| Avesta -- Zoroastrian Archives | Contents | Prev | saga5 | Next | Glossary |
This electronic edition copyright 2003 by Soli Dastur. Used with permission.
NOTE: You will need a Gujarati font installed to read some of this document.
We had written from New York and made arrangements to stay at the boarding-house of a retired British officer of the Indian Military Service. Accordingly, on reaching London by the end of August, we boarded there. The first Parsi to set foot in this capital city of the British Empire was the son of Rustom Maneck Seth, the one-time broker of the East India Company, who had gone there in 1723 to settle his claims with the company. But the first to establish a business firm and to settle there was the Cama family in 1855. Thereafter, some large and small firms or shops were opened there, most of which have closed down now. A good number of students continue to go for studies to England and Scotland. Indian doctors carryon a panel practice in the poorer quarters of London, amongst whom approximately fifty Zoroastrian physicians have made a good beginning. Besides these, a few other families have settled there permanently. On Jamshedi Navroze or Pateti there is a fairly large gathering of Parsis who go there for a change of environment or as tourists.
On the Parsi New Year's Day the customary public dinner was organised by the Parsi Association of Europe for all the Parsis of London and prominent guests of our sister communities. On this occasion I had taken the New Year toast. On Khordad Sal day I performed the Navjote ceremony of Dr. Faredoon Boomla's son, Darayus, before a cosmopolitan audience at the conclusion of which I gave a talk on the significance of the ceremony. I was elected the first honorary member of the Association and a function was organised to felicitate us. [561]
Other gatherings and lectures were also organised by them and by others in generous appreciation of my humble services. In addition, I had the opportunity of speaking on eight occasions including the one held at the residence of the Duchess of Somerset under the auspices of the School of Oriental Studies and other public organizations.
At the end of one of those lectures. Khwaja Oamal-ud-din, the Imam of the mosque at Woking who was present, placed in my hands his book entitled Islam and Zoroastrianism. He was the Imam at London of the newly established sect of Muslims, known as Ahmedias.
In the eighties of the last century when Dayanand Saraswati, the founder of the Arya Samaj was denouncing the Christian missionaries on the one hand and the Muslim maulvis on the other, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, the Mirza of Kadim, a village in Gurdaspur, a district of the Punjab, established the Ahmedia sect under his own name.
The Muslims are awaiting the advent of the Mahadi and the Christians talk of the return of Jesus as the Messiah. This new prophet claimed to be the Mahadi and the Messiah himself at one and the same time. Later he also introduced himself as a new Avatar of the Hindus.
In 1913 Khwaja Saheb came from Lahore to London and began to propagate this new Muslim sect. He succeeded in converting Lord Hadley and a few other Englishmen.
In the above-mentioned book he praises the Zoroastrian religion first and then writes that like the Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, and Christian religions, Zoroastrianism too has not been able to preserve its pristine purity. The Quran alone reveals God's true and final teaching. For its diffusion [562] amongst mankind in the present times the Almighty has sent the great saint Mirza Ghulam Ahmed as His messenger.
May God save tormented mankind from such so-called messengers who spring up from time to time in various places!
Upon request from many to express my views on the several questions that were being repeatedly debated most bitterly in our community in India the Association asked me to tackle such subjects.
Prominent amongst these were the utilization of bull's urine, ceremonies for the dead, prayer in intelligible language, the question of proselytising, crematorium, the practice of smoking, the wearing of the sudre and kusti, etc. Of these, the first five questions have already been dealt with in earlier chapters of this book, hence it is not necessary to repeat my opinions. Some new light was called for on the question of crematorium, so it is essential to give a brief review here.
In Europe and America, after cremating the corpse it is packed in airtight glass or china jars. These are usually buried and a tomb or tablet is raised over them. Some people drown the ashes of their loved ones, while others inscribe verses on these jars and hand them over for preservation in the precincts of the crematorium. Just as the system of disposing of the dead body by intensive heat seems perfect from the hygienic point of view. if its ashes are given an aquatic burial there would be a great saving of lands which are reserved as cemeteries in large cities like London and New York with a population exceeding seven millions. But this does not happen due to the common yearning of people to cherish the memory of the departed ones and just as large and expensive edifices are erected over jars containing [563] the ashes as over the dead that are buried. There is no saving either in space or in expense. In New York we had seen splendid sepulchres costing twenty-five and fifty thousand to two and five lakh rupees built over the jars of ashes that had been buried. The only advantage in burning and then burying the ashes, over ordinary burial is that the unsanitary conditions that are created by myriads of bodies buried and rotting in the earth is avoided. But the land that should be preserved in the interest of the living is equally occupied by the dead and the wastage over the construction of monuments continues. Both purposes are served by burning the corpse and drowning the ashes. The corpses of some co-religionists have been cremated in public crematories and their ashes have been buried in our cemetery in London and the usual tomb-stones have been raised over them. Instead, a suggestion was made from certain quarters that a deep recess open to air and sunshine be dug, and ashes of all placed therein so that there be no need for tombs and the custom of purification by the rays of the sun can be preserved. As the suggestion seemed impractical it was deferred.
The questions that seemed to perplex people the most and regarding which, even after returning to Karachi some carried on a private correspondence with me for months, were about smoking and the compulsory wearing of the sudre and kusti. These gentlemen argued that if a person leads a life on the principles of Humata, Hukhta, Huvarashta good thoughts, good words and good deeds he was an avowed Zoroastrian and it mattered little whether he moved about bareheaded or smoked or did not put on the sacred shirt and girdle. He should be considered a Zoroastrian on all accounts and should have the right to all Zoroastrian privileges. In other words a bare-headed Parsi or one with a cigarette between his lips and without the sudre-kusti on his [564] body may be permitted to enter Agyaris and Atashbehrams, and be present at ceremonies performed for the living or for the dead.
Many changes have been wrought in our way of life during the last fifty years, as also in our manner of dress. Formerly to go about bareheaded was not only a fault but a crime. Today thousands of men and women move about bareheaded. Formerly men wore the Jama-Pichodi at weddings and funerals. Gradually the Jama-Pichodi gave way to the white dagli or daglo and some bridegrooms were garbed in the Persian styled sahaya. By degrees these in turn were supplanted by Parsi coats of all colours. Since some time men are attending Navjotes and weddings in European attire and both men and women come with heads uncovered. Today many gentlemen smoke and so do some ladies. A few have bidden farewell to the Sudre and Kusti in their personal lives. But no one has yet been found publicly attempting to attend religious ceremonies performed at religious premises bare-headed or with a cigarette in his mouth or without a sudre-kusti. This is because they realize that they may behave as they please in their private lives they may even wear the sudre-kusti or not and no one has the authority to try to reform them or to excommunicate them, but should they try to enter religious institutions or meetings, the organizers can object. Some gentlemen from London vouch that by moving about bare-headed or with a cigarette poised between the lips or by discarding the sudre-kusti a Parsi does not become a lesser Zoroastrian or a non-Zoroastrian. He was born a Zoroastrian hence until he gives up the Zoroastrian faith and gets converted, whether he wears the sudre -kusti or not, without the least restriction or limitation, he has the birth-right to enter into religious institutions and to participate in religious ceremonies. Should he be a bachelor and desirous [565] of marriage, he may get wedded without the sudre-kusti and should he die he may will to have his body put in the final resting place without the Zoroastrian custom of garbing it in the sudre kusti. The fact is that Ahura Mazda evaluates a man's worth according to his good and bad deeds only. Virtue and vice have no relationship whatever, with man's bare-headed ness, his smoking or his wearing of the sacred shirt and girdle.
All the religions of the world are based on the same fundamental principles of good thoughts, good words and good deeds and those alone bear testimony to a truly religious life. But the diversity of countries, climes and conditions is responsible for the differences of religious opinions, philosophies, customs and conventions. Together with the eternal verities of every faith, due to times and circumstances, certain good or bad, true or false customs and conventions are always interwoven. Because of their mingling with basic religious teachings they are accounted to be sacred and as time passes they form an essential and integral part of religion. Socio-religious customs, in the name of religion and religious sanction, become binding on those who follow that faith and they cannot escape from practising them. Just as laws of marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc. differ from community to community and from nation to nation, these socio-religious practices become like essential commandments of that faith. Conventions are invested with the garb of authority and the believers must of necessity adhere to them.
Could we but for a moment peep into the Kingdom of the Creator we would find out that His Divine Justice is very different from our earthly mode of judgement. In the High Courts of Bombay when there are social claims, if the claimant is a Hindu, justice is meted out according to Hindu law, if a Muslim by Muslim law, and if a Parsi by Parsi [566] law. In God's courts there are no such community wise law-books. When a Parsi soul enters the portal of heaven he is not questioned whether he has abided by Zoroastrian conventions or not, or whether a Hindu spirit has faithfully followed the social customs of the Hindus. The same is the case with Muslims, Christians, Jews and others. No questions are asked as to the practice of the various customs and conventions connected with the diverse faiths. Moreover, Meher Davar, the Lord Chief Justice does not distinguish anyone as a Zoroastrian or a Hindu or a Muslim or a Christian or a Jew. He looks upon each as a thinking being, having lived on earth with a free will and examines only his thoughts, words and deeds as a man. The person whose thoughts, words and deeds are pure He declares to be virtuous and pious and if impure, that man is judged as sinful and vicious.
Since it is the destiny of mankind to be continuously quarrelling over differences of opinions, there is no choice but to abide by the true and false beliefs of the majority of a community. Hence the sudre-kusti which has become a traditional symbol of purity and genuine Zoroastrianism since ages cannot be disclaimed by a handful of fanatics. This explanation seemed sound to some of my brethren in London, while others found it meaningless. The member of a respectable family, after eight months of such correspondence wrote to me at Karachi that it was regrettable that since I was not as economically independent as a Christian Archbishop or Bishop, I was not able to voice my independent opinion with courage.
In 1930 as we had voyaged directly from Karachi to New York and returned via Japan and China we had not been able to go to London and so we could not meet Shapurji Saklatvala. This time before we reached London he had crossed the boundaries of this world and gone to the abode of the [567] saints. Therefore, our last meeting with him was in 1927 when he had visited India. He had stayed with us in Karachi at that time and was to give a public lecture under my Chairmanship. As soon as this news was broadcast quite a few bitter controversies commenced. As the officials were opposed to him, his presence was not welcome to influential Parsis in the government also.
In those days the reins of the 'Daily Gazette' were in the hands of Sir Montague Webb. He questioned in his editorial as to what connection the Head Priest of the Parsis had with communism so as to shelter the propagandist of socialism under his roof and to have him lecture to the community. He added that the community was taking steps to dethrone their Priest! At Shapurji's lecture I stated from the Chair that as a Mobed's son, he had been reared on the saying:
(“dosi tewu afargaan”) (Learn to cater to circumstances.) And his lecture proved as innocent. It so happened that at the very time that our Parsi propagandist of communism was living under my roof, I was writing a chapter against communism in my new book Our Perfecting World.
Having served the community and the country for three decades to the best of his ability according to his own light, he had now gone to the abode of eternal rest and peace.
I first met Reverend Bhabha in London in 1908. After that we met him twice. He had reached the ripe old age of 82. Inviting us to tea, he wrote that due to age he was bed-ridden since some time, but when we visit him, God willing, he would be sitting up in an easy-chair and having a long conversation with us. And, in truth, God gave him the strength and he was able to talk to us for quite a while. This was our final meeting, for he passed away shortly after our return to India. In youth he [568] had forsaken his religion and was converted, but his love for his dear community remained unshaken to the end of his life. He used to bemoan the fact that, of the young people of the community who came to study at an immense expense, only a few did credit to the money spent by their parents and returned home after completing their studies and settled down happily. The others got entangled in immorality and abandoned their studies. He told us of his efforts to save such youths and added that he always advised them to avoid the temptation of marrying foreign wives.
Marriages between Parsi men and western women have been taking place since a hundred years from the time Parsis started going to .Europe and America for business and education. Today about a hundred such couples are existing. They are living their lives midst conflicting faiths and conflicting cultures. Those who have found homely and wise mates are living happily. Yet, had they sought the companionship of the girls of the community, there would have resulted a desirable decrease in the community's spinsters. This fact must not be lost sight of.
During our five visits to the West we witnessed quite a few unions between Parsis and Christians or Jews. Wealthy boys of the community who could have secured the best girls of the most aristocratic families of the community were being wedded into very ordinary American families. We saw an old acquaintance of ours an American girl from a destitute family who found a rich partner and stepped out of her wretched home into a palatial mansion, moving about in automobiles, and sustaining her poor family in comfort on the wealth of her Parsi husband. We have also seen Parsi wealth running into lakhs go into an alien land and an alien home at the demise of a rich Parsi husband. Some, due to changing times and circumstances, [569] having lost their jobs or being unsuccessful in business, eke out a miserable existence in exile with their foreign wife and offspring. Some we have seen, who, have left the shores of their homeland in youth pine to set foot on it again, but due to circumstances have been unable to do so and are miserable. A few we have seen who have forgotten their community and their country and are avoiding ever to acknowledge them.
Since the turn of the century, from the time the Jooddin problem came up in its most poignant form our community has opposed it in no uncertain terms and passed resolutions against it. But those whose hearts have been pierced by Cupid's arrow do not seem to pay the least attention to the community's objections. Lovers enamoured of their youthful sweethearts are bent upon making them their own without any consideration of the past or future. Thus mixed marriages cannot be stopped.
In the years that followed the Jooddin struggle, we saw eight Parsis marry American wives during our various trips to America. What was strange about all these marriages was that the husband and wife did not continue with their own individual religions and get married according to the Civil Marriage act out but young men adopted their wife's Christian faith and were wedded according to Christian rites. Talking to some of these we were informed that taking into consideration the resolutions that were being passed by the Bombay Anjuman against performing the Navjote of the offspring of non-Parsi wives, instead of the children being harassed in the future, it was thought advisable that they themselves be converted into Christianity so that the children be reared in the Christian faith.
This is quite understandable. The threat of not taking the offspring of non-Parsi wives into the [570] faith does not in any way deter the men from marrying but instead they forsake the faith and go out of our very small community. We have performed the Navjote of hundreds of children born of Parsi fathers and non-Parsi mothers. There is wisdom and foresight in avoiding impractical talk of placing sanction upon such Navjotes.
Our work had come to an end. There were rumours of a war breaking out in Europe and it seemed as though our experience of 1915 of returning from America through an environment of war was to be repeated in 1938. As arranged by the Secretary of the World Fellowship of Faiths, at this critical time I lectured on the Zoroastrian teachings on war from the 'Mazdaznan' platform. On that very day the comforting news of a peace pact being signed at Munich by Chamberlain and Hitler was received, so this lecture was delivered midst everyone's rejoicing. By God's grace for the time being the terror of war had been set aside so we commenced our return voyage to our native land. On board the ship I delivered one lecture.
After delivering ten lectures in Bombay under the auspices of various associations we returned to Karachi.
[571]
Ever since man came out of his original pastoral state and settled down to agriculture, through labour and experience he gained a great deal and a variety of things from his land, and as he prospered his culture developed. The land yielded all kinds of grain, vegetables and fruit for him. Some of these which were the means of his livelihood remained fresh and unspoilt for a while, but even the things that could be preserved had to be consumed within a year or so. If some fertile soil produced more than he could utilize he would send it to neighbouring villages and in exchange he got something that they could spare. Experience taught him that some things were such that could not be sent far. For example, in some places the grape-vine yielded such a rich crop of grapes that, after consumption In the village there was a surplus which would be spoilt in transit and would lie in the village and rot. As time passed some clever person succeeded in discovering that if the grapes are filled in large vats they ferment and finally turn into a sweet and sour juice which does not spoil even if kept for a long time, but the longer it remains the tastier and more nourishing it becomes. So now the surplus of grapes was no longer a matter of regret. On the contrary men put in more effort, sowed more plants and tried to grow more grapes and produced more wine. This nourishing sap served as an additional sustenance throughout the year.
According to Persian legend it was in King Jamshed's time that grape wine was accidentally discovered and it began to be used as a tonic and a precious remedy for illnesses. It is said that a beautiful maiden in the King's palace was harassed by a persistent head-ache. Despite all kinds of [572] treatment it could not be cured. One day her eyes fell on some fermenting grape juice which she drank and her malady was immediately cured.
As time passed new discoveries at different places revealed that just as this nourishing drink which remains unspoilt for long is produced from grapes, it can also be derived from rice, barley, maize, cereals, wheat and various kinds of grain, as also from potatoes, fennel seed, dates, apples, pears and other fruit and many kinds of perishable vegetable. This gave farming and agriculture a new impetus. Besides growing these for edible purposes farmers sowed seeds in wider areas in order to produce wine and gardeners planted fruit trees in great numbers. Grape-vine began to cluster many regions of the globe, industry grew and people prospered. All nations of the world began to use this drink as a tonic and a stimulant, as a relaxing beverage after a hard day's labour, as a generator of heat when the temperature dropped to zero and below, as a relief to mental strain and worry and as a safe guard against the strains of life. Men began to regard wine as an essential part of their meal.
On sacred occasions like thanksgiving Jashans for a season of abundant harvest, when everyone worshipped the spirits of nature's flora, a portion of the product of fruit crop formed part of the ceremonies as an offering of gratefulness. Together with solid foodstuff this liquid juice which was pressed from them was offered to the divine beings with deep religious feeling. When the ceremony was over the priest who had performed it plus those present tasted of these things with fervour. Four thousand years ago, even before the Indo-Iranians separated from each other, they made use of this drink with a clear conscience. Besides the Som-Haum drink, they used a mild drink known as Madhu and a strong drink known as Sura in [573] Sanskrit, and Hura in Avesta in their sacred ceremonies and drank the same with reverence. Modern Indo-Iranian scholars of religion compare this ancient Sura-Hura with today's strong intoxicants made from rice, dates and other substances.
Founders of major dynasties after parting from Indo-Iranian families and settling in Iran, and Persians, Parsis and Zoroastrians who ruled up to the seventh century, have been using it throughout history as part of their daily repast and in ceremonies as a sacred offering to God and His ministers and to the pious souls of their departed forefathers. For approximately three thousand years Zoroastrian religious books written from time to time in Avesta, Pahlavi and Pazand, proclaim unanimously the advantages of a moderate use of liquor and state that it helps digestion, strengthens the body, develops the faculties of mind and memory, enhances fluency of speech, induces sound sleep and refreshes life generally. Never in the history of Zoroastrianism has the partaking of liquor been deemed sinful, but considering drunkenness to be a crime, it has been commented upon in Pahlavi law-books. The Zoroastrian religion teaches temperance, not prohibition.
At this end, just as the Aryans in all matters of religious thought, philosophy, ceremonials, modes of living and behaviour differed from their Iranian cousins, as time passed their dietetic habits also underwent many changes. They abstained from flesh-eating and became vegetarians. Manu and other religious law-books prescribed prohibition. Yet all sects of the vast masses known as Hindus did not completely ban the use of liquor. Chankya Kautalya, the wise and learned minister of Chandragupta, the famous Emperor of the Maurya dynasty, comments in his famous dictionary upon the processing of liquor in his kingdom, the regulations regarding its sale etc. [574]
The renowned Charakmuni declares that it is obvious that excessive drinking is harmful but liquor within limits is a tonic, a reliever of fatigue, a nectar that wards off sorrow and brings joy. Sura derived from cereals and rice was used in various ceremonies like Sautramani, Vajpaye etc. Of the vast Hindu population that inhabits this country, large numbers of Hindus are liquor-consumers and use it in their ceremonies. For decades in Karachi wine business was mostly in the hands of Parsis and Goans. Now it has gone into the hands of the Sindhi-Hindus. In place of Palanji and Pereira, Palumal and Pitambardas are now minting money from this flourishing business.
Amongst the major religions of the world the Zoroastrian, Jewish and Christian faiths are well-known for commending the use of liquor in their sacred ceremonies. Buddhism preaches prohibition, but millions of Japanese and Chinese who follow the faith partake of wine like water. Three-quarters of the inhabitants of the world use liquor. Everyone everywhere preaches temperance. In communities that opt for prohibition, more harmful drinks and drugs than liquor are freely used. Intoxicants made from poisonous drugs like hemp, opium, bhang etc. are responsible for ruining the physical and mental health of millions of people in these communities that are regarded as regions of partial or total prohibition.
Three decades ago, from the time of the First Great War, Russia, the United States of America and certain smaller kingdoms introduced prohibition in varying degrees. All these ultimately failed in their purpose. After prohibition had been introduced in America we had the opportunity of visiting that country twice at intervals of seven years. For eight months on each occasion, we were disgusted to see the farce that was conducted there by the American government under [575] guise of prohibition. When we were there in 1922 five years had elapsed since prohibition had been introduced in America. Yet controversies, regarding it were in full swing. Those against prohibition were known as 'Wet' and those in favour of it as 'Dry'. Many famous people in the country were against the government's policy of prohibition. The basis of their argument was that no social reform can be wrought by force. A law passed without the will and the consent of the public was a rebuff to national freedom. It was a fatal blow to the nation's democratic constitution. While putting it into practice, falsehood. immorality, bribery, deceit and treachery were on the increase.
Despite prohibition wine flowed like water in all the towns and cities of America.
It was served freely in hotels and restaurants. Almost every home had a bottle of liquor. All this was a fact. Liquor was distilled within the country and liquor came from without. In public and private gatherings and assemblies every type of liquor was available. Cheap and poor quality liquor caused havoc to the poor. Newspapers published such vehement articles in favour of prohibition and magazines gave so much publicity to it, that in the beginning everyone was amazed to find that such a large majority was sold on prohibition. But it did not take long to reveal its insincerity. More literature was being published by the bootleggers and smugglers who were hoarding money, thanks to prohibition, than by genuine advocates of it. At an expense of lakhs they were constantly endeavouring to beguile the public, for as long as prohibition lasted their business could flourish. Such wide-spread roguery was going on allover the country. When we visited America again in 1928 the fabrication was still prevalent. As though to [576] refresh our memories, we had a taste of it on the high seas a night prior to our entry into Boston harbour. It was about 9.30 p.m. The passengers were pacing the decks. It was pitch dark and the blanket of night covered the horizon. Suddenly everyone was startled by a flash of light not more than a hundred yards away from the ship. Turning our gaze towards it we discovered that a launch had tagged along with us while our lights were off, and all of a sudden about fifteen electric lights were switched on, on that boat. It was a detective launch of the prohibition department. At a signal from it our steamer stopped. Officers from the launch boarded the ship and when they left after half an hour our steamer moved again. Only the detectives and God know the truth, but the fact that the ship was allowed to proceed meant that the steamer was not carrying contraband liquor. Ships coming across the Atlantic and the Pacific brought plenty of liquor and the F. B. I. and the shipping department understood each other. Such hypocrisy we had witnessed time and again.
Just as all kinds of liquor poured into the country by sea, it also came in night and day through the three thousand mile land boundary between Canada and the United States. Over and above that liquor was being brewed in various places of the country itself. But when stories of the tomfoolery of prohibition were publicised abroad and the policy of the American government made a mockery, the detective squad was alerted and a semblance of some arrests was made for some time. An American gentleman was staying in our building with his family. Both of us lived on the sixth floor and we met and conversed daily. Vats and trunks of liquor were stacked in his basement and he was carrying on a roaring trade. One day there was some tumult and he was arrested for selling illicit liquor. A trial was conducted and he [577] was sentenced to a month's imprisonment, during which he came home every night and enjoyed his sleep and at dawn returned to his cell. When the month was over he was back home permanently and began his business once again.
