Can You Follow Zarathushtra?
The Historic and Scholarly Case for Conversion
"Zarathushtra was and is in very Truth, the world teacher.
His message is meant for all humanity for all time." Dr. Taraporewala
Web site created by Stephen Williamson
If you found this page it means that you have questions about Zoroastrianism.
This page is to support new seekers, converts, and inter-married couples.
I am a Zoroastrian convert. Here is a link to pictures of my acceptance ceremony.
This page deals with only ONE issue: CONVERSION - not Personalities or Organizations or other Faiths.
There are almost 75 pages of text here. It is black and white, for easy printing and emailing.
When someone says you can't be a convert, you can answer them with this document.
These are not my words, except where noted, These scholars speak for themselves:
Framroze Bode, Taraporewal, K.D. Irani, NA Mobeds Council,
Cyrus Mehta, Ali Jafarey, Farrokh Vajifdar, Stanley Insler
Thank to all of the people who sent me this information. Special thanks to the websites & their authors.
First, The Arguments Against Converts & Inter-Married Couples (All Refuted Below)
1) Conversion has not been allowed for at least 150 years by priests in India.
2) Everyone should stay in their religion of birth, God put them in that faith. (also a Hindu idea)
3) Conversion breeds hatred within faiths. (True Christian & Muslim history)
4) The Gathas speak about a moral choice, not conversion from one faith to another.
5) Children of inter-married couples may not be recognized as Zoroastrian by others.
Resolution by the North American Mobed Council, Summer. 2000
From: Jehan Bagli
To: z-alias-2
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 3:30 PM
Subject: [zoroastrians] Re: Definition
Zarathushtrians:
Recently there has been some discussion
about the definition of the term Zoroastrian/Zarathushti.
It is of interest
to remind the Zarathushtrian community of North America of a resolution that was
passed at the 13th AGM of NAMC. The underlying principle of this important
resolution is essentially lost to the community. It is certain that some in
India will just disregard this, as the work of Altoo Faltoo (worthless)
Zarathushtis. Be that as it may, this was an effort of several dedicated mobeds
who spent precious hours of serious discussion, before this was achieved to tear
through the traditional synonymity of a Parsi and a
Zarathushti.
NAMC (North American Mobed Council) at its 13th AGM
in the year 2000 passed following resolution unanimously with one abstention.
This was during the tenure of presidency of Ervad Jal Birdy, present
vice-president of the Traditional Mazdayasni Zoroastrian Anjuman
The
resolution reads:
· Parsi is a
race.
· Zoroastrianism is a
religion.
· The term “Parsi” applies to the
descendents of the original migrants who left Iran to settle in India to
preserve Zoroastrianism
· A “Parsi”
is a person born of both Parsi parents who has an inalienable right to practice
the Zoroastrian religion.
· A “ Zoroastrian” is
a person who believes and follows the teaching of
Zoroaster.
· It is recognized that
“Zoroastrianism” is a universal religion.
· It
is further recognized that a Zoroastrian is not necessarily a
Parsi.
It is a pity that despite the publication of this, in a
short report in FEZANA Journal (Summer 2000, pg. 9) it has had no impact on
FEZANA, its member Associations, or grass-root community to awaken their
querying for the notion "Who is a Zoroastrian/Zarathushti?" It is
invariably chronicled that NAMC should act to lead the community
in North America. However something as fundamental as a question of
definition of a Zarathushti has been overlooked, and ad nauseam
the discussion continues.
With Guidance and Enlightenment from
Mazda
Jehan Bagli, President NAMC
Sept 14, 1903 Bombay Parsi Panchayat Supports Conversion, over 100 Years Ago
Opinions
of Dastur obtained by the Sub-Committee established by the Zoroastrian
Anjuman to answer the question" Should non-Zoroastrians be allowed to
convert to the Zoroastrian faith."
Opinion of Kaikhushru Dastur Jamaspji
Bombay, India
5th Gatha 1272 Y.Z. 14th September 1903
Dear Shams-Ulema Ervad
Jivanji Jamshedji Modi,
Secretary of the B.P.P.,
Dear Sir,
You have requested me to give my opinion on whether or not to allow
non-Zoroastrians to convert to Zoroastrianism. In reply, I have to
state that there is no bar in our religion, to accept non-Zoroastrian
converts. Every Zoroastrian reciting his obligatory daily prayers, such
as Khorshed & Meher yashts, prays that our Mazdayasni religion may
spread to all the Haftakeshwar Zamin. (i.e. the seven regions of the
earth). The athornans of days gone by did not just sit around wishing
this (spread of religion) to come true, but travelled to distant lands
to spread the Zoroastrian religion (Refer to Yasna 4l.6). Such
athornans met with oppositionfrom many people (see Yasna 9.24). We have
referred to only Two passages from the innumerable in the Zoroastrian
Scriptures confirming that the conversion of juddins to Zoroastrianism
is permitted.
The second edition of
Ervad Tehmurasp Dinshahji Anklesaria's "Treatise on the Conversion of
Juddins into Mazdayasni Religion" has just been published,in which this
able Ervad Saheb has quoted examples from Avesta, Pahlevi and Persian
texts - and we totally agree with quotation/examples. In the second
edition of “Pashoke Nirange Javit Dinan" published in 1252 by our dear
departed Dastur Jamaspji, further examples/ quotations have been given
concerning the conversion/ acceptance of juddins into the Zoroastrian
religion. From the writings of Ervad Tehmurasp (Anklesaria)and our dear
departed Dastur Jamaspji, it can he said that there is hardly any
material left on this matter for further research by any scholar.
Therefore rather than state more quotations/ examples it is best that
we give to your Sub-Committee these books (referred to above).
Yours sincerely,
Kaikhushru Dastur Jamaspji.
Zarathushtrianism: An Ancient Faith for Modern Man
By Dasturji Framroze A. Bode
Dastuji
Bode was one of the leading Parsis Zoroastrian priests and
intellectuals of the 20th century. You can read a good short biography
of him at Vohuman.org. The link is below
http://vohuman.org/Author/Bode,Framroze.htm
Man is essentially a spiritual and moral being. Modern man is not
satisfied with the present dogmatic conditions of religions, he is in
search of some spiritual and ethical philosophy of life which will
satisfy his inner self needs in search of Truth and Reality and
realization of his spiritual potentialities. Man cannot live by bread
and material things alone, he is a thinking; feeling and willing being
who needs spiritual nourishment. In the name of religion man is kept in
separation. Religion was intended to be a binding adhesive force,
but unfortunately it has become disruptive. The basic urge of man
is to know himself by spiritual science of the soul to bring forth the
Divine impulse operating in a new higher consciousness. Modern man
needs a new perspective, a restatement a regeneration of an enlightened
Faith in which he can experience the Divine Truth -and attain
happiness, success and joy in life.
Now, some of the fundamental, pristine, pure, spiritual, philosophical,
ethical and practical teachings of Zarathushtra could satisfy modern
man in his need of an Enlightened Faith in which he can experience the
Divine Truth and Reality.
The Advent of Zarathushtra was Cosmic Manifestation of the Divine Plan
for the new cycle of evolution of mankind. Zarathushtra was the
Prophet of Ancient Iran, a world teacher whose mission was to give
spiritual illumination to all mankind, he yearned to inspire abiding
faith in Ahura Mazda, in the hearts of all living beings.
Zarathushtra was the first Prophet who gave freedom and liberation to
then enslaved mankind from ignorance, superstition, ritualism and blood
sacrifice. He does not demand blind following, On the contrary he
says: "Give ear, listen, ponder with the light of your shining mind,
decide, discriminate, each man must choose his faith for himself. Thus,
he gave freedom of thought and freedom of choice in the matter of
religion."
Zarathushtra gave to the world pure Monotheism, a profound concept of
the Supreme Godhead – Ahura Mazda. He contemplated with his Pure Mind,
Vohu Manah over the Nature of Being and the laws governing the
Universe. Ahura Mazda is the Infinite Being. Ever present,
Lord of All- Wisdom, the Creator, eternally the same, all pervading
Loving Father, the Transcendent and the Immanent
Zarathushtra was the first world teacher who gave ethical conception to
religion. Before him primitive cultism was formalism, propitiation,
sacrifice, exteriorization. Without moral conduct in life, no
spiritual progress is ever possible. He applied religion to life
and to him life was light and illumination. Ethical Philosophy of
Zarathushtrianism is summarized in three Jewels, “Good Thought”, Good
Word”, “Good Deed”.
Man being the thinker and the mind being his unique.potentiality,
Zarathushtra emphatically propounded the philosophy of controlling and
disciplining the i mind and making it Vohu Manah - Good Mind, Pure
Reason, reaching the deepest level of the source of Superior Mind.
Zarathushtrianism teaches something which is useful to modern man.
Things happen in Nature and in Man not by the whim of some hidden
invisible dictator, but by the operation of the Immutable Divine Law of
Asha .the law of harmony , order, truth, concision and purity.
Zarathushtra gave a scientific teaching regarding the law of cause and
effect - the law of Karma. At several places in his Gathas he
reiterates: "As you sow, so must you reap", With this law of Asha is
tied up the conception of happiness and misery, heaven and hell, Those
who follow the law walk on the path of truth, righteousness and
goodness out of which happiness comes, Those who break the law furnish
themselves and suffer misery . Heaven and Hell are no places and
locations, they are the subjective states of man's spiritual
consciousness, God is a loving Father, He never , punishes man and
hurls him into Hell for eternal condemnation. The greatest good in life
is Goodness itself which brings happiness, Zarathushtra says:
“Happiness to him who gives happiness to others."
The Illustrious Master of Wisdom Zarathushtra, solves the problem of
evil and declares that evil is not an entity or a being, It is only the
twin mentality and relativity in the human mind, Vohu Manah the
positive, constructive Good Mind and Ako-Mano the negative, distractive
Evil Mind, There is no Cosmic dualism in the original fundamental Pure
Monotheistic teachings of Zarathushtra. He gave to humanity the
spiritual philosophy of One supreme Godhead eternally the same,
It will be interesting for modern man to know that intellect is finite
and it cannot reach the Infinities, Man must transcend the limitation
of intellect and enter into what Zarathushtra calls the region of
Sraosha -Intuition which dispels darkness, conflict, and confusion in
the human mind, The relativity light of Good and Evil, right and wrong
is transcended and the subject and object are merged together in one
flash of intuitive light, then Truth draws upon the consciousness of
man.
The concept of Fire in Zarathushtrianism is a deep scientific
philosophy. It does not mean the worship of physical fire.
Zarathushtra in his spiritual vision captured the experience of flaming
cosmic mystic fire of Ahura Mazda. “Athro Ahuraha Mazdao Puthra”.
Athro means etheric energy, the purifying energy of Ahura Mazda.
Fire is the cosmic mystic symbol of Ahura Mazda. Through this
Fire of Spirit man can realize God and experience bliss. Breath
is fire and fire is life. Thus, fire worship is reverence for all
life everywhere. Athra never means the physical fire of wood or
sandalwood. The association of Athra with Vohu Manah – pure Mind
and Asha – the Divine Law indicates that fire is a divine Spark
emanating from the Supreme Being, Illuminating the total mind with
Radiance of Wisdom. This fire will ignite the Flame of Love in the
heart and illumination of the soul. As Athra is the purifier its prime
function is to bum all impurities and cremate the dead body according
to ancient Zarathushtrian Custom. Fire can never be made impure by any
means.
Zarathushtrian spiritual philosophy of Self-Unfoldment,
self-realization or God-realization is practical. Realization means to
be real in our life within and without. By cultivating four Divine
Attributes - Wisdom, Law, Will and Love man is able to contact the
Spenta.Mainyu, the Holy Spirit within and be aware of his own
Perfection and Immortality.
Zarathushtra' s message is full of hope, optimism and cheer. The
ultimate triumph of good and transmutation of evil into good by living
dynamic good life are assured.
In the light of all the above, we may say humanity today needs the true
spirit of religion for revitalizing itself. There has been restlessness
and violence due to loss of spiritual and ethical values. It
might be said that the spiritual, philosophical ethical, rational
psychological, universal and practical teachings of Zarathushtra might
satisfy the spiritual yearnings of modern man and inspire him towards
establishing a better world of brotherhood, humanity and love. We
can sum up the message of Zarathushtra in the Triple Yoga thus: Think
creatively, constructively, rationally, originally and independently
with your head; love fully, universally and joyously with your heart;
and live dynamically in total goodness by using your hand to serve
mankind in the cause of unity and peace.
CONVERSION IN
ZOROASTRIANISM
The Truth Behind the
Trumpery
K. D. Irani & Farrokh Jal Vajifdar
Professor
K. D. Irani is a world renowned scholar and lecturer on
Zoroastriansm. With his kindness, his great sense of humor, and
his profound knowledge, he is one of the most beloved figures in the Z
world. He was born in India, is a Parsi in fact, and his
father,the late great Dinshah Irani was also a renowned scholar, who
was a good friend of both Poure Davoud (in Iran) and Rabindranath
Tagore (in India). In fact it was a slim little book of Dinshah
Irani's that first attracted me to the teachings of Zarathushtra. Prof.
K.D. Irani is now professor emeritus of the City College of New
York, where for many years, he not only taught philosophy, but headed
its Dept of Philosophy. He has travelled and lectured on Zoroastrianism
all over the world, -- in the United States, Australia, England, India.
Farrokh Vajifdar is a scholar who lives in England. He
spearheaded the first ever Gatha Colloquium in England, sponsored by
the WZO in 1993 (the WZO has published the papers given at that
colloquium and anyone interested may purchase copies from the WZO.
Zarathushtra preached a religion which demanded of individuals
responsibility for reflective moral living, and transformed human
existence from social abrasion to social harmony. He wished us to
become thereby HEALERS OF EXISTENCE. Many who consider themselves
Zoroastrians, mainly among the Parsi community, seem to claim that this
message was addressed by Zarathushtra to a specific tribe. Hence, if
someone of non Zoroastrian parentage, upon hearing the message of
Zarathushtra, and being convinced by it, declares himself or herself to
be a Zoroastrian, such a claim would, and should, be rejected by the
religious community of Zoroastrians. This view, though widely accepted,
is intellectually absurd and morally inhuman and bigoted, beside being
totally incompatible with the teachings of the Prophet.
That this view is incorrect, both conceptually and textually, is what
we wish to present here. We examine briefly the theological perspective
on the matter, and collect the various texts where the issue is
adverted to. Our contribution is not wholly original: the position we
hold, viz. the universality of Zarathushtra's teachings, had been
affirmed in a pamphlet prepared in the first decade of this century by
scholarly Zoroastrian priests; it was also supported by eminent Western
scholars of Zoroastrianism. Several percipient dasturs over the last
eighty years had expressed remarkably similar views. In recent years a
pamphlet addressing this issue was published by the Zoroastrian priest
Dr Kersey ANTIA.
The fallacious and bigoted view nevertheless continues to be
promulgated. We were, however, disconcerted by recent articles from
highly respected High priests of Bombay, and express our disquietude at
their arbitrary joint statement that a principle exists by which
CONVERSION IS NOT ACCEPTED BY ZOROASTRIANISM, and further, that
CONVERSION IS BOTH ILLEGAL AND INVALID (Parsiana, November 1995,
pp.29-34; Bombay Samachar, 24th December 1995) . Apart from the fact
that no such principle has EVER arisen within our universalist
religious system, it is exceedingly difficult to understand just what
they collectively mean by "illegal and invalid" -- which LEGAL criteria
have been applied, and why, and on what basis can one discredit an
individual's informed and deeply held SPIRITUAL belief, and its
practice, as LACKING VALIDITY! Why are quasilegal constraints sought to
legislate against clearly formulated RELIGIOUS precepts? Conversion is
not some idle hypothetical problem which can be dismissed through
misconstruing and disinformation. It cannot be made to vanish through
arbitrary denials and empty nuances.
Conversion is a practice apparently unacceptable among the Parsis
today, and has been so for some 150 years. It is a social practice of
the community for the establishment of which. good reasons were
perceived in the socio-political environment of the times. It must be
clearly recognized, though, that it is a matter of social practice
affected by social conditions, and NOT a matter of theological
doctrine.
A theology like Zarathushtra's, based upon the grasp of the eternal and
universal Truth by the divinely endowed Good Mind enabling us to
implement the Righteous Order in existence, is so clearly a universal
message that it would be altogether irrational to limit its acceptance
and practice to a community identified by biological ancestry.
Identifying religious commitment by birth is an extremely primitive
form of tribalism, entirely incompatible with Gathic teaching. We are
aware of the bizarre thesis that God places each soul into the womb of
a mother belonging to a tribe and expects the individual so born to
believe in the religious doctrines of a tribe. Apart from the intrinsic
absurdity of this view, the slightest exposure to the words of
Zarathushtra, with his emphasis on individual judgment and
responsibility, enables us to recognize the anti-Zoroastrian character
of this view.
We have long been acquainted with the suspect methodology by which
attempts to assert the reverse of our religion's injunctions regarding
conversion have been made. They are in the nature of factoid claims
achieved by careful contrivance and are simply not probative.
We encounter rather weak efforts at glossing our texts at the same time
as claiming to "correctly" interpret them. Being groundless, they do
not stand up to scrutiny, and yet it appears that the fictionalizing
process is energetically, and deliberately, pursued. Among the minor
but blatant fictions is the entirely false invocation of the Qisseh-ye
Sanjan's "five conditions" as proof that Jaydev Rana granted asylum to
our forefathers provided that no conversion of his Hindu subjects was
attempted. There is NO SUCH CONDITION among the five to which we
supposedly agreed.
Our eminently rational religion primarily urges a world-view based on
clear-mindedness whereby the Good Mind aspect of Ahura Mazda may be
attained in quest of Truth. Its texts -- from the Gathas of
Zarathushtra to the Persian Rivayats -- extend over some two thousand
eight hundred years, in the long course of which they responded to
religious evolution, the conflicting ideologies of newer religions, and
the unpredictable forces of a rapidly changing history. But
understanding the theology enables one to recognize immediately its
universal message. WE STRESS THAT NONE OF OUR LATER TEXTS CONTRADICT
EARLIER RATIONALIZING PROCESSES, EVEN LESS THEIR UNIVERSALIST PURPOSE:
THEY ARE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT ON THE SUBJECT OF ACCEPTANCE AND/OR
CONVERSION. That these texts may be distorted to suppress or yield
meanings entirely alien or out of context is a willful exercise against
which we must take issue. Our priests surely should apply religious
laws, for they too are subject to them, and not obscure socio-economic
regulations which vaguely find their origins in dubious traditions. And
the vociferous followers of such traditions would do well to also learn
from our texts, being the root and branch of our universalist religion.
The evidence of the Gathic texts
Most of us are agreed that these very ancient texts are the product of
Revelation for the metrical Gathas themselves, and the work of
Zarathushtra's earliest inspired disciples for the prose part. The
Gathic message does not come as isolated snippets, but as an intensely
logical series of precepts carefully worked into their main purport the
transfiguration of man from brutishness towards saintliness. For whom
is this message intended? The second of our Gathic kusti verses
(Ys.44.16) clearly entreats Ahura Mazda, as Healer of existence, to let
His hearkening (Sraosha) come to WHOMSOEVER He wills it: we actually
pray this each time we prepare to fasten on the kusti. The first stanza
of the Ushtavaiti Gatha (Ys.43.1) is Zarathushtra's benediction in the
same vein: May Ahura Mazda, who exercises sovereignty at will, grant
blessings to WHOSOEVER desires them. In neither passage do we encounter
the slightest hint that Ahura Mazda's Revelation was meant only for a
chosen few, still less a narrow ethnicity: it would be disrespectful to
suggest otherwise.
And the message? This reflects the single-minded purpose of the
Revelation: just as Ahura Mazda is acknowledged as the divine Healer of
an existence corrupted by spiritual perversity, so too is man destined
through his own FREE-WILL to wage an earthly combat to regenerate the
world, towards which end the good powers of Mazda are invoked for help
(Ys.30.9). "May we be those who shall renew THIS existence" urges
Zarathushtra, and we dutifully echo this sentiment in a stray line of
our kusti prayer (Yss.50.11 and 46.19). Elsewhere it is the sovereignty
of Ahura which is invoked for the Healing in accord with OUR wish
(Ys.34.15).
Zarathushtra was a realist who fervently hoped to bring to fruition
Ahura Mazda's Revelation that it was spiritualized man -- one lifted
from barbaric tribalism to civilization -- who would renew this world.
Armed with this inspired precept, the Prophet of the Righteous Order --
the New Order -- would convert ALL the living (Ys .28.5) ; again asking
for the formula from the very tongue of Ahura Mazda's mouth whereby ALL
the living would be converted (Ys.31.3); thereafter from Spenta Mainyu,
the Bountiful Spirit of Ahura Mazda, that Right-mindedness and Truth
come together to convert the many WHO ARE SEEKING (Ys.47.6)! Indeed,
the many came from near and far to seek Zarathushtra's wisdom
(Ys.45.1), emerging also in Yss.30.1 and 47.6. It must be noted here
that Zarathushtra had uncompromisingly rejected all contemporary
non-Mazdaean worship as hostile to the Revelation received from Ahura
Mazda (Ys.44.11). His Gathas are replete with the idea of CONVERSION
from dregvant to ashavan. We shall presently deal with its historical
devolution. After our Prophet's demise, we continue to encounter the
missionary activity of our fire-priests who ranged afar to spread his
religion (Ys.42.7).
For emphasis we again stress that ALL the living are required for the
work of Renovation, known to us as Frashokereti, the establishment of a
universal Righteous Order. The Prophet did not, moreover, distinguish
between the sexes when he assured both men and women: "O Ahura Mazda!
WHOEVER, man or woman, I shall impel to invoke You, with ALL these
shall I cross the Chinvat Bridge" (Ys.46.10).
The religion of Zarathushtra is open to ALL persons of moral goodness
and goodwill who would accept the Gathic Revelation. Reason tells us it
would indeed be pointless if only a chosen few were enlisted for the
great task, for despite all their piety, all their good work would be
surely rendered ineffective or even undone by the many NOT converted to
the Mazdaean New Order. Prophet Zarathushtra and the community of
believers in Iran, ancient and mediaeval, and even today, took this to
be a universal and NOT A TRIBAL RELIGION, and on many historical
occasions acted on that belief. There remains the act of worship
inculcated in the Haptanhaiti (Ys.39.2) towards the souls of righteous
men and women, past, present and future, WHEREVER THEY WERE BORN, which
statement only the most obstinately inclined would see as a mere
lip-service concession to good people of all other religions! Such
reverence was accorded, rather, to all ashavans everywhere, in a wholly
Gathic spirit, for their godly activity towards the Regeneration of the
entire world.
The Fravardin Yasht
The world-embracing Fravardin Yasht, a text as ancient as any in the
syncretist Zoroastrianism which post-dated our Prophet, is a
celebration of the fravashi, or pre-existent spiritual power of
righteous men and women, again past, living, or to be born (Yasht
13.21) . Included are the religious heroes of early Zoroastrianism, as
also its mythical and historical figures from the First Man to the
future Saviours of Mankind. (Zarathushtra had counted ALL Truth-seeking
persons as Saviours, or saoshyants, who had cultivated the Good Mind!).
Here it is that we find the categorical statement that ALL Truth-owning
men and women whose religious view contributes to the fulfilment of the
Renovation are worthy of reverence (Yasht 13.154).
With every emphasis, this Yasht urges the veneration of the Fravashis
of all righteous men and women from ALL lands, including the infamous
Turanians, the traditional enemies of Iran whose injurious activities
against Zoroastrianism form the substance of many an ancient legend!
But even more important is the remarkable passage celebrating the birth
of Zarathushtra (13.94): THEN WILL THE GOOD MAZDAYASNIAN RELIGION BE
PROPAGATED AMONG THE SEVEN CLIMES OF THIS EARTH!
Our most sacred prayer of the Yatha ahu vairyo, which an early
commentator tells us pre-existed Creation (so numinous did he consider
it!), has to be correctly taught to the ENTIRE physical world,
whereupon ALL of the living shall transcend mortality
(Ys.19.6-?,10-11).
The totality of veneration is indicated also by our Yasnas 23.3 and
26.6, the latter from our Satum-no-kardo! It is futile to still pretend
that a universalism directed towards the Frashokereti does not involve
conversion! Our priesthood solemnly intones such passages in the course
of the Yasna ceremony – pious declarations which, as Zarathushtrian
Mazdayasnian spiritual guides, they religiously vow to uphold. They
should suit their beliefs to these sacred words, and not deny the true
significance of our universally proselytizing prayers the moment they
cease chanting them!
The Vendidad, frequently misused to conform to closedmindedness and
religion overriding personal dislikes, also strongly comes down on the
side of conversion. Its chapter 19, X26, both in Avestan and its
Pahlavi zand, makes Ahura Mazda answer to Zarathushtra's query as to
whether he should guide both the righteous and the wicked
daeva-yasnians, men and women, towards the Good Religion: "You should,
0 righteous Zarathushtra!" It could not be plainer.
