The resolution of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) demanding affidavits regarding a woman married outside the fold averring her Zoroastrian faith, once by herself during her lifetime and the second time by her relative or next of kin after her demise in order to have her body consigned to the Towers of Silence, is retrograde ("A second anniversary affidavit,” Editorial Viewpoint, Parsiana, September 7, 2010). The resolution has been passed without due application of mind. A letter, much less an affidavit, from her stating that she continues to profess the Zoroastrian faith and wishes to be consigned to the Towers of Silence upon her demise should be enough.
If a woman marries outside her faith and has been converted to the faith of her spouse why would she want to use the system of dakhmenashini when she does not believe in or follow the Zoroastrian religion? Such a resolution could only be the Frankenstein like brainchild of WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) through its two trustees on the board.
Without vultures the system of dakhmenashini has collapsed and even some of the staunchest Zoroastrians shy away from the thought of ending up in the dakhmas today. Many opt for dakhmenashini out of the fear that their last rites, the geh sarana ceremony, sarosh no kardo and the uthamna on the morning of the fourth day will not be allowed to be performed by the priests who are under the threat of excommunication.
How many indignities are going to come the way of our womenfolk? God save us from such defenders of the faith.
DARA M. KHODAIJI
dara_mk@hotmail.com
Before overstepping their brief as custodians of our community’s mammoth public charity trust, the six administrating Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trustees should introspect to assess if they are morally worthy of their elected post, albeit they were voted to it.
Instead of making ill-conceived and unjust resolutions tantamount to issuing unconstitutional diktats against women who have married outside the community, the not so magnificent six should first glance inwards and lead by example, like their seventh colleague.
The WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) associated wife of an incumbent trustee has condescendingly moralized: "When a woman undergoes a religious marriage with someone who is not from her community, it is assumed she has left her old religion. This is not so under the Special Marriage Act. This is something that has been there for years. I have never questioned it as a woman.” As a woman herself, this person should have questioned the objectionable law discriminating against those women whose intercommunity marriages are equally preordained in heaven just like hers to a community member was.
How can such an infamous resolution give legal backing to an old custom? How will the BPP implement this impractical decree that will not stand up to logical debate apart from being unworkable in actual practice? At the rate the BPP is finding reasons for restraining consigning of Parsi bodies to the Towers of Silence, and with several Zoroastrians already opting for alternate methods of disposal, there will gradually be a dearth of ruvaans (dead bodies) to be consigned at Doongerwadi.
Leading lights who have taken up cudgels to fight against the unfair banning of priests who opt to perform the last rites for devout Parsis desiring cremation should now join forces to include women affected by this retrograde resolution as well as those denied entry to fire temples because their spouses are not Parsis. In fact, every one affected by the archaic diktats by the BPP should form a common platform to combat the slew of unwarranted new policies that cause faction and upheaval in our peace loving, cultured and educated community.
MICKIE SORABJEE
nashmick@hotmail.com
I have received your interesting magazine today and read "A second anniversary affidavit” (Editorial Viewpoint, Parsiana, September 7, 2010) about the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) making it mandatory for the families of Zoroastrian women who have married out to provide a second affidavit stating that they were practicing Zoroastrians.
A death in any family causes shock and grief. When a woman dies, the grief is often greater, irrespective of caste, as every mother is very dear and special to a family. When a death occurs we have to run to the municipal authority, the Doongerwadi office and the agiary’s panthaky, which puts a great deal of pressure on nuclear Parsi families. Think about the plight of the family of an outmarried Parsi woman where the non-Parsi members are not familiar with the formalities. They would have to depend on some Parsi to guide them. Making a second affidavit compulsory at such a time would amount to deliberately creating hurdles for them.
It also means that when the living Parsi woman solemnly affirms that she is following the Zoroastrian religion you don’t believe her. But, after her death, when her non-Parsi family or Parsi relatives file the second affidavit, you solemnly believe them. The fate of the body of the dear departed is left to the mercy of our elected representatives.
Suppose the second affidavit is filed and submitted, but a person who harbors a grudge or a jilted Parsi lover wants to settle scores with the family of the deceased and comes up with a cooked up story that the departed woman was not a practicing Zoroastrian. Will the BPP trustees be able to discriminate between what is correct and what is deliberately fabricated? Why are the BPP trustees inviting trouble for themselves? Do they have enough time to decide on the merits of the second affidavit? Don’t forget that even women married outside the community have the right to vote for BPP trustees as they are still practicing Zoroastrians.
If the homes established by Mother Teresa can welcome persons of any faith and give them a respectable burial why can’t Parsis come forward and take over the body of the departed women and perform the last rites as per Zoroastrian customs to show the world that we do care for our community members? On one hand the BPP wants every Parsi to follow dakhmenashini and on the other the trustees shun Parsi women married to non-Parsis by creating obstacles.
Just as Doongerwadi has a priest available round the clock to perform the ceremonies, the BPP must appoint a notary or a legal representative to prepare and file the affidavit at the time of death. Will our trustees organize this to reduce the pressure on the family of the deceased?
The people on the BPP board should use their creativity to benefit the community instead of becoming involved in disputes and legal battles and then pointing fingers at some group or the other as being responsible for the high legal expenses incurred from the community funds.
NAUZER PESIKAKA
npesikaka@rediffmail.com
Here comes another sweeping fatwa from the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) requiring two affidavits — one before death and another after death — swearing that a Parsi woman married to a non-Parsi has retained her religion, in case she wishes to be consigned to the Towers of Silence.
Why this bias? Why should only Parsi women have to prove their credentials time and again? Many Parsi men married out of the community have relinquished their religion in favor of that of their wives. So why not have this legal document signed by them as well? It is known that many of these men retain their names but are non-practicing Parsis, and the same goes for their children, but the BPP does not have the guts to touch them as they have famous surnames. I request the BPP to desist from such farmans (diktats) that are only dividing our small community further. The sugar from the Parsi race, of which we are so proud, is gradually turning sour, thanks to them.
Let the BPP trustees concentrate on issues like health, education, old age, housing, scholarships as well as controlling the properties and funds entrusted in their care during their stipulated tenure. Let individuals and their conscience take care of themselves. Why must the BPP play God?
RODA DARA HAKIM
Baroda
vadhakim@yahoo.com