Liquor was not available as freely as it was in 1912 but it was served in hotels and restaurants. We went with friends one day to dine at a Turkish restaurant and seeing the word 'Alibaba' on the menu card my wife enquired as to the nature of the item. Some glassfuls of fennel seed wine were placed before us and the waiter smiled and introduced them as 'Alibaba’. There was prohibition in America but liquor was available in homes, in clubs, in restaurants, in hotels, in picture houses, in trains-wherever you looked for it, it was available. The rich and the poor drank; masters and servants drank; men and women drank; wholesalers and retailers drank; the police and the law-givers drank; the savants and the scientists drank; professors and priests drank; all who relished drinking, drank. The consumption of liquor increased with the introduction of prohibition. Those who did not drink before began to drink. College students displayed scenes such as had never been witnessed before. A boy unadorned by a 'hip flask' of whisky was dubbed by the girls as effeminate.
There was a huge deficit in the government treasury. Just as a group of 'nouveau riche' springs up in society in times of war, a sect of snobbish aristocrats was created in American society comprising of pirates. This new aristocracy was made up of millionaires, multi-millionaires and even billionaires. Looking at it from a moral angle, prohibition left the American nation a heritage of falsehood, fraud, bribery, immorality, treachery, deceit and pretended sanctimoniousness. [578]
In January 1930 Gandhiji placed before the government a manifesto comprising of eleven demands and informed them that if the government granted those demands he would retract the nation from launching the non-cooperative movement. The very first demand was total prohibition. On this occasion I gave a series of lectures in Karachi under the heading 'At the dawn of independence'. In one of those lectures, speaking about the effects of independence on the economic condition of the community, I touched upon the question of prohibition. I stated that if prohibition were introduced in the country our community would suffer a great loss. Under British jurisdiction as well as in many native states wine and toddy distilleries were in the hands of the Parsis since a very long time and we were managing innumerable retail wine-shops. lakhs of date palms yielding toddy were owned by Parsis. A great deal of the community's wealth was invested in liquor and toddy trade, and it was the means of livelihood of hundreds of co-religionists. The fear of prohibition was not imaginary. The political movement in the country was facing many trials and tribulations and it was therefore temporarily dormant, but before long it would surely and steadily forge ahead. In the near future some sort of initial independence was bound to come-if not complete at least in half-measure, if not ripe at least raw, if not perfect at least imperfect. On the other hand even if a semblance of Swaraj were attained, the infatuated pillars of the Congress who were bent upon introducing prohibition would, without doubt, hasten to hang its yoke forcibly around the nation's neck.
And that is exactly what happened. With the advent of provincial autonomy the congress abandoned non-co-operation. The reins of administration were in its hands. As expected, on coming into power, it introduced prohibition as time and opportunity permitted. Unemployment grew. The [579] delight and pleasure on auspicious occasions in a large city like Bombay were curtailed. The splendour and glamour of hotels, restaurants, cinemas, clubs, parties and gatherings faded. Complaints were registered requests received. They fell on deaf ears. Provincial governors were approached to use their authority but they refused to intervene. The government was not prepared to displease the Congress. The officials acted in accordance with the orders received from the Indian government to placate the congress. No one paid any heed. No appeals touched the power-intoxicated ministers. With the attainment of narrow provincial autonomy the majority community, in its newly-won sovereignty, snatched away the freedom of thought, speech and action of the minority communities - it smothered their voice of conscience it trampled their right to act according to their traditional customs and beliefs - and thus giving an insight into how subjugated and helpless they would be when, with time, complete independence was achieved, they began to tremble at the name of the Congress.
At present prohibition has been curbed to some extent under the subtleties of law. It has abated but it has not been permanently abolished, It is merely hanging fire. The Congress government is bound to regain power, and as soon as that happens it will make necessary changes in the constitution, and steeped in its fanciful notions about prohibition, is sure to drag it in again. The Congress will deprive people of their birth-right to eat and drink as they please and it will force temperate and civil society to stop the moderate intake of wine and toddy for the benefit of their mental and physical health. It will refuse to differentiate between moderate drinking and drunkenness. Because of some vices of drunkenness it will put brakes to the divine right of hundreds of temperates to choose their own nourishment. What [580] autocratic Hindu rajas and maharajas and Muslim navabs and padshahas did not do, congressmen who are the advocates of freedom have done in this age of freedom and independence and they will repeat the performance. They will freely use the tools of authority to enforce reforms which according to them, seem to be for the benefit of society.
These gentlemen flatly refuse to learn from the evil results of prohibition in the United States and other countries. They argue that India is not America. They boast that they will succeed where America has failed. As Muslims and Hindus are united on this single question these devotees of freedom, these propounders of non-violence, with the reins of government in their hands, become violent and, at the point of the sword, have come into the battlefield to attempt the impossible task of reforming the Indian nation and to make it pious and religious. It is not as though America were made up of men and India inhabited by angels. Temperamentally and by inclination men are alike. Fashioned by Nature, men's inherent tendencies are unconquerable. World-conquerors have not been able to subjugate them. America attempted the impossible and it failed. The decade and a half of prohibition was a reign of disgraceful defeat for America. The result of this thoughtless step in India is sure to be the same. These dominant congressmen will not bend with persuasion, but will undoubtedly break under the pressure of defeat.
[581]
The Revolt of Youth - this phrase was first heard in the West after the war 1914-1918, war and later it resounded amongst the various nations of the East. In one form or another this rebellion of the rising generation against the rule and authority of age is still raging everywhere. In our community since some time a new awakening and a fresh vitality is apparent amongst a group of people known as the reformist party. Three decades ago the Rast Goftar, the powerful instrument of the reformist party, the 'Parsi' and similar reformist monthly magazines had to close down. Old newspapers giving publicity to orthodox views gathered strength and new journals supporting them came into existence. The only reformist organization, the Rahnumai Mazdayasnan Society, on reaching its seventies was withering with age, whereas a couple of new associations were born which propounded orthodoxy. With the demise of the Zoroastrian Conference the reformist group disintegrated while, as in the present political chapter of the country the Congress has become the only coordinated, constituted organization, the members of the orthodoxy, through their societies, and the regular publication of their newspapers and magazines have formed the only consolidated body. They waged war against any movement that was distasteful to them, or emanated from the reformist party. Through the press and from the platform they maligned them at every opportunity. With the help of an army of the faithful by sheer numerical strength, they succeeded in dispersing meetings of the reformists.
In the absence of an organization or a constituted body the reformists were unable to unite and adopt their resolutions, yet their opposition and [582] dislike of the orthodox party is ever on the increase. Due to their irritable temperament they have now lost patience and have become aggressive. They are eager to give vent to individual outbursts, and, what they abstained from doing twenty-five years ago in ventilating their rash ideas respecting the sentiments of the community, they have now started to express without limitation through writings and speeches. Since a long time there have been stray cases of people not wearing the sudre and kusti, but that was in private. Today many people do not hesitate to speak and write and inform the masses that they have discarded this sacred symbol of the Zoroastrian faith. Those who formerly smoked in secrecy today blow puffs of smoke openly. Those who silently regarded with contempt the system of disposing of the dead at the Tower of Silence now publicly vilify it as an uncivilized and gruesome custom. They do not stop at vilifying it but have begun to take practical steps against it whenever opportunity arises. Twice since the start of the century have they been unsuccessful in their move to dispose of the corpse by cremating and now they are turning their attention to burying the dead. It is obvious that the question of burial would not meet with as strong an opposition as that of crematorium. Although in utilizing the crematorium the fire does not touch the corpse at all, yet the majority believes that if not directly at least indirectly the corpse comes in contact with fire. As fire is the most sacred symbol of the faith, its use in disposing of the corpse in any way is accounted as a desecration of the holy fire and an unforgivable sin. Since 2500 years the Vendidad lists cremation and burial as sins. Yet public feeling is stronger against cremation than against burial. There are two reasons for this. The first is that the corpse is considered to be the greatest impurity in the Zoroastrian religion and fire the purest of God's creations. According to science fire burns and purifies the uncleanest and impurest [583] thing. Nothing can make it impure, as it is God's supreme medium of purification. Yet, carried away by sentiment, Zoroastrians faithfully believe that the contact of fire and the corpse are sacrilegious. The other reason is that the community is accustomed to the traditional idea of burial wherever it is not convenient to have a Tower of Silence.
It is nearly twelve hundred years since our forefathers came to settle in this sub-continent. The community's history of the first centuries is very incomplete. Notes regarding the Tower of Silence can be found only in the beginning of the 14th century, while those on the system of burial at the end of the 18th century. In 1777, as plague broke out in Bombay, the proportion of deaths increased, so that the two existing Towers of Silence proved insufficient. As a result the Bombay Panchayat enclosed a piece of land near the Doongervadi by high walls, dug a hole in the centre and placed the excess corpses in it. The Panchayat asked for the opinion of the Navsari Anjuman whether this mode of disposing of the extra dead bodies was valid or not according to the religion. Taking into consideration the unusual circumstances the gentlemen at Navsari decided that it was justified. It is to be noted that the Bombay Anjuman did not bury the excess corpses, but left them open to the elements near the Tower of Silence. This is worth keeping in mind. Is it possible that in those days, in places where there was no Tower of Silence, the custom was to leave the corpse open to the sun's rays on the top of a hill or mountain between four walls as mentioned in the sixth chapter of the Vendidad? For lack of sufficient evidence it is impossible to pronounce an opinion with authority.
The first written comment to be found regarding burial is in 1793 when a pit was made [584] near Talcheri along the Malabar Coast. From the middle of the 18th century our co-religionists started going to various parts of India and outside India to China, Colombo etc. for trade and commerce. Thereafter, wherever they went cemeteries were established to bury the dead. Later, in cities whose population grew, a Tower of Silence was built and with its establishment the cemetery was no longer utilized. Under somewhat strange circumstances an exceptional example has been noted at Madras. In 1796 a small 'Dakhma' was built there. But it is said that superstition was circulated that it was necessary to place the corpse of a young girl, first in the newly-made Tower of Silence. Guided by this superstitious notion the use of the Dakhma was avoided and the cemetery continued to be utilized.
Thus the practice of burying the dead in a cemetery was accepted as a last resort by the majority of the community in the absence of a Dakhma; although it is a sin to do so, God would bear in mind the desperate circumstances of those doing so and would forgive them. But those who are patronizing the cemetery since some years are doing so because of their personal disapproval of the Dakhma and their own love of burial, and they are eager to scorn that ancient custom. Since a decade a small section of the community has started publicly opposing this age-old practice of placing the corpse in the Tower of Silence. So far no one had ventured to bury where a Dakhma existed. The first two examples occurred in Surat and Poona during the last decade. At the death of a wealthy lady at Baroda, her dear ones did not place her corpse in the existing Tower of Silence there, but took it to Godhra for burial. During that period those in favour of burial obtained from the government a plot of land near Poona on behalf of the community. On receipt of an objection from authoritative sources that those people had no right [585] to ask for the land in the name of the community, the government withdrew its permit, so they challenged the legality of this action and managed to secure land elsewhere.
The new controversy of burying the dead even where a Dakhma was in existence reached its zenith in Bangalore. At an invitation from one party, my wife and I went to Bangalore in the beginning of 1941 to lend our humble services in cementing the rift there.
Approximately three hundred Zoroastrians reside in Bangalore. There have been examples of establishing a Dakhma in cities that are inhabited by so many Zoroastrians, hence there was nothing surprising in leading, wealthy, co-religionists living there or those visiting Bangalore annually for business, making a move to establish a Dakhma there. The orthodox rich do charity in the name of religion or the middle-class give their share and believe they are reaping a reward of virtue. Such people attach prime importance to establishing Agyaries, Atashbehrams, Dakhmas and similar religious institutions. This is the custom in all the communities of the world. As soon as the scheme of building a Dakhma at Bangalore was made known this large section welcomed it with open arms as a noble and pious enterprise and gladly acclaimed it as a practical scheme. Never before has a move to establish a Dakhma met with such a persistent, vehement, systematic and constitutional opposition as was put forth by a small group known as the Aramgah party. Dissensions and disputes, speeches and articles for and against kept mounting. The Bangalore battle began to be fought in Bombay papers. Those in favour of the Dakhma warned the community to beware of their opponents whom they termed as heretics, non-Zoroastrians, corpse burners etc. and to donate generously towards this religious and virtuous [586] enterprise so as to witness its fruition. And the community from all quarters lost neither time nor energy in contributing double of what was needed. The majority, both in Bangalore and in Bombay was against the Aramgah party, but from the beginning the latter had managed to win the full sympathy of the Divan, Moreover, even before a proper permission was given to build a Tower of Silence, they had constantly endeavoured verbally and in writing to secure a promise from the high authority of the government that even after the construction of a Dakhma those who desired to bury their dear ones in the old cemetery may have the right to do so. Somehow when the Anjuman had first secured from the government land to use as a cemetery, a clause had been added that if in future that land was not utilized as a burial ground, the government had the right to reclaim its management. On the strength of this queer condition the Divan comforted the Aramgah party that even after the Dakhma comes into existence those who wish to make use of the cemetery may continue to act according to their own inner beliefs without anyone's interference. Similarly the Aramgah party insisted upon the Anjuman that even though the Dakhma be constructed and thrown open for use it would allow members of the opposition to follow their own inclination and use the cemetery as a burial ground. Fearing that the Divan would not grant permission to construct the Tower of Silence without such an assurance and consequently the scheme would fall through; and in the hope that once the Dakhma was built, the opposition party would respect the will of the community and deem it wise to withdraw their opposition, some of the office-bearers of the Anjuman in order to appease the advocates of the Aramgah privately and publicly, unwittingly gave them half-hearted assurances to allow them to do as they pleased. When the Dakhma was ready and its inauguration ceremony over, the Anjuman [587] sealed the doors of the cemetery and announced that henceforth its use as a burial-ground would cease. The Aramgah party ;immediately took up the cudgels and requested the government to take away the management of the Aramgah from the Anjuman and to hand it over to them. Before any decision could be arrived at, the government issued a warrant against the Anjuman warning them that should they refuse to grant anyone permission to use the cemetery, the government would, as per agreement in the documents, take over the management of the Aramgah. In addition the Aramgah party, exerting its influence, acquired a new plot of land adjacent to the city, so that, just in case the old burial ground was not available, the new land could be used and their aim could be achieved at any cost.
Never has such an occasion arisen before. In places where a cemetery existed, on the establishment of a Dakhma, without any opposition, automatically and with the unanimous consent of the Anjuman, the use of the cemetery has ceased. According to tradition the Bangalore Anjuman had the right to close down the cemetery. But the assurance that it is supposed to have given that even after the Dakhma was inaugurated, those who desired may continue to use the cemetery; the clause included in the document at the time the government granted the land to the community that on the cemetery not being used as a burial-ground it reserved the right of management; and the Divan's i.e. the government's obvious sympathy towards the advocates of the Aramgah all went against the Anjuman.
Viewed from any angle, the Tower of Silence had been established and, according .to the practice of centuries, the cemetery should be closed. For, should it be otherwise, it would deal a severe blow to the sentiments of the extraordinarily large [588] majority of the orthodox group of the community by the admission of a new custom of conflicting systems of disposing of the dead in a single city at one and the same time. Under the circumstances my main job was to appeal to the good sense of the saner members of the Aramgah party to exhibit a broad-minded attitude and to desist from hurting the community.
The ladies of the Aramgah party informed me that they did not wish to hurt the feelings of the majority of the Anjuman. They were not in any way obstructing those who wished to patronize the Tower of Silence in accordance with the dictates of their conscience and their own religious principles. But just as they viewed the sentiments of the majority with respect and tolerance, they asked for naught but a similar treatment towards the minority. Our community was educated and cultured and their only request was to be granted their individual rights.
Individual freedom of thought and speech is the precious heritage of civilization. After thousands of years of struggle and sacrifice man has just managed to secure that right. And yet he has not attained it in all fields of life, nor in its fullness. In spiritual and religious matters individuals are not yet able to act according to their inclinations, their intellect and their convictions. In minor and less important matters they can do so by cultivating public opinion and by persuasion. But in major and more significant questions concerning a community or a nation, while they continue to remain members of that society, it is not possible for them to act according to their own will. What the majority believes to be correct and true, it tries to enforce universally, throughout the ages. At such times those who honestly differ from the demands of society have no recourse left but to obey or to bifurcate and create a new and independent party, [589] sect or creed. This has been so since ancient times and it continues to be the same today It happens in the old-fashioned, slow-moving and lethargic East, and it happens in the active and vigilant West. There is no evidence in any society of the world to permit anyone, anywhere to act as he thinks, as he wishes and as he believes in social and religious matters. It may come to pass in some distant, idealistic future, because mankind enjoys today freedom in many fields of knowledge and science which it had never enjoyed before. Formerly inventive or creative scientists who discovered or taught anything that was contrary to established belief were made to suffer intensely. Socrates was forced to drink a cupful of hemlock for daring to preach a new code of ethics. In his old age, to save his life, Aristotle had to flee from Athens because of his philosophy. Bruno was burnt alive for writing that there are more planets in existence like our planet earth. Copernicus did not dare to publish his discoveries to the end of his life. Galileo publicly retraced his principle that the earth revolved round the sun, in order to save his life. To escape from the assault that was directed against him, Hobbes burnt the documents of his discoveries. Descartes was not able to publish his research magazine stating that the world works like a machine. After spending his whole life teaching philosophy at the University, Kant resigned from his professorship in his old age and went into seclusion because his book was proscribed from being published. This has been going on in every age both in the East and in the West. Today man has earned the right to express his views freely on matters of learning and science. It is therefore possible that, as generations pass, man will enjoy the freedom to act according to the dictates of his conscience in his spiritual and religious beliefs regarding contact with the other world and [590] converse with the souls of the dead. However, it must be borne in mind that at present he does not have that freedom.
The religion of society is an adulterated conventional religion. It is water-tight, rigid and austere. Its history is as tyrannical as that of the Spanish Inquisition. Its oppression is bound to end, but that will take a long, long time. No one can achieve it at one stroke and within the twinkling of an eye.
For the first time in the history of religion, three decades ago, it received a striking blow in Russia. Putting an end to the tyrannical regime of the Czar, the new government tore to pieces the country's political, economic, social and religious traditions and took upon itself the responsibility of remoulding the life of the nation. It announced that the abyss into which religion had descended had intoxicated the nation and obstructed its progress. The Bolshevik government grew impatient and began to abolish and annihilate the slightest semblance of religion from the land. Thousands of bishops were imprisoned, many shot dead. It confiscated five arabs worth of churches, property, goods and valuables. Those who defied the government and congregated for prayer were imprisoned and their leaders exiled. 'The League Militarist Godless' comprising of fifty-five lakh members was set up. Millions of anti-religious pamphlets and pictures ridiculing religion were distributed throughout the country. Education that scoffed and scorned at religion was introduced in all schools.
A country-wide survey in 1933 revealed that religion was as alive as ever and that prayer and worship continued clandestinely and in seclusion. The government came to its senses and the Russian Orthodox Church became free. [591]
Life without religion is barren and futile. If everything is present but religion is lacking, then all is empty. The sun will eventually set on conventional religion. Dogmatism and fanaticism will abate with time and man will profess a religion unhampered by society I according to the voice of his own conscience and the dictates of his own soul. But it is not so now and that fact must not be forgotten.
Another argument of the Aramgah party was that their request to bury their dear departed ones did not contravene any original principle of religion. Dakhmashini was merely a custom, hence they had the right to make alterations, as it was the nature of customs to change with times, conditions and circumstances.
Amongst God's creations, custom is as old as man. Both were born twins. In the Frawardin Yasht Ahura Mazda says that Gayomard the first man was the first to accept his word. In other words religion did not exist until man set his foot upon the earth. The religion that was Gayomard's, and after him that of myriads of souls that have lived eon upon eon, was custom. All prophets, saints, and rush is that have brought great religions into the world have come only since the last seven thousand years, whereas mankind has existed on earth for more than five lakh years. During this long period the moulders of his social, mental, intellectual, physical and spiritual life were the customs that were born from time to time in various places. Custom was man's manifested religion and the traditional and legendary handing down of customs from one generation to another became the social religion of the family or the tribe.
Man, by the nature of his physical make-up and by birth is an animal. He is a thinking, speaking, intelligent animal. Albeit he is a beast. Moulded [592] by the experience of ages and the blossoming of intellect he has to reach humanity and as time passes he has to refine the qualities of his heart and attain a spiritual status. A child is born ignorant and acquires understanding as he grows; even so does a man begin his life in a wild, unprotected and savage state and as time passes and his experiences accumulate and enlightenment dawns, he goes through a semi-savage, semi-civilized stage and reaches a state of civilization. Keeping in mind the things and deeds that bring pleasure and comfort in his daily life, he continues to act accordingly and fears and avoids the conditions that have caused sadness and sorrow. He remembers that by behaving in a certain manner under specific conditions he is benefited and, when occasion arises, his deeds conform to that behaviour pattern, and he encourages those around him to act likewise. The elders of a tribe retained the memory of such customs, methods and conventions because it was not a literate age. Thus customs accumulate and the elders, as their custodians, keep a strict control over their adherence. Guided by the superstitious belief that should a single member of the tribe break those rules of conduct, the deities are annoyed and the whole tribe suffers, the wrong-doer is punished accordingly. In this way customs become the guiding principles, aides, guardians and directors of men's lives. The part that ethics, hygiene, sociology and legal and religious codes play in an advanced society is fulfilled by conventions that are passed on from generation to generation. These customs are later collected by a Hamurabi, a Manu, a Solan or a Justine and made into law books.
Herodotus says that custom is the king of mankind. This is a fact for, like a king it commands and rules over mankind. Masters and moneylenders, noblemen and emperors are alike not able to disregard it. Man has wholeheartedly accepted its authority. Not only is custom a king, [593] but it is an autocratic king. Its kingship is not benevolent but tyrannical. No one can escape from its clutches. We know that time conquers everything. It even wears away rocks and stones. And yet custom can hold its own against so mighty a foe as time. The domain of its sovereignty is extensive and all-pervading. Its influence is felt in every field of life. It directs man's attire, diet, thoughts and speech. It is unwilling to surrender the unlimited authority it exercised over man's barbarian state even now when man is ascending the peak of civilization. It is heedless of man's experience of thousands of years and its advancement in knowledge and science. Such arrogance is not to be found elsewhere on earth. Like the Roman Catholic Pope it believes itself to be infallible. The Creator has not taught it to differentiate between the essential and the unessential. Foolishly it seeks immortality for all customs good or bad, true or false, beneficial or harmful, virtuous or vicious, progressive or retrogressive. It has not been taught to consider times and circumstances. It is blind to the constant changes of climes and conditions. When man was not enlightened mentally and spiritually it rendered valuable service in putting his feet on the pathway of progress. We have never refused to acknowledge its priceless contribution. But it does not rest satisfied at that. It yields neither to persuasion nor to pleadings. No one can wean it away from its purpose only defeat can destroy it. To keep man enslaved is his sole intent. It hates to see man refuse to be goaded on like dumb, driven cattle, to study, to learn, to think for himself and to listen to the voice of his own conscience. Due to these reasons the conflict between an educated and enlightened man and handed down customs remains undecided.
With the blossoming of man's mind through education and science he begins to examine the customs that have been handed down by his forefathers [594] and to evaluate whether they are genuine or faked, good or bad, beneficial or harmful. This scares the masses who have thoughtlessly lived with the idea that all customs that have come down through the ages are bound to be good. They march out into the battlefield to wage war against educated reformers who claim to weigh the worth of age-old customs and dare to challenge them. Instead of sound arguments they fight with weapons of fanaticism. Moreover, when highly qualified people, harbouring staunch orthodox views who are great adherents of ancient customs venture to defend them, matters become much worse. To give longevity to the most unsuitable and undesirable customs they muster all their wit and with a multi-coloured patch-work of interpretations and imaginary explanations they endeavour to paint them as rational. Thus they lengthen the life-span of customs which are better dead than alive.
No one had raised any objection to the traditional practices that had been going on for a thousand years that followed the dark age of ignorance after the downfall of our empire. But, during the last hundred years, thanks to higher education that has been admitted amongst the masses for the first time in history, there has been a flowering of minds of men and women of our community, and customs are being sifted in the sieve of discussion. During these hundred years there has been a change in the community's habits and mode of living. Feeble customs have been worn away by age and wiped out by knowledge. In the perilous struggle that has ensued, some are half-dead, while others are still alive and aflame. Let us recall the jihad that was waged against some customs.
It is a very old practice of ours for corpse bearers to carry the corpse on their shoulders to the Tower of Silence. We have witnessed the sorry [595] plight of corpses drenched with rain during the monsoons. Since decades there have been complaints particularly in Bombay against the indecent appearance, despite all caution, of corpses covered with rain-drenched sheets being carried along the roads and viewed from the 4th or 5th storey. Thought-provoking arguments are put forward, stating that since a corpse is impure and particularly that of a person who has died of an infectious disease like plague water dripping from it onto the ground carries germs which are harmful to the well-being of the living which is wrong according to Zoroastrian principles. On such sound pleas, a reform to take the corpse in a vehicle has been suggested since the middle of the last century, but is still being vehemently debated. In 1879 Seth Jamshedji Dadi Sethna had an iron carriage made in England and sent it to the Trustees of the Bombay Panchayat. A strong protest was raised and the votes of the dasturs were invited. They voted against carrying the corpse in a carriage as being against the codes of religion, hence the iron vehicle was not utilized. Seventy years have gone by since this event. A carriage has made an appearance at some places but it has not been able to gain ground in Bombay and elsewhere.
The main objection to carrying a corpse in a carriage is that it is more respectful to carry it on the shoulders. Due honour is not given to the departed one, if the dead body is conveyed in a vehicle. Many educated and learned people argue in this way with deep feeling. After twenty-five years of unsuccessful attempts at conveying the corpse in a car in Karachi, it has come into use since a few years. Many orthodox families are not utilizing it yet. Those who do use it do not place the corpse in it right at the doorstep, but as if to pay respect to the dead walk a short distance carrying it on their shoulders. Thereafter it is placed in the car that. awaits at a distance. This system is not only [596] cumbersome but presents an unpleasant sight when the bier carrying the corpse is placed in the middle of the road.
For thousands of years man was content with light radiating from coconut and kerosene oil-lamps, candle sticks etc., but since the last century it has been in search of brighter and ever brighter illumination and is now reaping the benefits of that research. At the end of the last century when there was a move to install electric lights in our Fire Temples there was a strong vote of censure against it and fanatics termed it irreligious. Their main objection was that electric wires were handled by non-Parsis throughout the town and when fitted in temples their sanctity would suffer a set-back. Another objection was that as the radiance emanating from electric lights was more brilliant than that of the sacred fire installed in the Daremehers and Atashbehrams it would be an insult to the holy of holies. Such ridiculous protests were raised not only by uneducated or less-educated orthodox dasturs and mobeds but even by young ervads who had taken Avesta and Pahlavi as their second language and received their B.A. and MA. degrees from the university, thus causing unnecessary hindrance in the progress of the community. Years of discussion have finally ended in success. Although recently, when there was a talk about introducing electricity in Udvada, there were cries of disapproval that it is wrong and sinful to install electric lights even on the streets of so sanctified a place like Udvada and it is only now that that town has, for the first time in its history, been illumined by electricity.
While the tug-of-war concerning burial and the Tower of Silence was going on between the reformists and the conservatives, certain members of the reformist party enthusiastically proclaimed that the days of orthodoxy were numbered and that it was [597] breathing its last. These innocent folk are mistaken. Orthodoxy has been born with the benediction of a long life. It will live as long as man exists. Depending upon a nation's mental development, it will exist in a weak or strong form. As a community we are educated and cultured; yet due to hereditary priesthood or practising priests, the sect that is the custodian of our customs and conventions, (excluding the few exceptions of university-trained dasturs and ervads) due to a lack of opportunity to study beyond the four or five standards of the vernacular as taught in the old tutorial schools or the 4th or 5th grade in English as per the new system at the Madressah, will remain narrow-minded and conservative. Consequently, side by side with the advance in education of lay men and women, orthodoxy is bound to thrive and flourish.
In spite of that the scourge of time somehow enfeebles even long-lived orthodoxy. The educated sons of many an orthodox dastur or panthaky are garbed in European attire today. Similarly their daughters and daughters-in-law move about openly with uncovered heads. To start the day with the application of taro on the face and limbs and many other customs are being frowned upon in these families. A hundred years ago it was impossible to find a home in which a woman's menstrual period was not observed. This has been changing decade by decade. Only the last six years of the present war have dealt almost a dealt-blow to this age old custom. In Karachi alone, approximately one hundred girls from lay and priestly families work in the defense services on high salaries every day of the month. The proportion of women working in other cities may be calculated from these figures. So the embankments of orthodoxy are definitely being washed away by degrees. The clash between the onward march of the community and the customs that obstruct the [598] reforms that follow on the heels of time, is sure to continue. We must not forget that while remaining within the fold, sound and solid customs not customs that are weakened and worn-out by all consuming time cannot be scoffed at, unmindful of the majority. One such obstinate custom is that of Dakhmanishin. Having flourished for two thousand five hundred years it has become deep rooted. Ancient Avesta, Pahlavi, Pazand. Persian and Gujarati writings have unanimously acclaimed it sacred. It is admittedly a custom but a sacred custom that is accredited to be a religious principle. A war is at present waging between the age-old practice of Dakhmanishin and the modern age. We cannot say what the future foretells. But this much is certain that a hundred years ago it would have been extremely difficult to find anyone opposed to this custom of disposing of the dead. Fifty years ago at least fifty families were struggling to be released from the burden of this custom. Today their strength has increased, so we can only guess what may be in store. However at present an exceptionally large majority of the community looks upon it as sacred, religious and virtuous and deems any other system of disposal as impure, irreligious and sinful. Therefore to remain a part of the community and yet to endeavour to effect an alteration that annoys it is impractical and improper.
My humble attempts to bring about an understanding have proved unsuccessful. The Aramgah party has already legally secured the authority to manage the cemetery that was sealed by the Anjuman party. Consequently, side by side with the Tower of Silence, those who wish to bury their dear departed ones will continue to do so.
Next to the Jooddin problem, the major question that has tormented us since the start of the century, is this question of disposing of the dead. Various communities either cremate or bury or [599] drown the corpse. In the age of the Vendidad we gave them as prey to dogs and birds and today only to birds and leave them open to the rays of the sun. Each nation looks upon its own custom as the only sacred one. Each regards it as an inviolable and eternal commandment and considers all others irreligious.
The system of Dakhminishini has been in vogue since the days of the Vendidad, hence it is quite understandable why it is so vehemently defended when opposed. But, at times, carried away by emotion, we say and write things which seem to cross the borders of common sense and appear quite ridiculous. It is declared that the composition of the Gehsarna and other funeral rites is so mysterious and infallible according to divine laws that Dakhminishi and giving the corpse as prey to birds is the one and only system that suits it to perfection. Should a Zoroastrian corpse be disposed of by any other method then all the prayers and ceremonies would be wasted and instead of reaching heaven, the soul of the dead goes astray.
Times are changing. The population of modern cities exceeds fifty to seventy-five lakhs, and is constantly increasing. Due to this even burial is gradually becoming impossible. Since the end of the last century a protest has been raised against it in the West. The newly-enlightened system of turning the corpse to ashes through 'crematorium' is acclaimed by sensible people as the most rapid and most hygienic way of disposing of the rotting and diseased corpses.
Fifty years ago, when the crematorium movement began in the West, there was a strong protest against it. Bishops and priests started a regular jihad against it. Priests openly refused to perform the final rites of those who scorned public opinion and cremated the bodies of their dear [600] departed ones. Eventually the bishops and priests have had to relent. Now they give extreme unction to those who are to be cremated. Today many great ones are openly cremated. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the High Priest of the entire Protestant Church was cremated in public only last year according to his own wishes.
In the recent events that occurred in Poona to bury the dead, our dasturs and mobeds have refused to perform the Geh Sarna ceremony. Like the priests, our Zoroastrian dasturs and mobeds of the East will have to surrender. Dakhminishi is not a system created by the Almighty it is a manmade system. This system of disposing of the corpse has been rendered a sacred custom because of its practice for three thousand years. Yet, even its three-thousand-year-old tradition of sanctity has not endowed it with immortality. With the change of times and circumstances its sway has come to an end. Dakhminishi is merely a tradition. The demolition of a tradition is not the destruction of religion. Tradition is not religion. In understanding, digesting and acknowledging this fact lies the wisdom of all concerned.
All these years the minority has obeyed the majority in all matters, out of sheer respect for its feelings. But now that time has changed. The minority too has feelings. Just as the sentiments of the majority are injured when their wishes are not respected, the minority's sentiments are hurt too. Therefore, in this age of individual liberty, the orthodox party must be prepared to have the broad-mindedness to let each one follow his own inclinations in the observance of conventions.
There is sanity in allowing each to do as he wishes with regard to Dakhminishi, burial or crematorium. It is the birth-right of the new age.
[601]
When man's conscience is aroused he develops, cultivates, refines and enriches his own species and that is called his individual culture. Religion, ethics, philosophy, law, customs, language, literature, knowledge, science, art, crafts, architecture, carving, music, dance, drama, industry all these are medias which raise him from his original savage stage to a state of culture and civilization. The culture of our community began to be moulded in Iran at the dawn of history and after the downfall of our Empire it continued to thrive in that country.
About four thousand years ago after parting from our Aryan neighbours we came into direct and close contact with Chinese, Babylonian, Assyrian, Chaldaean, Jewish, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Syrian, Armenian, Arab and many other smaller nations and their cultures. Just as Achaemenian and Sasanian Iran was the centre of the confluence of the cultures of the Old World, it was also the headquarters from where it spread out in all directions. During this period of contact with various cultures we contributed much and also received a great deal from them. On the whole we have received more than we have given.
Peshdadian and Kyanian Iran speaks of our contacts with the Chinese, the Turanians and the Tajias or the Arabs. Insensitive generations have failed to preserve any ruins, writings, coins or any other insignia of that ancient age. In the priceless Avestan literature alone is confined all the heritage of those days. Achaemenian Iran presents another picture. At that time Iran had vanquished the mighty Babylonian and Assyrian Empires. She had conquered Egypt, Arabia, Sind, the Punjab and [602] many other countries. The cultures of the conquered countries had greatly influenced the culture of Iran. In the winged statue of Cyrus, the crown on the king's head is fashioned in Egyptian style, while its eyes give evidence of Assyrian-Babylonian workmanship. The form and features of the gigantic winged bulls with men's heads which can be seen on both sides of the front porch in palaces are Assyrian. The forms that are known as Farohars have come down to us from the Assyrians and Babylonians. The supernatural animals with whom King Darayus is seen fighting are an imitation of the handiwork of these two countries. The cuneiform writing on the Behistun Mountains and in other places is the heritage of the culture of these great Semitic nations. Ionian craftsmen have worked to lend splendour to the palaces. The marble and metal statues that adorn the interior of the palaces are made by the G reeks. Rather than creative, original work we have imitated others.
At that time the Iranian system of calculating the year had an influence on the calendars of Capadocia and Armenia. Zoroastrianism had a direct influence not only on these two but also on the Jews, which later through them, extended to the Christian and Muslim faiths.
In 250 A.D. since King Asoka accepted Buddhism, the teachings of that religion spread from Eastern Persia to Capadocia. The effect of Buddhist culture was prevalent in Kabulistan right unto the 9th century.
Byzantine -Roman craftsmanship had already found its way into Persia even before the Sasanian regime. The statute of Goertz is a sample of Roman craftsmanship. The carvings representing winged angels of success that can be seen in Takhte Bostan near Kermanshah give evidence of Roman handiwork by Byzantine craftsmen. [603]
The Christians found a foothold in Persia from the time of the Parthians and the monasteries of monks and nuns existed in Sasanian Iran. The Bible was translated into Pahlavi and Pazand. With the intention of converting Zoroastrians to Christianity, religious and philosophic Christian literature was freely distributed amongst them. Despite the strictest vigilance some Zoroastrians were converted and a few, like Maraba the Great, have reached the ranks of a patriarch. From time to time there were disputes and dissensions between Christian and Zoroastrian priests, each vying with the other to bring the opponents' religion into disrepute.
Through Neo-Platonists and Nestorians, Greek philosophy made an appearance in Persia at this time. Tansar, the reformist Dastur of Ardeshir Babagan, himself believed in Neo-Platonist philosophy. King Noshirwan and many other nobles and lords, scholars and savants, studied Greek philosophy most enthusiastically. When King Noshirwan ascended the throne it was said that Plato's pupil had been crowned. Many books on Greek philosophy were translated into Pahlavi. Books on philosophy, whose origin was Pahlavi, were later taken to Europe by the Arabs and in those Dark Ages, the heirs of the olden Greeks through Arabic, were taught the Greek philosophy of their forefathers. The philosophers that had been exiled by King Justian lived with honour and glory at Zend-e-Shapur, the University founded under the patronage of King Noshirwan.
By order of this wise king who was a lover of learning and a patron of art, Hindu scholars cooperated in the translation of many valuable books from Sanskrit into Pahlavi. Just as tyrannical times have prevented the manuscripts of Pahlavi translations of books on Greek philosophy from falling into our hands, these Pahlavi versions of [604] Sanskrit books have not been preserved. However, Panch Tantra's and Hitopadesh's Syrian, Hebrew and finally Arabic translations derived from them managed to reach Europe. The Indian game of chess went to Europe via Persia.
The history of religion tells us that every nation acclaims the language of its own scriptures to be divine. Thus Avesta is also regarded as being celestial. But in the history of languages, what is strange in our case is that the sacred literature that had been composed by Zarathushtra and his close associates in Avesta and in the script of the Avestan period has come down to us as prayers in the Avestan language but they have been written in a completely unknown and alien Semitic script. Should the Prophet and his disc1ples happen to arrive amidst us and a copy of the Vendidad be placed in their hands, they would not be able to read it. Thus the language is our own, but its attire is alien, its script is Semitic. The Aryan languages are written from left to right, but our Aryan Avesta which is garbed in Semitic garments is written from right to left. The court language of the mighty Sasanian Empire was Pahlavi, and Pahlavi is originally Aryan; yet it is written in Semitic script. Its Aryan vocabulary contains many Semitic words of everyday usage, its construction is mainly Semitic and its grammar is also Semitic.
A kingdom was lost, a country was lost; but together with these went something much more precious and that was its literature. A part of it has found a place in Arabic. In the Pahlavi literature that has escaped the scourge of time, not a single song or lullaby or even a line of poetry can be found during the four hundred years of glorious reign of the Sasanians. .
Herodotus is universally acknowledged as the father of history. The science of history originated in Greece. We came into close [605] contact with the Greeks for two thousand five hundred years. The narratives of our Peshdadian and Kyanian era are not authentic history. We are in possession of a collection of legends and folk lore. In the field of history the Arabs are the direct pupils of the Greeks and real historians. Our history, written by sons of the soil, does not exist. The Book of Chronicles compiled by them dealing with the history of Achaemenian Iran is lost. Whatever is available is therefore what has been written by the Greeks who are regarded as their enemies. The Pahlavi writings of the history of Sasanian Iran are lost, hence it is written on the authority of Armenian, Syrian, Jewish, Chinese, Muslim and Roman historians. The world-renowned epic of the heroes, the Shahnamah, which revives the greatness of ancient Parsi kings and warriors has been inspired by the now lost 'Khudai - Nama', the legends of kings and heroes that are recited by the villagers and written by the great Muslim poet Abdul Kasam Tusi (Firdausi) a poet of the people who destroyed the Parsi Empire. Such is our misfortune.
As the sun set on the Empire, Zoroastrian Iran became Islamic. Conversion was conducted in all quarters. Many authors, well-known in history as Arab composers, were in truth converted Zoroastrians. Instead of the resonance of the prayers of Mobeds, the Muezzin's call to prayer could be heard. Zarathushtra's name began to be despised and Mohammed's worshipped. Allah reigned in the seat where Ahura Mazda, the creator of Arya Vaija had resided. Century after century the darkness that had descended upon the Zoroastrians deepened. Troubled and tormented, their ignorance and wretchedness increased and, as time passed, they dropped to the level of backward and illiterate people and Parsi culture languished. Islamic culture flourished all around them. They lacked even the [606] strength to reap its benefit. This dark age of Iranian Zoroastrians lasted almost to the middle of the last century.
The Zoroastrians who became Indians grew up in an environment of Indian culture. The people of Europe, speaking a variety of languages, on settling in America forgot their own languages as two or three generations elapsed and adopted American English. Similarly we forgot our own Parsi Pahlavi language and adopted Gujarati. The Persian names of men and women gave way to Hindu names. Instead of Katayun and Manushcher, we became Cooverbai and Maneckji. Many such Hindu usages did we adopt. Later, with the advent of Muslim culture in India, these two cultures developing side by side influenced the mode of living of the Parsis. We adopted the dress of both cultures, their food, habits, their superstitions, their rites and rituals, and astronomers and astrologers. Thirsty for philosophy and starving for spiritual knowledge, enquiring Parsis went in search of light to the headquarters of Hindu Yogis and Muslim Sufis.
Two thousand five hundred years ago, from the commencement of the Achaemenian dynasty, we came in contact with western culture. This relationship lasted for nearly eleven hundred years and, with the downfall of the Sasanian Empire in the middle of the 7th century, it came to an end. It has been revived in this modern age. The culture that the white Aryans, living on the other side of the Mediterranean, brought with them into our midst is commonly known as western culture. Just as the Hapta Hindu or the Sapta Sindhu gathers strength with the confluence of its tributaries and flows along as the mighty Indus River, this culture too was watered by more than one culture and had bloomed before it reached us. This western culture is primarily made up of Greek and Roman culture, then of the Islamic culture known as [607] Saracen, Moorish or Arabic culture that had spread in Europe during the Middle Ages and, amongst the greater religions, the cult and colour that was lent by the Jewish faith and Christianity. The modern age is the machine age the age of scientific advancement. In the physical sphere science has made unprecedented strides. Even as science wag born in the West, its inventions also originated in the West and they have come to us via the West.
When two different cultures combine, there arises a steady I imperceptible and intimate exchange in social customs, moral standards and mode of thinking. However, when both are stimulated and grow in self-esteem, there results a clash of ideologies. Western culture came into our country and brought with it many new things. Until recently we had worn the headgear of Hindus and Muslims, their loose flowing garments and their slippers. At one stroke the dashing Englishman's necktie and collar, coat and pantaloons turned the rajas, maharajas, navabs, nizams and our community also into Europeans. The Hindus gave us a taste of sev, ganthia, laddoos and jalebi. The Muslims served biryani and palav and we relished them equally. And then English men delighted us with sweets, cakes and macaroons, together with chicken-pies and fish curry and these too found a place in our recipes. We never believed in half-measures we always went the full length. Although our mobeds, during Barashnom, from ancient times ate with a spoon, the young and old of the community always used their fingers. The English ate with knives and forks, so now we were ashamed to eat with our fingers and we started relishing dhanshak with a spoon and digesting meat-balls only when placed in the mouth perched on the prongs of a fork. Besides, those people dined at table, so they were to eat a little more as they sat upright on chairs, whereas we were uncomfortably curled up on low stools or [608] squatted on carpets, hence could digest much less. 'Why had we been such fools?' we mumbled, and began to enjoy God's grace in comfort.
With the loss of our empire, a small group of our people first settled in Kathiawad and Gujarat twelve hundred years ago, and the language of the inhabitants of those places became our own, Some of our scholars adopted Sanskrit of their savants while the masses used its later corrupted vernacular, Gujarati, as their current language. Our coreligionists in Iran used Persian which was derived from Avesta and Pahlavi. The educated mobeds who had come to India had studied it. The Arabs who had conquered Iran could not foist their language on the Persian people. The language of Iran remained Persian, but the Arab conquerors succeeded in encumbering our Aryan. Persian with their Semitic script. With the help of Zoroastrians who had been converted to Islam, in 749, the Abbasid Khalifa brought an end to the Umayyad dynasty and drove the Arabs out of Iran. From that time Persian was raised to the status of a state language. When the Muslims who spoke Persian became the emperors of India, Persian found its place as the language of the court and of the scholars, so our learned dasturs and mobeds used it widely. Now when the English language reigned as the queen of the many varied languages of this country, our educated class began to study it. Perhaps fifteen or twenty mobeds studied Sanskrit during the Hindu era. During the Muslim period at most a hundred or two hundred Parsi scholars became proficient in Persian. But with the advent of English, hundreds and thousands of common people studied it. In the Sanskrit and Persian eras not a single Parsi lady knew those languages. Hundreds of Parsi maidens learned the English language. The thorough knowledge of a language enables its students to enjoy the benefits of its fine literature. Very few had been able to take advantage of the [609] great Sanskrit and Persian literature. Gujarati became the communal language of the learned as well as the illiterate. But the Parsi Gujarati that was used for social communication remained very backward compared to the high Gujarati of the literate Hindu. Despite our contact of over a 1housand years with this language, yet, even today, we cannot find even a thousand Parsis who could enjoy the pleasures of good Gujarati literature. Since some decades our sons have been studying Persian as a second language at the university level. Barring a few exceptions after attaining a degree they hardly utilize this language again, hence the community does not reap the benefit of its rich literature. But English is the language of courts and kings. It is the language of business. It is the common language that links the people of the land speaking a variety of languages. Since it is the language of social intercourse of the educated masses, its knowledge is ever fresh and ever blossoming. Again English is the most widely-known language of the modern world, both in the East and in the West. It is the distinguished language that. holds the boundless treasures of the Old world and of the New of learning and of science. In the history of the community during approximately four thousand years, we have become the devotees of eight languages Avesta, the ancient Achaemenian Irani, Pahlavi, Pazand, Persian, Sanskrit, Gujarati and English. But the ease, thoroughness and facility with which we can read, understand and digest the beauties of the English language and its rich literature have surpassed our knowledge of any other language at any time.
The political awakening that has come into the country since the last six decades and the consequent uprising against the British government, at a cursory glance seems purely political and economic. But its root causes are more profound. At present we are experiencing a clash of [610] conflicting cultures a battle of cultural ideologies is waging all around us. When the English brought the culture of the West into our midst our two vast sister communities the Hindus and the Muslims were worn out by centuries of conflicts with each other and were in a deep political lethargy. They too were enamoured of the new, western culture and, at the sacrifice of their own, had begun to embrace it. But, with the resurrection of self-respect and self-esteem, a reaction was effected. Hindu Muslim cultures have waged war against this new culture of the west. On the other hand these two communities themselves are contesting with each other about their conflicting cultures.
We are placed in the midst of this collision of cultures. We have a kinship with all these opposing cultures. Four thousand years ago, when the seeds of Hindu culture were sown, because their culture and ours had grown from the same roots they were alike in form and feature colour arid contour. Later, new lands, new life and new experiences guided the two along differing ideologies. With regard to the religious principles, the optimistic philosophy of life etc. of western and Islamic cultures, the direction that Parsi culture had given 2500 to 3000 years age to Jewish and through it to Christian and in time to Islamic culture, is present in them even today. Living midst the contention of these great conflicting cultures we have imbibed one thing or another from them, each according to his disposition and inherent temperament.
