Editorial Viewpoint
The fire in the temple
The music and laughter that filled the Homawalla Agiary in Bharuch in December last year made one realize that fire temples do not have to be solemn, dimly lit, slovenly and mournful sanctuaries. They can also be lively, picturesque and distinctive while maintaining their sanctity, their ancient structures and unique architectural heritage.
In many fire temples one sees unshielded tube lights, dangling wires, walls fitted with bathroom tiles, unclean floors, accumulated dust, shabby paper fans, dog-eared prayer books, steel support beams rising up to the ceiling to reinforce an ageing roof. The interiors are bereft of worshipers at most fire temples save those that are based in residential colonies. The Rustom Faramna Agiary in the Mancherji Joshi Parsi Colony in Dadar, the Karani Agiary in Cusrow Baug and a few others are well frequented.
But most of the 50 odd agiaries and atash behrams in Bombay and the other 100 or so in the rest of India have only a handful of worshipers gracing their portals. Ervad Parvez Bajan, panthaky of the Mevawalla Agiary located about a kilometer away from Rustom Baug and Jer Baug, once complained that the baug residents preferred to frequent the fire temples in the Fountain/Fort areas where they worked rather than walk the extra bit from the Byculla bus stop or railway station to worship at his agiary.
But with the number of working Parsis continuing to dip as the community population plummets, even the Fort agiaries will feel the pinch. As it is, a move by the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) over 20 years ago to move the sacred fire of the desolate Godavra Agiary from the Fort area to the newly constructed agiary at Godrej Baug floundered when a handful of Parsis objected to the shift claiming they worshipped there; so also with the isolated Doongaji Agiary in Bharuch. A move by the trustees to move the fire to Bombay’s Godrej Baug met with resistance and the matter languished in the courts of law.
The myriad Bombay fire temples once served over 70,000 Parsis. Now there are barely 40,000 in the metropolis. The Grant Road-Nana Chowk-Tardeo area has the largest concentration of Parsis and correspondingly the largest number of fire temples, 11. But even the popular ones amongst them see only a sprinkling of devotees in the evening.
Places of worship in India for other faiths are normally packed with the faithful. Even roadside, makeshift mandirs have disciples queuing up to offer homage. In destinations like Tirupati in the south, worshipers sometimes stand in serpentine queues over 24 hours to view the idol of the main deity. During the Ganpati festival millions throng the idols of Ganesh located all over the city. The Parsis in contrast are minuscule in number, around 60,000-62,000 in India down from 1,14,890 in 1940 and therefore should try harder to attract their flock to the agiaries.
But if one attends a navjote or wedding and/or the ensuing reception at the Jeejeebhoy Dadabhoy Agiary’s sizable compound in Colaba one will notice very few Parsis entering the portals of the fire temple. Why would they not venture to offer homage when they are present at the site? Largely because one would have to perform the kusti ritual which when one is dressed to the nines can prove cumbersome. Of course, many women find it inconvenient to wear a sudreh kusti with their evening outfits. Devotees have to remove their footwear which involves bending over and soiling one’s hands. Then if there is a non-Parsi member of the family at the gathering, he/she would have to wait outside alone, probably next to the board that crassly proclaims admission is restricted to only Parsi Zoroastrians (and in some fire temples the sign adds: “Parsi women married to non-Parsis and their children should refrain from entering”). And of course there is the odd agiary as in Valsad that bars entry to Parsi women married outside the fold with or without their children. Dogs, however, are permitted entry in all fire temples.
Why so much emphasis on clothing to denote one’s religiosity? Do not worshipers enter a church or temple or mosque or synagogue without having to wear specific garments or recite certain prayers? Some may require a devotee to be bare headed while others may insist on heads being covered. Some houses of worship may require a particular dress code depending on the country or city or custom. But in most places visitors are permitted entry if they are decently attired.
In the West where churches face a decline in the number of footfalls, every effort is made to attract worshipers. Services are offered in Vietnamese or Chinese or any language that the congregation feels comfortable with. Houses of God are often the hub of social service activities: raffles to raise money for charities, meetings of civic organizations, music recitals, talks. Many churches are architectural marvels, the exteriors and interiors meticulously maintained. The wooden pews, the stained glass windows, the high vaulted ceiling, all add to the aura of sanctity. The Christian clergy knows if the religion is to remain relevant it must see to the needs of its parish, not vice versa.
The more recently constructed/acquired Zoroastrian community dar-e-mehers in North America as well as the Zoroastrian Centre in London follow the lead of the churches with their centers hosting manifest activities to remain relevant and attract the faithful. But they, of course, are not fire temples.
Bharuch has less than 140 full-time residents and four adarians. Except for the restored Homawalla Agiary, the rest have few visitors. What will happen when the number drops further? we ask the fire temple’s trustee Sarosh Ginwalla. The same thing that will happen to the rest of the community in India, he replies. When pressed further, he talks of the possibility of appointing trustee/s from the BPP.
But when he is informed that the BPP trustees already have their hands full and sometimes are even unaware of the property they own outside of the city, he ponders on the impracticality of the idea.
The BPP trustees often advise selling the property and diverting the funds to Bombay to build more houses or assist the needy in the city. But as the Parsis in Bharuch flourished thanks to the town, it would only be proper to return something to the city and state that made them prosper. By turning defunct or soon-to-be-defunct fire temples into schools or libraries or nursing homes and involving the local, socially-conscious non-Parsis into the management of the trusts, the legacy of Parsi philanthropy would continue even after no Parsis are left in the vicinity.
In Bhuj non-Parsis tend the agiary as no Parsis remain in that Gujarat city. The grounds maybe leased/rented to a nongovernmental organization for its activities.
