities (Indian and overseas), of Zoroastrians who are buried or cremated, the funerals will be found to have been Zoroastrian funerals.

I was with other members of the committee for the Disposal of the Dead with Dignity — Action Group (DDD-AG) initiated and chaired by the late J. R. Gagrat, solicitor, when we were granted a hearing by trustees of the Bombay Parsi Punch­ayet, some years ago. All persuasion was rejected, to use the Doongerwadi land (meant for all Parsi Zoroastrians) and bun-glis for optional use for "Zoroastrian funerals” accompanying burial or cremation.

If, indeed, there is some legal obstruction about the use of land for any method barring dakhmenashini, surely a cy pres petition in court would clear up the issue?

The trustees for the property should themselves take the lead, instead of perpetuating the present filthy conditions prevailing since a long time, despite the efforts to strengthen the traditional practice by using solar reflector panels to substitute vultures.

The Zoroastrian religion denounces filth. The erstwhile successful system never created filth, which was the strongest reason for the custom to be approved by us all Zoroastrian Parsis. Now the system, without the essential ingredient of vultures, is perpetuating filth — and doing so in the name of the religion. It is a shame.

The Zoroastrians in Bombay are rebelling, and are opting for municipal crematoria. I would agree with Nariman when he says, as reported in the article: "The lackadaisical approach at the crematorium, he feels, is not in keeping with the solemn occasion.” However, there is absolutely no reason why the "approach” should be lackadaisical! If it is, the remedy would be to improve "the approach” and not to perpetuate a disposal method which is not functioning properly because the sine qua non condition (vultures) does not exist.

FEROZA H. SEERVAI

fseervai@gmail.com