The British government brought into the country the new education that fostered an acquaintance with western culture in the language of the West and on western lines. We were the first to take advantage of this. We pursued education and science with enthusiasm and eagerness, [611] and were enlightened. Dispersing the clouds of intellectual stagnation that had set in from the time of our immigration, the sun of our culture is shining once again since the turn of the last century. The 19th century was the auspicious century of the renaissance of our culture. In this new era we are gaining a greater insight into the ancient languages of our religion. The historical writings which had lain dormant since centuries have become vocal once more. But much of what has happened and whose benefit we are reaping, has not come about through our intellect or our research. The chaste text of the Avestan language has been revealed to us by western scholars. On the strength of philology the vocabulary, grammar and translations of the Avestan language have been made by western scholars. They have unravelled the cuneiform script. Western scholars were the first to inform us that Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes and other kings were Parsis. Western scholars, at an expense of millions, have brought to light the places and symbols of Parsi glory by excavating the ruins of Persia. They have revealed to the modern world an invaluable collection of its pictures and paintings. Since the last sixty or seventy years we have begun to publish all these things in the Gujarati language.
After coming to the sub-continent we have established about one hundred and seventy-five fire temples. Their construction is not such as to create a spirit of reverence on entering them or to stimulate a devotional atmosphere. The external appearance of Hindu temples, Muslim mosques, Christian churches or Jewish synagogues reveals their identity at a glance. Looking at our places of worship they give an idea of a warehouse or a villa or a bungalow. In building them we have not in any way utilized ancient Parsi architecture. Recently there is an awakening amongst us and we are satisfied with replicas of our ancient Persipolitan [612] scenes on the frontage. The Muslims reaped the rich heritage of the round, elliptical domes of our Sasanian architectural skill and they have lent splendour to their palaces, mosques and tombs throughout the world by employing it in their constructions. We perforce build a dome over the central room that holds the sacred fire in our temples but by raising a tiled roof over it we hide it and destroy its beauty.
Since settling in this country we have gained from time to time from different cultures and we have tried to contribute our mite in return. In using a variety of languages we have given thought to creating some literature in these languages. We have written fiction in Persian. We have written narratives, impressive books on customs (Rivayats), composed Satayashts and Monajats. Much has been written in poetic form also. Yet this Persian literature comprising of lakhs of lines written over the centuries are today accumulating dust on shelves. A very small portion of the Rivayats and Satayashts are being used today, and those too, through their Gujarati and English translations. Only a handful of students find it necessary to examine the original Persian writings. This literature created in Persian gave knowledge and guidance to our studious forefathers in their days, formulated their characters and put them on the path of progress. It is not considered sufficiently important to be translated into Gujarati and English, hence now that Its use is over it is being forgotten.
During the last thousand years the Muslims have also written in Persian. Amongst Muslim authors who have written in Persian are Firdausi, Sadi, Hafiz, Omar Khayyam, Jami, Nazami Faredoon Attar, and innumerable others who have gained immortality through their memorable writings. Not a single Parsi author or poet's name ranks in this list of literary luminaries - it has not [613] been deemed worthy of repute. Superior literature that can be universally acclaimed and can find world-wide renown has not been produced. The scholastic world has not acknowledged Parsi Persian literature as having any particular value. We have written more in Gujarati than in Persian. The style of Parsi writings differs from that of Hindu writings. It is said of Thomas Carlyle that the 'Sartor Resartus' composed by him must have been read by only three people himself, the compositor and the proof-reader. The same could be said of us where good Hindu-Gujarati literature is concerned. Excluding a few exceptions, the majority of the community regards it as written in some alien tongue like Tamil or Telagu and keeps away from it. We have written both in new Gujarati and in old Gujarati, in prose as well as in poetry, in Hindu Gujarati and in Parsi Gujarati. Narratives, history, articles have been written. Gujarati translations of English novels have been made. Stories of Parsi social life have been penned. Plays of Persian history have been written. Songs and poems have been composed. We have created light literature, informative literature, -popular literature. We have not been able to produce classic and refined literature.
While writing in English, John Bull stands like a sentinel to see that the King's English is used. A strong authority on language which can enforce rules of 'Maharaja's Gujarati' is non-existent. Thus, unmindful of the laws and limitations of the science of language, our compositions contain errors in spelling, style, chasteness and they lack flavour. We have failed to keep before us a vision of the beauty and elegance of literature. Right from the beginning we have not cared to emerge as excellent and inspired poets, authors and fiction-writers, and to wield the pen with grace and skill. Due to this carelessness we have lost a great deal and [614] endured untold hardship. Should we but resolve to excel, we can surely contribute our share, however meagre, to the world of literature.
Time fulfils its own purpose. Fifty years ago when the attention of our editors and novelists was drawn to the purity of language, many replied haughtily that if they were to bother about the intricacies of spelling and syntax, they would lose sight of their more important work. Moulded and chiselled by taunts and criticisms, many have come to recognize the rules of decorum and style. We have also come to realise that it is preferable to create original works than merely to imitate. We find a few of our authors paying attention to beauty of style and skill and writing in chaste language and with a facile grace, relating their writings to cultural standards. They have come to realise the greatness of creativity. For the first time Gujarati Hindus have carved the name of a great Parsi poet - Ardeshir Khabardar - on the plaque of literary luminaries in the Hall of Fame of Gujarati literature.
The most precious treasure of a community is its literature. It is the crown of its culture. The history of literature teaches us that the high and the low, the learned and even the illiterate who have been endowed with an innate inspiration, have produced remarkable literature. Jacob Beaumont was a cobbler by profession. He wrote divine philosophy. Kabir was a weaver. He composed devotional songs that stirred the heartstrings of all who heard them. In ancient Alexandria Amoneous Sacas was originally a porter. He founded the seat of the great Neo-Platonic philosophy. The history of literature shows us that many a tailor, an oil-presser or a betel-nut vendor has become a world renowned literary luminary. The despised, disdained and rejected Jewish nation has produced some unique literature. Today we are a minority, but it was not always so. Today we are [615] reduced to a community. Twelve hundred years ago, during our two thousand years of sovereignty we traversed the earth as a mighty nation. Even in those times we have not created any literature of wide-spread fame, capable of going beyond the Parsi fence and appreciated by all creeds and communities, in all countries of the world. These words may sound pessimistic, but they are not born of idle sentiment. It is an established historical fact. Lovers of literature throughout the world have not accepted a single Parsi as a literary genius of international and universal repute. This is because we have failed to produce inspired artists endowed with ingenuity and creative talent who could be universally acclaimed for their immortal masterpieces. Even today we sing praises of our own works and applaud them profusely. Unprejudiced neighbouring critics attach no value to them. Without waiting to reflect on this fact, we rejoice, considering self-praise to be the evaluation of our success. We are elated by this self-appraisal. It is time we rid ourselves of this conceit.
Without being led away by emotion, we need to examine this question with an open mind and from a purely scholastic angle, with the purpose of research. Why is our field of science and literature so bare and barren? Why are we so impoverished in inventive intellect and lacking in creative capability? There is no wisdom in blaming the ravages of time and pacifying ourselves that there was a great deal in the past but time has annihilated everything. Some remnants, however insignificant, of whatever we have written during our history of three thousand years have surely been saved. Therefore we can weigh the worth of what was destroyed by comparing those remnants. Twenty one Nasks were lost or ruined, but details of their contents have been preserved for us through Pahlavi and Persian books. Even the minutest scrutiny does not reveal anything that can be [616] remotely placed in the annals of universally acknowledged literature. This is indeed a pessimistic picture but it is not written in a stupor of pessimism.
Amongst the famous Arab authors that sprouted during the ascendancy of Arab prowess after the downfall of our empire, some were converted Zoroastrians or their descendents. Parsi blood was flowing in their veins. Besides, some of the Muslims who produced superb literature that can attain immortality in Persian which is an offspring of Avesta and Pahlavi, were of Parsi lineage. Then, how was it that what they could not achieve as Zoroastrians, as converted Muslims or their second or third generation, they were able to acquire? Surely it cannot be argued that the miraculous effect of a new faith had in some strange and incomprehensible manner quickened the inherited intelligence and made it more creative and intuitive. Nor can it be said that what Ahura Mazda withheld, Allah endowed. Then from whence flowed the scholarship into the minds of converted Islamic sons and daughters of Zoroastrian descent?
The flame of Arab culture and progress which radiated allover the globe, had been enkindled during the auspicious era of unrestrained freedom of thought. Later with the expansion of the conquest of the Caliphs of Baghdad, the ascendancy of their religious fervour, the establishment of their religious authority, the increase of the control of the Mullahs and the snatching awi1Y of the freedom of thought, the flame dimmed and was finally extinguished. The history of religion teaches us that when fanaticism and dogmatism are in command, thought is fastened by bonds of tyranny, the wings of imagination are clipped and the mind contracts. Culture does not flourish in such a clime. It fades and falls into a trance. Hence, [617] it is neither strange or surprising that it should be so in Sasanian Iran when the church and the state were in collaboration.
Two types of priesthood exist amongst the nations that follow the major religions of the world. One is hereditary. Here no one but those born into the priestly family can enter. In the second group any member of society can join on merit. Our Indo-Iranian society was formulated on class basis. Both comprised of four sects. These four castes still exist amongst the Hindus, whereas amongst us, just this one sect of priests has managed to survive as a distinct caste and that is our Athornan group. The history of religion tells us that when a religious group dominates, it becomes narrow-minded. Under pretext of being the direct representatives of the Almighty, it exercises its authority over all from the king to the pauper. The priest class becomes authoritarian and in time leans towards ignorance, fanaticism and intolerance. The Hindu community has suffered and is suffering a great deal due to the backwardness of the majority of their Brahmins. Yet Hindu literature, art and science have not ceased to thrive and flourish. The main reason is that their population has always been vast and even today can be counted in crores. Hence in their history at every turn new religious sects have been established, infusing into the people a fresh vitality and giving a renewed impetus to their culture and development. The condition of our community has always been different.
Our community is smaller than any other community of the world today. Formerly it was large, but was never extensive. We are constantly hearing and reading that thirteen hundred years ago, at the sunset of our Empire, our population ran into crores, but due to thirteen centuries of conversion it has thinned down to a mere lakh and a quarter. [618] It is true that there was mass conversion in Iran. Similarly from the time the Muslims set foot in the sub-continent, there has been an equally large scale conversion here also. In spite of that the present Hindu population is twenty-eight crores. No famous historian of any standing has believed that Parsi population has ever exceeded a crore at any time, which is quite true.
Our population was limited, its learned section was limited and the scope to speak openly and write freely was also limited. Knowledge and learning were mainly the prerogative of the religious sect. The priests were religious leaders as well as rulers. Since priesthood was hereditary, apart from excelling in ceremonials, the proportion of people proficient in general knowledge was limited. Although living in this free age of the 20th century and enjoying a reputation of mass education as had never been heard of or imagined before, we are not able to display any tolerance, then how can we expect it of our forefathers who lived 1500 years ago in the Sasanian era?
The devotional faith of the time of Zarathushtra's sacred Gathas turned into a ceremonial conventional religion in Iran. The condition of the Brahman religion in India was the same. But in India there continued to be a revolt against it and from the Upanishad era new philosophical faiths, devotional faiths, intellectual faiths, continued to originate. Keeping ceremonial religion apart, the founders of those faiths and their learned followers, through mental independence and freedom of thought went on producing first-class new, original and creative literature. On the other hand our religion in Iran remained static in ceremonials and conventions. Iran did not have an environment that could create scholars and philosophers of exceptional intelligence, capable of original thinking. India continued to create high philosophy that [619] could successfully compete with the great philosophy of Greece. We could do nothing of the kind. The most we did was to translate important books on Greek and Indian philosophy in King Noshirwan's university at Zend-e-Shahpur. We were capable of imitating, not of creating.
