“Snafu in Sanjan”

I was indeed surprised to see Vada Dastur Khurshed Dastoor strongly criticized in the advertisement by WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) in The Free Press Journal of November 26, 2010. I also saw on YouTube the video of the Sanjan Day incident referred to in the advertisement. The speaker, a WAPIZ luminary, first reminded the gathered audience that he was worth Rs 500 crore. We wish him well and hope that he is soon worth Rs 1,000 crore. He then criticized Dastoor in language and tone which did not show any respect for the vada dastur who was seated on the dais.

The so-called "orthodox” and WAPIZ often take shelter behind the pronouncements of the vada dasturs and the laity is exhorted to follow their dictum; then why the sudden U-turn?

The reason for WAPIZ’s ire was that Dastoor decided to follow the law of the land and refused to give an affidavit that Parsi Zoroastrian women married to non-Parsi Zoroastrians should not be given entry into our agiaries and atash behrams. Dastoor was justified in his stand. It is well settled that in India the Parsi community consists of Parsis who are descended from original Persian immigrants and who are born of both Zoroastrian parents and who profess the Zoroastrian religion and children of Parsi fathers by alien mothers who have been duly and properly admitted in the religion (Petit vs Jeejeebhoy — 1908 XI Bom LR 85). If either the orthodox camp or the liberal camp does not like the dictum of this case, they should take the matter to courts once again.

A Parsi Zoroastrian has a dual qualification. He is by caste or tribe a Parsi and by religion a Zoroastrian. A Parsi Zoroastrian by marriage to a non-Parsi Zoroastrian does not lose his caste or tribe. One has to be born a Parsi and once born would die a Parsi. Similarly, there is no doctrine in the religion which deprives a Parsi Zoroastrian of his religion by marriage to a non-Zoroastrian. The persons who seek to debar a Parsi Zoroastrian from entering an agiary or an atash behram are legally and morally wrong.

This criticism of Dastoor on Sanjan Day and again in the advertisement in The Free Press Journal raises an important issue which goes beyond the filing of an affidavit. Should a vada dastur be respected only so long as his pronouncements tally with each individual’s (whether orthodox or liberal) concept of the religion? In fact, the article on the Federation meeting, "Reining in the radicals” (Parsiana, November 21, 2010), quotes Khojeste Mistree, another WAPIZ luminary telling Jamsheed Kanga: "It’s time you heard what the High Priests have to say …” Then why the criticism of the vada dastur in such a disrespectful manner?

A second very important issue arises from this incident. The vada dasturs do not speak with one voice on any important aspect of religion — except dakhmenashini and racism, i.e. excluding all those who were not born of Parsi Zoroastrian parentage.

The community and certainly I will welcome unanimous guidance from the vada dasturs on the following topics:

Is reincarnation an accepted doctrine of the Zoroastrian religion or does the religion prescribe only one life on earth?

Is the Zoroastrian religion a strictly monotheistic one or does it prescribe dualism?

Are the doctrines of Ilm-e-Khshnoom or its offshoot Pundolism which preach reincarnation an accepted part of mainstream Zoroastrianism or are they to be regarded as a heresy?

Is leading a good honest Zoroastrian life, following the law of Asha, sufficient for the progress of one’s soul or are prayers and ceremonies performed after death, which depend on the goodwill of the survivors, essential?

These are very important questions, the answers to which will determine the manner in which a person desirous of following the Zoroastrian religion will fashion his life.

E. P. BHARUCHA

epbharucha@gmail.com