The Pahlavi "Zartusht-Namag" (Denkard VII)
Prophet Zarathushtra's (here Zartusht) piously compiled biography was
given its final revision in the ninth century of our Common Era, well
after the murder of the last Sassanian king. Islam was then secure in
its ascendancy, and despite the obvious danger to our ancient religion,
our Prophet's, biographers gave forthright views on Zartusht's
legendary life. The seventh book of our Mazdaean encyclopaedia, the
Denkard, is fully devoted to this biography. Its first chapter does not
baulk at declaring that ALL mankind are made knowledgeable in the
religion -- hardly an idle academic assertion! -- and Zartusht the
Spitamid's Fravashi is to be venerated. Ohrmazd/Ahura Mazda previews
the Prophet's birth with His Amshaspands/Amesha Spentas: Having a mouth
and tongue, he will declare the faith to the world incarnate (ch.2).
After he is born, Vohuman/Vohu Manah escorts him before the spiritual
assembly so that his Good Religion may spread among the seven regions
of the earth. The Prophet's spiritual lordship is over the entire world
(ch.3). A Turanian -- no less! .-- invites the kiks/kavis and
karaps/karapans, both enemies of the new faith, to accept the Prophet's
religion. It will be remembered that Vishtasp was a kavi, and Zartusht
converts him to his religion by chanting aloud the Gathas. As token of
the veracity and power of the new religion, Ohrmazd sends Vohuman,
Ashavahisht and His spiritual Fire to Vishtasp for its propagation in
the world (ch.4).
The righteous Adurbad-i Maraspand diffuses knowledge of the religion in
the world, and through his ordeal convinced the wicked ones, the marvel
of the Avesta being that it is a compendium of the most supreme
expressions of wisdom (ch. 5). In Book IV we read: "The King of Kings,
Shahpur (II), son of Hormizd caused, through disputation, all the
inhabitants of the country to be without fault, and brought all
theological discussions to deliberation and examination. After Adurbad
won the case by seemly discourse against all those sectarians, students
of the nasks, and heretics, he (the king) said: 'Now that we have seen
the religion in existence, we shall not let anyone approach evil
religion. We shall exercise greater zeal over this' . He indeed acted
in this manner" (Shaked's translation). What would have been the point
of Adurbad's public disputation and demonstration of the potency of the
Avesta before a 4th-century multi-faith assembly if his purpose had not
been one of conversion through the universal validity of the religion?
Ancient mythico-geography divided up the world into seven keshvars, or
climes, of which Khwaniras/Khvaniratha was the central, Zoroastrian,
region. Fifty-seven years after Zartusht received the Revelation from
Ohrmazd, its acceptance was proclaimed throughout these seven regions
from whose SouthEast and South-West continents came their High-priests
to enquire from Vishtasp and Frashostar/Frashaoshtra -- they came in
search of Zartusht's wisdom (Book VII, ch.6). We close this seventh
book with Ohrmazd's declaration: "Thereupon I, Ohrmazd, shall renovate
the world and render everything vivified and ever full of advantage,
desiring good rulership", being Gathic reflexions in Pahlavi garb.
Not to be outdone, the ninth-century Priest Zadsparam provided a
variant perspective on the Prophet: this time it is a karap, summoned
by Zartusht's own father to examine the supernatural infant -- "When I
looked all about", said this mumbler-priest, "I saw again that the
words of this one shall spread throughout the world, becoming as the
Law of the Seven Regions ..." (Wizidagiha, 10.19). Zartusht dreamt that
the men of this world came towards the north, and at their head strode
Medyomah/Maidyoimaongha (traditionally, his cousin-german) ... who was
the guide of all of mankind attracted towards Zartusht; it became
evident that firstly Medyomah, and thereafter all of the physical
beings are converted (Wizidagiha, ch.20). The story is here told of a
crestfallen Zartusht (he had until then converted only Medyomah) being
reassured by Ohrmazd: "There will be days when fewer persons shall be
converted by you"! (ch.24). May it be noted that the Pahlavi verb
HAKHTAN covers the notion of TO PERSUADE, TO CONVERT, exactly as did
the Gathic root VAR- in the Prophet's own times: the proselytizing
trend had faithfully continued over two millennia!
The philosophical Book III of the Denkard commences its chapter 172
thus: "All profession of the Good Religion bears upon the will and
commandment of the Creator. When all of mankind which is in the
material world comes over to the profession of the Good Religion, then
the Assault (of Evil) shall be destroyed; all of creation will attain
to a purity without opposition and to perfect bliss: that is the
Revelation of the Good Religion"! Stirring sentiments uttered during
very difficult times when conversion to anything other than Islam was
expressly banned! Even later, we find conversion by the age of fifteen
to the VEH-DEN, our good Zoroastrian religion, being enjoined in the
case of a child born from an illicit union between a veh-din/behdin and
a woman of different faith, failing which duty the Zoroastrian father
is deemed to have committed the gravest of sins -- he becomes
MARGARZAN: "worthy of death"! (Pahlavi Rivayat of Emed-i Ashavahishtan,
42.4).
The Persian Rivayats
It was popularly believed that contact between the Indian Jarthostis
and the Iranian Zardushtis had been severed for several centuries,
apart from the occasional brave refugee fleeing persecution and
impoverishment in the Fatherland. In India, where conditions were far
less harsh, the Parsis of Gujarat had lapsed into an increased adoption
of local Hindu customs and beliefs. Certainly Hindu names proliferated
among the provincial Parsis, and the ritual had succumbed to much
adulteration. Matters having doubtless come to a head, the concerned
davar Changa Asa of Navsari and some co-religionists determined upon
obtaining correct answers to several questions of doctrine, ritual, and
practices. The first emissary, Nariman Hoshang was sent, at great risk,
along terrifyingly dangerous routes to the priests in Iran in 1478 and
again in 1487.
Among the answers brought back in direct response to questions from the
Parsis, one addressed the problem of conversion: "If slave-boys and
girls have faith in the Good Religion, then it is proper that kusti
should be (given to them to be) tied [that is, they should be converted
to Zoroastrianism], and when they become intelligent, attentive to
religion and steadfast, they should give them barashnum andit is also
proper and allowable to eat anything out of their hands"! For some who
irresponsibly wish to exclude children -legitimately born from
exogamous unions or born out of wedlock by Parsi fathers from non-Parsi
mothers -- from the religion of their Zoroastrian fathers, then we must
present an even stronger guideline from the 1599 Kaus Mahyar Rivayat
whose response includes categories from even lower-deemed persons: "Can
a grave-digger, a corpse-burner and a darvand become Behdins (i.e. be
converted to the Mazdayasnian religion)?" Its answer: "If they observe
the rules of religion steadfastly and (keep) connection with the
religion, and if no harm comes on the Behdins (thereby), it is proper
and allowable"!
We cannot help wondering how often such proof of steadfastness and
religious knowledge is demanded from "racially pure" Parsis to test
their suitability for continuing in the faith of Zarathushtra. We do
not thereby imply mass conversion of all and sundry who express perhaps
only a passing or selfish interest in our religion; in the West serious
enquirers have exhibited an affinity and sure grasp of its knowledge
far exceeding the average Parsi's whose xenophobia thinly masks his own
woeful religious deficiency. The nononsense translations (1932) from
the Rivayats given above are by an orthodox scholar-priest, Ervad
Bomanji N. Dhabhar. It is worth pointing out that attempts were
clumsily made to have these disconcerting passages declared unauthentic!
The Itthoter Rivayat of 1773 was the last in the series of exchanges
between India and Iran which had endured for nearly three hundred
years. The replies to the 78 questions from the Parsi Zoroastrian
dasturs of Broach and Surat, taken to Iran by Mulla Kaus Jalal, were
signed by nine Iranian dasturs and nine religiously versed behdins.
Here is Question 13 and its answer, dealing both with conversion and
exposure within dakhmas:
"In this quarter the behdins of Hindustan acquire large numbers of
young Indian boys and girls as servants, and then use them for
household chores; once they have taught them the Avesta and have got
them to wear the kusti and sudreh according to the, rites of the
Zoroastrian religion, they consecrate the daron-i gahanbar and other
things which they have them prepare. Water and food also are taken from
them by the mobeds and behdins of Hindustan. Yet when they die, those
mobeds and behdins do not allow their bodies to be placed in the
dakhma, claiming that they are sons of darvands, and that it would be
unseemly to mix the bones of the behdins with theirs. Thus, while these
people are alive they make use of them for all the religious
preparations, and after their death they do not allow them to be laid
in the dakhma. The question is, therefore, whether it is proper or not
to lay their bodies in the dakhma. Let them write to clarify this
matter".
The answer came: "Concerning the acquisition of young men and women who
are juddins as servants, the mobeds and behdins must first of all show
care for their own religion, for their own rituals, for their personal
property, and for their own soul so as not to face losses. TEACHING THE
AVESTA TO THE SONS OF THE JUDDINS WHO HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED AND CONVERTING
THEM TO THE DIN-I VEH-I MAZDAYASNAN EARNS ONE GREAT MERIT!
What is instead exceedingly blameworthy and non-conformant with the
opinion of the members of the din-i behi is the fact that the mobeds
and behdins of Hindustan should eat food prepared by those youngsters
while they live, and then once they die and stand to face God's mercy
they should make such base comments about their poor bodies, arguing
inappropriately that they are sons of juddins and that their mortal
remains should not be united with those of the behdins in the dakhma.
IT IS NOT RIGHT! Such iniquitous arguments do not profit the religion
of Zaratusht and the Righteous Path, and whoever behaves in this way
and does not allow their bodies to be laid in the dakhma is, according
to the religion MARGARZAN and guilty before Mehr and Srosh. Indeed it
is necessary for the mobeds and behdins to show greater mercy for these
youngsters and to allow the bodies of the deceased ones to be laid in
the dakhma according to the rules of the din-i behi, and this will be A
SOURCE OF GLADNESS FOR ORMAZD AND THE AMESHASFANDS.
"Here we have heard from the magniloquent speeches of the dasturzade
Dastur Kaus, worthy successor of the deceased Dastur Rostam, that
several dasturs, mobeds and behdins across most of the country
[Hindustan] stand in the way and are an impediment and have agreed not
to teach those youngsters the Avesta and not to convert them to the
din-i veh-i mazdayasnan. THIS IS UNREASONABLE AND ALIEN TO THE
TRADITION. May the Beloved ones prosper! In the second fargard of the
Jud-div-dad [Vendidad] the Creator of the righteous material world has
ordered the honourable Zaratusht Esfantaman anushe-ravan TO LEAD ALL
MEN TO THE DIN-I BEHI, to the Main Path, to edify His joy, His glory
and His honour.
"Secondly, at the time of Hoshidar-mah, Hoshidar-bami and Siavashans
[the three millennial Saviours of Zoroastrianism] ALL THE JUDDINS WILL
BE CONVERTED TO THE DIN-I BEHI. It follows that according to the din-i
behi it is appropriate and necessary to convert these youngsters, IT IS
A VERY GREAT MERIT AND A RIGHTEOUS GOOD DEED. Therefore, those who
hinder this and are against it can be considered AS BELONGING TO THE
RELIGION OF THE JUDDINS, and they are not even aware of the Origin and
of the other world. THEY PROCEED ALONG THE PATH OF ABERRATION AND
VANITY AND ACCORDING TO THE RELIGION IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO DEFINE THEM
AS BEHDINS, SINCE IF THEY WERE BEHDINS THEY WOULD INCREASE THE DIN-I
BEHI." (We follow Mario Vitalone's translation with minor changes for
ease of reading.)
Our learned Ervad Shehryarji BHARUCHA, an excellent philologian
well-versed both in Zoroastrian religious traditions and Parsi social
mores, had used the authentic Persian text and a Gujarati translation
of this Itthoter Rivayat for his pro-conversion arguments early this
century. A little later, his English translation was published
posthumously as part of a wide-ranging article, "Is Zoroastrianism
preached to all mankind or to one particular race?" One can only wonder
at the sharp contrast between the attitudes of our learned priesthood
of former times and those of today who surely cannot be ignorant of our
religious texts which so clearly and UNEQUIVOCALLY set out the case for
conversion. Or could it be that they care not to attend to these
contents of our sacred books? How are these texts explained by them to
novitiates? How are Irani Zardushti perspectives presented to them, if
at all? Are the several problems arising at all seriously discussed in
Zoroastrian seminaries, or are they simply brushed aside as irksome,
irrelevant, perhaps even rated secondary to the ritualistic primacy of
textual contents? It would be instructive to have straight answers to
such questions of so much direct importance to the wellbeing and
progress of our minuscule communities.
A rectification: from pseudo-history to historicity
The treatment of historical records by our priests is capricious to a
degree, either ignoring or deliberately confusing the evidence of royal
inscriptions. Thus we see a foreign source -- Deutero-Isaiah -- brought
in as evidence of the Achaemenid CYRUS II's tolerance of alien faiths
and leniency towards the subject peoples. In itself the Iranian
emperor's exaltation is praiseworthy: he is "the anointed of Yahweh",
the Abrahamic deity. The Jews of the Babylonian Captivity indeed had
cause to so elevate their Persian liberator. But the cosy assumption
thenceforth that all his Achaemenid successors were equally tolerant is
to stretch credibility too far, especially when we read in DARIUS I's
political testament his strict religiosity. In a quite Gathic tone, he
declares to his successors: "Proclaims Darius, the king: You, whosoever
shall be king hereafter -- the man who shall be a FOLLOWER OF FALSEHOOD
(martiya haya draujana), or (the man) who shall be an EVIL-DOER, to
those may you not be friendly, (but) punish them severely" (Schmitt
translation).
His son and successor XERXES I went one better: "Among these countries
there was (a place) where previously FALSE GODS (daiva/daeva) were
worshipped. Afterwards, by favour of Ahuramazda, I destroyed that
sanctuary of the demons (daivadana), and I made proclamation, 'The
demons shall not be worshipped!' Where previously the demons were
worshipped, there I worshipped Ahuramazda and Arta/Asha reverently"
(Kent translation). Xerxes' religious tolerance was very thin, and
obviously selective; it has been substituted for political expediency
and astuteness. Historical hard facts do not lie; their fictionalizing
can and frequently do. When misused, they can become dangerous tools
which often adversely affect the unwary and distort perspectives.
In the face of continued misleading assertions that no conversions to
Zoroastrianism were attested for Sassanian times, we feel it right to
place the true historical facts before our readers. The major religious
figure under the earliest five rulers of that dynasty was
KIRDIR/KARTIR. The name was not his title; that most forceful prelate
himself tells us of his rise through the priestly hierarchy from simple
herbad/ervad to mobad of Ohrmazd, Judge of the (whole) Empire,
Soul-saver of Bahram II, Director and Authority of the Anahid-Ardashir
and the Lady Anahid Fire-temples in Stakhra, ayenbad or custodian of
religious ceremonial procedures. This is what he says he did to
non-Zoroastrians: he ensured that "great blows and torment befell
Ahriman and the demons, and the heresy of Ahriman and the demons
departed and was routed from the Empire. And Jews and Buddhists and
Hindus and Nazarenes and Christians and Baptists and Manichaeans were
smitten in the Empire, and idols were destroyed and the abodes of the
demons were disrupted and made into thrones and seats of the gods . . .
and the heretics and the destructive men, who in the Magian land did
not adhere to the doctrine regarding the Mazdayasnian religion and the
rites of the gods -- them I punished, and I tormented them until I made
them better ... and MANY MEN WHO WERE UNBELIEVERS BECAME BELIEVERS, AND
MANY WERE THOSE WHO HELD THE DOCTRINE OF THE DEMONS, AND ON ACCOUNT OF
ME THEY LEFT THAT DOCTRINE OF THE DEMONS ..." (MacKenzie's translation,
closely paralleled by others).
Our readers will agree that nothing less than FORCIBLE CONVERSIONS were
being described. Kirdir's name and fame mayhave been marginalized in
priestly memories and forgotten in our extant Pahlavi and Pazand texts;
the great man has, however, left records incised on stone which may be
read to this day in Fars province in Iran. He was powerful enough in
his own right to have his relief portraits carved alongside those of
royalty -- a unique privilege not accorded any other prelate in
Sassanian times. His history may have been suppressed, for whatever
reason, but the man and his labours in the cause of third century
Zoroastrian orthodoxy have emerged in the clear light of 20th century
research.
The new Zoroastrian orthodoxy was unsuccessfully forced upon the
Christian Armenians by MIHR-NARSE, Prime Minister under three notable
Sassanian kings, Yazdgard I , Bahram V and Yazdgard II. The first
monarch was detested by the priesthood for his tolerance of other
faiths coexisting in Iran; the second for his religious disinterest;
but the last was called "The Clement" (!) by the Mazdaean priests
because he enforced the conversion order against the Armenians in the
fifth century. That edict was refuted by eighteen unimpressed Christian
bishops, and ultimately proved unenforceable despite the
still-remembered bloodshed of 451 C.E. MihrNarse's conversion activity,
like the above-mentioned precedents, has been passed over in silence by
our present embarrassed priesthood, and it not being our purpose to
further press historical issues dealing with forcible conversions, we
let these unpleasant matters rest.
Very much nearer in time, however, and again from Iran, came the
consensus statement under the seal of the Tehran Council of Mobeds,
signed by Mobed Ardeshir AZARGOSHASP, published in the Bombay Samachar
columns dated 3rd February 1991. It bore the heading, taken from the
last paragraph: "WE MUST PERSEVERE TO PROPAGATE OUR RELIGION AND ACCEPT
PERSONS WHO WANT TO EMBRACE IT" -- a carefully considered, and
responsible, document of intent. Is Iranian Zoroastrianism so very
different that it can unreservedly, yet so prudently, express such a
divergent -- indeed opposite! -- view on the subject of conversion?
A Pazand prayer: "Din-no kalmo"
The navjote, or formal initiation into the Zoroastrian fold, is
normally performed for a child of seven to eleven years of age. Among
the prayers PRONOUNCED BY THE OFFICIATING PRIEST and dutifully REPEATED
BY THE CHILD is the Pazand Affirmation of the Faith, well known as the
Din-no kalmo (or Kalma-i-din). It translates as "[Avestan prologue]
(This is) the truest, most insightful Mazda-given righteous Good
Religion of the Mazda worshippers. [Pazand] The good, true and perfect
Religion, which God has SENT FOR THE PEOPLES OF THIS WORLD, is that
which Zarathushtra has brought. That Religion is the Religion of
Zarathushtra, the Religion of Ahura Mazda revealed to the righteous
Zarathushtra". Its veracity is ratified immediately after by the
recitation of the Ashem vohu, the Laudation of Truth!
This is the religion which the priests formally confer upon the
initiate IN THE SACRED NAMES OF AHURA MAZDA AND HIS PROPHET
ZARATHUSHTRA, and is a solemn turning-point of his/her life. Ervad
Kavasji Kanga (respected to this day as "Kangaji") has translated the
universalist passage into Gujarati thus: "... din, je dadar hormazde ae
dunyana lokone mate mokli ..." He then glosses the passage "je asho
jartoshtne (ae dunyama felavane-mate dadar hormazde) api hati" --
"which He, the Creator Hormazd/Ahura Mazda, gave to the righteous
Zarathushtra FOR PROPAGATION IN THIS WORLD". Ervad Shehryarji Bharucha
and Ervad Jivanji Modi have both closely agreed with Kangaji in their
respective English renditions of our Din-no kalmo. The former had
added: "In the face of this recital and acknowledgement would it not be
ABSOLUTELY WRONG TO DENY THE RIGHT OF EVERY MAN OF THE WORLD TO EMBRACE
THE RELIGION OF ZARATHUSHTRA; and when a person applies to a
Zoroastrian priest to admit him into his religion, how can he refuse
him? Surely, if he does, it would be DERELICTION OF DUTY ON HIS PART"!
It is indeed assumed that there is clear understanding of the prayer's
contents amongst us who since childhood devoutly offered it to Ahura
Mazda IN, ZARATHUSHTRA'S NAME. If so, then surely our belief must
reflect our piously uttered affirmation.
Difficulties with the Bombay Zoroastrian community and the communities abroad
Despite exposure of the feeble canard on non-conversion falsely
implicating Jaydev Rana, we notice that this untruth is still being
peddled by unscrupulous anti-conversion lobbyists. Bombay indeed does
have its particular difficulties with regard to acceptance of outsiders
into the Zoroastrian faith, but pleads especial SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
reasons for RELIGIOUS non-compliance! Emphasis is placed on the Parsi
socio-religious funds set up with the provisos that they benefit only
the Parsis and that strange class of the socalled "born Zoroastrian".
The priests have, apparently, left a loophole to conveniently allow the
return of some backsliders on the curious pretext that their conversion
out was both "illegal and invalid". This is untenable, for were it
really so then we should not have had any obstacles denying exogamous
Zoroastrian women their INALIENABLE BIRTHRIGHT of fire-temple visits
and dakhma exposure: on such occasions we were assured that by
outmarrying they had voluntarily and knowingly (!) renounced their
Zarathushtrian Mazdayasnian faith! It is distressingly evident that
religious adherence is being determined quite arbitrarily from ad hoc
misogynistic premisses.
No less unpleasant is the sad tendency of our Bombay prelates -- to
whom we once used to entrust our religious and spiritual guidance -- to
manipulate texts to suit their predilections for a tribal religion
despite the clearest injunctions to the contrary. One such piece of
misinformation was noticed in a false statement that just one lone
Parsi scholar had translated the root VAR-, thrice located in the
Gathas, as "convert". That this was palpably untrue was quickly brought
to light with references to the sound scholarship of Kavasji KANGA,
Khodabax PUNEGAR, and Irach TARAPOREWALA -- all respected Gatha
translators.
Much is being made of the fact that our Parsi translators had also
utilized "to choose", "ward off/turn from (evil)", "to convince", "to
cause to believe". Permutations formed about the root VAR- can only
convey expressions unambiguously suggestive of the drive for
PROSELYTISM. A selective adherence to peripheral meanings, with the
careful exclusion of the embarrassing "CONVERT", is exactly like saying
of someone that "he strides, paces, strolls, saunters, promenades,
causes one foot to move ahead of the other, BUT he is not walking!"
What would be the point of Zarathushtra's energetically repeated
"convincing", "causing to believe", "turning away from (evil)" of
seekers after Ahura Mazda's Wisdom, if his purpose and intent was not
their CONVERSION? We shall not further labour the point, having done so
at length precisely for reasons of countering so much manipulation of
our religious texts and undermining of the real importance of the
conversion issue. We ourselves having no personal or vested interest,
and certainly NO HIDDEN AGENDA, we seek only a restitution of the Truth
of our religious and commentarial texts.
Mr Cyrus P. Mehta of Harlow, Essex, recalls for us that the several
learned articles and factual religious statements made in Western India
early in the twentieth century by the pious Parsi Zoroastrians Darab
SANJANA, Jivanji MODI, Shehryarji BHARUCHA, Khurshedji Rustamji CAMA
and Tehmurasp Dinshahji ANKLESARIA, all of whom had opined that IF A
PERSON SERIOUSLY WISHES TO BECOME A ZOROASTRIAN, THEN THERE IS NO BAR
IN OUR RELIGION. Their conclusions were not based on blind beliefs but
ON THE STUDY AND AUTHORITY OF ZOROASTRIAN SCRIPTURES. Few in Bombay now
care to remember these judicious pronouncements of our enlightened
ancestors. Enlightenment is not some new fad brought about since the
Parsi and Irani emigrations world-wide: it has always illumined the
Zoroastrian psyche. Western scholars too, pioneer and modern-day,
applying common-sense to their disciplined scientific training, have
arrived at the same conclusion: that ZOROASTRIANISM ENJOINS CONVERSION.
No' sensible Zoroastrian would advocate indiscriminate or mass
conversion. However, he does maintain that in cases of intermarriage,
non-Zoroastrian spouses and the children from increasing intermarriages
be encouraged to embrace Zoroastrianism and integrate within the
communities. Family harmony would thrive, apostasy disappear, and
community stability benefit naturally from RELIGIOUSLY inculcated
social moves towards acceptance.
Had the Bombay priests come straight out with the RELIGIOUS TRUTH ABOUT
CONVERSION and then explained that owing perhaps to personal distaste
or disinclination, or economic and socio-political pressures, now.
augmented by alien fundamentalist busybodies and wily opportunists, it
was not possible to put our religiously inculcated precepts into
practice, and called a moratorium on this vexing issue. The
self-respect of the Bombay community and its religious and populist
leaders would thereby have remained unassailed throughout the decades
of needless obfuscation. However, what is seemingly appropriate for
Bombay cannot be rigidly imposed as RELIGIOUS dogma upon the rest of
the Zoroastrian world where, evidentially, circumstances and needs are
very different. Solutions similarly remain to be boldly tackled over
the thorny questions of Calendars, Initiation, Intermarriage, Funerary
procedures (especially regarding Burial, Cremation, Secondary Burials,
non-Zoroastrian pallbearers, post-mortem Prayers) and all other matters
which our communities continue to irresponsibly and hurriedly shelve as
"controversial". Such pressing matters of real concern to every
Zoroastrian will not resolve themselves through studied indifference.
