“Challenges for...”

In "Challenges for the chairman,” (Parsiana, April 21, 2010), Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) chairman Dinshaw Mehta states that at present 50 percent of our community members reside outside baugs and are isolated from "mainstream community affairs” and seeks to bring them within "the colony culture.”

When it is an established fact that our community strength is rapidly dwindling, estimated to be around 30,000 in the next 30 years, why spend money on buildings which will last for minimum 80 years? There will be very few claimants for these after some years. Surely there must be some other way to provide accommodation to the needy and deserving people? Can we not just subsidize rent for the needy, instead of incurring capital expenditure?

Also what makes Mehta think that by giving flats to young couples our population will go up? An average Parsi couple does not want more than one or at the most two offspring. A number of independent males and females do not wish to get married. Dwindling numbers have perhaps very little to do with lack of housing.

What makes Mehta think that living in baugs will make the community more enterprising and progressive (one supposes this should be the aim)? Can some study by social scientists be carried out to support such assumptions? One also hears that those staying in baugs and colonies tend to develop ‘ghetto mentality’ and become easygoing which may not be good for the community in the long run.

Further, why does Mehta bundle "Parsi Irani ethnicity” and "religion” into one? The religion of Asho Zarathush­tra has nothing to do with "Parsi Irani ethnicity.” The universal religion of our Asho Zarathushtra is meant for all human beings. All our scriptures endorse accepting anyone wanting to follow it (a write-up quoting our scriptures can be obtained by writing to me).

And what are these "time-tested customs and practices?” It is ‘time’ which has failed the dakhma system — a time when there are just no scavenging birds (the heart of dakhmenashini) and to call this system "time-tested” is self deception. Actually the Vendidad prohibits use of a dakhma when there are no birds (extracts of Vendidad can also be obtained by writing to me).

Regarding survival of our community, if you wish to cling to your "ethnicity” one doubts if there can be any solution. But if you are open to suggestions on how to have more followers of Zoroastrianism, there will be many solutions. It was our Asho Zarathushtra’s vision and mission that the religion of Ahura Mazda be spread in the far corners of the world (Ys 33.7; 49.5; 47.6; 44.7, etc). If the leaders and the priests of the community want to stray away from the Prophet’s mission, who can save that community?

A question that has been dividing the community is: Does the community come first or the religion? As long as the trustees of the BPP and our so-called high priests keep putting the community first, it is doomed to meet extinction as all demographic figures and indications show. The day the community members think of how to spread our religion, there is some hope for the community. To begin with why not just start accepting children of intermarried couples into our religion and community? It is not against the religion of Asho Zarathushtra.

Besides, why should priests be made to look as parasites on the community? This concept of looking after priests life-long does not seem healthy, honest, respectable and wholesome. Can we not think of teaching them some income generating skills at the madressas? Also, let us understand clearly that our children and their children as products of the computer age will be strong believers of rationality and logic. The days of ‘blind faith’ are numbered. One hears that about 11 agiaries in Bombay are almost closed. More will meet a similar fate. How long will you keep supporting the priestly class when their utility to the future community is doubtful? The quoted figure of Rs 100 crores can surely be put to more constructive purposes?

An in-depth study of the problem is certainly called for, before we decide to collect funds and start spending them. Perhaps the sons of our priests do not want to follow the footsteps of their fathers because they do not find it satisfying to their innate intelligence and abilities or because the job is not considered sufficiently ‘respectable’ in present times. Perhaps it has nothing to do with the remuneration or money?

I believe that the prosperity of the community will increase if we generate funds to buy seats in medical, engineering, law, commerce and other colleges, finance education of a student’s choice, make available loans for entrepreneurship and place in every community member’s hands a fishing rod rather than a fish!

It is really surprising that Mehta tries to justify the seemingly criminal offence when he along with some 40 miscreants disrupted the initiation into priesthood of a Russian Zoroastrian in Sanjan. The whole incident was sordid and does not make any Parsi or Zoroastrian proud — the less said the better.

KERSEE KABRAJI

Poona

kerseekabraji@gmail.com