Contentious correspondence

Following his intemperate remarks at the Sanjan Day function on November 18, 2010 that sparked off a protest, Ahmedabad industrialist Areez Khambatta wrote a lengthy letter addressed to Udvada’s High Priest Dastur Khurshed Dastoor justifying his remarks.

In the letter dated November 27, 2010, which was reproduced in the "Parsi Tari Arsi” column of The Bombay Samachar on December 5, 2010, Khambatta wrote: "You kept proclaiming from the stage that the Udvada mo­beds are perfectly capable of protecting holy Iranshah on their own, and therefore I had to draw your attention to the recent Valsad case, in which several intermarried women have filed sworn affidavits in the Gujarat High Court stating that they freely enter Iranshah. You deliberately ignored that I was referring to intermarried women and kept repeating that ‘no convert has entered Iranshah, unless he was brought in by a Parsi!’ and then abruptly walked off the stage, so that you could avoid giving any answers... You also tried to instigate your Udvada mobeds and hamdins to react, by repeating your wrong statement about ‘converts’... But as you are aware, hardly a handful of hamdins left, showing that they agreed with my views, which has lowered the dignity of your position...”

The letter continues: "Pak Iranshah is the first and foremost holiest fire temple for the ‘Parsi Irani Zoroastrians of the world’ and definitely not for the ‘Zoroastrians of the world’ as sought to be promoted by you and your convertist friends... Together with my WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) team, I am doing my best to save our glorious religion and lovely community from these cunning and crooked convertists who have no guts to come out openly but always stab the community in the back. These convertists are more dangerous than the Arabs from whom we fled, as they work slyly all the time with excellent propaganda being their speciality, which you too seem to have adopted this time.”

Areez Khambatta (left) and Dastur Khurshed Dastoor

Replying to Khambatta on December 16, 2010, the Udvada Samast Anjuman wrote, "We, Udvada Samast Anjuman have taken note of your letter... addressed to our Dasturji Khurshed Kaikobad Dastoor, the contents of which are derogatory, inaccurate, untrue, misleading and mischievous. All that your letter conveys are figments of a warped sense of imagination... We firmly believe that your only interest in attending the Sanjan Day celebrations was to disrupt the function and create pandemonium by making efforts to mock, insult and malign our revered Shreeji Pak Iranshah, Dasturji Khurshed, mobeds present at the function and our Anjuman... casting false allegations and aspersions from the podium...

"The spontaneous reaction from the audience was an indication of their annoyance, infuriation and condemnation of your comments. All that you succeeded in doing was to disrupt a pleasant program and mar the decorum of an annual function that many Zoroastrians eagerly look forward to attend. It is self-proclaimed defenders of the faith such as you, who through such disgusting public pronouncements do the most damage to our faith and religious institutions. It is individuals such as you that make our community an object of ridicule in the eyes of... our sister communities... In the present generation, you have harmed the interests of our community and our religious institutions more than anyone else... We have advised our respected Dasturji Khurshed not to lend dignity to the vile and despicable contents (of your letter) with a response.”

On receiving a copy of the Udvada Samast Anjuman’s letter to Khambatta, Bombay Parsi Pun­chayet (BPP) chairman Dinshaw Mehta has offered the good offices of the BPP to "mediate and bring about an end to the needless controversy... the continuation of (which) is to the detriment of the community interest.” In a letter published in the "Parsi Tari Arsi” column of The Bombay Samachar of January 18, 2011 Mehta stated the controversy was "the result of misunderstanding and miscommunication leading to needless maligning of Mr Khambatta... After seeing the tape in its totality, I can affirm that there was nothing ‘vile, obnoxious, or atrocious’ in (the) speech, that ‘mocked, ridiculed, or insulted’ either our respected Vada Dasturji, the Udvada Anjuman or our Pak Iranshah Atash Behram.” He added that "it is important that the orthodox remain united and steadfast to combat a common foe to safeguard the interest of our Pak Iranshah.”

Regarding the sale of land adjacent to the Iranshah Atash Behram, an e-mail making the rounds on the Internet with the subject line: "Update on Udvada Atash Behram case before the Hon. Gujarat Revenue Tribunal” has targeted advocate Percy C. Kavina of Ahmedabad for "representing the hated developer” and urged readers to "condemn” his "mercenary behavior and actions and bombard his e-mail (p_kavina@yahoo. co.in)... with your views on what you and our community thinks of him.” This ignores the fact that Kavina’s professional ethics enjoins him to represent defendants in all kinds of legal matters.