Adding to the difficulties confronting our priesthood and the laity is
the infiltration by those Parsis who rejected Zoroastrianism for a
moribund THEOSOPHY: an insidious mix of doctrines incorporating ideas
alien to Zarathushtra's theology are passed on to a gullible public as
a modern extension of the Prophet's teachings. Then there are among the
Parsis groups of followers of the latter-day receivers of secretly
communicated pseudo-religious teachings, the more revered as they
become less comprehensible!
Such non-Zoroastrian views are being espoused by small vocal
minorities. And though they certainly, under the principle of 'freedom
of conscience', have the right to believe and declare the same, they
must be seen for what they really are -- PERVERTERS OF THE DOCTRINE OF
THE PROPHET ZARATHUSHTRA. Not only do they publish and preach in India;
they appear as itinerant preachers in parts of the world where
Zoroastrians have recently settled to promote their peculiar
theosophies, attempting to gain the support of the uninformed by
insinuating a tribal religion based upon blood. The illuminating
message of the Prophet is craftily avoided, or even displaced. The life
of moral striving and the goal of establishing the Rule of
Righteousness is utterly ignored. For whatever unpleasant reasons, our
authentically Zoroastrian priesthood seems paralyzed to denounce or
counteract such unprincipled infiltrations, preferring to divert
attention to imagined threats from phantasms. These difficulties indeed
lie with the Bombay priesthood.
We do not wish to engage in pointless disputation. Ours is a plea for
enlightenment, which is already embedded in the words of the Prophet.
We urge our enlightened dasturs to articulate this Wisdom and not fail
the Teacher whose teachings they profess. We jointly feel that a
cultured, enlightened, educated and teaching priesthood represents our
best hope for the propagation of the faith and the continuance of its
glory well into the next millennium of our PROPHET ZARATHUSHTRA WHO WAS
SENT TO US TO PERFECT THIS WORLD THROUGH OUR OWN PERFECTION.
RELIGION OF ZARATRHUSHTRA IS FOR ALL MANKIND
by Dr. Cyrus P. Mehta
Cyrus
Mehta was born in Bombay, India into a Parsi family, and earned his
Bachelors degree from the Indian Institute of Technology in Bombay in
1967, and his Masters and Ph.D. from Massachusetts Institute of
Technology in 1970 and 1973. Dr. Mehta is a founder and president
of Cytel Software Corporation and an Adjunct Professor of Biostatics at
Harvard University. (from Vohuman.org)
Excellent article by Dr. Mehta, from Vohuman.org
In the twenties and
thirties, it was a common belief within the Parsi community that “A Parsi is
a Zoroastrian and a Zoroastrian is a Parsi.”
At that time most Parsi boys and girls attended Parsi schools. The community lived in large numbers in towns
like Bombay, Surat,
Navasari, Karachi and as few
others. As such it was natural for it to
accept the belief quoted above. Time has
marched on since those days. The Parsi
community now lives in smaller scattered groups in the U.S.A.,
Canada, United
Kingdom, Australia
and other countries. It is anxious to
preserve its traditional way of life and the communal-cum-religious identity.
With the passage of time,
inter-faith marriages have increased within the community. So far no concrete proposals have been
considered as to how the non-Zoroastrian spouses and their children can be
partially or fully integrated within the communal fold.
One of the main reasons why this
difficulty has arisen is due to the fact that a large section of the community
has not understood or is unwilling to accept the basic fact that Prophets
address their messages to the whole mankind and not necessarily to a group of
people or a community. Once this fact is
understood and accepted, the community will be in much better position to
accept certain socio-religious changes within the communal structure.
The purpose of this article is to present the scriptural evidence on the subject matter under
consideration for the benefit of the Parsi community.
Below is a list of passages from
Gathas and other Zoroastrian scriptures and prayers, together with the comments
of scholars of the Zoroastrian religion, on the above-mentioned subject:
Comments
by Prof. A.V. Jackson on the above verse:
“Zoroaster’s
religion was active and vigorous, seeking and gaining converts, as we see from
many passages in the Gathas. [“A Hymn of Zarathushtra – Yasna31” by Jackson. Page 27]
Comments
by Prof. Lawrence Mills:“
And
he (Zarathushtra) declares that this is the doctrine which should be proclaimed
for the conversion of mankind. Here we
observe that Zarathushtrian Mazda-worship was aggressive and missionary in its
spirit, and in a proselytizing sense by no means indifferent to the final
destiny of the Gentile World.” [“Sacred Books of the East” Vol. XXX1, The Zend Avesta, Part III, Page
37]
<>
Gatha
Ushtaviti 3.1 (Yasna 45.1).
<>With
specious words the pleasant paths of wrong.[Dr. I.J.S. Taraporewala’s translation]
Here
Zarathushtra clearly gives out his message to people, not only to Iranians, but
also to those who may have come from distant lands and were not Iranians.
Comments
by Prof. Wilhelm Geiger:
“He
was burning with zeal to embark upon his great mission. He was the chosen of Mazda, who speaks with
sublime satisfaction that Zarathushtra alone among mankind had heard his divine
commands and having heard them was now going to make them heard among all to
mankind. He tells Mazda that he will
lead mankind on the path of righteousness and sing untiringly his praise all
around as long as his life is blessed with power and strength. He speaks of his faith in terms of
Universal Religion.” [“History
of Zoroastrianism” Dastur Dr. M.N. Dhalla. Page 17]
<>
Yasna Ha 8.7
Haptan Yasht (Karda 8.6)
Vendidad (Fargard 19,26)
[Vendidad in Gujarati by
Ervad K.E. Kanga –3rd Edition Page 312: Vendidad in English by T.R. Sethna. Page 144]
<>
From
all the foregoing passages, it is clear that it was Zarathushtra’s intention
that his message was not only for Iran
but also for other countries. This
intention was understood and carried out by his followers, during the Avestan
Period (from about 800 B.C. to about 200 A.D.) and major part of Pahlavi Period
(from the 3rd to the 9th century)
Commenting
on this information, Prof. Jackson wrote:
(2)
”May the knowledge, extent and fame of the Commandments of the excellent
Mazda-worshipping religion ever increase over the world, over all its seven
regions. So may it be.” [Source: “Zarthoshti Daily Prayers” by I.J.S. Taraporewala]
The
twentieth century is over but majority of the community is blissfully unaware
of the teachings of their own Prophet and choose to cling to several
socio-religious customs, which are incompatible with the teachings of
Zarathushtra. To debar or object to the
presence of non-Zoroastrians in our religious ceremonies, just on the ground
that they are non-Zoroastrians is a classic example of praying one thing and
doing diametrically opposite to it, as can be seen from the under mentioned
prayer:-
(a)
“May the brilliance of the excellent Mazdayasnian
Religion be wide-spread over the seven regions.
May this be specially fulfilled!”
[Source: ‘Mazda Yasna – Some Daily Prayers from Zend
Avesta’ by D.S. Framroze]
Noble
words indeed, but in reality is that nothing is being done to spread the
message and those for whom blessings are invoked are debarred from receiving
them in person.
During
Muktad and Farvardian Jashans, some within the community oppose
the attendance of non-Zoroastrians at these prayer meetings. Let us consider the philosophy of Fravashis
or Farohars, which is based on ‘Farvardin Yasht’ Briefly,
stated Fravashi means Divine Essence of God in everything within the
creation, including human beings and its purpose is to push forward all
creations in the goal of evolution. In
order that we may better understand the nature of work done by Farohars.
‘Farvardin Yasht’, tells us that there are three groups of Farohars.
<>Group
1. This consists of Farohars in
all creations of Ahura Mazda as stated above.
Our
Mobedss, during the course of the ceremonies in question, invoke Farohars
of righteous persons of all countries irrespective of caste, color or
creed. A few countries are actually
mentioned by names --- the countries that were known to our ancestors and where
Zoroastrian religion prevailed. The
relevant passages are as under:-
Karda
XXXI (143): “We revere the fravashis of righteous persons of Aryan
countries. We revere the fravashis of righteous women of Aryan
countries. We revere the fravahsis
of righteous men and women of Turanian countries. We revere the fravashis of righteous
men of Sairim (Syrian) countries. We revere the fravashis of righteous
women of Sairim (Syria)
countries.
Karda
XXXI (144) “We revere the fravashis of righteous men of Saini (China)
countries. We revere the fravashis righteous
women of Saini (China)
countries. We revere the Fravashis
of righteous men of Dahi countries.
(These countries are supposed to be to the east of Caspian
Sea where brave tribes once lived.)
Karda
XXXI (145) “We revere the fravashis
of righteous men of all countries.
We revere the fravashis of righteous women of all countries. We revere all the fravashis of the
righteous, good, powerful, beneficent fravashis those from Gayomard to
the Soshyant.”
So, in theory, these religious
ceremonies can be open to one and all, but for a start we should immediately
cease opposition to non-Zoroastrians spouses and their children who attend our
ceremonies out of respect and reverences and wish to be associated with the
Zoroastrian community. This single step
will go a long way to restore harmony within the community, whether it is in U.K.
or elsewhere.
In conclusion, who can deny that
in prayers and rituals what matters most is heart and devotion and not just
observation under all circumstances of outward forms of worship. It is no fault of non-Zoroastrians who were
not born of Zoroastrian parents. One God
creates all humans, and we all worship the same God. The aim of all Prophets has been to establish
a kind of ‘Brother of Mankind’ under the ‘Fatherhood of God’. Zarathshtra wanted to establish ‘Brotherhood
of Magavans’ and extend it to all who accepted his Faith. (‘Maga’
means message and ‘Magavan’ is one who has taken to heart Zarathushtra’s
message.
FEDERATION MEET:
LOUTS RUN AMOK AT AHMEDABAD: AGAINST INTERMARRIAGE
(Editor's note: does anyone know what issue of Parsiana this article is from? please email me)
A sad and sorry chapter has been written
in the annals of our communitys affairs. The Federation meeting at
Ahmedabad degenerated into a brawl. Our leaders of eminence like Minoo
Shroff, Dinshaw Tamboly, Nariman Mogrelia and Mani Clubwalla were
terrorized into silence by louts. Physical violence was just inches
away. If this sounds shocking, what has left us aghast is that some of
the hosts from Ahmedabad egged on these louts to frenzy. PTA had asked
the delegates to emulate Gandhi, instead, some of them behaved like
goondas.
We have decided, and so have the PARSIANA and the JAME, to publish
sordid details of this meeting, to enable the community and others know
to what extent, fundamentalists are ready to go.
Tension was brewing in the air from the start. There was a pre-meeting
skirmish between the President of the Youth Wing of Ahmedabad and the
office bearers of the Ahmedabad Parsi Panchayet. At dinner, Areez
Khambatta, President of the Ahmedabad Parsi Panchayet and
host-in-chief, almost came to blows with Dady Mistry of the Delhi Parsi
Anjuman, in full view of fellow diners. Is this the famed Gujarati
hospitality or is it a part of what Khojeste Mistree calls,
Parsi-Panu?
When Nariman Mogrelia of Chennai spoke about the survey regarding
allowing children of intermarried Parsi mothers into the Agiary, the
louts began screaming that "we shall strip you of your Sudreh-Kusti and
burn you alive". The same treatment was meted out to anyone who dared
to dissent. The Chairman, Minoo Shroff, veteran of numerous corporate
meetings, was speechless. The usually aggressive BPP CEO, B.T. Dastur
was also terrorized.
The highly respected sociologist and demographer, Dr. Ava Khullar, was
told to explain her Juddin surname and shut up. Khojeste challenged
the veracity of PARSIANA statistics. Thereupon, the Chairman
requested its editor, Jehangir Patel, to explain. He was hardly allowed
to speak. That famous fruitcake, Yazdi Desai, told Arnavaz Mama of
PARSIANA that "you are not the Press, you are chors!".
On the other hand, the fundamentalist speakers were applauded and a din
created. The atmosphere was so surcharged that violence was almost
visible.
The frustration of the fundamentalist is understandable. As the noose
tightens around the future of the Parsis, and as simultaneously, the
Niagra of Neo-Zoroastrians roars round the world, they are almost
breathless with fear. They have no answers to cold statistics. Their
fruitcake arguments are being openly laughed at. This frustration and
fear is lending them to be so aggressive, so crude, so boorish as to
bring louts, in the guise of delegates, to the Federation meeting.
We are not, for a moment, denying their right to disagree. Whether to
join the IZO or not, is, indeed their privilege. However, they have no
business disrupting meetings and preventing discussion.
There was continual insistence by the orthodox to take a vote on the
issue. The Chairman refused. So far, most decisions by the Federation
have been by consensus. The voting rights of the Anjumans are utterly
disproportionate. The BPP representing 40,000 Parsis has five votes,
while the Khergaum Anjuman representing 4 Parsis has one vote. The
so-called 24 out of 29 Anjumans which opposed the move collectively
represented far fewer Parsis than the 5 Anjumans in favour! This then
was the tyranny of the minority. Whoever decided the weightage of votes
must have their heads examined. Why should the Bombay Parsi Panchayet
let its voice be stifled by some cartoon Anjuman from Nowhere land.
Khojeste Mistree represents the Belgaum Anjuman. Pray, what is your
connection with Belgaum, Sir? Instead, why dont you represent the
Oxford Parsi Anjuman? If the majority allows itself to be hijacked by
some vociferous Hoon, Bawa ne Mangaldas Anjumans from the hamlets of
Gujarat, woe betide the community.
So is the Federation of India going to abandon its collective intellect
and be dictated to by butchers, bakers and sodawatermakers. The
question, is, where do we go from here.
Firstly, the BPP, the Delhi, Calcutta, Madras Anjumans must publicly
state that if any such behaviour is repeated at any Federation meet,
they shall leave the Federation. Secondly, they should blacklist
Ahmedabad as the venue of any Federation meeting. The same applies to
Surat too. Let the official transcripts of the meeting (every word has
been recorded at Ahmedabad) be published so that the community knows
what was said by whom. Do not forget to delete the expletives first.
Thirdly, there should be a complete revamp of the Federation
constitution to link weightage of votes to the number of Parsis
represented by each Anjuman. It is a bad, Dhanshaak joke that four
Parsis of Khergaum can cock a snook at the 40,000 Parsis of Bombay.
Some of these Anjumans complained that they were being armtwisted into
silence by the threat of cutting off WZO donor help. We would
ordinarily condemn such fetters on free speech and free thought.
However, the situation is slightly different here. You cannot publicly
abuse and denigrate your donor, call them chors and still expect aid.
If you repeatedly spit in the plate offered to you, then do not
the plate offered to you, then do not expect further aid. Fourthly,
expel Anjumans which bring louts instead of delegates to these
meetings. If all this does not work out, let the metropolitan Anjumans
form a new Federation.
As for the BPP itself, let the Chairman spell out what exactly is the
decision of the trustees. PTA has reliably been informed that all the
trustees are in favour of joining the IZO provided the office bearers
are only Parsi Zoroastrians atleast for ten years (Dinshaw Mehta denies
ever having agreed to a ten year period and states that this
restriction is to be permanent, while the Chairman and Tamboly say that
a ten year period has indeed been agreed to!). The Chairman ought to
place this item on the agenda and decide the issue conclusively. Mehta
and the other orthodox trustees are insisting on this office bearer
restriction, knowing fully well that it is a non-starter and will never
be accepted by non-Indian Federations (and rightly so!). This is their
clever by the half move to ensure that BPP never joins IZO. It is
time the Chairman calls their bluff. PTA believes that a majority of
the BPP Trustees will agree to join even without the office bearers to
be Parsis clause. So instead of shuffling your feet, please decide
this issue once and for all. What, however, if the BPP decides to
continue to insist on this clause and never joins the IZO. The IZO will
not be the loser.
Parsis are a small, minority sect of people who practice
Zoroastrianism. If they want to be xenophobic, racial and regressive,
so much the better for the World Body to be without such people. Let it
be a true Zoroastrian international organization whose doors are open
to all Zoroastrians irrespective of race, colour, sex or caste. Let
Unity of Faith be the sole criteria. Perhaps the IZO can do without
members who disrupt meetings and indulge in hooliganism or members who
insist upon blatantly offensive restrictions like only Parsis to be
office bearers or members who put fascists to shame by talking about
racial purity and preservation of semen-stock.
We always believed that Zoroastrianism will do fine even without the
Parsis. We now think that it will be much better off only that way. The
Cosmic wants Zoroastrianism to flourish and that perhaps is the reason
why the Parsis are perishing.
May We Not Lose the Vision
Zareen Hakim, A Zoroasterian for Today
Zareen Hakim
an active member of The Zoroastrian Association of Greater New York (ZAGNY),
grew up in New York State. She holds a BS in biology from The State
University of New York (SUNY) at Binghamton, and has been working for J.P.
Morgan Chase & Co. since 1996. Her interests include art and graphic
design, and she is now working towards pursuing a career in a related field.
Zareen was one of the 34 pilgrims who traveled to Iran in May 2000. She was
thoroughly amazed by the experience, which has sparked an even greater desire to
learn more about Zoroastrianism and to find ways to keep Zarathushtra's Vision
alive. (from Vohuman.org)
http://www.vohuman.org/Article/May%20We%20Not%20Lose%20the%20Vision.htm
Zoroastrianism has survived for over 3 thousand years, and while we
have come to various crossroads in our history, it seems that now is
the time for us to re-assess and capture its essence once again!
Imagine a world, not just a small community, where the use of one’s
good mind, Vohu Mana, leads humankind to the path of
righteousness. Is this not Zarathushtra’s vision, Our
Vision? Can we work to fulfill it, and if so, how do we get
there?
Zarathushtra’s vision is something that transcends ethnic, geographic,
and generation boundaries. It is at the ‘core’ of Zoroastrianism,
that which ties us together, and needs to be explored and maintained in
order for the religion to survive.
I understand that because of our history of persecution, we have had to
keep the religion within our own walls, to protect the flame as best we
could - isolation our only measure of hope…
But as much as this was a means of survival, in ways, it has proved
detrimental to the growth of Zoroastrianism, and this may be why the
mentality of exclusiveness remains today.
In the worst of circumstances, we and our forefathers and mothers kept
the flame alive - we kept it alive in the hopes that one day, we would
be blessed with the opportunity to openly practice our religion, to see
it thrive, not just survive, for the betterment of all humankind!
That time is NOW! No longer are we in danger...After thousands of
years of preserving and protecting the religion, we are free!
Let’s rejoice and continue to carry out Zarathustra’s vision!
Presently, we as a community, know that the inevitable forces of change
are upon us, but we don’t quite know what to do or how to go about
channeling this change in a positive way. What is the goal of our
Zoroastrian community? What do we want our future to look
like? Do we even want to make a difference?
Perhaps we are afraid to take the first step in what may result in
change. This is understandable, but I view change as a welcome
enhancement, and not something to be feared. After-all, change is
inevitable - and change is a tool to open our minds and progress
towards the future, a very Zoroastrian concept. In fact,
re-assessing the religion and re-awakening the vision, will do us some
necessary good. What better way to clarify our minds and to
revitalize our collective conscience than to come together and
re-educate ourselves and others on the ‘core’ elements of the
religion?! Surely, we may differ on what the vision is, but I
hope that we can agree that Zarathushtra’s message is a universal one,
one which grants each and every one of us the good mind, despite
ethnicity.
Zarathushtra envisioned an eventual perfect world, a state of
Hauvertat, which may be achieved through the conscious decisions of the
Good Mind to choose the righteous path. Zarathushtra did not limit the
use of the religion to his first followers - his vision was to be
spread to all of humanity!
Because his vision is universal, we, alone, can not reach that eventual
utopian state without sharing his message with those who choose to
accept it.
In fact, to keep Zarathushtra’s vision alive, it is our obligation to
educate, encourage, and welcome into the religion, all who have made a
conscious decision to embrace it.
Let’s think for a moment - What are the benefits of isolating
Zoroastrianism from the rest of the world? I couldn’t think of
any, either! Some think that the religion will not remain "pure"
if people from other ethnic groups practice it.
But, if one Chooses, Accepts and Lives by Zarathushtra’s message, that
person is one step closer in bringing the world towards “perfection” -
that is quite the opposite of "impurity", and more importantly, is in
conjunction with Zarathushtra’s vision….for he states in the Gathas in
one of many examples:
“As long as I have power and strength, I shall teach all to seek for Truth and Right.”
Being a Zoroastrian is founded on personal choice. As I view it,
ethnicity does not even become an issue. We can not rely on
intra-faith marriages alone to preserve our faith. Eventually,
with ethnically mixed marriages on the rise, it would be wise to
explore other ways to increase the Zoroastrian population.
Extinction, in my opinion, is not an option. While our ethnicity
may not flourish in the future, Zoroastrianism can and will!
Let’s be excited that so many people are interested in our religion,
and that families of ethnically mixed marriages want to raise their
children as Zoroastrians. Look around you - I know that many, if
not all, know someone who was not born into the faith, but is carrying
out Zarathushtra’s universal message far more than many of us who were
born into the religion are. Let that be an example to all, esp.
to the youth.
I think the vision is what the Zoroastrian youth find comfort in,
today. This is what we feel needs to be preserved. It’s not
that we don’t believe in practicing the ritualistic aspects of the
religion, but the connection becomes weak if the message is being
lost. With the influence of both Indian and North American
cultures, for example, I find that I have to go further back to our
roots in Iran in discovering who I am. In the same way, I look to
Zarathushtra’s early teachings in the Gathas, where he clearly
communicates a universal vision!!
To find comfort in your own faith, not because you were born into it,
but because it gives you meaning in life, is a truly wonderful
thing. Unfortunately, while we may not be able to preserve our
ethnicity, we have enough knowledge and enthusiasm to let
Zoroastrianism live on and encourage the lives of many!
Let’s unite and attempt to re-establish the core elements of the
religion - The Vision - not only for ourselves, but for humanity!
This is no easy task, but I believe that truth will triumph in the end,
whether or not we as a community decide to embrace it at this time.
Zarathustra’s vision represents this truth and will survive, must
survive - why not nurture the evolution of the vision, while we still
have a chance to shape it?
<>
Dr. Ali Akbar Jafarey, was born in
Kerman, Iran. He received his schooling up to the University level in
Karachi. He has a doctorate in Persian Language and Literature, and has
self-studied thirteen living and ancient languages, and also studied
linguistics, anthropology, Indo-Iranian literature, history, geology
and research methods. In Saudi Arabia, he worked as a
translator/anthropologist in the Arabian Research Division of Aramco.
In 1991, Dr. Jafarey established the Zarathushtrian Assembly in Los Angeles. Read more of Dr. Jafarey's articles on the Assembly web site or here: http://vohuman.org/Author/Jafarey,AliAkbar.htm
CONVERSION AND CHOICE OF RELIGION
by Ali A. Jafarey
Several readers have asked us to write on conversion. Does it
amount to repudiating one's religion of birth and accepting an alien
religion not determined by destiny? This is an argument repeatedly
said by those who, for reasons known best to them, are against any
change of religion. Generally the argument is that God assigns one a
religion at birth and one must not disobey God. Some of those against
conversion elaborate that God created various races of mankind and
divided them to belong each to a certain predestined religion.
Let us first understand the meanings of conversion and
choice in relation with religion. Conversion is derived from
Latin "conversion, conversio, from convertere, to turn around, transform, convert, from com- + vertere, to turn." It means: "An experience associated with a definite and decisive adoption of religion."
Choice is derived from Old French choisir, to choose, and "choose" means "to select freely and after consideration." (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 1997)
Now that we understand the two words in their contexts, let us turn to our subject: Conversion/Choice.
As already explained in the previous posting Religion-by-Birth and
Karma," the above theory is the product of the Hindu belief in
reincarnation." The established fact, therefore, is that one cannot be
born in religion but is brought up in the religion of his/her
fosterer/s.
How many creeds and cults have died a natural or violent death
through migration, invasion, commingling and fostering, we do not
know. They could number in the thousands. Let us consider the
existing major religions in a chronological order:
Hinduism has been an evolving religion for some 4,000 years, and
Good Conscience was founded by Zarathushtra 3700 years ago, Judaism by
Moses some 3300 years ago, Buddhism by Buddha 2500 years ago, Jainism
by Mahavira 2500 years ago, Christianity by Jesus and Paul 2000 years
ago, Islam by Muhammad 1400 years ago, Sikhism by Nanak 500 years ago,
and Baha'ism by Bahaullah in 1863, only 142 years ago.
Conversion:
How could their numbers grow or decrease to their present extent
if God had destined people to adhere to their "birth-religions"? Why
has none of these founders a clear commandment prohibiting conversion?
On the contrary, most of them have advocated the spread of their
respective religions. Why do those Zoroastrians who are against
conversion beat around the bush in long articles and go in circles of
interpretations in an attempt to make their point of view appear true?
All they need to do is to produce a terse prohibitive commandment against conversion. They
have none, not a single evidence from the Avesta, Pahlavi and Persian
writings or from an alien history saying that Zoroastrians from
Achaemenian to Sassanian times did not convert and that one had to be
born Zoroastrian.
Had it been so, Greek, Roman, Christian, Armenian, Indian, and Muslim
historians would have noted this strange custom.
