Readers' Forum
“Reaching for the light”
Since James Darmesteter has been referred to by former Air Chief Marshal Fali Major in "Reaching for the light” (Parsiana, March 7, 2016), I would like to commence by quoting him: "As writers of the opposed extremes seem honestly convinced of the radical error of each other’s views — a scholar should put himself fully under the influence first of one school, and then the other. The necessity for well-balanced study is extremely great,” Darmesteter avers.
Ervad (Dr) Ramiyar Karanjia, principal of the Dadar Athornan Institute appears to agree, suggesting in the last para of his response to Major’s article that one should study the "Vendidad closely and dispassionately.” Unfortunately no references whatever are provided in his response. In contrast, London based independent researcher Farrokh Vajifdar’s clarifications are measured and full of validations and references. Karanjia declares, "Major is not entirely correct when he mentions that dakhmenashini is the only practice from the Vendidad which is still being followed.” I read and re-read Major’s article and I see no such observation made therein! On the contrary, Major avers that there are, indeed, a number of diktats not being followed (even by the priests themselves!), so his reasonable query which followed was why make one an "outcast” for not following just this particular one? Had I been a priest who followed the Vendidad I may have been tempted to check and find out for myself what these diktats are that I am being accused of not following. I find Karanjia’s response unsatisfactory, and especially so when juxtaposed with Vajifdar’s detailed response.
There is yet another shroud of mystery on an allied subject which bears elucidation. To quote the respected Dastur Hormazdyar Kayoji Mirza in his Outlines of Parsi History (1974 edition): "Under the Sasanian Emperor Artakshir Papakan (226-241 AC), Dastur Tansar collected the (scattered) Avesta texts and prepared a Standard Edition of the Avesta Scripture.”
In Sasanian times there were 21 Avesta books called Nasks (collections). These Avesta Nasks were translated into Pahlavi, most probably in the reign of Shahpur II (309-379AC); and commentaries added during the reign of Khushro I (531-571AC). The Arabs invaded and conquered Iran in 641 AC. Of these 21 Avesta Nasks and their Pahlavi translations, 20 Avesta Nasks and 19 Pahlavi translations were (still) in existence in the ninth century. Thereafter, most of the Avesta Nasks, their Pahlavi translations and some other Pahlavi works have been irretrievably lost. Most of the Pahlavi texts now extant were compiled or composed in the ninth century (AC). This unambiguously shows that a full 200 years after the infamous Arab invasion these books still existed. How, then, did they get "irretrievably lost” thereafter?
It has always been dinned into our heads that our holy books were lost firstly because of the "accursed” Alexander’s invasion and subsequently the Arabs’. But now it clearly appears that as many as 20 Avesta Nasks were in existence 200 years after the Arab invasion!
Who is to blame for this loss? I should blame those in charge of the safekeeping of the books at the time. And the time was after we arrived in India or just before (depending on which century of arrival to India one prefers). Blaming the Arabs for this careless loss appears unjustified by the facts. We therefore not only have ourselves to blame for the loss of 19 Avesta Nasks (not an insignificant number to inexplicably lose) after the ninth century AC, but find ourselves left with only one complete Nask! And when we note in them weird proscriptions and weirder remedies, are we not justified in enquiring why this text takes precedence over the older and more venerable scriptures, the Gathas?
As the learned Vajifdar has observed, "Debate is pointless and fruitless in the absence of true learning.” I therefore exhort the laity to read for themselves to come to a studied decision and not accept stories without enquiry. There is a set of volumes available at the Parsiana Book Club, Sacred Books of the East, and if not for a private collection, at least every panthak could procure one set for the enlightenment of individuals in their parish.
Being content with not knowing is indeed a sad and sorry state to resign oneself to. More importantly, it goes directly against the Prophet’s exhortation to investigate and pursue the truth for oneself. SHEEROY SUNAWALA
Bangalore
sunawalas@gmail.com
Ervad (Dr) Ramiyar Karanjia, principal of the Dadar Athornan Institute appears to agree, suggesting in the last para of his response to Major’s article that one should study the "Vendidad closely and dispassionately.” Unfortunately no references whatever are provided in his response. In contrast, London based independent researcher Farrokh Vajifdar’s clarifications are measured and full of validations and references. Karanjia declares, "Major is not entirely correct when he mentions that dakhmenashini is the only practice from the Vendidad which is still being followed.” I read and re-read Major’s article and I see no such observation made therein! On the contrary, Major avers that there are, indeed, a number of diktats not being followed (even by the priests themselves!), so his reasonable query which followed was why make one an "outcast” for not following just this particular one? Had I been a priest who followed the Vendidad I may have been tempted to check and find out for myself what these diktats are that I am being accused of not following. I find Karanjia’s response unsatisfactory, and especially so when juxtaposed with Vajifdar’s detailed response.
There is yet another shroud of mystery on an allied subject which bears elucidation. To quote the respected Dastur Hormazdyar Kayoji Mirza in his Outlines of Parsi History (1974 edition): "Under the Sasanian Emperor Artakshir Papakan (226-241 AC), Dastur Tansar collected the (scattered) Avesta texts and prepared a Standard Edition of the Avesta Scripture.”
In Sasanian times there were 21 Avesta books called Nasks (collections). These Avesta Nasks were translated into Pahlavi, most probably in the reign of Shahpur II (309-379AC); and commentaries added during the reign of Khushro I (531-571AC). The Arabs invaded and conquered Iran in 641 AC. Of these 21 Avesta Nasks and their Pahlavi translations, 20 Avesta Nasks and 19 Pahlavi translations were (still) in existence in the ninth century. Thereafter, most of the Avesta Nasks, their Pahlavi translations and some other Pahlavi works have been irretrievably lost. Most of the Pahlavi texts now extant were compiled or composed in the ninth century (AC). This unambiguously shows that a full 200 years after the infamous Arab invasion these books still existed. How, then, did they get "irretrievably lost” thereafter?
It has always been dinned into our heads that our holy books were lost firstly because of the "accursed” Alexander’s invasion and subsequently the Arabs’. But now it clearly appears that as many as 20 Avesta Nasks were in existence 200 years after the Arab invasion!
Who is to blame for this loss? I should blame those in charge of the safekeeping of the books at the time. And the time was after we arrived in India or just before (depending on which century of arrival to India one prefers). Blaming the Arabs for this careless loss appears unjustified by the facts. We therefore not only have ourselves to blame for the loss of 19 Avesta Nasks (not an insignificant number to inexplicably lose) after the ninth century AC, but find ourselves left with only one complete Nask! And when we note in them weird proscriptions and weirder remedies, are we not justified in enquiring why this text takes precedence over the older and more venerable scriptures, the Gathas?
As the learned Vajifdar has observed, "Debate is pointless and fruitless in the absence of true learning.” I therefore exhort the laity to read for themselves to come to a studied decision and not accept stories without enquiry. There is a set of volumes available at the Parsiana Book Club, Sacred Books of the East, and if not for a private collection, at least every panthak could procure one set for the enlightenment of individuals in their parish.
Being content with not knowing is indeed a sad and sorry state to resign oneself to. More importantly, it goes directly against the Prophet’s exhortation to investigate and pursue the truth for oneself. SHEEROY SUNAWALA
Bangalore
sunawalas@gmail.com
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive