“Awaken to this doctrine”

Does conversion amount to repudiating one’s religion of birth and accepting an alien religion, not determined by the divine pre-destiny? This is an argument often repeated by those who, for reasons known best to them, are against any change of religion. Generally the argument is that God assigns each one a religion at birth and one must not disobey God. Some of those against conversion elaborate that God created various races of mankind and divided them so that each would belong to a certain pre-destined religion.

Let us first understand the meaning of the words "conversion” and "choice” in relation with religion. Conversion is derived from Latin "conversion, conversio, from convertere, to turn around, transform, convert, from con- + vertere, to turn.” It means: "An experience associated with a definite and decisive adoption of religion.”

Choice is derived from Old French choisir, to choose, and to "choose” means "to select freely and after consideration.” (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 1997)

Now that we understand the two words in their contexts, let us turn to our subject: conversion and choice of religion.

The author (centre) performing the navjote of Stephen Williamson at Rostam and Morvarid Guiv Dar-e-Mehr in San Jose, California on January 29, 2005

The theory of religion-by-birth has only one source: karma. In other words, it is the product of the Hindu and associated religious belief in reincarnation. And here too, in Hinduism and associated religions, the pre-destined birth covers not only the religion but the very life of a person — his/her caste, the living condition of the family and the place of birth. And one is expected to stick to it and work under the very conditions he/she is born into to get a better and higher place in the next birth. Religion-by-birth does not stand apart and important. It is just one of the many "birth” conditions. One wonders what has made the upholders of "religion-by-birth” adopt only this one out of the many conditions. Is it to give themselves the freedom to leave their "pre-destined” town, province, country, nationality and/or profession of "birth” to seek a good living anywhere in the world, particularly in the English-speaking Western countries?

There is not a single allusion to religion-by-birth in any of the other existing religions, especially the Good Religion — not in the Avestan, Pahlavi, Persian and other scriptures and inscriptions, not even in Qisse-i Sanjan, which does not allude to any promise of not converting or accepting any natives into the Zoroastrian religion. Here the asylum-seeking Zarthoshtis from Iran agree to the five conditions laid by Jadi/Jadav Rana of Gujarat: Explain the tenets of the religion, change the language from Iranian to Indian, women to adopt the Indian dress, men to disarm themselves and perform the marriage ceremony in the evening (instead of morning). The explanation of the tenets does not mention the topic of conversion.

The established facts are contrary to the birth theory. One grows under the circumstances one is brought up in. If the child is adopted by a couple who belong to another standard of life and another religion, the child is brought up in the manner that they foster him/her. Unless fostered by the real or adoptive parents, no child can grow up in the religion it is supposed to have been born into. It is only the fostering that works and never the natural growth in mind and matter.

If God created various races of mankind and divided them to belong each to a certain pre-destined religion, why did He not create all the religions at one time? Why have the religions appeared at different times and in different places? Did He want people to remain without a religion for ages until He sent them a guide in the form of a rishi, avatar, messenger, prophet or guru?

We do not know how many creeds and cults have died a natural or violent death through migration, invasion, commingling and fostering. They could number in the thousands. Let us consider the existing major religions in chronological order and in round figures: Hinduism has been an evolving religion for some 4,000 years, and Good Conscience was founded by Zarathushtra 3,700 years ago, Judaism by Moses some 3,300 years ago, Buddhism by Gautama Buddha 2,500 years ago, Jainism by Mahavira 2,500 years ago, Christianity by Jesus and Paul 2,000 years ago, Islam by Muhammad 1,400 years ago, Sikhism by Guru Nanak 500 years ago, and Baha’ism by Bahaullah in 1863, only 165 years ago.

Again, why did God, the omnipotent and omniscient, not create the followers of different religions as different species, who could not interbreed or intermarry? Did He want them to continuously resort to conversion and commit such an awful sin resulting in the ensuing violence? Have those who believe in pre-destined religion any straight, authentic answers to the above questions?

This reminds one of the 1995 navjotes of Neville Wadia and Nusli Wadia. Ethnically Parsis, the father and son were "born” Christians and were products of intermarriages. They wanted to "revert” to their ancestral religion and their wish was endorsed by five High Priests — Dasturs (Drs) Hormazdyar K. Mirza, Kaikhusroo M. JamaspAsa, Firoze M. Kotwal, Hormazdiar Nosherwan Dastur and Noshirwan Manchershah Dastur. Although all these High Priests were opposed to conversion, they called this "reversion.”

What do they have to say about the "reversion” movement among the so-to-say "born” Muslims? Contrary to the Wadia case, in which they were never forced to become but were brought up as Christians, we know that the Iranians were brutally converted to Islam. And now they want to revert and are reverting to their ancestral religion.

One wonders why none of the founders of different religions have mandated a clear commandment prohibiting conversion and acceptance. On the contrary, most have advocated the spread of their respective religions. Why do those Zoroastrians who are against conversion beat around the bush in long articles and go in circles with interpretations in an attempt to make their point of view appear true? All they need to do is to produce a terse prohibitive commandment against conversion. They have none, not a single shred of evidence from the Avestan, Pahlavi and Persian writings or from an alien history saying that Zoroastrians, from the Achaemenian to the Sassanian times did not convert and that one had to be born a Zoroastrian. Had this been so, Greek, Roman, Christian, Armenian, Indian and Muslim historians would have noted this strange custom.

Conversion through propagation, persuasion and force remains the main means of spreading a religion. In fact, had there been no conversion, each of the founders would have been the sole follower of his own religion and since they were not permitted to convert their spouses, their religions would have died with them! Once converted, the children are obviously brought up in the accepted religion. Setting aside the traditionalist Zoroastrian viewpoint, every religion, whether gigantic or small, is working to convert the entire world of six billion+ people. Christianity, Islam and to an extent, Buddhism are engaged in a global missionary competition. Unlimited conversion has turned Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism into large multiracial, multicultural and multilingual fellowships. And Bahai’sm is making quiet but sure progress. Why not Zoroastrianism, historically the first universal and missionary religion? Happily, it has reverted to its goal of spreading over the seven keshvars of the good earth.

Conversion has different shades. In some religions, it means the use of every possible means to bring the person over. In others there are certain rules and regulations. In the Good Religion of Zarathushtra, it is only through thorough study, acceptance and choice. One has first to acquire sufficient knowledge of the religion, consider its doctrine with an open and clear mind and accept it through free will and personal choice. That is why the word "conversion,” in its modern usage, has not been used in the Gathas. It is choice and personal choice only:

"Hear the best with your ears

and ponder with a bright mind.

Then each man and woman, for his or her self,

select either of the [following] two choices.

Awaken to this doctrine of ours

before the great event of choice ushers in (Gathas: Song 3:2 = Yasna 30:2).”

A founder director of the Zarathushtrian Assembly and a founder trustee of the Cyrus Society, Dr Ali Jafarey’s fields of specialization include Indo-Iranian history, geography, culture, religion, linguistics and literature. Author of 16 books in Persian and English on the Zarathush­trian religion and Iranian culture, Jafarey has taught at various universities and institutions in Iran and Pakistan.