All the above-named religions have had conversion through
propagation, persuasion, force and commingling. Hinduism, a creed of
the multi-races of Australoids, Dravidians, Aryans, Tibeto-Chinese and
others, which had become restricted later by its rigid caste system,
has now its missionaries in India and abroad. Judaism, an ethnical
religion, has all along accepted people who have been "hebraized" and
that is why Jews hailing from various parts of Europe, the Middle East,
Central Asia, Southwest India, and Ethiopia are a mixed race of whites,
browns and blacks. The slow progress in their missionary zeal has
mostly been due to tough and even cruel restrictions
enforced by the ruling Romans, Christians and Muslims. The extension
and expansion of Buddhism, from India to China and Indochina and now to
other countries, has been only through propagation and conversion.
Jainism has been slow but now Jains are active even in North America.
Christianity, Islam and Baha'ism are quite open and active in their
missionary work. Christians and Muslims are again well known for
forced conversions in their past records. After the defeat of the
Zoroastrian Iranian empire, the Muslims converted Zoroastrians by using
a policy of both "carrot and stick," rather "concession and sword."
One can confidently state that 90% of the Iranian people are
descendents of Zoroastrians.
This brings us to another excuse against conversion. Conversion
creates hatred and enmity. Quite true! Brutal force used by
Christianity and Islam to convert their conquered peoples has been the
cause of much hatred and frequent bloodsheds. We have recent bloody
incidents between Christians and Muslims in Eastern Europe and between
Hindus and Muslims in India. And let us not forget the bloody
Israeli-Palestinian tug-of-war going for more than half a century.
Against this, we do not see any violent reaction, even
hatred, against Buddhists and Baha'is. Why because their expansion has
been and is peaceful. I remember two incidents. In 1928, a
Baha'i leader in Karachi told my father that there were 200 Baha'is in
then undivided India and later I came to know that all of them were
Zoroastrian converts. In 1993, I was told by a Baha'i, again an Iranian
Zoroastrian convert in Delhi, that there were 700,000 Baha'is in [the
present divided] India. No reaction against so many Hindus, Muslims,
Sikhs and Zoroastrians silently and peacefully going over to Bahai'sm!
Baha'is are quite welcome in India simply because the converts behave
well with their former coreligionists.
Recent anti-Christian incidents in India are due to missionaries
going after the lowest caste "untouchables' that consequently deprives
the upper castes of the cheap labor doing the "dirty jobs," never
touched by the upper the ones. It also elevates the converts to turn to
higher education and better living! Mother Teresa, a zealous Catholic
missionary, cared for the "uncared" poor on the streets, whom she
eventually baptized, is praised and raised for her role in peaceful
conversion. Baha'is go after upper classes and therefore no adverse
reaction.
And let us not forget that Zoroastrianism, which spread from the
Nile to the western parts of China and India, did not use force to
expand. The 800-year war by the Parthians and Sassanians with the
"Pagan" and Byzantine Romans has never been remembered by the two sides
as religious. Even a single incident of taking the "Cross on which
Jesus was Crucified" as a war booty by the Sassanians did not give that
battle a religious color. The struggle between the two super powers was
more political and it has been recorded as such. Logical and peaceful
propagation of religion to convince and convert people has always its
good rewards. The only exceptional instance is by the powerful
Sassanian Mobedan-Mobed KARTIR. He recounts his forced conversions of
Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus and heretics into Zoroastrianism.
(See his bas-reliefs on Naghsh-e Rajab and Naghsh-e Rostam, the only
bas-reliefs by a person who is not a King-of-Kings of the Iranian
Empire)
Traditionalists say that the Zoroastrian religion was and is meant
for the Iranian people. Although Avestan and Pahlavi scriptures and
the bas-reliefs left by Sassanian authorities say otherwise, let us
look at facts. The Iranian Plateau, from the modern Iraqi borders to
Tajikistan in the Pamirs, was inhabited by numerous indigenous peoples
having their own creeds, cults and civilizations. The Aryan supremacy Iranianized
them. They were all converted to the religion founded or as the
Traditionalists present it, "reformed" by Zarathushtra. If this was
not true than how did Zoroastrianism became the dominant religion of an
estimated 15 million people inside and outside the Sassanian Empire?
What about Armenians, non-Iranians Iranianized since the Achaemenians,
who were Zoroastrians before they were converted to Christianity, and
that too because of the wrong policy of the Sassanian sovereigns? What
about the Arab, Chinese and Turkic Zoroastrians we read in history
books? What about the phrase "Tâziân-e baste-koshtiyân --
koshti-girdled Arabs" in the daily prayers? Who were they? History
records by early Muslims state that they were the Arab Zoroastrians on
the east coast of the Arabian Peninsula on the Persian Gulf.
What do the Traditionalists say about the children of the people
who were forced into non-Zoroastrian religions? Should they be content
with what is said that at present their birth in a religion, which was
brutally forced upon their ancestors, is what God has destined for
them? What made God to send Islam to convert His predestined
Zoroastrians into Muslims? Or was it the stronger Ahriman who changed
the Divine Destiny for them?!?! If so, who sent Mohammad as the Prophet
to be the cause of this disaster? The thought-provoking questions can
go on until the notion of predestined birth becomes preposterous.
Conversion through propagation, persuasion, and force has been the
main means of spreading the religion. In fact, had there been no
conversion, each of founders would have been the sole follower of his
own religion and since they were not to convert their spouses, their
religions would have died with them! Once converted, the children are
obviously brought up in the accepted religion. Setting aside the
Traditionalist Zoroastrian viewpoint, every religion, whether gigantic
or small, is working to convert the entire world of six billion+
people. Christianity, Islam and to an extent, Buddhism are engaged in
a global missionary competition. Unlimited conversion has turned
Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism into large multiracial,
multicultural, and multilingual fellowships. And Baha'is are having a
quiet but sure progress.
Conversion has different shades. In some
religions, it means the use of every possible means to bring the person
over. In others there are certain rules and regulations.
In the Good Religion of Zarathushtra, it is only through study, acceptance, and choice.
One has first to acquire sufficient knowledge of the religion, consider
its doctrine with an open and clear mind, and accept it through free
will and personal choice.
That is why the word "conversion," in its modern usage, has not been used in the Gathas.
Freedom of Choice
Meaning and Message of
Yasna 30:2
Dr. Ali A. Jafarey
The
Gathas are a well-worded, well-versed, well-patterned, well-defined,
well-rounded, well-turned, well-linked, coherent, cohesive, concise, and precise
divan of the Divine Doctrine by the Master-Mâñthran (Thought-provoker)
and Prime-Poet Zarathushtra Spitama. They have five meters, seventeen songs and
241 stanzas, small enough to fit into a pocketbook of only 40 pages. They
discuss, in clear words, a unique Monotheism, Primal Principles of
Existence, mental enlightenment, physical soundness, Good and Evil, Freedom of
Choice, progressive life, constructive contribution, rehabilitation of the
uprooted, renovation of the world, radiating happiness in a natural and peaceful
environment, and advancing towards a godlike goal. They are supernal
inspirations, sublime prayers, subtle rituals, simple directives, and sound
advices for a superb splendid life. The Gathas are the Guide to Daênâ Vañguhi,
Good Conscience, “the best religion …. for the living …. [because it]
promotes the world through righteousness and polishes words and actions in
serenity.” (Song 9:10 – Yasna 44:10)
All
the above subjects are interrelated and therefore interwoven within the
241 stanzas, a moving mosaic of Message. One may pick a subject in a stanzas but
to comprehend its meaning and message, he/she will have to see it in its context
as given in the stanza, then look at it in the song in which the stanza stands,
and then understand its interrelation with other stanzas in other songs.
Understanding the Gathas is easy, provided one has the entire
picture, the complete Doctrine, in his/her full view. A single sample,
out of context, may lead to misunderstanding or even wrong deduction.
Therefore
to comprehend the second stanza of the third song, we shall have to carefully
look at its main point in the context of the entire Gathic guidance. That main
point is “Freedom of Choice” and the word on which it is based is âverenâo.
It is from the root var (Sanskrit vr), which means to choose,
to select with a secondary meaning to prefer, to like.
Happily the words derived from this root have been used
for 30 times in the Gathas, more than enough to give us the true meaning of it.
They have been used twice in the Haptanghaiti and 12 times in the Fravarti
(Yasna 12). It makes a total of 44 times in the Gathas and their Supplements in
the same dialect.
The
words from this root occur twice in the non-Gathic Yasna, once in the Vispered,
twice in the Yashts and thrice in the Vendidad, a total of eight times in the
entire Later Avesta. The non-Gathic Avesta is, in size, almost twelve times
larger than its Gathic part. One may wonder at the ratio of eight times against
the Gathic 44 times. The reason is simple. The non-Gathic part of the extant
Avesta is more concerned about rituals, customs, prescriptions, proscriptions,
legend, history, geography, medicine, and more. Its composers knew well that the
Gathas were the Divine Doctrine. That was enough and adequate for them.
They appended what they considered appropriate. As it will be seen, although
eight in number, they are a good help in understanding the significance of our
subject of ‘Freedom of Choice’ as seen by the Avestan people.
My
translation of the our main stanza reads:
Hear
the best with your ears
and ponder with a bright mind.
Then each man and woman, for his or her self,
select either of the [following] two choices.
Awaken to this Doctrine of ours
before the Great Event of Choice ushers in.
(Song
3 - stanza 2)
But
let me give also the translations by three Parsi scholars and three Iranian
Zartoshtis:
(1) Ervad
Kavasji Edalji Kanga: …. (tê)
mhotâ banâvo-ni agamcha darêk jan-nê
potânê-mâtê ê (potâni) pasandagi-no
êtekâd (hovo joîyê – yâne darêk
mânasê khodâ-parasti tathâ dêv-parasti,
ê bê-mâñ-thi jê sârûñ
hoê
tê pasand kari-nê, tê mûjab potâ-no dharm
sañbañdhi êtêkâd râkhvo …
“….
Then before the great event, each person should, for his own self, have his
preferred belief. (It means that each person should prefer from the two –
God-worship and demon-worship, the one which is better and thus have his belief
concerning the religion.) ….” (Ervadji Kanga – Happily, he has this stanza
in the Avestan script on the cover page of his book Gâthâ bâ Maenî,
Gujarati language, Bombay, 1895)
(2)
D.J. Irani: “…. Let each one choose his creed with that freedom of
‘choice,’ each must have at great events. ….”
(3)
Dr. Irach J.S. Taraporewala: “…. Before you choose which of
the Paths to tread, deciding each man by man, each for each; before the great
New Age is ushered in, wake up, alert to spread Ahura’s word.
(4)
Ardeshir Faramji Khabardar: “…. the careful selection of the
two ‘choices,’ man by man for his own self, before the great setting off on
life’s journey, ….”
(5)
Mobed Firuz Azargoshasb: “…. decide each man and woman
personally between the two paths, good and evil. Before ushering in of the great
day, or the day of the judgment, arise all of you and try to spread Ahura’s
words (Zarathushtra’s message).”
(6)
Mobedan Mobed Rostam Shahzadi: “…. Before the opportunity is
lost, each man and woman should for his/herself choose between the two – the
right path (Mazda-worship) or the wrong path (demon-worship). May you, with the
help of Mazda Ahura, be successful in your choice of the right path.”
The
word âvarenâo has been translated as ‘etekâd, yekîn,
belief, faith’ by Kangaji; ‘creed’ by Irani; ‘choices’ by Khabardar;
‘Path” by Taraporewala with the note “Bartholomae translates ‘avowal of
belief or of faith’ and derives it from var (Skt. Vr), to choose
and with [the prefix] â, to profess (a belief); ‘râh, aqîdeh
(path, belief) by Azargoshasb, and ‘râh’ (path) followed by
‘Mazda-worship or Demon-worship’ by Shahzadi.
The
stanza speaks of the full Freedom of Choice of Belief as the right of
each man and woman, and has a request to awaken to the Zarathushtrian
Teaching of the Divine Doctrine before the Great Event. The stanza is one
of the eleven stanzas of the Song devoted to the first sermon on vahya mainyu
and aka mainyu, the better and the bad mentalities, which
translate in human thoughts, words and deeds. It expounds this unique theme of
Good and Evil that has confounded many an exponent. The following Song 4 (Yasna
31) guides how to choose the better mentality and lead a good life, and Song 5
(Yasna 32) exposes the wrongs done by the aberrant.
Regarding
the remaining 29 instances of the words derived from var, all the above
five persons give the meanings of verbs as ‘to choose, to prefer, to like (pasand
karvûñ), to please, to believe, to put faith in (mânvûñ, etekâd râkhvûñ),
and nouns as ‘faith, creed, religion, doctrine, custom, path.’
I
have, in a larger version of my essay, given the renderings of the above persons
for almost all the 44 instances in which the derivatives of the root var occur.
Here I will confine myself to only those passages, which are more related to our
subject of the day.
Ahunavar
(Yathâ Ahû): We
begin with Ahunavar, the stanza which has given the first Gatha its name Ahunavaiti.
It says: “Just as the lord (ahu) is vairyo, meaning ‘to be
chosen,’ so is the leader (ratu) on account of their righteousness
only.” Lord, according to Song 2 (Yasna 29) is the person “who repels the
fury of the wrongful,” and the leader is the person “who offers
civilization, nourishment and strength” to the living world. The person ‘to
be chosen’ as both the “Lord and Leader” by the Living World was and is,
of course, Zarathushtra Spitâma. He was the only person who had listened
to the Divine Message and was prepared to proclaim it through his Songs. He was
granted the sweetness of tongue to carry out his universal mission.
Song
1:5 (Yasna 28:5): Zarathushtra says: “With these greatest thought-provoking words, we
shall convince the barbarians to choose (vâurôimaidi) the right
religion.”
Kangaji:
“We shall be able to give faith to the wicked people.”
Taraporewala:
“May we e’er convert with force of tongue those gone astray., (with a note:
“… At any rate this passage is clear proof of the great desire of Z. that
His New Message should spread all over the world.”)
Shahzadi:
“When shall I have the ability of leading the warriors, antagonists, robbers,
and astray to the path which is the best and superior.”
Song
4:3 (Yasna 31:3): Zarathushtra wants the Divine Message to help him “to guide all the
living to choose for themselves (vâurayâ) the right religion.”
Kangaji: “I
may make all the living as believers.”
Taraporewala:
“to convert all the living” and in his note he mentions about
‘conversion” and adds “that Zoroastrians in India today are on the whole
averse to proselytizing; some indeed regard it as positively ‘sinful’ (adharmî).
Shahzadi:
“…. Mazda has taught me the Religion of Mazda through his own tongue and
talk and told me to convey it to mankind.”
Song
4:11 (Yasna 31:11): God
has “fashioned for us the living world, conceptions and intellects, put life
in the physical frame, and gave deeds and doctrine, so that one makes his
‘choice’ ((varenêng) through free will.
Kangaji: “….
for fixing the deeds and religious commandments or for the belief or choice.” Taraporewala
“Whereby one may hold whatever Faith one wills.”
Shahzadi: Subtitle:
“…. You wanted every person to choose the way he/she prefers by his
determination and in full freedom.”
It
may be pointed out that Mobed Firuz Azargoshasb has written notes on
stanzas 1:5, 4:3 and 4:11 that the Good Religion of Zarathushtra is a universal
religion for all mankind and that it is to be spread through teachings without
any push, persuasion and/or force. People may choose it through their
knowledgeable discretion and Free Will only.
Song
6:2 (Yasna 33:2): Whosoever
foils the wrongful by word, thought or action, or …. teaches good things,
advances in his choice (vârâi).
Kangaji: “He
… presents for his religious belief i.e. he strengthens his belief.”
Taraporewala:
They accomplish (Thy) Purpose. (in the vocabulary vâra, wish, lit.
‘choice.’) Shahzadi:
“… or
guides a wrongful person on the right path, … (Note: Propagation of religion
and fighting evil is permitted according to this stanza.)
Song
12:6 (Yasna 47:6): “…. With the growth of serenity and righteousness, (serenity) shall
convert many a seeker.”
Kangaji: “It
is completely selected by the aspirants.”
Taraporewala:
She shall draw (into her fold) many Seekers.
D.J. Irani:
This shall cause many to hear Thy Message.
Song
13:4 (Yasna 48:4): Whoever,
Mazda, has set his mind on the better or the worse, sets his conscience
accordingly with actions and words. His desire follows his cherished choice (varenêng).
Kangaji:
“He who keeps himself good and pure, maintains the religion the same way; his
wish, belief and faith follow suit.
Taraporewala:
“His will follows his voluntary choice.”
Shahzadi: “His
desire follows the same path.” (Note: a Persian couplet: You see exactly what
you wish. You wish exactly what you see.)
Song
14:3 (Yasna 49:3): This
has been put as a choice (varenâi) that righteousness is for the
promotion of the doctrine, and wrong is for harming it.
Kangaji:
“In order to guide the people of world, the religious preference ….
has been laid down.
Taraporewala:
“It is laid down by Mazda as choice for all – the Teaching that Truth shall
prevail, that Untruth shall be frustrated.”
D.J. Irani:
“According to Thy Faith, O Mazda, the choice of Righteousness is its own
vindication.”
Shahzadi: “…
the Mazda-worship Religion is based on Truth and therefore it is always
beneficial, and the demon-worship religion on Lie and therefore always
harmful.”
Song
17:2 (Yasna 53:2): “And now, let Kavi Vishtaspa, the Zarathushtrian Spitama, and
Ferashaoshtra pursue, with mind, words, and deeds, the knowledge for the praise
and for the choice (fraoret) of venerations of the Wise One, in order to
establish in straight paths the religion which God has granted to the
benefactor.”
Kangaji:. “…. With faith in adoration rites ….”
Taraporewala:
“Let each choose acts of piety … meditating on the Path of Truth – the
Faith Ahura has revealed to the Saviour.”
D.J. Irani:
“May they teach all to keep to the established straight path, ….”
Shahzadi: Subtitle:
The Best Course to Teach the Religion to Mankind. “For the pleasure of Mazda,
all should sincerely spread the best religion through thought, word and deed.
…. Vishtaspa and Ferashaoshtra became supporters of Zarathushtra and succeeded
as the Benefactors (Saoshyants) …. in teaching people the right path of the
religion.”
NOTE
I: Mobed
Azargoshasb follows closely his preceptor, Dr. Taraporewala, in his translations
of the Gathas. Nevertheless, he has his independent way also. His renderings of
the above stanzas are in quite harmony with Dr. Taraporewala’s.
NOTE
II: Mobed
Shahzadi has given subtitles to most of the stanzas of the Gathas in his
translation. Thirty-two of them present the Good Religion as the ‘universal’
and that it should be propagated and spread, and the Subtitles speak of Freedom
of Choice.
Haptanghaiti:
Song 1.3 = Yasna 35.3: That we have chosen (vairîmaidî), Lord Wise, through sublime
Righteousness, Which we have thought, spoken and done. Of these deeds, the best
be for both the [mental and physical] existences.
Yasna
16:2: We
venerate Zarathushtra’s Religion. We venerate Zarathushtra’s Choice (varena)
and Doctrine.
Yasna
57:24: This
religion was forth chosen (fraoreñta) by Ahura Mazda the Righteous, also
by Good Mind, Best Righteousness, Choice Dominion, Progressive Serenity,
Wholeness, Immortality, Ahurian Questions, and Ahurian Doctrine.
Vispered
5:3: For You, Righteous Ahura Mazda, I choose for
myself (verenê) this religion as a Mazda-worshipper, Zarathushtrian,
void of false gods and of the Divine Doctrine.
Yasht
10:92: This
religion was chosen forth (fraoreñta) by Ahura Mazda the Righteous. ….
The Amesha Spentas chose (vereñta) the religion …. .
Yasht
13:89:
Zarathushtra was the first to eliminate false gods and to choose (fraorenata)
to be a Mazda-worshipper, Zarathushtrian, void of false gods, and Divine
Doctrine.
Vendidad
12:21: Should
an alien-believer (anya-varena) alien-doctrined (anya-tkaesha)
die, how many creations of the Progressive Mentality would he pollute?
Vendidad
15:2: He
who teaches the alien-belief (anya-varena) and alien-doctrine (anya-tkaesha)
to a righteous person knowing.
These
two passages show that other religions were known by the term ‘alien’
instead of what some religions do by calling others as heterodoxy, unbelief,
heresy, paganism, or heathenism.
Vendidad
19:2: Zarathushtra
chose for himself (fraorenaêta) the Mazda-worshipping Religion.
The
use of the words derived from var show that they do carry the idea of the
choice of religion and also that the Gathas are the Divine Message for mankind.
That means that the Good Religion is the first missionary religion,
a mission that firmly believed in “Freedom of Choice” after a good knowledge
of the thought-provoking Message presented with a sweet tongue. To sum up what
one understands from all the above references is:
(1)
Freedom
of Choice is for every individual person.
(2)
A good
choice is made by considering the subject with a bright, clear, un-tinted and
unbiased mind.
(3)
Zarathushtra
wishes all to be awake to his Teachings also.
(4)
The
message is universal and is not confined to race, color, and nationality.
(5)
It has to
be peacefully spread with a soft and sweet tongue.
(6)
Force and
coercion are not allowed.
It
is because of such a meaningful mission that the composer of the eulogy in honor
of Zarathushtra in the Farvardin Yasht declares: “Henceforth the Good Religion
of Mazda-worship will spread all over the seven climes of the earth.”
With
our main subject of Song 3:2 (Yasna 30:2) in view, we now turn to two important
points: (a) Mazê Yâonghô, the Great Event and (b) Declaration of
Choice.
The
word ‘yâonghô/yâh’ is derived from the root yah/Sanskrit yas,
meaning ‘to endeavor, to strive.’ It occurs in Song 3:2 (Yasna 30:2), Song
11:14 (Yasna 46:14), and Song 14:9 (Yasna 49:9). It also occurs as ‘mazishtâi
yâonghâm – the greatest of events’ in Haptanghaiti Song 2:2 (Yasna
36:2). The two Gathic
instances show that the occasions refer to the days King Vishtaspa and Jamaspa
chose the Good Religion and the Haptanghaiti occurrence speaks of the day when
the congregation of early Zoroastrians had encircled the Fire altar in their
community enclosure for a special occasion called the greatest of the events,
perhaps a group initiation into the Good Religion.
Yâonghô
has been rendered as ‘mhoto banâv, agtyanûñ kâm – a great event,
an important undertaking’ by Kangaji, ‘great events’ by D.J. Irani,
‘ushering-in-of the Great New Age’ by Taraporewala, ‘the great setting off
on life’s journey’ by Khabardar, ‘ushering in of the great day or the day
of judgement’ by Azargoshasb, and ‘opportunity (sic)’ by Shahzadi. In Song
11:14 and Song 14:9, the some of the above scholars have translated it as ‘The
Day of Judgment.’
The
word yâh does not occur in the Later Avesta but the word for Koshti, the
religious girdle is derived from it. It aiwi-yâongh. The prefix aiwi
meaning ‘to, towards, for’ also imparts ‘intensity’ to the word. That
expresses what the Koshti stands for: to strive for the New Age begun by
Zarathushtra’s Divine Message. The Koshti, we all know well, is girdled on the
occasion of the Declaration of Choice – the Initiation Ceremony. Aiwi-yâongh,
the Koshti, is first girdled on Yâongh, the Great Event in
one’s life.
The
Declaration of Choice begins with Yasna 12, known as Fraoreitish Hâitish, the
Religious Choice Chapter, a declaration that was/is made by the Initiate for the
Choice of the Good Religion. It is, in fact, the responsible response to
Zarathushtra’s call for consideration and choice.
In
Yasna 12 (repeated in Yasna 1:13, 3:24, 11:16, 14:4, 57:24), the Initiate
states: "1 do hereby eliminate the false gods. I do hereby choose for
myself (fravarânê) to be Mazda-worshipper, Zoroastrian, void of
false gods and Divine Doctrinal. ….”
“1
do hereby choose (varemaidî) the progressive serenity for myself.
May it be mine!”
Then
the Initiate declares that he/she will cleanse the world from theft and
violence; guard the home of the Mazda-worshippers against harm and destruction;
give the wise people, who live on this earth with their cattle, full freedom of
movement; does not intend to hurt any body or soul; renounces false gods and
their devotees; renounces sorcerers and their devotees; renounces each and every
mental malady and physical ailment; in fact all falsities and malignities in
thoughts, words, and deeds.
He/she
renounces the false gods just as the Righteous Zarathushtra did, and goes on to
declare:
"With
the Choice Belief (varena) in waters, with the Choice Belief in plants,
with the Choice Belief in the bountiful world; with the Choice Belief in God
Wise who created the living world and the righteous man -- the Choice Belief
Zarathushtra had, the Choice Belief Kavi Vishtaspa had, the Choice Belief
Ferashaoshtra and Jamaspa had, and the Choice Belief each of the
truth-practicing righteous Benefactors have, it is with the same Choice Belief
and doctrine that I am a worshipper of the Wise One.
"1,
with my appreciations and Choice Beliefs (fravaretas-châ), choose
for myself (fravarânê) to be Mazda-worshipper and Zoroastrian.
I
appreciate well-thought thoughts,
I appreciate well-said words,
I appreciate well-done deeds.
"I
appreciate the Good Religion of Mazda-worship which overthrows yokes yet sheaths
swords, teaches self-reliance, and is righteous. Therefore, of the religions
that have been and that shall be, this is the greatest, best, and sublimest. It
is divine and Zoroastrian. I do attribute all good to God Wise."
