Editorial Viewpoint
A favorite minority?
A video clip of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address to the Indian diaspora in Singapore where he spoke about the Parsis coming to India has gone viral amongst community members. Many of them are jubilant that Modi singled them out for praise, narrating the oft repeated but fictitious tale of sugar in the milk.
Modi probably chose to narrate the fable to show that minorities are welcome in India and the country is tolerant of other faiths. His Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has come under much flak for attempting to promote Hindutva while discriminating against minorities.
The Parsis in many ways constitute the ideal minority. They are largely well off, with almost 100% literacy; they have their own housing, hospitals and schools (though mostly in South Bombay and parts of South Gujarat); they have not sought reservations or undue favors. They don’t welcome others into their religion, and mainly resort to constitutional means to resolve their differences or vent their resentment (the assault on the Russian Zoroastrian neophyte priest in Sanjan around five years ago being an exception).
No wonder then that Modi focussed on the Parsis. In 2011 while chief minister of Gujarat he addressed a large gathering of the community in Udvada on the sacred fire’s 1,290th anniversary. He spoke of the sugar in the milk allegory and added, "You have given everything, asked for nothing — not even an electoral ticket...I wonder what would have happened if the Parsis had not arrived in Gujarat...we would not have known humor or how to weather troubles with a smiling face.” Modi said he wanted three things from the sacred Iranshah’s fire, "to think good thoughts, speak good words, do good deeds with mind, heart and spirit — so that I may not make mistakes, not do harm to anyone.”
On that occasion, one of the two Udvada high priests, Dastur Khurshed Dastoor while acknowledging Modi’s contribution to Gujarat and his warm feelings for the community added somewhat prophetically, "When we celebrate Iranshah’s 1,300th anniversary, we shall welcome Narendra Modi as the prime minister of India.” And this December 27 there are high hopes he will once again visit the coastal village/town during the Udvada Iranshah Utsav. (He has not confirmed his attendance so far.)
If the Parsis had come as religious refugees to India 1,000 plus years ago, they would have possibly received the same "welcome” accorded to Syrian, Iraqi, Afghani, Bangladeshi and the Rohingya fugitives today. Instead of a bowl of milk they would have probably been met by angry locals with drawn swords. Parsis, therefore, probably came as traders and when the opportunity arose stayed on, happy to be able to practice their religion relatively unfettered.
That we prospered is because our numbers were always small, we adapted to the local customs and were, like most migrants, hardworking and aspiring to a better life. There is no historic record of any king named Jadi Rana and the sugar-in-the-milk legend does not even appear in the Qissa-i-Sanjan, the text that narrates the mythical tale of the Parsis’ arrival in India. The analogy of sweetening their new surroundings by placing sugar in milk or water is claimed by several migrant communities and is probably the imagination of ancient public relations professionals.
While enjoying all the benefits of a pampered though deserving community, most Parsis sadly are unsympathetic to the plight of other less privileged minorities. They have little or no love for Muslims and barely tolerate members of the scheduled tribes and castes. The Parsis’ loyalties lie more with the majority community. Perhaps it is an instinct for survival that makes them do so. As Dastoor reiterated at the 2011 function, "As long as we have the rulers’ support, no one can harm us.” Even the late Maharashtra Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray whose abhorrence for all non-Maharashtrians, and especially Muslims, resulted in countless deaths and suffering, was partial to Parsis. We are a truly privileged lot.
But can we turn a blind eye to what is happening to others? People have been killed if there was even a suspicion of their having eaten beef or having slaughtered a cow. Text books were being rewritten to glorify Hinduism, and if not denigrate, at least downplay the contribution of certain minorities. Those espousing Hindutva were being appointed to head prestigious institutions even if they did not have the qualifications, experience or standing to occupy the post. Books viewed to be at all critical of Hinduism or Hindus were sought to be banned. Ink was thrown on the face of a prominent journalist and former BJP executive because he had organized the Bombay launch of a book by a former Pakistani foreign secretary.
Notable members of the minority religions such as former police commissioner Julio Ribeiro and box office film star Aamir Khan voiced their apprehensions for the first time in their lives about feeling unwelcome and uncomfortable in India. Both were denigrated with Khan facing intense flak. The characteristic response to any criticism from Muslims is met with "go to Pakistan” or with comparisons between the lot of Muslims in India and those in parts of the Middle East where they are being slaughtered or having to flee for their lives.
Fortunately a few prominent community members have been voicing their dissent. Noted writer and former Indian Police Service officer Keki Daruwalla who retired as the additional director in the Research and Analysis Wing and served in the Cabinet Secretariat returned his prestigious Sahitya Akademi Award stating: "There are times when one must stand up and be counted” (see "Poets’ dissent,” Events and Personalities, Parsiana, November 7, 2015). In the same issue reputed poet Adil Jussawalla was quoted that while he was "honored” to receive the award from the Akademi the "unacceptable censoring of many writers by violently intolerant groups must be condemned…this is the time to unequivocally support the right of the nation’s writers.”
