“Consequences of change”

From his article "Consequences of change” (Parsiana, August 21, 2008) it seems that Eruch Desai, former trustee of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP), is unable to get over the old system and accept the reality that under universal adult franchise a handful of bawas in fetas and topis can no longer hold the community to ransom.

Desai laments that the new team of ignoramuses will be a big handicap. But no one is born with experience, which is gained. In fact a new team will have fresh ideas and an open mind on vexatious issues concerning the community.

Desai faults the ensuing election as an open field where at least 30 candidates will contest. But that is democracy. Anyone who feels that he is competent and capable of winning should throw his hat into the ring. It is left to the electorate to decide whom to vote for.

Desai’s point is valid and well taken that completely fair elections are not possible. As he rightly adds, "no community, no nation, no state can have a record of having completely fair elections. The Parsi community cannot claim exception to this almost universal rule.” This applies to the old system as well. However, in reality most of the centers are baugs/colonies where people are known to one another. Also, the candidates will have their own volunteers, so the chances of rigging are remote.

Desai states that the new board, not being enlightened in religious matters, can always seek advice of religious scholars and priests. Is he not aware that scholars and priests are contesting the coming elections? And that is the biggest fear for it is said that "the world is ruled by two great schools: religious rogues and bigoted fools.”

The writer then goes on to create fear by repeating rumors that those eying trust property particularly Doongerwadi may change the method of disposal and makes a veiled threat of legal action being taken by members of the community. Doonger­wadi is a matter of shame and disgrace. It has been conclusively exposed and proved that dead bodies are decaying in the bhandars and then given a mass burial. Fanatics, rabid hypocrites and ignorant orthodox have railed against this but failed to prove that the video clips were doctored.

Desai is right in stating that any member of the community can go to court, but it has not dawned on him that this is a double edged sword. Anyone can challenge the existing system — using solar reflectors and dumping bodies to decay in bhandars followed by mass burial — by demanding inspection of the relevant trust deed and insisting on implementation of the original procedure. As a former trustee Desai should be aware that in the past some trust deeds have been amended with the consent of the courts, and it appears that ultimately the courts will have to intercede to restore a semblance of respect and dignity towards the dead.

In the matter of paying obeisance to the dead I fully agree with Desai that people of other communities do not murmur or complain, they are more understanding and sensible. It is the Parsis who do not understand, are inhuman, devoid of commonsense, and have no clue to the sentiments, sensitivity and feelings of other people. As for the dakhmenashini, the system worked while there were vultures. Had the system been working well, would there have been any need for solar reflectors and chemical spraying?

To sum up, Desai is still gloating about the past, cannot accept that the "old order changeth,” is negative about others and underrates them. So be it. He is entitled to his opinions. But time marches on and a new era is about dawn, which nothing and nobody can prevent.

BEHRAM AGA

behram_r_aga@yahoo.co.in