It
is a daring declaration, and it is a great event. The very
fact that one calls his/her religion as the greatest, best and the sublimest,
means that he/she considers all other religions as great, good and sublime and
that he/she has made the choice after a comparative study of as many of them as
possible with a bright mind. The declaration explains the full meaning of the
Gathic stanza. It gives the salient points of the Good Religion. Enjoying the
Freedom of Choice, it is a highly desirable, proper and practical response to
Zarathushtra’s call for awakening to his Divine Message, our subject of the
day.
mazdayasnô
ahmî, mazdayasnô zarathushtrish
fravarânê âstûtascâ fravaretascâ.
âstuyê humatem manô
âstuyê hûxtem vacô
âstuyê hvarshtem shyaothanem.
âstuyê daênãm mâzdayasnîm
fraspâyaoxedhrãm nidhâsnaithishem
khvaêtvadathãm ashaonîm
ýâ hâitinãmcâ bûshyeiñtinãmcâ
mazishtâcâ vahishtâcâ sraêshtâcâ
ýâ âhûirish zarathushtrish
ahurâi mazdâi vîspâ vohû cinahmî.
aêshâ astî daênayå mâzdayasnôish âstûitish!
*
* * * * *
NOTE:
The above article is the Speech made by Ali A. Jafarey at the Special
Event, sponsored by FEZANA (The Federation of North American
Zoroastrian Association) as a concurrent event on 30 December 2000 to the 7th
World Zoroastrian Congress, also sponsored by FEZANA and hosted by the
Zoroastrian Association of Houston, held at J.W. Marriott, Houston, Texas from
28 December 2000 to 1 January 2001.
Religion-by-Birth and KARMA
by Dr. Ali Jafarey
We all hear and read certain Traditionalist Zoroastrians
untiringly repeat that one does not have any Choice to change his/her
religion because it is against the Will of God Who alone gives one the
birth in a religion of His Choice.
How have the Traditionalists come to such a VITAL
conclusion? Any clear or even a hazy proof? Any precise prescription?
Not that I have seen or any person else can claim he/she has read it in
any of the "Zoroastrian" scriptures. It is said again and again, and
the emphasis is on the Divine Will and Will only. All one has to do is
to blindly accept the "unproven" statement as TRUTH or one is subjected
to all insults they can hatch and hurl.
Occasionally a "moderate" Traditionalist will speak of "Karma"
to explain the reason behind the predestined birth in a religion. Is it
an Avestan, Pahlavi and/or Zoroastrian Persian word that defines one's
religion by birth? No. It is a Sanskrit term and foreign to Iranian
languages.
Let us see how it has been defined:
Literally, "karma(n)"
means "act, action." In the Vedic literature, it also means
"occupation, profession." It was in the later post-Vedic period, both
among Hindus and the new-on-the-scene Buddhists, in which it gradually
acquired the notion that the sum total of one's actions has its
consequence in the status of his/her re-birth. It has acquired a
central doctrinal status in Hinduism and its offshoots, Buddhism and
Jainism.
In Hinduism, it is what makes a person to be born as a Brahmin (belonging to the priestly caste), Kshatriya (warrior caste), Vaishya (merchant caste) and Shudra
(servile caste). The caste system has determined how each member of
his/her relevant caste must pass his/her entire life within the closed
community of his/her birth in the Hindu society in all walks of life -
grow, work, worship, marry, socialize, live and die. It is Karma that
has given him/her that status by birth and it must not be changed.
Needless to say that through centuries and centuries of reform
movements, particularly the last 500 years with the recent Gandhiji's
Harijan drive, the caste structure is falling apart and should finally
disappear. Yet Shudras are still treated as serfs in many parts of
India.
It is this Hindu doctrine of predestined reincarnation that
has provided the Traditionalist Parsis with the excuse that "Religion
is by Birth." Some are even more "karmic" in declaring that one is only
born in the Zoroastrian Religion if his/her past actions are so subtle
that he/she is exceptionally raised to be born as Zarathushti! All
those born in other religions are of inferior status.
Let me elaborate: While the Hindu "Karma" birth applies to every
phase of one's life, the Traditionalist Parsi narrows it down to
"Religion" alone. Although one is born in a family, which resides in a
certain locality in a certain land and pursues a certain profession to
maintain his/her living, this Divine Will does not apply to these
predestined conditions. As far as the Traditionalist Parsis are concerned, the Divine Will does not apply to one's place and nationality of birth.
It does not apply to one's family profession. A person born by the same
Divine Will in Surat, India can migrate to another town in India or
forsake India altogether, and emigrate, settle and earn the citizenship
of his/her choice country. He/she can change the family profession and
go for any profession he/she chooses. That is why a Traditionalist
Priest, who does not believe in changing religion, is all for migration
to the Western countries to change his citizenship and alliance and is
also all for forsaking his sanctified class/caste/profession by birth
to become a fulltime engineer, doctor or any other well-earning
profession. The Divine Will in firmly fixing the birth of a person
concerns religion only and nothing else for the Traditionalist Parsi,
and no one else!
None of these propounders of Religion-by-Birth has ever discussed this point that HAD
THIS BEEN THE DIVINE WILL, THEN WHY GOD DID NOT SEND HIS
PROPHETS/MESSENGERS/AVATARS ALL AT ONE AND SAME TIME TO DIVIDE HUMANITY
RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING OF CREATION INTO DIFFERENT RELIGIONS AND
REGIONS. Why these founders have appeared in different times
and established their religions that have caused and are causing
millions and millions of people to change their religions-by-birth? If
it was His Will that the "blue-blooded Aryans" were to be born as
Zoroastrians, why did he send Mohammad to found a religion that overran
and converted almost all of them to Islam? And how did He tolerate to
see that one born as Zoroastrian had his/her children born as Muslims
thereafter for generations to come? Did He predestine them to this
lasting curse of the forced change in religion?
How is it that a child, born in a family of a particular religion,
if orphaned or otherwise adopted by person/s of alien religion, grows
up to belong to the religion of his/her fosterer/s? Why does he/she not
naturally grow up in his/her religion of birth? Is Karma working
justice here? And lastly, God created innumerable species of animals
that cannot cross breed. THEN WHY DID HE NOT CREATE SPECIES-IN-RELIGION
THAT COULD NOT INTERBREED?
Let it be made clear. The "Karma" Doctrine, the predestined birth
in a particular caste, which covers every aspect of one's life and
living in Hinduism (and the two offshoots, Buddhism and Jainism), is
narrowed to one point, Religion-by-Birth, by the Traditionalist Parsis
ALONE and no other section of Zoroastrians, Parsis and Iranians. It has
no place in the Universal Message of Zarathushtra.
WHY the Traditionalist Parsis alone? Because the choice means that
one would study the Good Religion first and when convinced of its
doctrinal sublimity and practical superiority over the creeds he/she
knows, he/she would choose the Good Religion. This would bring in
well-read, open-minded and progressive persons, persons who would not
follow many of the prescriptions that have become outdated and
impractical. It would mean reform. It would mean the end of all
impractical traditions, especially the mute, illegible rituals. The
Traditionalists simply cannot afford to lose themselves in the Reform.
The Hindu Karma doctrine, by which the Parsis have survived over
1,000 years in a caste-ridden society, may help them to survive longer
in face of the Reform movement, particularly the return to the Pristine
Pure Good Conscience of Zarathushtra that stands firm on continuous
renovation and updating of the mode of living based on the Primal
Principles of the Divine Doctrine under the Gathic Guidance. Or their
uproar of fabricated allegations may induce the readers to inquire and
discover the TRUTH, a discovery which may strengthen the Reform
movement and shorten the survival of Traditionalism and speed up their
extinction.
Silly questions and simple arguments to provoke serious reflections!
* * * * * *
Ali A. Jafarey
31 Farvardin 3743 ZRE = 20 April 2005 CE
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS BY DR. ALI JAFAREY, May, 2005
Dear Companions-in-Asha: The following are my answers to the questions asked and comments made by some of our companions:
QUESTION: Is it important for some people to formally be accepted as
Zarathushtris after they have converted, because it makes a difference
*as to how they are perceived by others*?
ANSWER: Those who joined the Manthran in his own days, called
themselves *Zarathushtris,* and so do we, because we too have, of our
free will and wise discernment, chosen to join his Zarathushtrian
Fellowship. Mazdayasna, I have shown in one of my earlier articles, is
a name which was adopted by early Zarathushtris to be distinguished
from the daevayasna and the "insider" adulterators of the later Gathic
age.
We do not want any recognition from any of the authorities of the
"Traditionalist" or whatever they want to call themselves, and/or from
any person or organization who/which considers him/her/itself as the
"guardian" of the faith. We have declared right at the founding of the
Assembly in 1990 that the Assembly is the sole Authority in this case.
It *formally* recognizes and accepts the knowledgeable person who
chooses the Good Religion for him/herself and joins the Fellowship.
He/she is Zarathushtrian.
We are the Mazdayasna Zarathushtris. Mazda is a word, explained in my
articles posted Online, coined by Zarathushtra. To us Mazda, Ahura,
Mazda Ahura, and/or Ahura Mazda, *the Super-Intellect Being,* is the
only creator, fashioner, maintainer, and promoter of the universe with
no durbar of helpers - amesha spentas, yazatas, fravashis, angels, or
any other "fanciful" being, and with no horde of opponents - Anghra
Mainyu, Devil, Satan, daevas, demons, evil spirits, witches, wizards or
any other "weird" wanderer.
The people who consider, rather believe, Ahura Mazda to be a "yazata"
(venerated, adored, adorable), the greatest Yazata (Mazishta Yazata)
among a host of yazatas, and recite "yazamaide" (we venerate, we
worship) formulas while mentioning each of the yazatas by name or all
of them together, may call themselves by the name of "Yazatayasna" with
pride. It is more appropriate for them than Mazdayasna. They do not do
so. Therefore, respecting them, we call them by the name they call
themselves -Traditionalist/Traditional/Traditional Mazdayasni. We do
not coin and use any sarcastic or derogatory name for our opponents.
It is the Traditionalists who are fond of calling those who follow the
Gathas by the name coined by one of them - The Gatha-Alone-Cult (GAC).
We smile. They are simply showing what Zarathushtra and his companions
should be called! He, the companions and the following generations of
what I term "the Gathic era" had the Gathas *only* plus a few prayers,
all in the Gathic spirit, of their own. The pre-Gathic Avestan/Vedic
compositions belonged to the daevayasna (devayâjin). Was it a
"cult" Zarathushtra founded or a religion? We are following the very
Doctrine he has given us. One may call him/us by any name. It only
reflects his/her/their mode of mind and core of character.
QUESTION: If the same label is to applied to converts as well as those
who are Zarathushtris by birth, then would the latter not feel *their*
formal label to have lost some of its "lustre" - at least as far as
*they* are concerned? Perhaps the best thing to do under the
circumstances would be to have some qualifying label applied to the
main label, much like the labels "Protestant" and "(Roman) Catholic"
are applied to Christians. That way one can't be confused with the
other. What is your opinion?
ANSWER: We need not. We are Zarathushtrians, Zarathushtris, Zartoshtis,
Zoroastrians, and Behdins. And we are not denying others the use of
these names. It is they who are denying others these names/labels. It
is they who named themselves as "Traditionalists, Traditional
Mazdayasnis" and others as "Liberals, Reformists, Cultists," and what
not. They may take appropriate action to distinguish themselves from
those whom they do not recognize. Let the naming begin at home and not
by calling others by derogatory names.
QUESTION: Has history not shown that applying labels like this,
especially in religion, can also cause much strife and even bloodshed?
Is that such a good thing?
ANSWER: Not in today's world. The Sassanians and Inquisition Christians
as well as the "crusaders" of all theocratic governments are gone. At
present, in the wide world of the melting pots, the fast dwindling and
spreading-thin "Traditionalists" are trying their best to survive. That
IS their main concern. They cannot afford a strife. All they have been
able to do and are doing, is the uproar they have raised, and that too
in a teacup of their press and Internet. As far as we are concerned,
the Gathas are guiding us through a peaceful progress. We have no
quarrel with any person/group, and this particularly includes the
Traditionalists.
The excuse that conversion "creates animosities and strife" does not
hold true any longer. Conversion by force or against force has, no
doubt, brought mighty misery to all the peoples of the world. Hinduism
against Buddhists, Christianity against pagans, Islam against
non-believers, and all these religions plus Sassanian Zoroastrianism
against other sects and "heretics" of their relevant religions have
shed more blood than any other strife in the world.
Even conversion through persuasion, practiced by zealot missionaries, is not pleasant.
Ways have changed. We hardly see, particularly in the civilized world,
any forced conversions. It has turned into a peaceful competition. And
the great winners are the Baha'is, Buddhists, Christians, and Muslims.
Some organizations, especially the charitable missionary
establishments, are praised for their humanitarian works in the
so-called "Third World" countries. Mother Teresa has been lauded by
all, including the anti-conversion Zoroastrian Traditionalist diehards,
for her noble work without ever mentioning the conversions she made and
her establishment is making of orphans, homeless, and the poor in
Bengal. Mothers Teresa and Fathers Francis are all over the world to
help the poor live better as *Christians* converts.
The same holds true about other proselytizing religions. Conversion is
widely practiced by the sects of one religion in winning over the
members of other denominations. All in comparative peace and
tranquility.
Here in North America alone, over 60,000 Muslim Iranians are reported
to have formally converted to Christianity during the last 20 years
without any reaction from any Muslim quarters. They have four churches
in southern California alone.
Baha'is do not divulge their figures of the conversion of Muslim and
other converts. When I was a small boy, my father asked the owner of an
Iranian restaurant in Karachi, an active Baha'i of Iranian Zoroastrian
parentage, as to the number of Baha'is in the then India, the reply was
200 -- all converts from Iranian Zoroastrians. Today, the Baha'is claim
700,000 Baha'is in the present-size India alone. Bangla Desh, Pakistan,
and Shri Lanka have their own Baha'is. No animosity or strife but
praise for the Baha'is, particularly by Indians. The new Taj Mahal-like
Baha'i House is a tourist attraction in Delhi, and so is the Chicago
one. All in good faith.
Although twice reported to the Iranian authorities by certain
"Parsi-ized" Iranis and Traditionalist zealots, the Zarathushtrian
Assembly is very well received by Iranians, most of whom are Muslims.
We are quite at home with all. The only opposition is by some
Traditionalists. This Alias is a firsthand witness to the uproar
Online. The uproar also rages on the pages of the Bombay Parsi press.
No other opposition. Admiration? Sure, very much. And increasingly on
an international scale.
QUESTION: What do you say about those who like to be called a
"Zarathushtri", a "Christian", a "Muslim", and a "Hindu" as well not to
mention "Buddhist", "Taoist" and every other "-ist" in addition - all
at once?
ANSWER: A fair comparison of the existing religions shows that the
contrasts between various religions are sharper than the similarities.
The similarities, even among those of the same stock, are not so close
as to enable one to say that he/she belongs to all of them. If,
therefore, someone likes to call him/herself an all-faiths fan, it is,
in my frank opinion, because he/she is supposing, musing, presuming,
assuming, pretending, or feigning, or simply because of his/her lack of
a fair knowledge of fundamentals of these religions and orders.
COMMENT by an Alias subscriber: <<I don't see a problem in
like-minded people forming their own organizations, as long as their
objective and emphasis is on spiritual growth according to what they
perceive as the *true* teachings of their preferred Prophet or
Sage.>>
ANSWER: The Zarathushtrian Assembly has been formed to pursue and it
pursues only the learning, practicing, teaching, and preaching on a
universal basis the "true" teachings of Zarathushtra?
QUESTION: "Should not the use of the label "Zarathushtrian" or
"Zoroastrian," if absolutely necessary, be qualified by some other word
to avoid confusion of identity with the mainstream Zarathushtis? In
this way, the concern of mainstream Zarathushtis about representation
in world bodies could be alleviated. Otherwise you can also have
confusion in the outside public as to who represents the mainstream
Zarathushtis.
ANSWER: The other side stands with the qualifications it
wants-Traditional, Traditionalist, and Traditional Mazdayasni. Then we
have the "Parsi" label, again exclusively used by them.
Sometimes, names are given by the antagonist side. We already know
about the "Gatha Cult Alone" and other name-callings. As already
explained above, we are Zarathushtrians, Zarathushtris, Zartoshtis,
Zoroastrians, and Behdins, and that is all. And we are Fundamentalists
because we adhere to the original Divine Message of Zarathushtra, and
not pre-Gathic, Gathic and post-Gathic "Traditions" combined. If others
like, they, according to their degree of dignity, will give us names.
We are satisfied with what we call ourselves.
I have no comment on calling the now proven narrowing course of the
Traditionalists as the "mainstream" Zarathushtis except that are you
not forgetting the Iranians and Parsi Reformists?
COMMENT by an Alias subscriber: "I do not want to keep the message of
Prophet Zarathushtra exclusively among born Zarathushtis. I do feel
that Iranians who were mostly converted through force, deception, or
coercion, have a right to go back to their original faith, and would be
more naturally accepted with fewer reservations in the Zarathushti
community. Here we are not stealing anyone from another recognized
faith, but merely accepting them back, and helping them to learn and
assimilate.
Some of us may have valid reservations about the fact that while our
ancestors did not waver and suffered death, persecution, humiliation,
and poverty to keep the faith, others and their children who now want
to come back, did not suffer or sacrifice. And, they may rightly
question the motives of these people who want to come back - is it
political (such as monarchists and others who oppose the mullahs),
social (those who are suffering lack of personal freedoms) ? We
need to understand these concerns and respect such feelings, while
encouraging people to forgive those that submitted to the invaders, if
they are really sincere.
Even for Iranians wishing to come back, it would be advisable that they
demonstrate their sincerity for some time, before they are fully
accepted by the community.
ANSWER: Should one have a fair view of the conditions prevailing among
the then Zartoshtis of the prostrated empire of the Sassanians, one
would not make such a generalized statement. The merciless force used
by conquerors was such that of the fifteen million Zartoshtis, only a
handful has survived the disaster. All suffered equally the unending
mental harassment and physical torture - those who died, those who
submitted, and those who have survived in Iran. The sheer majority
could not escape and gave in. Some Iranians have survived *only*
because their turn for the breaking torture did not come. And some were
able to escape and survive. The small community of Parsis exists
because of their successful flight to a haven where the rigid caste
system tolerated them as the fifth caste.
My studies show that the laity followed the Mobeds and other leaders
who went over because of the circumstances. And now, after 1400
years, the circumstances have turned such that many want to return to
what is their inherent right.
COMMENT by an Alias subscriber: In India and Iran it could alleviate
the concern about the use of charities by non-Parsis and non-Irani
Zarathushtis, and the concern that some people might be calling
themselves Zarathushtis mainly to take advantage of these benefits.
ANSWER: Please note these Iranians are not coming back to the Parsis.
No Iranian has approached the Parsis to accept him/her. None has
asked them for any charity or favor. And the Iranian Zoroastrians do
not have the charities the Parsis have. In Iran, and outside Iran, the
non-Zartoshti Iranians are well off and to this day none has asked any
Zartoshti for financial aid. Furthermore, they are not the "fourth
caste" people who would grab a "golden" opportunity to have a free ride
in the Parsi community. They are the elite and educated.
Iranians are returning to their *own* ancestral religion. And that is
what the majority of Iranian Zartoshtis openly know and inwardly want.
And they are silently looking for it.
One wonders why some speak on behalf of the Iranian Zartoshtis and the
reformist Parsis. Their views are different from those of the
Traditionalists. The Iranian Zoroastrians are neither dumb nor
silenced. In fact, I have found Iranians more daring and vocal in such
situations. If need be, the Iranian Zoroastrians and the Reformists
will, each, have their own spokesperson/s.
I repeat, the returning Iranians are not approaching the Parsis to
accept them in the Parsi community. They do not need so. So why worry
and throw conditions in the air? The Traditionalists can sit safe and
sound within their closed doors, and enjoy all the charity facilities
they have. I can assure you that no one, NO ONE, will knock at their
doors, here or in India. If at all some freak does, throw him/her out
and set an example!
Let it be clear, that the Good Religion is for mankind. It is
universal. The mission of the Assembly is to spread the Divine Message
throughout the world, and that includes India. Indians will be welcome
to study the Good Religion, decide for themselves to choose it, and
join the Assembly. They will become Zarathushtris, Zoroastrians,
Zartoshtis, Zartushtis, Jarthostis, and/or Behdins. But never, never
Parsis. Parsis constitute the ethnic surviving community of those
Iranian Zoroastrians who took asylum in Gujarat almost a thousand years
ago. They have their doors closed to non-Parsis. These doors shall
remain closed until they are opened by the Parsis themselves.
In fact, the Assembly makes it *quite* clear to all those, Iranians or
not, who join it of what they should expect if they happen to meet a
Parsi here, in India and in any other part of the world. They are
explained as to ascertain if he/she is Traditionalist or reformist.
They are told that while in Iran, they can go to the anjomans and enter
fire-temples, but in the Indian subcontinent, they should never venture
to enter any of the Parsi out-of-bound premises. The same holds true
about Dar-e Mehrs and associations in the West. That is why one does
not see any Assembly member trespassing any of the Traditionalist
boundaries in any of part of the Zoroastrian world.
COMMENT by an Alias subscriber: Those who proselytize do so either for
satisfying their ego, power, money, or they truly believe that they are
saving the souls of people whose current religions according to their
understanding are not teaching the right things.
ANSWER: What would you say about Zarathushtra and all others whom you
call "prophets and sages?" Did they not teach, preach, and accept those
who went over to their side after being fully convinced? Was it because
of their ego, power, money, or they truly believed that they were
saving the souls of people whose then current religions according to
their understanding were not teaching the right things?
Proselytization, conversion, acceptance, choice, reformation, or
whatever you like to call it has been initiated and promoted by every
founder of a religion, order, sect, or denomination.
What would you say about the persons who stand opposed to
proselytization? Is it their ego, power, money, politics, prejudice,
fanaticism, jealousy, fancy, or sheer fear, which drives them to take
such a stand?
(1) A Marked Change: With foul uproars and personal attacks off the
Zoroastrian Alias, we see a new atmosphere prevail.
Proselytization/Conversion/Acceptance/Choice/Label is now being
discussed in peace and respect by persons of different schools of
thought. The same holds true about other subjects too. Many who had
gone silent, are slowly returning to take part in expressing their
views and exchanging information. It is a healthy sign.
We should all be thankful to the person/persons, whosoever he/she/they
is/are, who brought the restraining order. But more than that, we
should all be grateful to Mr. Mehrdad Khosraviani who suffered from
both sides - from the restrainer/s and the restrained. Both were hard
on him. It appears that the restrained and their behind-the-scene
supporters and feeders are still harassing Mr. Khosraviani. His
honorary services to the Zoroastrians and friends should be greatly
appreciated.
Meanwhile, I hope that the persons who were behind the past uproars of
distortions, lies, blasphemy, foul language, cheap shots, and personal
attacks, have realized that it bore them no fruits. They only reflected
their true selves.
One says that the Gathas are the guide. The other has the Vendidad as
its practical partner. One speaks how powerful the Avestan prayers are
with their vibrations. The other says that the prayers are good only
when understood. One makes the reader know that only a select high can
comprehend the true meaning of the Avesta. The other is "mistified* why
there should be mysticism in the Message. One wants the Avesta to be
understood through translations. The other believes that no one can
translate the sacrosanct scriptures. One emphasizes the need to
preserve the Traditions his/her community in Iran/India has kept alive
to this day. The other shows that the Good Religion is a
modernizing way without any loss of the Primal Principles of Life. One
is resolved to spread the Divine Message throughout the world. The
other wants to promote the Parsi community to the heights it enjoyed in
the British India.
All of them can present their viewpoints with logic, reason, and in
peace on this List. They can, with tolerant and yet strong argument,
prove their viewpoint to be correct. Etiquette and netiquette can
present logic and maintain dignity. A fair competition for a fair
result.
The subscribers are all elite and educated. It will give them a good
opportunity to look at them all, understand what different schools of
thought say, and decide to choose what they consider the best and the
most practical.
Ali A. Jafarey
9 Dey 3736 ZRE = 30 December 1998
Reposted: 31 Farvardin 3743 ZRE = 20 April 2005 CE
THE GOOD RELIGION
and
THE INSTITUTIONALIZED ZOROASTRIANISM
Dr. Ali
A. Jafarey
*
* * * * *
Foreword
<>
Good Conscience, the religion of Zarathushtra,
is, historically, the first and foremost monotheistic religion in the world. But
like other religions, it also has continually changed from its pristine purity
to the present institutionalized form of Zoroastrianism. The Zarathushtrian Assembly has been established by
its founding members with the sole aim of restoring the Good Religion of
Zarathushtra to its pristine purity and activating its progressive universality.
The unique movement has raised a few questions: What is the pristine purity of
the Good Religion? How does it differ from the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
practiced by the remnants of a once great world religion?
How would a restoration to a remote past place the religion on the path
to progress and promotion in a fast-moving modern world?
This booklet provides the answers to these questions and more. It is
hoped that it will illuminate the subject and open the way to an increasing
study of mâñthra, the
thought-provoking message of Zarathushtra. They are embodied in the Gathas,
his ever-fresh divine songs of guidance.
Introduction
The
religion founded by Zarathushtra is known by several names. He himself called it
Daênâ Vañuhi, meaning the
"Good Conscience," or
freely rendered, the "Good Religion."
His disciples chose to add
Zarathushtri, Zarathushtrian, to show that it was founded by Zarathushtra.
To express its true source of inspiration, it is also called Âhuiri,
belonging to Ahura, divine. A
little later, they coined a new befitting term,
Mazda-yasna, to make it clear that they regarded their only god as Mazdâ,
the "Supreme Intellect," a Wise Being quite unique and above the
human-conceived, human-natured deities known as daêvas,
whose cult came to be called daêva-yasna.
The name Zarathushtra has been contracted into Zartosht in Persian and Zarathusht
or Zarthusht in Gujarati. Daênâ
Vañuhi is Dîn-e Behi or Behdîni in
Persian. Zoroaster is the
Anglicized form of a Greek mispronunciation of the name Zarathushtra. And since
the 19th century CE, "the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism" means the
final institutionalized version of the Good Religion.
With all the forms in view, a follower of the Good Religion is a
Zarathushtrian, Zarathushti, Zartoshti, Zoroastrian, Mazdayasni, or Behdin. The
two forms of Zarathushtrian and Zartoshti have been preferred by the
Zarathushtrian Assembly.
This book distinguishes between the pristine form of the Good Religion
and the evolved, transformed, and transmuted state of the religion.
The Zarathushtrian Religion is
the religion taught and practiced by Zarathushtra and his generating followers
for centuries. It is based only on
the Gâthâs,
the very Teachings of the Teacher. The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
is the massing shape it has taken over the last 2,500 years. Some call it the
"Traditional" Zoroastrian religion.
The pristine state and the evolving form will be explained under the
subtitles of Source Scriptures, History, Zarathushtra, Institutionalization,
Doctrine, Rituals, Outside Influence, Present and Future, Changing Attitudes,
the Zarathushtrian Assembly, and Conclusion.
Source Scriptures
The Good Religion:
Zarathushtra practiced, taught, and preached his Divine Doctrine for
a full forty-seven years. Finally, he reduced his teachings in seventeen songs
as the all-time guidelines for "all the living beings" to come. Later
the songs were called Gathas, meaning
"sacred songs," His immediate followers, adhering fast to his
teachings, wove more songs and composed several pieces to supplement the Gathas:
They are Haptañhâiti (Seven-chapters
in poetry), Hadhaokhta (a short piece
advising people to listen to seraosha,
the inner-voice expounding the divine message of Zarathushtra), Fshusho-mâñthra
(another short piece on one preparing oneself to serve the progressive cause in
thoughts, words, and deeds), Yeñhe Hâtâm
(a paraphrase of a Gathic verse in veneration of men and women), and Fravarti (a section on Initiation in which one renounces one’s
superstitious beliefs and cultic practices and chooses the Good Religion). They
are all in the same dialect, now termed Gathic.
The entire collection of a total of 312 stanzas or approximately 7,600
words, is called Staota Yesnya, reverential praises, by Zarathushtra’s followers.
It is also known by its Pahlavized form of Stot
Yasn. It is homogeneous in doctrine and very inspiring and stimulating.
The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
was quite rich in scriptures. In addition to the Staota
Yesnya texts, it had compositions going back to pre-Zarathushtrian eras and
writings ending as late as 1773 CE in three languages of Avesta, Pahlavi, and
Persian over a span of more than 4,000 years. It was rich in subjects also:
theology, myth, legends, history, geography, agriculture, animal care, medicine,
pollution and purity laws, prayer preparations, elaborate rituals, potent
spells, and commentaries of the Gathas, all en masse, of course, around the
Staota Yesnya. The canonized collection, duly selected and collated by the
priestly authorities of the Sassanian order, was completed in about 550 CE It
consisted of 21 volumes. Only one volume, called Stot
Yasn, contained the Gathas and its supplements. The remaining volumes were
commentaries, interpretations, later liturgies, religious epics, administrative
and social laws, or miscellaneous subjects of day-to-day life of the Sassanian
theocracy.
The Arab conquest and the subsequent conversions dealt a heavy blow to
the 21-volume collection. Most of
the collection was lost and less than one third of the volumes was salvaged and
re-arranged into six volumes: the Yasna containing the Staota Yesnya and later liturgical
compositions; the Vispered on the Gâhânbâr
seasonal festivals; the Yasht, praises
in honor of Ahura Mazda and his "assisting" deities; the Vendidâd,
mainly concerning pollution and purification laws; the Khordeh Avesta, a handy popularized late collection of mostly
non-Gathic daily prayers in Avesta and Middle Persian; and lastly, the
collection of Avestan and Pahlavi fragments of various lengths on various
subjects. Fresh compositions
appeared in Pahlavi during the 9th century in order to make some good of the
loss. Avesta was a dead language
long before and Pahlavi died a consequent death to produce modern Persian.
Persian writings, written in Arabic script, began from the 15th century and
lasted until the close of the 18th century.
Further writings, in Persian, Sanskrit, Gujarati, and English, have been
solely based on this comparatively vast literature.
Only a comprehensive study of this literature could project the full form
of the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism. This booklet is, therefore, confined to
the main points of the subject. A better presentation is made in the author’s The
Zarathushtrian Religion, a chronological perspective.
History
Zarathushtra was born, according to a conventional reckoning, 3,757 years
ago. His family raised cattle and
horses. They belonged to an
Indo-European people who called themselves
Aryans, meaning "noble." They
were polytheists and believed in superstitions and magic. The greedy priests put
on a good show of bloody sacrifices, instant intoxicants, and loud chants to
please the gods and repel magic, and exploit the simple laity. The people were
also exploited by their ruling princes.
Zarathushtra, an inquisitive person, looked at the Aryan cult with doubt
at the tender age of seven. His doubts increased when the priests could not
satisfy him with their dubious answers. They,
in their frustration, boycotted him. He
left them to discover the truth by himself.
His questioning search into the contrast between social disorder
and natural order led him to a discovery: the Being whose supreme wisdom
created the order which prevails throughout the universe.
His discovery of, and communion with the "Being of Supreme
Intellect," Ahura Mazdâ, gave
him a message he conveyed to others. Zarathushtra founded a religion based on
the "Primal Principles of Life" he had divinely discovered. He
publicly proclaimed his divine message at the age of thirty with the sole aim of
leading the entire human society to an ever-fresh spiritual and material
existence.
The priests and princes, realized the threat to their vested interests,
vehemently opposed him, and forced him and his few friends to leave home.
Zarathushtra left home, only to go to the court of Vishtaspa, the leading
ruler in the region. They had a two-year long discussion, and Zarathushtra
converted Vishtaspa and his sagacious companions of men and women.
They became fervent peaceful preachers of the new religion, and it spread
fast, far, and wide.
A thousand years passed and the Good Religion was accepted by all the
Aryan and Aryanized people on the Iranian Plateau through the peaceful, but
zealous propagation of its devotees. About
2,500 years ago, Cyrus the Persian founded the first world empire, known as the Achaemenian empire, based on the Zarathushtrian doctrine of freedom,
benevolence, tolerance, and progress. It extended from Libya to the Pamirs and
the Indus. It lasted 220 years (550-330 BCE).
After a short rule by alien Macedonians and Greeks, the Zoroastrian
Parthians took over and ruled a shrunk empire, mostly confined to the Iranian
Plateau, for 478 years (254 BCE-224 CE) with the same spirit of benevolence and
tolerance. It was taken over by the
Sassanians who turned the empire into a tight theocratic state of one sect.
Other Zoroastrian sects were condemned as heretics.
Theocracy means total dependence of religion’s sustenance on the ruling
power, consequently causing the religion to weaken much.
It turns it into a parasite which depends more on the theocratic
government than on its own potentiality, and therefore, the fall of government
proves disastrous for the religion.
Meanwhile, Christianity, the religion of the Byzantine Empire west of the
Sassanians, posed as a rival. The
two empires fought several wars over a period of several centuries.
Both were badly weakened and were not able to stop the rise of Islam in
the Arabian Peninsula. Zealous
Muslim warriors defeated both, and completely overthrew the Sassanian dynasty
and overran the vast Iranian empire within a short span of twenty years— 532
to 652 CE
With the empire gone, Zoroastrian survival has been at stake. Conversion
to Islam through force, persecution, propagation, and concession has drastically
reduced the number of Zoroastrians in Iran.
Outside Iran, only one group of Iranian emigrants has survived. They are
the Parsis of the Indian
sub-continent. All other pockets,
Iranian or not, have disappeared without leaving any noticeable trace.
Zarathushtra
In the Good Religion Zarathushtra is a human being who, in his persistent
search for truth, discovered and realized the Supreme Entity; called it Ahura
Mazda, the Wise God; renounced and discarded the old cultic beliefs and
practices; communed with his God; was inspired to convey the Divine Message he
had realized, to all men and women of all climes and times; and founded an
entirely new universal religion. He is the foremost Ahu
(Lord), Ratu (Leader), and Mâñthran (Thought-provoker); in fact, the primal mental and
material, spiritual and physical Guide of a righteous life for every person and
for ever.
In the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
Zarathushtra is more of a reformer than a founder of an ancient Iranian religion
which had deviated from its path. He cleansed the religion of its daeva
worship and superstitions but perpetuated all the "good" old beliefs
and rituals. He is the "Prophet" of an ethnic community, at present
represented by Iranis and Parsis. Yet some Zoroastrians consider him a Divine
Being of supernatural knowledge and power.
Zarathushtra was to be followed by three saviors, known as Saoshyants,
meaning "benefactors," who were to be miraculously born of virgin
mothers, each a thousand years after the other, to renovate the deteriorating
world. Although approximately three thousand years have passed since
Zarathushtra passed away, so far the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism has
recognized no one as a Saoshyant. Many Zoroastrians are now eagerly awaiting the
appearance of Bahrâm Varjâvand. This
person is not mentioned, even casually, in the Avesta or Pahlavi writings. He
appears more in Persian and oral tradition. Some historian scholars say that he
could be Bahram Chobin, a defiant Sassanian chief who left Iran for India and
China to form an army and return to expel the invading Arabs. He was never heard
of but people, looking for a savior, waited for his return. The waiting has
grown into the Bahram Varjavand legend.
Institutionalization
The Good Religion:
Zarathushtra founded an altogether new religion on the basis of his
divine realization. He eliminated
every rite and ritual that was performed to appease false gods, enrich priests,
and exploit people. He cleansed
minds of superstitions. He taught a
very sublime and strong doctrine.
His meaningful prayers make the soul divinely soar high but his simple
rituals hardly distract one’s mind to ceremonial performances.
His doctrine is based on the "Primal Principles of Life" on
this good earth, but does not set up do’s and don’ts to govern one’s every
mental thought and physical movement. His
highly philosophical teachings are not commandments to govern minute details of
every day life. It is a progressive
doctrine that wants its adherents to wisely progress with time and adjust their
lives accordingly. The motto is:
Continuous renovation and refreshing of life.
Zarathushtra is ahu, an improving lord and a ratu,
a true guide "chosen" by the people for his righteous actions.
He is a manthran, a
thought-provoker. He has put his
entire doctrine in seventeen songs of a total 241 stanzas or less than 6,000
words—the Gathas—enough to guide
humanity of all ages to wholeness, immortality and God without depriving them of
their mental and physical freedom and choice.
The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism:
But the Aryan cult was a well-formalized establishment with an orthodox
hierarchy, colorful rituals, and a detailed way of life. When the leaders of the
cult joined the spreading religion, many of them wanted to save and perpetuate
their leading profession. They very
cleverly reintroduced many old beliefs and rituals, and reinstated many gods and
animated more from Gathic conceptions and thus created a large pantheon of
deities under the godhead of Ahura Mazda.
First the elaborate Haoma ritual was introduced. However,
the original intoxicant drink was substituted by an ephedraic drink. The ritual
was blended in with the Staota Yesnya
recitation. It was followed by
personifying some of the Gathic abstractions under the term of amesha
spenta, conventionally rendered as " Incremental Immortals" and
yazata, adorables. Seraosha, the
inner-voice, was turned into a warrior deity, and then some of the prominent
"heroically helping" gods and goddesses of the pre-Zarathushtrian
era—Mithra, god of tribal contract; Verethraghna,
god of war and victory; Tishtrya, god
of rain; Anâhitâ, goddess of waters;
Vayu, god of wind; Drvaspa, goddess of animal health, and many more—were
re-introduced as yazatas. Bloody sacrifices accompanied the heroic gods.
Still later sun, moon, stars, earth, and other objects had their
presiding deities. And still later, the Gathic personifications, called amesha
spentas, lost much of their Gathic concepts and were given the task of
guarding over cattle, fire, metal, earth, trees, and waters without infringing
upon the authority of pre-Zarathushtrian deities presiding over the same
elements.
The priestly hierarchy, now firmly established, was at the head of two or
occasionally three lower classes of warriors, professional producers, and
artisans. At present, Zoroastrians are divided into two classes
only—The Priests known either as Mobeds
or Athornâns (misreading of
Avestan/Pahlavi âthravan/âsravan or âsron)
and the Laity called Behdins
(meaning" [of] the Good Religion").
Doctrine
The Good Religion: Zarathushtra
presents a progressive monotheism. Ahura
Mazda, literally "the Being [of]
Supreme Intellect, " is the "continuous" creator, sustainer, and
promoter of the universe. Ahura
Mazda is the "most progressive." He is also transcendental and
impersonal, and therefore without any pantheon at all.
Yet he is so close, that one can easily commune with him without any
mediation.
Ahura Mazda has created and creates the universe by his progressive
mentality (spenta mainyu).
It is a good creation. Among
his creations, he has fashioned the "joy-bringing" living world of
ours on the earth. It is guided by
the "Primal Principles of Life."
The Gathas present them in a beautifully intertwined, inseparable pattern
to provide one with a well-blended, progressive way of life. Here they are given
separately with the sole view of giving a glimpse of
the most important of them:
Vohu Manah, good mind, good
thinking. It stands for the
discerning wisdom and thorough thinking required for leading a useful life.
Asha stands for "truth,
order, righteousness." It is the universal law of righteous precision. It may best
be explained by stating that it means "to do the right thing, at the right
time, in the right place, and with the right means in order to attain the right
result." It should result in
constructive and loving good not only for oneself but also for one’s fellow
creatures and for God. It is the positive, beneficial and unselfish precision
par excellence.
Khshathra denotes the
"power" to settle in peace. Used with the adjective of vohu,
good, or vairya, to be chosen, it
stands for benevolent power, good rule, and the chosen order.
It is chosen by free and wise people as their ideal order in spirit and
matter. It is the divine dominion.
Âramaiti, means
"tranquility, stability and serenity." It
is peace and prosperity. When
used with the adjective spenta, it
means the "ever-increasing serene peace" achieved by adhering to the
Primal Principles of Life.
Seraosha means
"listening" to the divine voice within us to guide us on the right
path. It means inspiration, divine
enlightenment, communion with God.
Daênâ is a person’s
inner-perception, the conscience. It also stands for one’s chosen religion.
Zarathushtra named the religion he founded as the "Good
Conscience."
All the above and more Primal Principles of Life given in the Gathas,
when followed precisely, lead to:
Haurvatât, wholeness and
completion. It is the perfecting
process and final completion of our material and spiritual evolution.
Ameretât means
"deathlessness" and "immortality."
Together with Haurvatât, it is the ultimate goal and represents the completion of
our evolutionary development and the final achievement of our life on the earth.
In short, the Primal Principles lead one and all to become
"godlike" and to live with God in an eternal bliss. The blissful state
is called garo demâna, the abode of
songs, or one may as well call it "the house of music."
The Gathas speak about urvan, soul,
and its final destiny to "live where the Wise God lives." but there
exists no fanciful eschatology. All it says is that the soul of a wrongful
person "returns" to stay in the "house of wrong" or
"house of the worst mind" until it realizes the truth to progress to
wholeness and immortality. Yet, this "return" does not feed one with
the elaborate doctrine of "reincarnation" and "transmigration of
soul" as is found in other religions and beliefs. It is a fair deduction
that a soul must evolve to become righteous to continue to live in bliss.
Ahura Mazda has endowed mankind with a powerful mentality—one which can
discriminate between good and evil. Human
beings are free to choose between a better or more progressive mentality (vahya
or spanya mainyu) and an evil or
retarding mentality (aka or angra
mainyu). The reward for the choice of the better mentality is eternal
bliss, and the consequence of choosing the evil mentality is a long suffering by
the soul until it is refined to achieve wholeness and immortality. Every person
receives the reward for every righteous act or suffers the bad consequence for
every wrong deed one does. The dualism of the Good Conscience is purely ethical
and confined to human behavior only.
Everything in nature, the entire environment, is a good creation and
should be looked upon as such. Light and darkness, day and night, water and
plants, in fact, the very world alive with life, should be promoted according to
asha, the universal law of nature.
Mankind is not on the earth to interfere in its evolution to perfection but
being creative and "godlike," he and she should increase its pace to
progress. The Gathic doctrine is a progressively ecological order.
Zarathushtra stands high in protecting and promoting the environment in a happy
scientific way.
Man and woman enjoy equal status. The
religion of Zarathushtra is a universal religion which knows no sex, race,
color, or national barriers. It is
historically the first missionary movement, a moderate movement.
The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
has a well-balanced pantheon of deities and demons.
Ahura Mazda has created the six amesha
spentas (Vohu Manah, Asha, Khshathra, Aramaiti, Haurvatat, and Ameretat),
numerous yazatas (adorables consisting of Gathic concepts and
pre-Zarathushtrian deities), innumerable fravashis
(conventionally rendered as Guardian Spirits), and righteous human beings to
assist Him in the continuous cosmic fight with His Adversary, Añhra
Mainyu (the Evil Spirit), the horde of daevas
(demons) created by him, and evil human beings who follow him.
In contrast to the ethical dualism of the Gathas, the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
is a cosmical dualistic religion in which all that is "termed" as good
has been created by Ahura Mazda, and every "bad" event and object,
from natural disasters to disease and death, and to the so-called
"noxious" creatures, are the creations of the Evil Spirit.
Life on this earth and the cosmos is a continuous fight against Anghra
Mainyu, the so-called Evil Spirit.
The Gathic doctrine of harmony with nature was partially maintained. Air,
water, plants, earth, and minerals were, and are, held in high regard. But
ecology was not as protected as it should have been according to the Gathic
doctrine. Good animals and plants were promoted and improved.
"Noxious" animals, particularly ants and frogs,
and "evil" plants were meritoriously destroyed. The destruction
of the "evil creation" is at present much reduced because of the
prevailing circumstances, but the belief in fighting it in mind and matter
continues.
The fight has made the scriptural doctrine to cover every walk of life
from birth to death. The Evil Spirit has created the all-spreading pollution,
and rites of purification are elaborate and complex. Life in the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
means a constant watch against devilish moves.
It is patterned upon the directives given in the holy scriptures.
They include, among a multiple of old and new subjects:
priestly duties, kingship, judiciary, religious festivals, ownership,
inheritance, agriculture, pastures, animal care, animal slaughter, medicine,
prophecy, apostasy, charity, begging, initiation, marriage, polygamy, adultery,
slavery, relations with non-Zoroastrians, religious conversion, warfare,
retribution, punishment, fine, ransom, compensation, theft, murder, assault,
witchcraft, sin, crime, death penalty, carrion, menstruation, and other
"do’s and don’ts" to fight the evil and lead a righteous life.
The canonized text was, and its salvage part is, in the Avestan language,
the translations and added commentaries were, and what remains of them are, in
Pahlavi or Middle Persian.
Many of the directives given in the scriptures are difficult and some of
them are impossible to be followed in a modern world of intercommunicating and
intermingling society. The result
is that only a dwindling number of priests try to follow as many of the
directives as are possible within the prevailing conditions.
The laity have silently abandoned many and are gradually abandoning more.
The eschatology is elaborate and picturesque.
The soul remains for three days and nights beside the dead body on the
earth and ascends on the fourth morning to reach the "Bridge of
Separation," originally a Gathic allegory, now turned into a concrete
construction. There, it is judged by three yazatas—Mithra, Sraosha, and Rashnu.
Here one is not judged separately for each of his or her deeds, but the total of
good acts are placed in one pan and all the evil actions in another pan of the
balance. Those whose good deeds outweigh their evil actions, are declared
righteous and go, according to merits, to one of the four categories of the
Heaven and live a life of bliss, and those whose evil deeds are heavier than
their good actions are wrongful and likewise go to one of the four Hells.
There they are grotesquely tortured, ironically, by the Evil Spirit and
his horde of demons. For those who
have equal weights of good and evil, there is the purgatory (Avesta Misvâna Gâtu, "mixing place" or Pahlavi Hammistagân,
“place of equal mixing”) to eventually purge them of their evil.
Here the souls are not tortured but made to suffer only from cold and
heat. In spite of these assignments, there is also the bodily resurrection when
the dead will arise. Then souls and
bodies will again be judged and sentenced to bliss or a temporary punishment.
All will eventually be united in the blissful existence. The Evil Spirit
and his creation will be doomed for ever.
The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
has transformed the Gathic conception of the mental state of enjoying good and
suffering evil and the subsequent achievement of wholeness, immortality, and the
eternal divine bliss into an elaborate eschatology of death, judgement, heaven,
hell, purgatory, bodily resurrection, and salvation, an eschatology which has
greatly influenced other religions, including, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Man and woman continue to enjoy equal status. Yet woman is considered
more prone to pollution because of her monthly menstruation and periodical
childbirth. She has to undergo elaborate and lengthy purification rites to
regain her purity. Many modern Zoroastrians have, as already said, given up most
of the purification rites. During the Sassanian times, while man could marry
more than once and yet keep his status, woman had several standards. Among them,
she was a "royal wife" if married as maiden with the consent of her
parents, a "self-willed" if she married without her parents' consent,
and a "serving wife" if remarrying as a widow. The husband had an
upper hand in divorcing his spouse. At present, modified laws promulgated by
Zoroastrian associations in Iran and India have restored the equality to a great
extent.
Nevertheless, marriage outside the community, generally places the woman
outside the society among orthodox Parsis. Parsi women married to
non-Zoroastrians are fighting for full rights. They are supported by many of
their co-religionists. Iranian women are not faced with such social problems.
Rituals
The Good Religion:
The Gathas are divine praises and guidance at the same time.
They contain barely any rituals. One
only finds some outlines of simple ceremonies in the Staota
Yesnya texts concerning the Initiation of a person choosing the Good
Religion, meditation for enlightenment, individual prayers, congregational
prayers, marriage, and honoring the living and the dead for their good
services—outlines that give one the virtuous freedom to keep in good tune with
the changing times and climes. The Gathas do not interfere in one’s
traditional good "living." Yet they advocate a happy life of radiating
happiness to others whosoever they may be.
Early non-Gathic Avestan texts show that the Gathas were sung, chanted
and recited by people whenever they were in a mood and urge to do so. They also
gathered around a hearth or fire altar to recite the Gathas and their
supplements in a congregation. Pure priestly "profession" is absent in
the Gathic texts. If required, persons of more knowledge led the prayers. Later
texts show that people celebrated their age-old seasonal changes in their
pastoral and agricultural life. They
are the six Gahanbars celebrated at the end of each change in activity.
Staota Yesnya was recited and explained to an inquisitive gathering.
It was followed by enjoying a feast collectively prepared by all the
participants. One’s life, mentally and spiritually enriched by the Gathic
doctrine, continued to progress with a higher, sublimer purpose.
The Gathic age did not have priests, professional or otherwise. The
prayers were not led by any particular individual. Persons with greater
knowledge of the doctrine officiated at simple ceremonies and congregational
rituals and in their spare time, taught and preached the religion. In fact,
every person was, in his or her own capacity, a practicing, preaching
Zarathushtrian.
The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism,
on the other hand, has an established hereditary priestly class with intricate
rituals. It has its fire-temples of different grades. While in Iran
non-Zoroastrians are allowed to enter a fire-temple, fire-temples in India and
Pakistan bar any person who is not a "born" Zoroastrian. Zoroastrians
in Europe, North America and Australia do not, to this date, have a
"consecrated" temple. Fire altars in prayer sanctuaries fulfill the
job. A few are gas-fired. With the passage of time, congregational prayers,
which once comprised only of the Gathas and their supplements in the Gathic
texts, have given way to ceremonies in which the Gathas do not constitute the
body of the prayer text but are, in certain longer rituals, a part of a much
longer whole. While seasonal
festivals of Gahanbars gradually have been turned into a feast without Stoata
Yesnya recitation, the reformed calendar, based on days and months named after
deities, have given more festivals. Whenever
the name of the day and the name of the month of the same deity coincides, a
festival (Pahlavi yazishn, Persian jashn,
and Gujarati jashan, [ritual]
veneration) is celebrated in honor of the deity.
The total of such deity-festivals comes to fifteen in a year.
Birth, initiation, marriage, death, disposal of the dead, and memorial
ceremonies each have their
preparations and performances. Pollution
and purification rituals are elaborate and difficult to perform.
Certain laid conditions make some of the rituals almost impossible to be
performed "overseas" on American continents, Australia, and other
island regions outside the Eurasian mainland.
Prayers are recited in Avesta and in a later form of Middle Persian
basically learned by rote. Both the
languages lie beyond the comprehension of the reciting priests and the listening
laypersons. Only a small number of
Zoroastrian scholars know what the prayers mean.
No standard translation of the holy texts exist in English, Persian, or
Gujarati. Most of the available
translations, especially of the Gathas, are by non-Zoroastrian scholars in a
scholarly language that rob the "scriptural" texts of their beauty.
The sublime songs of Zarathushtra lie too philologically analyzed to inspire and
deliver the divine message. The
laity has only one book to be spiritually contented with:
Khordeh Avesta, usually in
Persian, Gujarati, or English script and without a translation. Moreover,
neither the priests nor the laity know the relevance or irrelevance of the
ritual to the texts recited during the performance.
The elaborate ceremonies, some running for hours have done one
thing—eclipsed the Gathas so much so that they are only recited either along
with the entire Yasna text or on the occasion of the last five memorial days,
the Muktâd or Panjeh.
The Ahunavaiti Gatha, the first
seven songs, are recited during a funeral ceremony.
And it is the officiating priests who do the recitations, not the laity.
It is just a generation that a movement has been generated to turn to the
Gathas.
Metaphysical interpretations of the Avestan texts presented by certain
circles satisfy those in search of mysticism, but the common men and women, who
are coming in ever-growing contact with science and other religions whose
scriptures are in intelligible renderings, are looking and asking for good,
understandable renderings.
Calendar
The Good Religion, founded
approximately 4,000 years ago, did not prescribe a calendar that would have
become outdated. The Gathas and certain earlier parts of the Avesta show that
the Gathic people continued to adhere to their ancestral luni-solar calendar
with a precise intercalation of 11 days to keep the Gahanbar festivals in line
with the agricultural life. There is no clue as to what were the names of the
months. One can only look at the Gahanbar names and the Vedic months to presume
that they might have been names after seasonal changes and agricultural phases.
The early Achaemenians, more Gathic in practice than the following dynasties,
had a solar calendar of their own with specific names of the months. The days of
the month were numbered the way one does in modern times. That shows that they
found themselves free to change the calendar to suit their times.
The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
too changed later to a purely
solar calendar. It, however, had its months named, in a non-orderly sequence,
after the amesha
spentas and yazatas. It also named the thirty days of the month, here in a more
or less, orderly sequence, after the amesha spentas and yazatas. The last five
days were dedicated to the five Gathas to provide a 365-day year. Intercalations
of one day every four years or one month every 120 years kept the calendar in
its place.
But the downfall of the Sassanians deprived the community of a single
calendarical authority. The Indian pocket was cut off from the Iranian
community. Leap years were observed
only for few centuries and then were given up for good. As a result, until
recently, there were two calendars, the Qadimi
(Old) followed by the Iranian Zoroastrians and the Shâhanshâhi
(Royal) by the Parsis, both drifting months from the vernal equinox. At present,
the Qadimi year begins in July and the Shahanshahi begins one full month later.
A few decades ago, some rose to reform it into a solar year of 365 days with its
leap year. It begins with the vernal equinox and is called Fasli
(seasonal) by many.
Meanwhile, Iran and Afghanistan have changed to the precise solar year of
365.2422 days. It has the first six months of 31 days each, the following five
months of 30 days each, and the last month either of 29 or 30 days. It is the
most correct current calendar. It is very practical. The Iranian months carry
Zoroastrian names and the Afghan months have Zodiacal terms. The days have their
numbers—1 to 31.
Outside Influences
The Good Religion
stands pure and pristine and is based upon the Gathic guidelines with no alien
religious influence. Zarathushtra
"renounced" the old cult after he discovered the truth and was
divinely enlightened. He did not
have any contacts with any of the then existing cults and religions.
Furthermore, the Good Religion is firmly based on the Primal Principles
of Life and that is sufficient to lead a wise, righteous, and practical life of
usefulness to the living world. As already stated, the Gathas did not, and do
not, interfere in one’s good mode of living. They guide and inspire one to
lead a better life.
Orthodox Christianity came into close contact with the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
during the Sassanian period. Its confession of sins has been instrumental in creating
numerous Patets, penitence pieces in
late Middle Persian, in which all the possible sins are listed and repentance is
expressed for each of them in daily prayers faithfully recited by many.
Even children, who definitely lie outside the scope of adult
"sins," are made to recite them on certain occasions.
Islamic influence on the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
in Iran may be seen in the number of Zoroastrian shrines and the unconscious
ascribing of every event, good or bad, to God.
While the later Avesta would begin an act with Khshnaothra
Ahurahe Mazdâo (for the pleasure of Ahura Mazda), post-Sassanian prayers in
Zoroastrian Persian begin with be nâm-e
Îzad bakshâyande-ye bakhshâyeshgar-e mehrabân (In the name of God, the
compassionate, merciful, and kind), an echo of Bismillâhi al-Rahmân al-Rahîm. The same holds true about Peimân-e
Dîn or Dîn-no Kalmo.
It follows the Islamic profession of faith Shahâdah,
also known as Kalema-e Dîn among
Indo-Iranian Muslims. In fact, Din-no Kalmo is a mere Gujarati rendering of
Kalema-e Din. One may also see a
response to 99 names of Allah in the much popularized 101 names of "Hormazd."
These names have, with a few exceptions, no roots in the Avesta and Pahlavi
writings. They even lie outside the Hormazd Yasht, a late Avestan composition in
which God enumerates His names and speaks about their potentials. Furthermore,
the Muslim dominance has, for the past 1,400 years, made the Iranian
Zoroastrians behave very protectively.
Hindu influence on the Zoroastrians of the Indian sub-continent may be
found in the growing number of persons attracted to Hindu saints, gurus, sâiñs,
bâbâs, mâtâs, and shrines and other pilgrimage centers.
Turning the community into a closed, caste-like society, prostration
before the fire altar, tinting the forehead with ashes, and many social customs
are perhaps among older influences. Once
very strong, the attraction of the Theosophical order is on the decline.
Finally, the Good Religion is a universal, progressive,
and modernizing religion meant for the humanity at large. The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism,
in its present traditional form, is an ethnical, static, and closed religion of
a specific community The two stand apart in their outlook..
Present and Future
The present, with the drastic changes in social orders, the discoveries
by science and the rapid progress of technology, challenges every religion, old
and new. Many of the religious
rules and regulations appear to many a modern person as outdated, obsolete, and
impractical. It is mostly the
simple or blind faith, strengthened by interpretations, some of them esoteric,
which is keeping many religious dogmas in place.
Meanwhile, Zoroastrians are no more confined to certain specific cities
within their enclosed residential areas in Iran, India, and Pakistan.
They are fanning out of their old strongholds and thinning into far-flung
cities in which they can find a better and safer place to live. Estimates put the present number of Zoroastrians in North
American cities at 10,000 persons. The
number is increasing.
But the story in India and Pakistan is different.
There the number is fast decreasing because of more deaths and less
births. "Exodusic" emigration and excommunication of
persons marrying outside the community are also eroding the numbers.
Experts on demography are warning of the day, not far, when the community
will disappear. The faithful adherents of ethnical the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
express their confidence that it will never be so.
Zealous inbreeding, they confidently predict, will keep the community
alive and expanding. Some are awaiting the appearance of Bahram
Varjavand to see the balance totally tilted in their favor.
While many are alarmed at the dwindling number of "born"
Zoroastrians, non-Zoroastrian Iranians are showing ever-greater interest in
their ancestral religion. A jump of 60,000 persons in the recent census of Zoroastrians
in Iran has surprised many. The
number of persons approaching Zoroastrians and Zoroastrian associations in North
America and Europe to seek knowledge with a view to join the community is
increasing. Enjoying the relative
freedom, some educated Tajiks, people of Iranian stock in the Soviet Central
Asia, are also anxious to join the fold. Even
some Armenians have made inquiries. Moreover,
as more and more Americans and Europeans are getting acquainted with the name of
Zarathushtra and his teachings, the number of inquiries is showing a steady
rise. A few have declared themselves Zarathushtrians and others have expressed a
desire to do so.
Zoroastrians today see other religious orders in their neighborhood. They
establish friendship with their adherents. They stand fully exposed to
non-Zoroastrian environments. Mixed-marriages between Zoroastrians and
non-Zoroastrians have become a common feature, and the figures of
mixed-marriages are showing a steady rise at the loss of inter-community
weddings.
So far excommunication of persons marrying outside the community has been
the usual reaction by the self-styled "traditionalists" and
"orthodox" who consider themselves as the ultimate authority.
But the action does not seem to be working in face of new challenges
thrown by the fast changing circumstances wherever the Zoroastrians live, in
good old India and Pakistan, or in new permanent residential countries of
Europe, America, and Australia. All
these challenges cannot be brushed aside or taken lightly.
Conditions show that threats, intimidation, condemnation, boycott,
excommunication, refusal to recognize a so-called convert as Zarathushtrian,
blasphemy and abusive language do not work. On the contrary, they turn many to
become increasingly curious to know the truth.
The matter warrants serious consideration, both for the traditionalists
and the liberals.
Changing Attitudes
Attitudes are undergoing a change since Western scholars began taking an
increasing interest in the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism almost 200 years
ago. They have, with their translations and interpretations, brought the mute
Avestan and Pahlavi texts to speak for themselves. The Gathas, once outranked by
daily Avesta/Pazend recitation, are the subject of much discussion now.
The reformist movement started by those trained in Western schools has
gained much strength during the last century.
It has made, and continues to make, even the staunch traditionalists
to reform without acknowledging the change.
Gathic studies have helped some to believe that if the Good Religion is
restored to its pristine purity, it can well meet the challenge of social
changes, scientific progress and technological advances.
It can also live in friendly relations with other religions.
One of the subjects brought up by the movement has been
conversion/acceptance. It has been vehemently opposed by the traditionalists,
and condemned by their high priests in India.
Nevertheless, the process of accepting spouses is gaining favor.
First, many began supporting the idea that the children of a
mixed-marriage in which the father is Zoroastrian should be initiated into the
religion. Now, those who stand for
equality of the sexes are pressing for the admittance of the children of a
Zoroastrian wife. This opinion is
strong in Europe and North America and it appears that Zoroastrians of these two
continents will eventually admit both. Initiations of children of Zoroastrian
wives and non-Zoroastrian fathers are more common than occasional.
The number of Zoroastrians who believe in accepting converts is also
increasing. The Iranian Mobeds
Councils in Iran and North America have given a green light to acceptance but
are not, for obvious reasons, making any special efforts to propagate and win
converts. If a
"qualified" candidate, generally one marrying into a Zoroastrian
family, comes forward, he or she is quietly initiated
into the religion. There are several associations in North America who hold the
same opinion and occasionally follow the same policy. Against this, the traditionalists in America are already
protesting against the move and are quite vociferous in their protest.
The number of those in favor of acceptance in India and Pakistan is
considerable but so far no one has dared to come in open except a few.
It means prompt condemnation by the orthodox who wield the power in the
society. A bold step by a few in future may change the silent supporters of
acceptance and consequently change the balance.
Among the Zoroastrians in North America and Europe, differences of
opinion have divided the immigrants and their children into two main camps: the
orthodox and liberals. Although met with stiff opposition, echoed louder in
remote India than in North America and Europe, so far the odds have been in
favor of the liberals. They have
been successful in most of the unorthodox actions they have dared to take.
The orthodox, although never admitting, are yielding but very, very
slowly. The question now is:
how far the orthodox are going to stretch themselves to meet the changes
brought in by the liberals, especially by their own children who are growing
in a typically open western society?
The fear of a split, expressed mostly by the orthodox, may come true
because of the stand taken by the orthodox themselves. It
is they who alienate others by their condemnations, excommunications and
boycotts. Once alienated, a person
cannot join a traditional association, attend a ritual performed by a
traditional priest, enter a fire-temple in the Indian sub-continent, or receive
a Zoroastrian funerary end. Such
persons have two alternatives: go and get lost, as has been the case so far, and
as a result, further aggravate the present decline in population, or form their
own establishment. The alienated
and excommunicated persons, each feeling isolated and rejected, have never made
an effort to come together to find a solution to their isolation.
However, there are faint signs that some are thinking about the need for
a united action to solve the problem in open.
The Zarathushtrian Assembly
But apart from the divided community, a number of prominent Zartoshtis,
each in his or her city, have seriously been thinking of establishing a
well-organized body in North America and Europe to promote the religion of
Zarathushtra. They have been
consulting each other but so far no concrete steps have been taken to form
groups and start it. Only one group has felt encouraged to come forward and
establish an independent organization. The
Zarathushtrian Assembly is a non-profit, non-political religious corporation
established in 1990 in Los Angeles. It declared its existence while celebrating
Nowruz and Zarathushtra’s Birthday on 22 March 1991.
It is the first of its kind. It
is unique. Contrary to what happens in reformative movements, the
establishment of the Assembly is not a protestant, sectarian, or denominational
one, a separatist move to split apart from an existing body.
It has been formed as an outside organization, an organization
which does not identify itself with the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism
as an ethnic entity or with any of its associations, institutions, and other
sacerdotal, sanctified, social, financial, charitable, singular or federated
establishments. It lies outside the
closed communal religious fold of traditionalist and orthodox Zoroastrians.
It does not seek any recognition by any authority/authorities of the
traditional Zoroastrian community. In fact, it is not interested at all in any
of the traditional/orthodox activities of keeping their identity, maintaining
their rituals and ceremonies, safeguarding their culture, opposing
conversion/acceptance, excommunicating persons of mixed marriages, and
inbreeding to increase their number.
Nevertheless, the Zarathushtrian Assembly is a Zarathushtrian
organization. It has, in theory and practice, restored the religion of Good
Conscience to its Gathic purity and Zarathushtrian universality.
It reserves the right to call itself and its members by the name
"Zarathushtrian" and any of its variants—Zarathushti, Zartoshti,
Zoroastrian, Mazdayasni, and Behdin. Based on the Gathic Doctrine, it considers
itself the Authority to follow its course.
Membership of the Zarathushtrian Assembly is open to all those who, of
their own individual accord and after full consideration and conviction, choose
the Good Religion and wish to belong to its World Fellowship.
The Zarathushtrian Assembly belongs to the knowledgeable persons who are
sincerely committed to the good, Gathic religion of the Manthran, the thought-provoker, Righteous Zarathushtra. The Gathas
are the only guide in life for the members of the Assembly. Other Gathic texts
are of explanatory importance. Its
ceremonies are based on the Gathic texts. All
other parts of the Avesta and Pahlavi have only their moral, historical,
geographical, and anthropological values and therefore there is a placid place
for them outside the doctrinal scripture-the Staota Yesnya.
The Assembly teaches, preaches, and practices the religion of Good
Conscience. It does not convert
people simply because the Good Religion is a religion of personal choice and
does not indulge in persuaded, pursued, and pushed conversion.
It is opposed to such conversions. Any person who is a Zarathushtrian,
either by free choice or by birth and upbringing, and has knowledgeably
performed his or her initiation (navjote/sadreh-pûshi),
can apply for the membership of the Zarathushtrian Assembly, and upon the
approval of the application become a member and enjoy all the rights provided by
the Constitution and Bylaws of The Assembly.
Those who are interested in the Good Religion, and those who, for certain
reasons, are not in a position to get themselves initiated, may associate
themselves with The Assembly by becoming "friends."
Friends can participate in all Assembly activities with the exception of
elections and being elected to administrative positions. Assembly activities are
open to all. Even administrative meetings may be attended by any person brought
in by a member or with a prior request.
Conclusion
A common problem faced by followers of the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism,
Buddhism, Islam and Sikhism, all of them comparatively recent immigrants, in
Europe and North America, is adaptation to an entirely new environment.
Western culture and social orders are very different in these countries.
While the first generation of immigrants wants to preserve intact the
ways of life as they were in the old world, an impossible task in the long run,
the new generation looks at America and Europe as its homeland and its culture
as its own.
Meanwhile, the spiritual world is witnessing increased religious
activities. Inter-faith movements
are working to bring most of the existing religions closer in reciprocally
respectful meetings. It is gaining popularity.
Parallel to this movement, Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, Sikhs,
Mormons, Baha'is, and even Jews are preaching and are out to win people to their
respective religions by peaceful means. Conversion is the order of the day.
The Institutionalized Zoroastrianism has its own stand: Safeguard and continue the identity
and culture it has acquired through the ages of its existence, no matter what
the conditions prevail in the homeland or the acquired homes.
It has, however, a growing group of its members who are concerned.
They favor a reform, some fast and fundamental, others slow and surface.
Only time, now moving fast, will prove as to who is right and who is
erring.
As far as the Good Religion of Zarathushtra is concerned, the restoration
has given it a new impetus. With
the eternal "Primal Principles of Life" taught by Zarathushtra
approximately 4,000 years ago as its motive and goal, it stands modern and
progressive. It has entered the
peaceful competition and is determined to spread the Zarathushtrian Message far
and wide. After all, every
Zartoshti, orthodox or liberal, understanding or just chanting, has been wishing
in his or her daily prayers: "May
the religion of Good Conscience spread all over the seven regions of the
earth." Their prayers, clear signs show, have been answered.
<>
Atha jamyât yatha afrinâmahi.
******
Books Recommended for Further Information
The
Gathas:
1. Irach J.S. Taraporewala, The
Divine Songs of Zarathushtra, Bombay, 1951.
2. S. Insler, The Gathas of
Zarathustra, Leiden, 1975.
3. Ali A. Jafarey, The Gathas, Our
Guide, Cypress, California, 1989.
Later
Avesta, Pahlavi and Persian:
1. Sacred Books of the East,
ed. F. Maxmuller, volumes IV,XXIII, and XXXI for Avesta texts and volumes V,
XVIII, XXIV, and XXXVI for Pahlavi texts, Oxford, 1895, reprinted by Motilal
Banarasidas, Delhi, 1970.
2. The Persian Rivayats of
Hormezdyar Framarz and others, Ervad B.N. Dhabar, Bombay, 1932.
History
and Doctrine:
1. Dastur Maneckji Nusservanji Dhalla, History
of Zoroastrianism, New York, 1938. (The
best and most comprehensive book to read on the chronological development
of the Good Religion and the Institutionalized Zoroastrianism.)
2. Rustom Masani,
The Religion of the Good Life, London, 1954
3. Dastur Hormazyar K. Mirza, Outlines
of Parsi History, Bombay, 1974.
4. Prof. Mary Boyce, A History of
Zoroastrianism, three volumes, Leiden, 1975-91.
5. ................, Zaroastrians,
Their Religious Beliefs and Practices, London, 1979.
6. Erach J.S. Taraporewala, The
Religion of Zarathushtra, Bombay, 1980.
7. Homi B. Minocher Homji, O Wither
Parsis? Placate and Perish or
Reform and Flourish, Karachi, 1978.
8. ......................, Zoroastrianism,
contemporary perception of ancient wisdom, a search for the true meaning and
scope of zarathushtra’s gathas, Toronto, 1989.
9. Cyrus R. Pangborn, Zoroastrianism,
A Beleaguered Faith, 1982.
10. Ali A. Jafarey, The
Zarathushtrian Religion, a chronological perspective, 1992.
Rituals:
1. Jivanji Jamshedji Modi, The
Religious Ceremonies and Customs of the Parsees, Bombay, reprint 1986.
2. Mobed Ardeshir Azargoshasb, Marasem-e
Mazhabi va Adab-e Zarthoshtian (Religious Ceremonies and Customs of the
Zoroastrians) (Persian), Tehran, 2nd ed. 1979.
3. Ali A. Jafarey, Fravarane, I
choose for myself the Zoroastrian Religion, a guide for the initiation ceremony,
Westminster, California, 1988.
<>
4. .............., Zarathushtrian
Ceremonies based on the Gathas, Cypress, California, 1992.
Note:
The author has, in his research
essays in English and Persian,
discussed at length many of the points which are but briefly mentioned in this
book. If requested, copies of the original essays will be provided at the cost
price.
Ali Jafarey Answers His Critics
EDITOR'S NOTE: Dr. Jafarey has been one of the most
active and effective proponents of conversion to modern day
Zoroastrianism. Because of his activism he has attracted a number of
enemies. You have probably read some of his critics on the Internet. Now, he has set up his own website to answer their questions and accusations.
Many of these critics believe that once he is
dead and gone then the whole conversion movement will die. Nothing
could be further from the truth as the other scholars on this web page
prove.
Personally, I wish that Dr. J's critics could spend a several days with
him as I have. He is an 85 year old great grand-father. His love of
people and for Zarathushtra are unmistakable. He speaks over a
dozen languages and is widely respected as one of the most
knowledgeable scholars of the Gathas. At age 85 he keeps up a busy
schedule people half his age would envy ..... Stephen Williamson
05-08-2005
The Persian Rivayats # 236, # 237 & # 238
India Turns to Persia for Advise
Questions Written Circa 1480 AD.
Beginning In the fourteenth century priests from
India sent a series of questions to their counterparts in Persia. Each
question was answered by individual priests. Below are questions from
historic letters, written over 500 years ago.
They clearly show that the historic Zoroastrians accepted new converts
into the faith.
These Persian priests helped settle many disputes
in the Indian community. Below are quotes from the Persian Rivayats as
found on Joseph Peterson's excellent website www.avesta.org
# 236. How should Barashnom be administered to one of foreign faith?
Persian Priest Kama Bohra (tr. Dhabhar)
- Q: An infidel (aniri) or one of a foreign faith has set his heart
on the good religion, and Barashnom cannot be administered to
him for fear of others. What is the decision?
- A: It is said in the 5th fargard of the Vendidad that if any
person who has become riman is 60 farsangs away from a Barashnomgar
[qualified purifier] then he should proclaim (his case) aloud
to a person (on the way) who should purify him with gomez and
make (his body) dry (with dust). With a loud proclamation, he
should take the padyab of the bull and with loud proclamation,
it should also be poured on his head so that all parts (of the
body) may be wet and then he should make himself dry with dust
from the moisture of the padyab. He should wash himself with padyab
for 30 times and dry himself with dust and then wash himself with
water once: and he should yet abstain from whatever has been prepared
or is being prepared for Yasht and Yasna. One of a foreign faith
who sets his heart on the religion and who is riman should be
purified thus.
Persian Priest Kama Bohra and Kaus Kama (tr. Dhabhar)
- Q: If a person of a foreign faith who has his mind and speech
set on to the good religion becomes riman by nasa and if they
are unable to administer Barashnom to him on account of some who
are of bad nature, i.e., on account of this that the wicked tyrannize
over the virtuous, what is the decision?
- A: In the 8th fargard of the Vendidad, it is so enjoined that
if (such) persons are away from a Barashnomgar, i.e., between
them and the Barashmongar there is (a distance of) 30 farsangs
and if a person (from amongst them) becomes riman (vadyab), then
it is necessary that he should wash himself 15 times with padyab
and make (his body) dry with dust, and then he should go to a
Barashnomgar who will administer Barashnom to him. (He should
wash himself) for these 15 times for the reason that if a stream
or a river or plants come on his way, they are less afflicted.
- If he is 60 farsangs away from a Barashomgar, he should act
30 times as I have said, and then he should engage himself in
work, but should abstain from (the performance of) the Yasna-service
until the time he comes upon a Barashnomgar who administers Barashnom
to him.
- And one should act in the same way in the case of one of a
foreign faith who has set his heart on the good religion. Whatever
has been ordered (to be done in such a case) by the Herbad Payadar
from the religion has been enjoined in the 8th fargard of the
Vendidad, and the evidence thereof has been manifest in the Avesta:
- thrisatathwem. frasnatee thrisatathwen. upasatee (Vd. 8.98)
i.e., he should wash himself 30 times i.e., with padyab (or gomez)
and he should (thus) was himself 30 times: The commentary (of
the Avesta) is thus given. Let it be known that there is not manifest
(herein) the evidence of the Avesta as regards drying the body
with dust.
Persian Priest Shapur Bharuchi (tr. Dhabhar)
- Q: If one of a foreign faith who sets his heart on the good religion
becomes riman and for fear of others, the Barashnom cannot be
administered to him, what is the decision?
- A: It is said in the 8th fargard of the Vendidad that if that
Behdin is 100 farsangs away from a Barashnomgar and has become
riman, then he should recite patet before another Behdin. Thereafter
the (latter) Behdin may give him padyab so that he may wash his
head and body clean therewith and then make them dry with dust
for 30 times; then he should wash himself with pure water once.
Then he should abstain from whatever has been prepared for Yashts
and Yasnas. One of a foreign faith who sets his heart on to the
good religion should thus be ceremonially treated (parkikhtan)
and washed.
# 237. On peaceful and forcible conversion.
Persian Priest Kaus Mahyar:
Q: Can a grave-digger, a corpse-burner and a darvand
(one of a foreign faith) become Behdins (i.e., be converted to the
Mazdayasnian religion)?
A: If they observe the rules of
religion steadfastly and (keep) connection with the religion, and if no
harm comes on the Behdins (thereby), it is proper and allowable.
Persian Priest Nariman Hoshang:
Q: A Behdin turns darvand (i.e., goes over to another faith). If
he returns to the religion of the Behdins, is it allowed or not?
A: It is allowable. They should
convert him to the religion in the way prescribed). He should be
advised and admonished, should perform a patet and (then) Barashnom
should be administered to him. He should again engage himself in
performing penitential acts and should recant (his former deeds) Let it
be known that he should be allowed (to be retaken) in this way.
Persian Priest Shapur Bharuchi:
A: If a person (of a foreign faith) exercises tyranny over
a man of the good religion and tells him to turn Musalman with his
family, then out of helplessness he should commit suicide [lit. take
poison] but he should not turn Musalman.
Persian Priest Suratya Adhyarus:
Q: If Muslms convert a Behdin by force to Muhamedanism but the
latter's heart is not set on Muhamedanism. (What is the decision)?
A: Whenever (such a person) is converted by
force to Muhamedanism and if his heart and mind are not set on
Muhamedanism [the word is written in Avesta characters], then it is no
fault of his.
238. On the Treatment of juddins and on conversion.
Persian Priest Nariman Hoshang:
Q: What is the retribution for taking away anything by force from the juddins and appropriating it?
A: One should give four for one in the
spiritual world for (what is taken away by) oppression and violence,
but if (a juddin) shows enmity towards a Behdin, then it is allowable
to take away the thing from him by force.
Persian Priest Nariman Hoshang:
A: If slave-boys and girls have faith in the
good religion, then it is proper that Kusti should be (given to them to
be) tied, and when they become intelligent, attentive to religion and
steadfast, they should give them Barashnom and it is also proper and
allowable to eat anything out of their hands.
Yale University's Dr. Stanley Insler on World Zoroastrian Organizartion Website
"The
restriction concerning initiation into your religion arose at a time
when other religions threatened its existence. In the free world, such
threats hardly exist today. Zoroastrianism is a religion that honours
the freedom of choice among its most important principles, and in
essence this consists of the individual and personal choice of each
human being to ally himself on the side of good or evil in the world.
Because choice is a primary concept of the religion, it must also be
extended in an equally effective manner to the question of acceptance
into the faith of those people not born as Zoroastrians.
If a person
sees the benefits of the religion and chooses of his own free will to
enter it, it is a demonstration in itself of that person's decision to
support the forces of good in the world. It was exactly that way when
Zarathushtra first founded the faith, because we see in his great hymns
how he urges people to follow the path of righteousness by choosing to
follow the principles of Ahura Mazda. Should it be any different today?
The freedom to join the faith should be option left to every person's
choice. (from World Zoroastrian Website,
Read more about renowned scholar & translator Dr. Stanley Insler:
World Zoroastrian Organization http://www.w-z-o.org/
http://www.vohuman.org/Author/Insler,Stanley.htm
"Zarathushtra was and is in very Truth, the world teacher. His message is meant for all humanity for all time."
Dr Taraporewala, (Parsis scholar & university chancellor)
See These Websites About Zoroastrianism
My Conversion & Photos from the Ceremony
Mrs. Dina Mcintyre is one of the most respected modern Zoroasterian
scholars. She is respected by almost everyone on either side of the
question of Conversion. Dina is a born Parsi, who married a man
of Irish desent. For years she was ostraschized by many of her friends
and family, She has endured decades of name calling, returning ther
hatred with kindness and more knowledge. Dina is one of the main people
responsible for me selecting this faith over others.
I am constantly
amazed at her wisdom and love for both Zarathustra and his followers -
Parsi, Iranian, Euro, Hispanic or whoever from whereever. She deeply
believes that Zarathustra's teachings are important for the whole world
to hear. She has published many articles, some of which, along
with a bio and photo are at www.vohuman.org I almost forgot to
mention: Dina Mcintyre has an active corporate law practice on the east
coast. Perhaps this is where she gets her shrewd negotiating skills and
ability to research the most likely answer to the riddles posed by
Zarathustra's songs.
These were sent as a series of emails to the diverse Zarathustrain groups on the Internet.
Conversions by Dina
Here is the first one.
-----Original Message-----
From: dinamci@aol.com
To: zoroastrianfriends@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com;
zoroastrianacceptance2@yahoogroups.com; Ushta@yahoogroups.com;
xsatra@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:32 pm
Subject: 1. Acceptance in Y Avestan texts
Dear Friends,
In fulfillment of my promise to Maneck B, here is the first installment
of evidence from Avestan texts (that are not the Gathas) which show
that our religion was a universal one, which accepted anyone who wished
to belong to it. This evidence is just a sampling. It is
not intended to be exhaustive (or exhausting!).
Commentary on the Ahuna Yairya: The Ahuna Vairya (Yatha Ahu
Vairyo prayer) is in Gathic Avestan, and in the same meter as the
Ahunavaiti Gatha. Many scholars believe that it was composed by
Zarathushtra himself. Several centuries after Zarathushtra, this
prayer was commented on in Yasna 19.6, a later Avestan text in the
Younger Avestan language (not in Gathic), which has Ahura Mazda
making the following promise to everyone in the entire world:
"And whoever in this world of mine which is corporeal shall mentally
recall...a portion of the Ahuna-vairya, and ..... shall then utter it
aloud, shall worship thus...I will bring his soul over the Bridge of
Kinvat, I who am Ahura Mazda,....." (Mills translation as it appears in
SBE Vol. 31, page 261).
The Farvardin Yasht was also composed several centuries after
Zarathushtra, in the Younger Avestan language. It expresses the
hope and belief that the teachings of Zarathushtra will spread all over
the entire earth. It says in verse 94: "...and there will
the good Law of the worshippers of Mazda come and spread through all
the seven Karshvares of the earth." Yasht 13.94.
The fravashi of the Younger Avestan texts is believed by many
Zoroastrians, to be a reference to the divine within (although opinions
differ). The Farvardin Yasht reverences the fravashi in all
things. As applied to different human races, verse 143 of this
Yasht reverences the fravashis of good men and women in various
enumerated countries -- Turanian, Sairimyan (which a footnote explains
is Europe and Western Asia), Saini (which a footnote explains is
China), and the verse concludes with reverence for the fravashis of
good men and women "... in all countries....." (as translated by
Darmesteter, in SBE Vol. 23, pp 226 - 227).
In the next installment, I will show you some evidence on the tradition
of acceptance that is reflected in the Khordeh Avesta prayers, which
were composed in Sasanian times.
Wishing you the best,
Dina G. McIntyre.
Here is the second one.
-----Original Message-----
From: dinamci@aol.com
To: zoroastrianfriends@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com;
ushta@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrianacceptance2@yahoogroups.com;
xsatra@yahoogroups.com; creatingawareness-owner@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 9:51 am
Subject: 2 Accptnce Phl and Skt Gathas
Dear Friends,
I know I said that I would limit my evidence on acceptance to
post-Gathic texts. I did this to keep the Gathas out of this
controversy. But I think I can provide you with some evidence
which is not readily available, and which you may find useful.
We all know the famous verse Y31.3, which has been translated by so
many scholars -- both Zoroastrian and non-Zoroastrian -- as evidence
for the fact that Zarathushtra considered his teachings to be for all
the living.
Many traditionalists, including some high priests in India, have argued
that these translations of Y31.1 are incorrect, inaccurate, and they
typically claim that such translations are the works of "western"
scholars, ignoring the many Zoroastrian scholars who have also so
translated this verse.
Well, the oldest translation of the Gathas that we have today, is the
Pahlavi translation. The second oldest translation we have is
Neryosangh Dhaval's translation of the Pahlavi translation, into
Sanskrit. Both these translations have been translated into
English by the late Professor Mills in his book, A Study of the Five
Zarathushtrian Gathas, (Oxford 1892, AMS Press Reprint, 1997). In
this work the English translation of the Pahlavi, was derived from a
collation of manuscripts from all known codices. Mills'
translation of Neryosangh was derived from a collation of five ancient
texts of Neryosangh's Sanskrit translation. Referring to Mazda's
teachings, these Pahlavi and Sanskrit translations translate the last
part of Y31.3 as follows:
Mills' free translation: "...declare it, that we teach all living the Faith." (p 57).
Mills' literal translation of the Pahlavi: "...tell that to us...thus the living of all kinds believe." (pp 56-57).
Mills' literal translation of Neriosangh's Sanskrit translation:
"... which wisdom is enlightening or awaking all the living." (p
57).
Thus we see that the two oldest translations of the Gathas -- made long
before the present controversy on acceptance arose -- state that
Zarathushtra's teachings are for all the living.
Wishing us the best,
Dina G. McIntyre.
NUMBER 3 IS MISSING
I think my numbering must have been mixed up. Here is # 4, but I could not find #3.
-----Original Message-----
From: dinamci@aol.com
To: zoroastrianfriends@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com;
zoroastrianacceptance2@yahoogroups.com;
creatingawareness@yahoogroups.com; xsatra@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:11 am
Subject: Acceptance 4 Khordeh Av Prayers
Dear Maneck B and Friends,
The Khordeh Avesta prayers, were collated and composed as prayers
during Sasanian times, more than 1,400 years after Zarathushtra.
Because most people no longer understood Avestan, the Sasanian priests
took parts of the Avesta (from both the Gathas and also from Younger
Avestan parts), added parts in the language of the day, and thus gave
their folks prayers, most of which the reciter could
understand. Honesty compels me to admit that I do not say
all these prayers (much to the disappointment of my brother, who chants
them beautifully). But I like to read them in translation, to see
what ideas they contain (as part of my personal quest for the truths of
mind and spirit -- asha).
Many of these prayers specifically contain language to the effect that
the religion is for all mankind. Here are a few
examples. The translation is by T. R. Sethna, in his book Khordeh
Avesta (3d Ed. reprinted 1980):
The quotation I like the best is in the Doa Nam Setayeshne which says:
"Homage to the all knowing tolerator, who sent through Zarathushtra
Spitman . . . teachings of religion for the people of the world
so that they may have friendship, inculcate faith and inner wisdom and
knowledge gained from hearing. For the information and guidance of all
men who are, who were, and who will be hereafter..." (p
63). This quotation reveals several things: First, a
beautiful perception of our religion – as being one which
promotes friendship, knowledge, and wisdom for all mankind.
Second, that it is not a coercive religion, but is available "for
information and guidance". And third, that Mazda is
tolerant. I really like that.
The Din-no-Kalmo (Pazand) speaks of "...The good, righteous and complete religion which God has sent for the world..." (p. 169).
The Doa Tandarosti (Pazand) prays "... May the religion of Zarathushtra be a source of glory unto all mortals..." (p 173).
The Meher Niyaesh says: "May the knowledge, extent and fame of
the commandments of the most excellent Mazda worshipping religion ever
increase over the world, over all the seven regions, so may it be."
(page 61). Almost identical words are also found in the Khorshed
Niyaesh (p 51), the Mah Bakhtar Niyaesh (pages 71 - 73), the
Ardvi Sur Niyaesh (p 83), the Atash Niyaesh (p 93), the
Ardibehesht Yasht (p 123), the Sarosh Yasht Hadokht (p 141), and
the Sraosh Yasht Wadi (p 165).
We pride ourselves on the fact that Zoroastrians are famed for their
honesty. One cannot help but wonder how anyone can truthfully and
sincerely say these prayers daily, or weekly, or perhaps just on good
occasions, and yet insist that the religion prohibits the admission of
non-Zoroastrians.
It is important to remember that Zarathushtra does not teach aggressive
proselytizing. On the contrary, he teaches that each person
should make choices for himself, after reflecting with a clear
mind. This teaching requires us to exercise tolerance, and
respect other people’s choices of religion. But this
teaching also requires us to accept and respect a person who wishes to
take Zarathushtra’s path to the Divine, as Zoroastrians have
done for most of their history -- from Zarathushtra's time, until long
after the Arab invasion (as we shall see).
Wishing us the best,
Dina G. McIntyre.
There is #5.
-----Original Message-----
From: dinamci@aol.com
To: zoroastrianfriends@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com;
Ushta@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrianacceptance2@yahoogroups.com;
xsatra@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:16 am
Subject: Acceptance 5, Vendidad
Dear Maneck B and Friends,
Most if not all high priests in India have expressed the opinion that
acceptance is forbidden by the religion. But the fact that they
say so, does not make it so. They have to cite chapter and verse,
and this, to date, they have not been able to do -- not a single
ancient text, or prayer, or law, or tradition.
A corollary to the practice of non-acceptance is the treatment of
Zoroastrian women who have married non-Zoroastrians.
According to the high priests of India, they are no longer considered
Zoroastrians, cannot enter a fire temple, and their children cannot be
admitted to the religion. In support of this practice, some
priests have cited Chapter 18, verse 62 of the Vendidad, which
(according to them) "prohibits union between a Mazdayasni and
non-Mazdayasni." (Quoting from page 2 of a letter dated August
22, 1990 from Dastur Kotwal to The Chairman & Trustees Bombay Parsi
Punchayet, which letter is initialed on each page by Kotwal, and signed
at the end with his full name and titles).
However, this verse of the Vendidad which is in the Younger
Avestan language, does not refer to interfaith marriages at
all. Verses 61 and 62 state that Mazda is caused grief by a
courtesan (Jahi), regardless of whether she sleeps with a Mazda
worshipper or with one who is not a Mazda worshipper. (Sacred
Books of the East, Vol. 4, page 200, and footnotes 1 and 2,
all as translated by Darmesteter).
The Pahlavi translation of the Vendidad in its commentary on this
verse, translates the word "Jahe" as an adulteress.
(Behramgore T. Anklesaria, Pahlavi Vendidad, published for
the K.R. Cama Oriental Institute, 1949, page 365 --
366). An adulteress is a married woman who sleeps with
someone who is not her husband. Whether the man is a
Mazdayasni or a non-Mazdayasni should make no difference in deciding
whether an adultrous act is "right" or "wrong".
So this verse has nothing to do with interfaith marriages. It
speaks against prostitution (according to the Avestan text) and against
adultery (according to the Pahlavi commentary). With one-sided
justice, this verse makes no mention of the fellows who enjoy the
woman's favors. But that is another story.
If any priest or lay person knows of any ancient Z text (i.e. written
before the migration to India) which specifically prohibits acceptance,
I would like them to cite chapter and verse, so that I can look it up.
Wishing us the best,
Dina G. McIntyre.
Here is #6
-----Original Message-----
From: dinamci@aol.com
To: zoroastrianfriends@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com;
ushta@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrianacceptance2@yahoogroups.com;
xsatra@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:14 am
Subject: Acceptance 6 Aerpatistan and Nirangistan
Dear Maneck B and Friends,
There is an ancient text called the Aerpatastan and Nirangastan, which
is described (according to S. J. Bulsara's translation) as "being
portions of the great Husparam Nask". The text covers many
aspects of the practice and administration of the religion in the
society of that day.
It states that if a child of another religion wishes to come over to
the Good Religion, then guardianship of the child is vested in the
person who is the greatest and most beneficent in the entire district,
even though a person of another religion comes claiming
guardianship over the child. (Book I, Chap IV, verse 28,
page 38 of the S. J. Bulsara translation, published by the Bombay Parsi
Panchayet, 1915). To be fair, the text does not say that the
person claiming guardianship was the child's parent or family.
What is clear, however, is that if even a child (presumably one
old enough to make an informed choice) chooses the Zoroastrian
religion, the community accepted it, and took care of it. How
different from those Zoroastrians today who say that the religion
prohibits Zoroastrian couples from adopting non-Zoroastrian
children. I would be very interested to see what textual
authority they claim for such exclusionary actions.
In one part of this text, it takes for granted the right of a
non-Zoroastrian to convert to Zoroastrianism, and focuses on
prohibiting forced conversions. It states that a man who
converts to the Zoroastrian religion should not force his wife to
convert. He should not strike her, or stop supporting her, or
"forsake her treacherously", nor does she "pass from the condition of
being his wife", because she refuses to convert. (Book I,
Chap. V, verses 4 and 5, page 40 of the S. J. Bulsara
translation). It is only fair to note that this text also
recommends that as long as the wife refuses to convert, the husband
should not sleep with her. Whether such advice was taken by the
converted husband is not known. While I don't think priests have
any business telling a husband whether or not he can sleep with his
wife, it is clear that, the object was encouragement (though not
coercion) to join the religion, not a refusal to accept anyone who
wished to join.
In another part, this text (the Aerpatastan and Nirangistan)
states: "When a slave professing any other creed comes over to
the Good Religion he then comes a direct subject of the King of Kings
who shall give his price....." (Aerpatistan and Nirangastan, Chap. IV,
verse 29, page 38 of the Bulsara translation). The Fortification
Tablets found in Persepolis indicate that it was built by laborers and
craftsmen who were paid wages, and so could not have been slave
labor. I do not know to what extent ancient Zoroastrians owned
slaves (or whether such persons were actual slaves or indentured
servants). However, the Persian empires of ancient times included
many countries and many races, which traveled, traded, and mingled
freely throughout the empire. So it is noteworthy that this text
does not limit the acceptance of slaves by race -- accepting only those
slaves who are Persians.
It is always distressing (to me at least) to read anything in any Z
text which does not comport with the high ethical standards of the
Gathas. But we should remember that the later texts reflect
diverse and changing cultural traditions which (sometimes wrongly)
resulted in different perceptions as to the rights of different
individuals. Two hundred years ago, slavery was considered normal
in the United States, and women were not able to vote. It took
two Constitutional amendments (and a civil war in the case of slavery)
to change both of those time-bound (and wrong) cultural traditions.
One of the things that make me love the Gathas, is that they tell us to
use our minds/hearts to try to figure out what is true and right, and
implement it with our words and actions. As we grow in
understanding, what may seem right to one generation or culture, may
seem very wrong to another. The beauty of the Gathas is that they
enable us to grow, as individuals, and as societies, as our perceptions
of what is true and right change.
Wishing us the best
Dina G. McIntyre.
Dear Maneck B and Friends,
The Council of Mobeds of Teheran in Iran, have expressed a very
different opinion from that of the high priests of India.
In the early 1980s, an American, Joseph Peterson, after long study,
first by himself and then under a Zoroastrian priest, concluded that he
wanted to become a Zoroastrian, and wished to have his navjote
done. An Iranian Mobed, Bahram Shahzadi of the United
States, a luminous soul, wrote a letter to the Council of Mobeds of
Tehran, requesting guidance. In an official written opinion (No.
466 issued in May of 1983), the Council responded. Referring to
Mobed Shahzadi’s letter, the Council's Opinion states: (in
English translation):
"… The Council discussed the contents of your letter at
an official meeting. You have, in your detailed letter, asked the
opinion of the Council regarding the acceptance of people into
Zoroastrianism. Let us glimpse through Zoroastrian scriptures and
find an answer to it."
Notice, we have no fatwa here, no mandate, no "my way or the
highway!". The Council invites us to accompany it in an
exploration of evidence. The Opinion starts by quoting from the
Gathas, and concludes:
"The above stanzas show that Asho Zarathushtra does not advocate force
to spread the religion, but has kept it open for all . . . . . He has
never reserved it for the Aryans, or for a particular caste of
people. Yasna 46.12 shows that the religion had spread into
the Turanian lands during Asho Zarathushtra’s lifetime.
Because he praises Friyana a Turanian Chief who supported Mazdayasna."
The Council's Opinion next gives references to later texts and concludes:
"The above citations show that the propagation and promotion of the
religion is a meritorious deed…If we Zoroastrians
believe that our religion is one of the great living religions of the
world and that it is beneficial to all the peoples of the world, we
….. must accept persons who want to embrace the
Zoroastrian religion."
This 1983 Opinion of the Council of Mobeds of Tehran is a shining
example of leadership, courage, learning, and civility. It has my
sincere respect and admiration.
Wishing us the best,
Dina G. McIntyre.
Dear Friends,
(Maneck, I have not specifically addressed you as that seems to make you uncomfortable, and I don't wish to do so).
In the centuries that followed the migrations of some Zoroastrians to
India, disputes arose among the priests in India about what the
religion allowed and did not allow. On various occasions over the
course of several centuries, Zoroastrian priests in India sent
emissaries to the Zoroastrian Mobeds of Iran to get answers to their
questions. These questions and answers are in written form, and
have been preserved in texts called the Rivayats. I do not have
copies of most of these Rivayats, and the following information and
quotations from the Rivayats are taken from an excellent article by
Professor K. D. Irani, and Farrokh J. Vajifdar. ("Conversion in
Zoroastrianism, The Truth Behind the Trumpery", as it appears in
"Humata", Journal of the Center for Ancient Iranian Studies, Winter
1998 -- 1999 issue).
One such Rivayat was given in response to questions taken to Iran by
Nariman Hoshang in 1478 A.D (more than 800 years after the Arab
invasion). In one answer, the Iranian mobeds gave the opinion
that slave boys and girls in Zoroastrian houses in India could be
initiated into the religion with sudreh and kusti, and when they became
intelligent, attentive and steadfast in the religion should be given
barashnum (the cleansing ritual).
In 1599 A.D., the Kaus Mahyar Rivayat gave the opinion that even
non-Zoroastrians who performed burials and cremations, should be
allowed into the religion, provided that they were steadfast and
occasioned no harm to the faith.
Finally, there is the Itthoter Rivayat of 1773. Here, 78
questions were prepared by the priests of Broach and Surat in India,
and taken to Iran by Mobed Kaus Jalal. The replies to these
questions were given in writing, signed by nine Iranian dasturs
(priests), and nine religiously versed behdins [lay persons, the word
literally means followers of the Good Religion]. One of the
questions asks whether the religion allows the remains of deceased boys
and girls who were servants, and who had been converted to
Zoroastrianism, to be placed in the dakhma.
In their unanimous answer, the nine Iranian Dasturs and nine lay
Zarathushtis, replied that it was indeed allowed. And their
response included a clear denunciation of those who advocated
exclusionary practices.
This Rivayat also answered the related question of whether it was
appropriate to refuse to convert these young servant boys and girls as
follows: "Here we have heard from ….. the
dasturzade Dastur Kaus, worthy successor of the deceased Dastur Rostam,
that several dasturs, mobeds and behdins across most of the country
[Hindustan] stand in the way ….. and have agreed not to
teach those youngsters the Avesta and not to convert them to the din-i
beh-i mazdayasnan. This is unreasonable and alien to the tradition. May
the Beloved ones prosper! In the second fargard of the
Jud-div-dad the Creator of the righteous material world has ordered the
honourable Zaratusht Esfantaman anushe-ravan to lead all men to the
Din-i Beh-i, to the Main Path, to edify His joy, His glory, and His
honour….. It is a very great merit and a righteous
good deed ….. those who hinder this and are against it
are not even aware of the Origin and of the other world. They
proceed along the path of aberration and vanity and according to the
religion it is not possible to define them as Behdins, since if they
were Behdins, they would increase the Din-i Beh-i." In
quoting from this Rivayat, Irani and Vajifdar say that they have
followed the Vitalone translation, with minor changes for ease of
reading, and that the translation of Ervad Shehryarji Bharucha, is in
accord.
One can only feel deep respect, admiration, and affection, for these
nine dasturs and nine behdins of 18th century Iran, who lived with
severe persecution, and yet signed their names to this document
expressing opinions which could have earned them death, but which were
nevertheless true to the teachings of Zarathushtra, and the traditions
of the religion.
Wishing us the best,
Dina G. McIntyre.
Dear Friends,
This is the last in my series of posts on Acceptance.
In the Gathas, Zarathushtra implies that the Divine is immanent
(present) in all things. A later Avestan text, Yasna 17.11,
expresses this beautiful thought by speaking of the fire in all things
-- in men and animals, in trees and plants, in the earth
and mountains, in clouds and lightning, in the entire
world. So too does the Bundahishn (a post-Sasanian, Pahlavi text).
A later Persian poet, Jami, expressed this same thought of the divine within, in one of his poems. He said:
"The essences are each a separate glass
Through which the Sun of Being’s light is passed.
Each tinted fragment sparkles in the sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One."
(as translated by Dr. S. H. Nasr).
If our religion teaches that the Divine is immanent (present) in all
men and women, of what relevance is ethnicity? Can we
reject any person without rejecting the Divine which is immanent
(present), within such a person?
Those who favor exclusion contend that this rule is not a question of
rejecting anyone. Rather, it is a question of obeying God's
will. They argue that it is God's will that each person should
remain in the religion of one’s birth, and that to change one's
birth religion is an act of defiance against God's will.
Well, God caused us to be born naked. Is it His will that we not
wear clothes? He caused us to be born ignorant. Is it
an act of defiance against God to get an education? Some babies
are born sick, or with birth defects. Is it His will that such
babies not be given medical treatment to save their lives?
What if one's parents are atheists? Is it an act of defiance
against God to want to believe in Him? What if one's parents are
religious fanatics? Is it God's will that the child of such
parents must be a religious fanatic also, and must massacre and torture
people as his parents do?
If Mazda is the God of the Universe, how can anyone shrink His
relevance to only 100,000 born Zoroastrians on this planet of several
billion people (to say nothing of the Vulcans and the Klingons!).
How did we sink from the high nobility of Zarathushtra’s
thought to such a narrow view?
Wishing us the best,
Dina G. McIntyre.