Many in the community are enamored of Modi. If they wish him to succeed, they must add their mite to the cry for tolerance. Modi may be inclined to listen to the voices from his favorite minority.
Modi probably chose to narrate the fable to show that minorities are welcome in India and the country is tolerant of other faiths. His Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has come under much flak for attempting to promote Hindutva while discriminating against minorities.
The Parsis in many ways constitute the ideal minority. They are largely well off, with almost 100% literacy; they have their own housing, hospitals and schools (though mostly in South Bombay and parts of South Gujarat); they have not sought reservations or undue favors. They don’t welcome others into their religion, and mainly resort to constitutional means to resolve their differences or vent their resentment (the assault on the Russian Zoroastrian neophyte priest in Sanjan around five years ago being an exception).
No wonder then that Modi focussed on the Parsis. In 2011 while chief minister of Gujarat he addressed a large gathering of the community in Udvada on the sacred fire’s 1,290th anniversary. He spoke of the sugar in the milk allegory and added, "You have given everything, asked for nothing — not even an electoral ticket...I wonder what would have happened if the Parsis had not arrived in Gujarat...we would not have known humor or how to weather troubles with a smiling face.” Modi said he wanted three things from the sacred Iranshah’s fire, "to think good thoughts, speak good words, do good deeds with mind, heart and spirit — so that I may not make mistakes, not do harm to anyone.”
On that occasion, one of the two Udvada high priests, Dastur Khurshed Dastoor while acknowledging Modi’s contribution to Gujarat and his warm feelings for the community added somewhat prophetically, "When we celebrate Iranshah’s 1,300th anniversary, we shall welcome Narendra Modi as the prime minister of India.” And this December 27 there are high hopes he will once again visit the coastal village/town during the Udvada Iranshah Utsav. (He has not confirmed his attendance so far.)
If the Parsis had come as religious refugees to India 1,000 plus years ago, they would have possibly received the same "welcome” accorded to Syrian, Iraqi, Afghani, Bangladeshi and the Rohingya fugitives today. Instead of a bowl of milk they would have probably been met by angry locals with drawn swords. Parsis, therefore, probably came as traders and when the opportunity arose stayed on, happy to be able to practice their religion relatively unfettered.
That we prospered is because our numbers were always small, we adapted to the local customs and were, like most migrants, hardworking and aspiring to a better life. There is no historic record of any king named Jadi Rana and the sugar-in-the-milk legend does not even appear in the Qissa-i-Sanjan, the text that narrates the mythical tale of the Parsis’ arrival in India. The analogy of sweetening their new surroundings by placing sugar in milk or water is claimed by several migrant communities and is probably the imagination of ancient public relations professionals.
While enjoying all the benefits of a pampered though deserving community, most Parsis sadly are unsympathetic to the plight of other less privileged minorities. They have little or no love for Muslims and barely tolerate members of the scheduled tribes and castes. The Parsis’ loyalties lie more with the majority community. Perhaps it is an instinct for survival that makes them do so. As Dastoor reiterated at the 2011 function, "As long as we have the rulers’ support, no one can harm us.” Even the late Maharashtra Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray whose abhorrence for all non-Maharashtrians, and especially Muslims, resulted in countless deaths and suffering, was partial to Parsis. We are a truly privileged lot.
But can we turn a blind eye to what is happening to others? People have been killed if there was even a suspicion of their having eaten beef or having slaughtered a cow. Text books were being rewritten to glorify Hinduism, and if not denigrate, at least downplay the contribution of certain minorities. Those espousing Hindutva were being appointed to head prestigious institutions even if they did not have the qualifications, experience or standing to occupy the post. Books viewed to be at all critical of Hinduism or Hindus were sought to be banned. Ink was thrown on the face of a prominent journalist and former BJP executive because he had organized the Bombay launch of a book by a former Pakistani foreign secretary.
Notable members of the minority religions such as former police commissioner Julio Ribeiro and box office film star Aamir Khan voiced their apprehensions for the first time in their lives about feeling unwelcome and uncomfortable in India. Both were denigrated with Khan facing intense flak. The characteristic response to any criticism from Muslims is met with "go to Pakistan” or with comparisons between the lot of Muslims in India and those in parts of the Middle East where they are being slaughtered or having to flee for their lives.
Fortunately a few prominent community members have been voicing their dissent. Noted writer and former Indian Police Service officer Keki Daruwalla who retired as the additional director in the Research and Analysis Wing and served in the Cabinet Secretariat returned his prestigious Sahitya Akademi Award stating: "There are times when one must stand up and be counted” (see "Poets’ dissent,” Events and Personalities, Parsiana, November 7, 2015). In the same issue reputed poet Adil Jussawalla was quoted that while he was "honored” to receive the award from the Akademi the "unacceptable censoring of many writers by violently intolerant groups must be condemned…this is the time to unequivocally support the right of the nation’s writers.”
Many in the community are enamored of Modi. If they wish him to succeed, they must add their mite to the cry for tolerance. Modi may be inclined to listen to the voices from his favorite minority.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive