Readers' Forum
“Parsi women of... ”
Jehangir Sarosh has written an interesting letter, "Parsi women of childbearing age” (Readers’ Forum, Parsiana, August 7, 2012), but unfortunately has missed the point entirely. He did not take into account one of the more idiotic aspects of current religious and social practices: how is a child born a Parsi.
Children born of Parsi fathers are generally accepted as Parsis, whatever the faith or race of the mother. All that matters is that the father be a Parsi. When the mother is a Parsi and the father is not all hell breaks loose and the child is often not permitted to have a navjote. Apart from dogma and plain old fashioned stupidity, I can see no reason why a man can produce a Parsi child but a woman cannot! (The verdict of Justices Dinshaw Davar and Frank Beaman in the Bombay High Court case of Petit vs Jeejeebhoy defines a Parsi as one born of a Parsi Zoroastrian father. But the bench noted Zoroastrianism not only permitted but enjoined conversion — the editors)
So, statistically, the number of Parsi women of childbearing age is completely irrelevant to the propagation of our community. If there was only one Parsi woman left in the world but all the Parsi men had children with non-Parsi women, the community would increase. If there were a million Parsi women but they all had children with non-Parsi fathers, the community would not increase by one soul. If all Parsi men married Parsi women the community would still not increase any more than it otherwise would have if all the Parsi men married non-Parsi women. That is also why, contrary to what most people seem to think, mixed marriages do not matter. As long as the Parsi man produces a child, the child can be a Parsi.
Now if Parsis would only enter the 21st century and accept that men and women are equal and that "Parsiism” (whatever that is) is a community and not a collection of male genes, the community may not die out. As it stands today, statistically all that matters is for Parsi men to have a lot of children. Women do not matter in this. Tragic.
CYRUS KHARAS
Blaricum, The Netherlands
kharas@wxs.nl
Jehangir Sarosh replies:
My point was related to the attempt to increase the Parsi population by offering subsidized accommodation and grants. I was not aware that this offer was also available to Parsi men who marry out. Is it? (The Bombay Parsi Punchayet is opposed to interfaith unions — the editors)
However Kharas has raised a very interesting and important point, about the so-called acceptance of children of Parsi fathers. I say so-called, for it would be good to carry out some research as to how well the children are really accepted by the Bombay Parsi community. Often the wife is not accepted and therefore the whole family is alienated.
I have read the government is also concerned at the diminishing Parsi population and is willing to assist. So why not ask them to change the law and allow Parsi men to have as many non-Parsi wives as they please? That would get the population soaring and the community roaring (in more ways than one). (The law has to be changed by moving the courts rather than the government — the editors)
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive