“Caste vs religion”

The articles "Caste vs religion,” "The right freely to profess,” "A cardinal human right” and "Opposite routes” (Parsiana, August 21, 2008) were not only interesting, enlightening and educative, they also put the issue of conversion in its proper perspective.

As a lay bawaji what I have understood from these articles is that the Zoroastrian religion makes it obligatory for Zoroastrians to propagate, proliferate and spread the noble religion, which certainly includes conversion. I have no hesitation in adding that our priests, vada and chhota, have failed miserably to discharge their bounden duty in this regard. Instead, they have embarked on a path of discrimination against women married out of the community and their children, treating them like outcastes.

The orthodox, and the self-styled scholars who claim that conversion is not permitted in our religion, are either doing féka fék (indulging in untruths), or have a vested interest in taking people for a ride. Will they please explain how not one but two court judgments presided over by two different courts in different lands and fiercely contested could have come to the same conclusion on the issue? To me it appears that the self-appointed protectors of our religion have taken the law into their own hands. The law of the land clearly permits people to profess a religion of their choice and the law of the land prevails over any religious diktat.

The time has now come to sort this matter out once and for all. Why are the priests bent on flouting the tenets of the religion and discriminating against out-married Parsi women who have not converted to any other religion, and their offspring? Those who convert will not be Parsis but Zoroastrians, and that is important for even during the days of the ancient Iranian empires all those professing Zoroastrianism were not Parsis; their number included people in other countries as well.

BEHRAM AGA

behram_r_aga@yahoo.co.in