The Ginwalla family involved non-Parsis in the project to repair and restore their fire temple in Bharuch. The result is there for all to see.
In many fire temples one sees unshielded tube lights, dangling wires, walls fitted with bathroom tiles, unclean floors, accumulated dust, shabby paper fans, dog-eared prayer books, steel support beams rising up to the ceiling to reinforce an ageing roof. The interiors are bereft of worshipers at most fire temples save those that are based in residential colonies. The Rustom Faramna Agiary in the Mancherji Joshi Parsi Colony in Dadar, the Karani Agiary in Cusrow Baug and a few others are well frequented.
But most of the 50 odd agiaries and atash behrams in Bombay and the other 100 or so in the rest of India have only a handful of worshipers gracing their portals. Ervad Parvez Bajan, panthaky of the Mevawalla Agiary located about a kilometer away from Rustom Baug and Jer Baug, once complained that the baug residents preferred to frequent the fire temples in the Fountain/Fort areas where they worked rather than walk the extra bit from the Byculla bus stop or railway station to worship at his agiary.
But with the number of working Parsis continuing to dip as the community population plummets, even the Fort agiaries will feel the pinch. As it is, a move by the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) over 20 years ago to move the sacred fire of the desolate Godavra Agiary from the Fort area to the newly constructed agiary at Godrej Baug floundered when a handful of Parsis objected to the shift claiming they worshipped there; so also with the isolated Doongaji Agiary in Bharuch. A move by the trustees to move the fire to Bombay’s Godrej Baug met with resistance and the matter languished in the courts of law.
The myriad Bombay fire temples once served over 70,000 Parsis. Now there are barely 40,000 in the metropolis. The Grant Road-Nana Chowk-Tardeo area has the largest concentration of Parsis and correspondingly the largest number of fire temples, 11. But even the popular ones amongst them see only a sprinkling of devotees in the evening.
Places of worship in India for other faiths are normally packed with the faithful. Even roadside, makeshift mandirs have disciples queuing up to offer homage. In destinations like Tirupati in the south, worshipers sometimes stand in serpentine queues over 24 hours to view the idol of the main deity. During the Ganpati festival millions throng the idols of Ganesh located all over the city. The Parsis in contrast are minuscule in number, around 60,000-62,000 in India down from 1,14,890 in 1940 and therefore should try harder to attract their flock to the agiaries.
But if one attends a navjote or wedding and/or the ensuing reception at the Jeejeebhoy Dadabhoy Agiary’s sizable compound in Colaba one will notice very few Parsis entering the portals of the fire temple. Why would they not venture to offer homage when they are present at the site? Largely because one would have to perform the kusti ritual which when one is dressed to the nines can prove cumbersome. Of course, many women find it inconvenient to wear a sudreh kusti with their evening outfits. Devotees have to remove their footwear which involves bending over and soiling one’s hands. Then if there is a non-Parsi member of the family at the gathering, he/she would have to wait outside alone, probably next to the board that crassly proclaims admission is restricted to only Parsi Zoroastrians (and in some fire temples the sign adds: “Parsi women married to non-Parsis and their children should refrain from entering”). And of course there is the odd agiary as in Valsad that bars entry to Parsi women married outside the fold with or without their children. Dogs, however, are permitted entry in all fire temples.
Why so much emphasis on clothing to denote one’s religiosity? Do not worshipers enter a church or temple or mosque or synagogue without having to wear specific garments or recite certain prayers? Some may require a devotee to be bare headed while others may insist on heads being covered. Some houses of worship may require a particular dress code depending on the country or city or custom. But in most places visitors are permitted entry if they are decently attired.
In the West where churches face a decline in the number of footfalls, every effort is made to attract worshipers. Services are offered in Vietnamese or Chinese or any language that the congregation feels comfortable with. Houses of God are often the hub of social service activities: raffles to raise money for charities, meetings of civic organizations, music recitals, talks. Many churches are architectural marvels, the exteriors and interiors meticulously maintained. The wooden pews, the stained glass windows, the high vaulted ceiling, all add to the aura of sanctity. The Christian clergy knows if the religion is to remain relevant it must see to the needs of its parish, not vice versa.
The more recently constructed/acquired Zoroastrian community dar-e-mehers in North America as well as the Zoroastrian Centre in London follow the lead of the churches with their centers hosting manifest activities to remain relevant and attract the faithful. But they, of course, are not fire temples.
Bharuch has less than 140 full-time residents and four adarians. Except for the restored Homawalla Agiary, the rest have few visitors. What will happen when the number drops further? we ask the fire temple’s trustee Sarosh Ginwalla. The same thing that will happen to the rest of the community in India, he replies. When pressed further, he talks of the possibility of appointing trustee/s from the BPP.
But when he is informed that the BPP trustees already have their hands full and sometimes are even unaware of the property they own outside of the city, he ponders on the impracticality of the idea.
The BPP trustees often advise selling the property and diverting the funds to Bombay to build more houses or assist the needy in the city. But as the Parsis in Bharuch flourished thanks to the town, it would only be proper to return something to the city and state that made them prosper. By turning defunct or soon-to-be-defunct fire temples into schools or libraries or nursing homes and involving the local, socially-conscious non-Parsis into the management of the trusts, the legacy of Parsi philanthropy would continue even after no Parsis are left in the vicinity.
In Bhuj non-Parsis tend the agiary as no Parsis remain in that Gujarat city. The grounds maybe leased/rented to a nongovernmental organization for its activities.
The Ginwalla family involved non-Parsis in the project to repair and restore their fire temple in Bharuch. The result is there for all to see.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive