The interestingly charted "Callout to candidates” questionnaire and the responses in "Clarification by candidates” (Parsiana, May 7-20, 2022) have prompted some reflections.
Do not questions in favor of tenancy, converting existing leave and license agreements to tenancies and Rs 750 service charges, pose a conflict of interest for candidates residing in Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) flats?
Since the candidates have unanimously responded that matters related to religious tenets and practices should be left to the high priests, should these questions be at all considered by the voters or talked about by the candidates?
Regarding flats being auctioned to the highest bidder, doesn’t the outgoing tenant receive a percentage of the share from the proceeds? How are such outgoing tenancy cases being handled?
I wonder why there are as many as 10 mixed responses such as "No,” "Can’t say” and "Maybe” to flats being given on L&L? Is there an alternative to L&L, other than tenancy?
A thumping 14 have said "Yes” to being in favor of constructing more housing. Are these to be affordably subsidized for the poor and lower income group?
Regarding augmenting the BPP’s finances, amongst several suggestions made, a common answer by nine candidates is to "build ownership flats.” One should first reflect on the status of the existing ownership buildings in several of the BPP colonies since the 1970s. Has the land been conveyed to these ownership building societies formed by the BPP? The lingering issues with these societies in BPP colonies need to be addressed. HOMI R. MULLAN
homi-mullan@hotmail.com
Your comprehensive survey of the views of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trusteeship candidates was interesting ("Callout to candidates” and "Clarification by candidates,” Parsiana, May 7-20, 2022).
As an outward-looking Zoroastrian, I was dismayed by the responses of the many aspiring trustees. Why should we be disinclined towards a world body which accepts non-Parsi spouses as members? The Gathas are replete with references to Zoroastrianism being a universal religion. Even in the Khordeh Avesta there is mention of the ancient Zoroastrians "praying for the safe return of our priests who went out to preach Zoroastrianism” — Stoom No Kardo, Fravardin Yasht and Aivisuthram Gah. Din Yasht and Zamyad Yasht also reiterate this prime message of Zoroastrianism.
We are (believed to be) a tolerant community. Then what’s the objection to performing the navjotes of children of Parsi mothers and non-Parsi fathers? Stop this dichotomy. By refusing to accept the children of Parsi mothers and non-Parsi fathers as Parsis we are signing the death warrant of the community.
Why are we blind to the need of allowing female mobedyars? Iran has taken an exemplary lead in that direction while we remain obstinately hidebound.
Why should not every Parsi have the choice over the mode of disposal of his/her body? Most seem to be in favor of dakhmenashini while 15% opt for cremation. BEHRAM T. DASTUR
dasturbehram@gmail.com
Fifteen candidates are in the fray for the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trusteeship elections. Of the sitting trustees Armaity Tirandaz, Kersi Randeria, Viraf Mehta and Xerxes Dastur are tried and tested war horses. Noshir Dadrawala felt he was wasting his time and energy and opted out of the contest.
The community has a wealth of talent, expertise and ability but able people often shy away at the prospect of functioning in such a hostile environment. Former BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta has served for 21 years but demonstrates no intention of passing the baton to others. Candidate Anahita Desai will no doubt get some sympathy votes, but she has a track record of dedicated social service. The community had earlier objected to a husband wife duo serving on the board together.
It is difficult to see that seven dedicated like-minded people who can work harmoniously in the interest of the community are elected. Some candidates have a grouse against the BPP on housing matters which they hope to settle once in office. Several candidates are more inclined to warmongering than peace.
Why do we not accept that with the extinction of the vultures, who were the main functionaries for efficient dakhmenashini, the system has ceased to function? We fallaciously tell the community that if a Zoroastrian corpse is not subjected to dakhmenashini the soul is tortured, tormented and will not find any reprieve in the next world. Does such a highly educated community lack simple common sense?
At present in all places where there are no dakhmas the community has established aramgahs where the dead are buried with all traditional rituals and ceremonies. Why should prayers and religious rituals be denied if people in Bombay choose other methods of disposal? Offering freedom of choice is the right way to bring peace and harmony in the community.
The younger generation is fed up with rigid stubbornness. While retaining our unique Parsipanu, let us encourage the community to become progressive and enlightened. Reforms mean a change for the better and there is no shame in calling ourselves reformists.
The newly elected trustees will have the responsibility of taking us out of the darkness and leading us to knowledge and reforms. Are the prospective trustees ready for this challenge?
PIROJA HOMI JOKHI
piroja.jokhi@gmail.com