“Who are the renegades?”

The gate stands rusted and creaking between us — traditional/liberal Parsis on one side and revisionist/conservatives on the other — on the issue of who should be allowed through and who kept out from the full practice of the Zoroastrian faith. Recent opinions in your magazine by Darius Khambata, Maharashtra’s advocate general ("Independent and impartial advice," Parsiana, October 7, 2012) and an editorial ("Who are the renegades?" Parsiana, October 21, 2012) make a powerful plea to the gatekeepers — namely a section of our clergy and their supporters in the community — to fling it open.

There have been other well reasoned articles in Parsiana recently. A collection of these along with a memorandum drafted by the revisionists should be published. This would serve to inform and remind the community about what is being argued and which side makes the more credible case for the gate’s existence.

Imagine if each side could argue the other’s case. The liberals, fully accepting revisionist thinking and making common cause with the conservatives would fight to preserve the much vaunted Parsi pedigree, even if that leads to extinction of the tribe. A situation not unlike what prevails today, and what would sadly come to pass. This could, perhaps, be the easier case to argue. The conservatives aligning with the liberals would affect to promote an all-encompassing communal growth and consensus without budging an inch on the stasis of their recently acquired beliefs. Now wouldn’t that be a wonderful victory for all of us? Yet, how likely is it to happen?

The Parsi community, conceptualized as a company, with a clearly stated memorandum and articles of association authored by both sides, would be readily reminded about where it is headed: to bankruptcy and dissolution or towards a regenerated and uniformly regulated community upholding the H3 (humata, hukhta, huvrashta — good thoughts, good words and good deeds) Zoroastrian tenet in public life and discourse. Ultimately this will reflect on how we, privately, practise H3 as individuals. Right now, that reflection does not look good.

My understanding of Zarathushtra, judging from his teachings, is that he was a traditional/liberal. Over the centuries his followers established a tradition of preserving his core spiritual message while accepting the need, as did the Prophet, to wisely adapt temporal practices to changes occurring with time.

The revisionist/conservatives are no less protective of Zarathushtra’s core spiritual message and therefore equally traditional, but have until quite recently contrived to put a spin on the issue of temporal practices to achieve their self-serving objectives in the guise of keeping the faith pure.

There are really no insurmountable differences that cannot be overcome with good H3. KHUSHRU (KHATU) DEVITRE

Madras

kdevitre@yahoo.co.in