Know
About Us
Feedback
and Comments
Get
in touch
Subscribe
to JameJamshed
Advertise
Home
 |
The impression that I gathered at the meeting at Chavan Auditorium was that Dr. Antia did not actually advocate conversion in India but laid stress on the acceptance by the community of non Parsi fathers and mothers, and their children into its fold. It was in support of this theory that he cited certain extracts from our religious textbooks and scriptures in support of conversion to buttress his arguments. This was refuted by the priests and scholars at the meeting at Framjee Cawasjee Institute, again by references to the same religious text books and scriptures, giving their interpretation of the texts, It was for the audience to draw conclusion as to whose version should be accepted considering the quality and scholarly achievements of the speakers at the two meetings. However, the purpose of this Article is not to enter into a debate on this issue. The aforesaid background in this Article is to explode the myths and concentrate on the realities on the issue of Conversion/Acceptance, particularly in India. To assess the above, we have to consider whether the aforesaid proposal of Dr. Antia is likely to achieve the desired results in India, viz, (a) increase in the number of the community and (b) whether such acceptance would enable the non Zoroastrians spouses and children of non-parsi fathers to enjoy the same rights and privileges as born Parsi Zoroastrians. I think not. Please do read on what follows. So far as the first issue is concerned, will it really lead to increasing the number of the community? The inter-communal marriages are a much smaller percentage as compared to the marriages within the community. Further, a large majority of non-Parsi spouses, particularly the husband, would not be ready to forsake their own religion and become Zoroastrians. The Indian society by and large is still orthodox and believes in traditions. How many of the parents of such non-Parsi spouses would be prepared to allow their sons and daughters to embrace another religion. How many of them, leave aside the parents, would in particular allow their grand children to be brought up as Zoroastrians. In my view, a very very small percentage. If at all it can possibly increase the number, it will be just a trickle. Is it then worthwhile to cater to the demand of the above two Associations, and by one stroke of pen, bring about a radical change in the community's time tested customs and traditions extending over a very long period of time, with a strong possibility of disastrous consequences not only to the customs and traditions, but also to our valuable properties and institutions. Although the judgment in the case of Petit v/s. Jeejeebhoy affirms that Zoroastrism not only permits but enjoins conversion, no right thinking member of the community can advocate the same in India for reasons obvious. If that was done, the present day Parsi Zoroastrians would be reduced to an insignificant minority. Will the community then be able to move with heads so high, trusted and admired by the authorities and other communities, as at present. I would leave it to the readers to judge and come to their own conclusion. Coming to the next issue viz. whether by such acceptance of non Zoroastrian spouses and children of non Parsi/ Irani fathers into the fold, will they be able to enjoy the same rights and privileges as enjoyed by those born as Parsi/ Irani Zoroastrians. Will they be able to enter the fire temples? No. Will they be able to stay in the Housing Colonies? No. Will they be able to avail of the Doongerwadi facilities? No. Will they be able to enjoy the other Trust benefits meant for Parsi/Irani Zoroastrians? No. As all concerned should be aware, valuable properties and institutions, including housing colonies, Doongerwadi property, various Fire Temples were settled by our ancestors on Trust only for the benefit of Parsi/Irani Zoroastrians, and according to the above judgment, they can only be (a) born Parsi/Irani Zoroastrians and their children and (b) children of Parsi/Irani fathers and non Parsi mothers and not vice versa. Any relaxation by the trustees of the various trusts, with regard to the above, would tantamount to a breach of trust. Which trustees of which institution, either the BPP, or the trustees of Fire Temples, Housing colonies and the like, would be willing to open the doors to non Parsi fathers and spouses or their children. Do we not see the Boards hanging outside the Fire Temples "Admission restricted to Parsi Zoroastrians". Apart from the above, even if all the trustees of BPP were to agree to such a proposal, it cannot have any binding efficacy even in respect of the properties under their control. Would the trustees of other trusts owning Fire Temples or properties be prepared to toe the same line? No independent minded trustee would be a blind follower of a lead taken in this behalf by the Trustees of BPP. Incidentally, in order that the Trustees of the BPP may be able to think in the right direction in accordance with the law, he/she should be one imbibed with learning, acumen, enlightenment and experience. I doubt, whether the recently talked about system of election through adult franchise would bring about such personnel on the Board of BPP. This system is most likely to usher in trustees of much inferior quality and less enlightenment, akin to the youngsters in the current Indian Cricket team who give many a hick up and tension, whilst achieving victory in the closely contested matches presently going on in the Tri-series involving Austrialia, India and Sri Lanka. Seasoned and experienced players like Dravid, Ganguly or Laxman would have been able to achieve the victory without much hick ups, heart beats or concern as we experience presently in these closely contested maches. Here, I recall with great interest, a very enlightened and excellent Article which Jamshed Kanga, my esteemed ex-colleague on the Board of BPP wrote in Jame some time back, explaining what the duties and responsibilities of the BPP trustees are and what sort of a person should adorn the chair. Every voter should read that Article to make the right choice. So to all those who profess "Acceptance", to them, I would say, that if they love our religion, sacrifice is the first element of religion and they should give some sacrifice. To break a tradition, just to cater to the wishes of a minority section is not likely to work either for the happiness of these individuals or the welfare of the community. Custom and tradition govern the world. Immemorial custom is transcendent law. It is the tyrant of our feelings and our way of life, and rules the community with the law of a tyrant. If we let in one little break in tradition, we will have in the whole monster, horns and tail and all. Custom and traditions are deep rooted, in the community and rightly so, and are still not on the wane. Dr. Antia's lecture has therefore raised a hornet's nest without the possibility of achieving the desired results. Only if all the beneficiaries of the various concerned Trusts would be agreeable to his suggestion (a vast majority opposes) any relaxation in this behalf would lead to the classic scenario of digging the mountain to find only a rat. The debate, therefore, generated by Dr. Antia's visit should be given a decent burial, but not at the Doongerwadi property. |
Dr.Kersy
Antia of USA visited Mumbai recently carrying with him a volcano and leaving behind
a sizzling tornado. His meeting at Chavan Auditorium was well attended - thanks
to the organizing ability of the Association for Revival of Zoroastrianism and
the Association of Inter married Zoroastrians, which mainly represent the higher
echelon of the community. However, as late Mr. Baman Behram ex-Chairman of the
BPP, used to say, the backbone of the community ventilating its real voice is
the middle class, and that was indeed noticeable at the very well attended gathering
with jam packed audience at Framjee Cawasjee Institute. The master stroke was
the erudite speeches at this meeting of the reputed priests and scholars of our
community, as also the messages sent by rest of the high priests who could not
attend the meeting, exhibiting exemplary solidarity, and rebutting with one voice
the contentions of Dr. Antia in support of his newly propounded theory of "Acceptance".