Editorial Viewpoint
A second anniversary affidavit
n another affront to Parsi women married to non-Parsis, the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) passed a resolution at their board of trustees meeting on August 10, 2010 requiring the families of such women to provide a second affidavit at the time of their death stating the ladies were following the Zoroastrian religion. The first affidavit is to be submitted by them in the course of their life. Only then would their bodies be consigned to the Towers of Silence.
The note stated: “several Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian ladies married to non-Parsis had approached the administration, with a request to accept their affidavit, stating that though they are married to non-Parsi, they were married under (the) Special Marriage Act and had not changed their name or their religion, but still profess Zoroastrian religion, and, as such, their bodies should be consigned to the Towers of Silence.
“The matter was discussed amongst the board of trustees that though they profess Zoroastrian religion, at the time of their marriage to non-Parsi, but thereafter during the course of their balance lifetime they may change their mind and start professing some other religion other than Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian religion, and, hence such affidavit alone cannot hold good at the time of the death, as they may have changed their religion after the affidavit filed with our office, but before their death. Thus, it would be better if the relative of the deceased or the next of kin gives an affidavit at the time of her death, that she was professing Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian religion, till the time of her death.”
This would be “in addition to such affidavit directly from such Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian ladies during their lifetime.”
Granted, it is possible a woman married to a non-Parsi may opt to change her religion but what about a man who marries a non-Parsi? Would he not be similarly prone to such an urge? And what about the countless other Parsi/Irani Zoroastrians married within the fold who visit churches and dargahs, go on pilgrimage to Shirdi, or Ajmer? Should they or their family members also be required to submit an affidavit stating they remained Zoroastrians in mind and spirit?
And what purpose does an affidavit serve? It’s just a piece of paper which is as often filled with falsehoods as truths. Do the trustees truly believe that by obtaining this scrap of paper they are preserving great Zoroastrian traditions? That they are maintaining the sanctity of their Towers of Silence? And what about our fire temples? Why should not such affidavits be submitted before entering the house of God? Are the agiaries less sacred than the dakhmas? And should not a fresh affidavit be submitted each time a Parsi enters the sacred precincts as there is no guarantee that between visits she or he may not have strayed to another faith?
It is these mindless, mischievous acts of our Taliban trustees that lead us to believe they are bereft of any ideas for the betterment of the community. Stymied in all their grandiose schemes by their opponents and their own limitations, they choose instead to pander to their orthodox constituency.
As it is dakhmenashini is under attack, so why drive away those who may want to avail of this archaic and decrepit system? The vultures are long gone, the solar concentrators don’t work during the monsoons, bovine urine is sprayed on the corpses to add further indignity to the dead, the naked corpses can be viewed from the neighboring skyscrapers and now this humiliation! At a time of grieving when the deceased’s near and dear ones are scurrying from pillar to post meeting all the cumbersome formalities death entails, they will now have another unnecessary and tedious piece of red tape to deal with.
Normally these acts of sadism are backed by engineered letters from some of our high priests. But this time the trustees have felt emboldened enough to venture out on their own. Either the dasturs have tired of being used as pawns or the trustees are saving this fig leaf of respectability for later when the opposition mounts.
But more than the indignities these poor women are subjected to is the long-term damage to the BPP’s image. Every time the trustees embark on some harebrained scheme, or issue mindless fatwas, they turn more people against the community’s premier trust. How many years of good governance and sensible leadership will it take to restore even a semblance of respectability to this once august body?
Of the seven trustees, two, Jimmy Mistry and Noshir Dadrawala were absent when the obnoxious resolution was mooted and passed. Dadrawala, even though he belongs to the orthodox school of thought, may have sought legal advice and a study of the reasoning behind the earlier resolution before deciding. Mistry has been playing the orthodox card and would probably have gone along.
Of the five trustees voting in favor the usual suspects, Khojeste Mistree and Yazdi Desai, were the driving force. They wanted a total ban on consignment to the Towers of Silence for women marrying out of the community but it appears that Mehta convinced them not to go the whole hog. As that astute observer of Parsi politics, Berjis Desai noted in his “Parsi Tari Arsi” Sunday column (August 1, 2010) in The Bombay Samachar, “WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis of which Mistree and Desai are founding trustees) has never trusted Mehta’s orthodox credentials — and rightly so. Mehta perhaps feels a debt of gratitude to WAPIZ who stood by him, in his hour of crisis (the 2008 BPP trusteeship elections). However, he is clever enough to realize that WAPIZ had no choice. It was like North Korea without China. Mehta would have had a much smoother innings if he had not unnecessarily provoked the liberal forces... By toeing the WAPIZ hardline, he is losing tons of goodwill amongst the influential sections of the community.”
He is also frittering away the mandate given to him and his co-trustees two years ago. Perhaps instead of asking others to file affidavits claiming they are following the Zoroastrian faith, the trustees should do so. Their actions definitely give the impression they have ceased to follow the religion of the good life.
The note stated: “several Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian ladies married to non-Parsis had approached the administration, with a request to accept their affidavit, stating that though they are married to non-Parsi, they were married under (the) Special Marriage Act and had not changed their name or their religion, but still profess Zoroastrian religion, and, as such, their bodies should be consigned to the Towers of Silence.
“The matter was discussed amongst the board of trustees that though they profess Zoroastrian religion, at the time of their marriage to non-Parsi, but thereafter during the course of their balance lifetime they may change their mind and start professing some other religion other than Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian religion, and, hence such affidavit alone cannot hold good at the time of the death, as they may have changed their religion after the affidavit filed with our office, but before their death. Thus, it would be better if the relative of the deceased or the next of kin gives an affidavit at the time of her death, that she was professing Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian religion, till the time of her death.”
This would be “in addition to such affidavit directly from such Parsi/Irani Zoroastrian ladies during their lifetime.”
Granted, it is possible a woman married to a non-Parsi may opt to change her religion but what about a man who marries a non-Parsi? Would he not be similarly prone to such an urge? And what about the countless other Parsi/Irani Zoroastrians married within the fold who visit churches and dargahs, go on pilgrimage to Shirdi, or Ajmer? Should they or their family members also be required to submit an affidavit stating they remained Zoroastrians in mind and spirit?
And what purpose does an affidavit serve? It’s just a piece of paper which is as often filled with falsehoods as truths. Do the trustees truly believe that by obtaining this scrap of paper they are preserving great Zoroastrian traditions? That they are maintaining the sanctity of their Towers of Silence? And what about our fire temples? Why should not such affidavits be submitted before entering the house of God? Are the agiaries less sacred than the dakhmas? And should not a fresh affidavit be submitted each time a Parsi enters the sacred precincts as there is no guarantee that between visits she or he may not have strayed to another faith?
It is these mindless, mischievous acts of our Taliban trustees that lead us to believe they are bereft of any ideas for the betterment of the community. Stymied in all their grandiose schemes by their opponents and their own limitations, they choose instead to pander to their orthodox constituency.
As it is dakhmenashini is under attack, so why drive away those who may want to avail of this archaic and decrepit system? The vultures are long gone, the solar concentrators don’t work during the monsoons, bovine urine is sprayed on the corpses to add further indignity to the dead, the naked corpses can be viewed from the neighboring skyscrapers and now this humiliation! At a time of grieving when the deceased’s near and dear ones are scurrying from pillar to post meeting all the cumbersome formalities death entails, they will now have another unnecessary and tedious piece of red tape to deal with.
Normally these acts of sadism are backed by engineered letters from some of our high priests. But this time the trustees have felt emboldened enough to venture out on their own. Either the dasturs have tired of being used as pawns or the trustees are saving this fig leaf of respectability for later when the opposition mounts.
But more than the indignities these poor women are subjected to is the long-term damage to the BPP’s image. Every time the trustees embark on some harebrained scheme, or issue mindless fatwas, they turn more people against the community’s premier trust. How many years of good governance and sensible leadership will it take to restore even a semblance of respectability to this once august body?
Of the seven trustees, two, Jimmy Mistry and Noshir Dadrawala were absent when the obnoxious resolution was mooted and passed. Dadrawala, even though he belongs to the orthodox school of thought, may have sought legal advice and a study of the reasoning behind the earlier resolution before deciding. Mistry has been playing the orthodox card and would probably have gone along.
Of the five trustees voting in favor the usual suspects, Khojeste Mistree and Yazdi Desai, were the driving force. They wanted a total ban on consignment to the Towers of Silence for women marrying out of the community but it appears that Mehta convinced them not to go the whole hog. As that astute observer of Parsi politics, Berjis Desai noted in his “Parsi Tari Arsi” Sunday column (August 1, 2010) in The Bombay Samachar, “WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis of which Mistree and Desai are founding trustees) has never trusted Mehta’s orthodox credentials — and rightly so. Mehta perhaps feels a debt of gratitude to WAPIZ who stood by him, in his hour of crisis (the 2008 BPP trusteeship elections). However, he is clever enough to realize that WAPIZ had no choice. It was like North Korea without China. Mehta would have had a much smoother innings if he had not unnecessarily provoked the liberal forces... By toeing the WAPIZ hardline, he is losing tons of goodwill amongst the influential sections of the community.”
He is also frittering away the mandate given to him and his co-trustees two years ago. Perhaps instead of asking others to file affidavits claiming they are following the Zoroastrian faith, the trustees should do so. Their actions definitely give the impression they have ceased to follow the religion of the good life.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive