“Middle of the road is…”

My attention has been drawn by many Zoroastrians of London to the article "Middle of the road is undefined territory” (Zoroastrians Abroad, Parsiana, October 7, 2007). On reading it one would imagine that the sun has suddenly started shining on the Zoroastrians of London since 1986 because Noshir Avari, Rusi Dalal, Dorab Mistry, Dr Feroze Munshi and Paurushasp Jila declared themselves to be practitioners of the "middle path” resulting in religiosity (but not religion) and cohesiveness returning to the community, every individual in the UK knowing who Zoroastrians are, the priesthood which was undermined pre-1986 now being respected and religious classes being started for the young.

Allow me to place some facts before your readers.

From the mid-sixties to the middle of 1986, when half the committee of Zoroastrian Trust Funds of Europe (ZTFE) resigned in disgust at the machinations of the Sethna brothers as well as Dalal, S. Shahrokh, B. Irani, B. Mody and others, the community in the UK was peaceable, prosperous and united. This was destroyed by the above-named and their cohorts including Avari and K. Jassawalla. The situation remains little changed as a large section of the community has chosen to opt out rather than be a part of this "middle path.”

Our Dastur Sohrabji H. Kutar was universally loved and respected, as was Ervad Burjor Magol. Kutar encouraged other priests to join in the various ceremonies held at the old Zoroastrian House (ZH). Ceremonies like navjotes, weddings and funeral services were also performed at the homes of Zoroastrians whenever required. When the extension to ZH was declared open, Siroja Faresta prayers were recited by Kutar and 14 or 16 ervads seated on the stage of the new Assembly Hall. The ervads were well respected and thanked for their voluntary services, which is quite contrary to what Avari has stated in the article.

The then ZTFE management followed a policy of religious tolerance and allowed mixed marriage couples, their children and others to attend all religious ceremonies and to enter the unconsecrated Setayash Gah, which was kept spotlessly clean by our Irish lady housekeeper. Since 1986 the Setayash Gah has been reserved "For Parsis only” with the spouses of mixed marriage couples not allowed to participate in the muktad and farvardegan prayers. Various other restrictions are also being practiced. Is this the "undefined” middle path… or sheer intolerance?

The percentage of Zoroastrian children marrying outside the fold has gone up from 50 percent in 1986 to 80 percent today. Even the priests in London have realized that nothing can be done to stem the tide. Yet my good friends, living in the 21st century enlightened England, wish to introduce the 18th century spirit prevalent in the villages of Gujarat!

I notice that my name sits heavily on the conscience of my erstwhile friend Dalal. Prior to the annual general meeting I was asked by all members of the committee to be president and the trustees unanimously invited me to become a trustee in place of Bahman Mobed, who subsequently migrated to Hawaii. There was no precedent that the same person cannot occupy the office of both president and trustee. In fact Jehangirji Moos occupied both these positions simultaneously for many years and no one ever raised any objection. My erstwhile friends objected merely in order to play politics. In fact, so intent were they in this pursuit that for nearly six months they had only one trustee instead of the mandatory three after one trustee had migrated and the other one had died.

Dalal, Avari and others on the committee did not sell all the investments of the association, despite my advising them to do so before I resigned, thereby missing out on a substantial gain and subsequent high interest earnings that could have accrued to the association. Since trustees have always attended committee meetings — Moos, Mobed, N. M. Dhalla and C. P. Mehta did so regularly — there is no novelty in the post 1986 trustees doing likewise.

Kutar, Moos and Mehta attended numerous inter-religious meetings and spoke on Zoroastrianism at gatherings of other communities. Even so we did not dare to claim, as Avari affirms now, that everyone in the UK knows about us. Minoo Madan and Mehta conducted regular religious classes and prepared children for their navjotes. Every opportunity was taken to hold lectures on Zoroastrianism whenever scholars like Dastur Now­rooz Minochehr-Homji, Rashid Shahmardan Irani, Piloo Jungalwalla and others visited London. Kutar, Feroze and Cyrus Mehta, Farrokh Vajifdar also lectured on Zoroastrianism. These lectures were well attended and open to all. No speaker was excluded, as is the present policy. Over one weekend in 1984 we organized a series of lectures at ZH with knowledgeable professors and dasturs enlightening us on the Zoroastrian religion, culture and history, the first of its kind ever to be held in London.

Kutar was very keen to establish an agiary and sagdi with suitable cold rooms at Compayne Gardens. Arbab Rustam Guiv was interested as well, but as the idea was not practicable I had to say no and disappoint Kutar. Had Avari and Mistry enquired, they would not have thrown away the hard earned money of the community members on a project that was doomed to failure. The idea of establishing an old people’s home in London was first mooted many years ago by the late Shahriar Bekhradnia. After investigation, we had to turn down the proposition as it was not practical.

Avari has made bold to state that the balance sheet strength in 1992 totaled £ 350,000 whereas it is now £ 6.5 million. (The most recent ZTFE balance sheet shows it as £ 6.2 million.) He had made the same claim earlier as well and I chose to ignore it, but I now feel that his misstatement should be rebutted. The 1992 accounts of ZTFE show a balance of £ 761,475 and not £ 350,000, a 45 percent understatement on the part of this chartered accountant from East Africa. Further, the new committee has chosen to ignore the fact that it was the property at old ZH, purchased by Moos and myself in 1968 and subsequently extended in 1982-83, costing around £ 245,000, that was sold for £ 2.3 million, considerably boosting the coffers of the community today. Hence, nearly £ 2.8 million, out of the £ 6.5 million was generated by the actions of the previous management.

Compare this record with that of the post 1986 trustees and committee investing a little over £ 200,000 in risky start-up companies paying no dividends. As a result, a substantial part of this large amount was lost.

The most recent ZTFE accounts reveal that the quality of earnings is poor; the net asset value applicable to the association is only £ 158,773, a mere 2.6 percent of the total, the rest of the £ 6.055 million resting in designated and restricted funds. Not a very rosy picture and one which is fraught with problems for the future.

SHAHPUR F. CAPTAIN

Kent, UK