Our priestly fold was staunchly orthodox. In modern parlance they may be termed 'best orthodox'. Orthodoxy always exists in every nation to a greater or lesser degree, and it will remain so. But where priesthood is hereditary it becomes inflexible and invincible, because the majority of such a religious fold has unfortunately been deprived of high, general education and will continue to remain so. Orthodoxy is deep-rooted in our Hindu cousins, but just as they have thirty-three crore deities, their innumerable new sects that have been founded give scope for preserving individual freedom of thought. In Zoroastrian Iran thought was in bondage and in Parsi India thought is still in bondage. Hereditary priesthood will never permit the breaking of those fetters and until they are broken we will not be able to produce literature that can be universally acknowledged and universally honoured.
It is a hundred years since we have started writing in English. In 1840 an account of a trip to England was published by a Parsi. Since then we have begun to write fairly well. No other language has given us what English has given us. But no one can tell how long the language will last with us. There is an unfortunate move to make the numerous native tongues of the land the medium of instruction from the primary to the postgraduate level and to give English secondary importance.
Delivering the Convocation, address at the Silver Jubilee function of the Benares University, Gandhiji declared that it was shameful to write and to speak in English. [620]
Through the nectar of knowledge and science of the whole world and the entire era, western culture has refreshed our intellectual ability and revived us. We will never be able to applaud it sufficiently. Yet, due to defective understanding, we have come to vilify it rather than praise it. Our age is the modern age, the age of science, the age of discovery, the age of the dissemination of the latest knowledge. Western culture is garbed in the attire of such an age of' unparalled discoveries. New knowledge has taught man many new things. It has made him view matters from a fresh standpoint to think new thoughts. In the light of research he has come to realize that much of the old was wrong. He has become a seeker of truth, so what seems false to him, he keeps shedding. This is difficult to endure, since we have been brought up on false ideas that what is old is proper and pure and sacred. Hence the new culture is slandered as irreligious, atheistic and unpatriotic. The old age was steeped in seeking man's esoteric life and the other side of existence and it has given to man a precious heritage of religion, philosophy and rituals. The new age is carrying on a scientific research into man's living world that exists between heaven and earth and is making man's life more enjoyable and more comfortable. As though this new culture of the new age were void of a spiritual element it is termed materialistic and we find pleasure and pride in maligning it. Formerly knowledge moulded man's destiny today science is improving, refining and making life more pleasant. Knowledge and science are leading our culture to an ideal of perfection. Both are needed equally for our real refinement.
We should not in any way deter from taking full advantage of whatever contacts time and circumstances give us with oriental or occidental [621] cultures. We should hold the cup of their benedictory ambrosia to our lips and drink deep and with sacred intent. Gleaning from them all their content and draining their very essence we should become adoring devotees of worth-while literature. Developing a scientific attitude we must give to the world thinkers, orators, visionaries, discoverers planners, creators, poets, artists, philosophers and scientists capable of enhancing the honour and glory of our small community.
[622]
Experience is necessary for the perfection of any profession or skill. In the beginning I had none of the prerequisites of a writer. High school education had given me a smattering of Gujarati, Persian and English. Of these three, having studied unto the 7th standard, the knowledge of English was the best. Yet it was certainly not sufficient to enable me to write in that language. On the strength of four years of scanty knowledge of Persian it was impossible to dare to write in Persian. The knowledge of Gujarati that I had received was also very flimsy, but as it was my mother-tongue, without ability or experience, during my eighteenth year, I ventured to write in Gujarati. For three years I wrote short and serial stories and of those years two were spent in composing about one thousand lines of poetry of the following calibre:
"The dog did bark seeing the cat,
And with a bang down came the rat."
Besides, I wrote three books in Gujarati on religious subjects. Since then, as I had started writing in English, after a long lapse of forty years I published my first edition of the Atma Katha in Gujarati, four years ago. During that long span of time, I had published twelve leaflets and pamphlets in Gujarati for free distribution on important matters that were being discussed in the community. Besides these, a few articles were penned for the journals, 'Zarthoshti', ‘Asha' and ‘Rahnuma'.
In 1905, in our philology classes at Columbia University, while studying the style and system of [623] writing oriental and occidental prose and poetry we evaluated their good and bad qualities and their intrinsic worth. Eastern prose, normally, was declared to be imitative, heavy, difficult to understand without the help of a critic like Sion, and exceptionally flowery. The author was depicted as writing five sentences for what could be expressed in a single sentence and taking the trouble to arrange the words in a manner that would sound sweet and melodious. It seemed as though the writer was bent upon exhibiting his own scholarship and his control over language and by his verbosity he would endeavour to divert the attention of the reader from the subject-matter to beauty of style. On the other hand western prose was judged as being natural, straight-forward, simple, terse and easy to understand on the whole. It was appreciated and praised. I could not relish this. It was my firm belief that beauty of style in writing was most essential.
Man puts to use the endless blessings and innumerable gifts that God has bestowed on him. He utilizes them not in their natural, raw state, but after moulding, shaping, chiseling and refining them to suit his intelligence and to respond to his emotions.. If he is building a house it does not suffice merely to give protection against cold and heat and storm. He endows it with craftsmanship and skill and tries to make it as comfortable and as beautiful as possible. He is not satisfied with clothes that can protect him from the vagaries of weather and serve as a means to safe-guard his modesty but he endeavours to fashion them so that they appear beautiful to the onlooker. He does not stop at taking food that can keep the machinery of the human body in order and upon which he can exist, but he hungers to make it as delicious as possible. He does not pass his living hours like an animal, but day and night he strives to make his life pleasant and worthwhile. Then [624] how can he be content at expressing his thoughts, either through speech or through the written word, in unseasoned. dry and drab language? The aim and end of speech and writing is not merely to communicate a man's thoughts to another. While speaking or writing he wishes to display his emotions as much as he wants to transit his ideas. The writer and the reader both are intelligent and emotional individuals. While the intellect of the reader demands clarity and correctness, his emotions crave for elegance and beauty. Just as food is rendered more palatable by the addition of salt, pepper and spices, the structure of language becomes more fascinating and captivating. On auspicious days if we prepare 'sev' or 'ravo', by sprinkling a few drops of some essence on it, we relish it all the more. But with a craze to make the dish extra-delicious if some avaricious cook pours spoonfuls of flavour into the pot. the whole course will be spoilt. Similarly, if there is an over-emphasis on style while writing, it loses its lustre and becomes heavy and unmelodious.
Hence writing must also be suitably adorned. Such reading I appreciated, hence my attention was first drawn to the style of writing in the books I chose to read. Even a serious subject like philosophy can be rendered attractive by a skilful author. This I realized when we were studying Plato's 'Republic' in the philosophy class. It seemed as though he were writing poetic-prose. This work of his appealed to me as much for its deep, philosophic thought-content as for its incomparable beauty of expression. During the long summer vacation I read more of his dialogues. I found the style of the famous pessimistic German philosopher, Schopenhauer, equally beautiful. Even when choosing an English novel or a Gujarati story, after turning the first few pages, if its language did not appeal to me, I would not proceed further. [625]
When I commence writing a book, I first arrange its entire structure with great care. It takes me nearly a year to cull out over three thousand passages befitting the subject of each chapter for every book of mine relating to Zoroastrian religion, ethics, philosophy, ceremonials, prayers, culture and progress from all the Avestan, Pahlavi, and Pazand books. During that period I keep pondering about the overall construction of the book, making the necessary amendments. When the time for writing arrives, considerable thought is given to the subject-matter of each chapter and a mental picture of it is carefully drawn up. Thereafter each chapter is penned including suitable arguments. It is revised, weighing all the pros and cons of the arguments presented. I read it once again from the view-point of style. If by a change or sentence the meaning becomes clearer, that sentence is altered. If the addition or alteration of a word makes the writing more pleasant, that word is altered. There is an abundance of amendments, alterations and corrections. While taking a walk in the evening, or awaking at midnight, if some argument or some sentence-structure or some suitable word suddenly comes to mind, I jot it down on a piece of paper which is always in my pocket or I jump out of bed and make a note of it on the memo-pad that lies on my desk. Later it is relevantly applied. The theme of the writing is examined by the mental eye and weighed by emotions. If the purpose of a particular passage is to play upon the reader's feelings rather than influence his intellect, time is spent in altering the structure of the sentence so as to appear more beautiful and to sound more melodious. Just as time is spent on the contents of the book, thought is also given to its presentation and phraseology.
In the world today there is a great deal of heavy writing which is an outburst of whatever comes into the mind. Disgusted mother-earth [626] mercifully drowns it in the sea of oblivion. In this age of steam and electricity, when it is preferable to run than to walk and to fly than to run, where is the time to glance over an author's artistry, is the question that is asked. Whatever the writer wants to convey to his busy and hard-pressed listener he should express as briefly, as simply and as tersely as possible. Speed is the ideal of the machine age. Speed has brought with it many advantages, but it has also sapped much of a man's life, it has dimmed the poetry of his existence. It is the bounden duty of every lover of literature, every admirer of art to check the tide of man's life from being dragged into the stream and to make it more graceful and more poetic.
The main media of progress of this modern age are the press, the pulpit and the platform. The brilliant and adventurous mobed, Fardoonji Marazbanji, a writer, a publisher, a sailor, a businessman, a banker, a doctor and proficient various skills, designed and made the type, the mould and other paraphernalia of a printing press, established the first Gujarati printing press and gave us the first Gujarati newspaper a hundred and twenty-five years ago. Our press does not stop at giving us news of our homes, our city, our country and the world. It is the community's 'big stick' today. Verily it is the tutor but as it is not able to bear the clean controversy on public communal questions, it gives to them a personal colour and, cooperates only with its own relatives throughout the year thus disgracing its own tutorship. Were it to learn the lessons of tolerance first and then step out to wield the pen, it would surely indicate the path to progress. I n proportion to the strength of our community, on the whole we have comparatively more newspapers and magazines than our sister communities. They contain articles concerning every topic that exists on earth. Their news editors do not rest at publishing news of the four [627] corners of the world, but give information on matters relating to the stars and the moon and the sun and all the things that happen in the realms of eternal light. They enlighten us on all subjects of literature pertaining to science and knowledge, sacred or secular, spiritual or material. The wealth of knowledge contained in big books under various headings is revealed to us through the modern press. It has contributed a large share to the progress of the community.
Newspapers to some extent, and magazines to a very large extent, exist on the worth of the articles contributed by writers. In this respect, from the outset I have disappointed the proprietors of newspapers. As a writer my services are restricted to my books. I do not write short articles. If I were to contribute to one newspaper, I would have to contribute to several. Parsi daily papers and quarterly magazines as well as cosmopolitan magazines of Karachi and other places, constantly invite articles on various occasions. I am obliged to turn down their requests politely every time. This attitude annoys some and others are disgruntled. Some do not remain silent but prefer to punish me. However this habit has advantages. It makes it possible for me to publish my books one after the other instead of frittering away my time and energy in all directions.
I deem it of prime importance to contribute my mite to the scanty literature of the community. I discovered that by participating regularly in cosmopolitan functions and cooperating constantly with civic activities, year by year there was such a growing demand on my humble services that it became impossible to do so except at the increasing sacrifice of my main work of creating literature. Hence, to my great regret, I was obliged to withdraw gradually from public service. [628]
This is an age of encyclopaedias of general knowledge, science, literature and religion. In the West such substantial volumes have been published containing information regarding Christian, Jewish, Islamic and other religions. I had planned to publish one such encyclopaedia of Zoroastrian religion in five volumes, each containing five hundred pages. In the West the publishers of encyclopaedias pay their scholars a good remuneration per page to secure material from them. The writer was paid a guinea a page for contributing to the 'Encyclopaedia of Religions and Ethics', an encyclopaedia of thirteen large volumes containing information on all the religions of the world. t had also received such remuneration for writing in it. Without such payment it is not possible to get any works of great writers in the West. I had arranged to give an honorarium of five or seven rupees per page and to fulfill my mission. Due to the vastness of the population of other religions it is possible to consume the expensive volumes that are printed. There is no such hope in our small community. Therefore, unless the rich subscribe generously to such an expensive project, we cannot venture upon such a major scheme. Eighteen years ago I had tried to muster assistance in that direction. One gentleman offered to contribute the generous sum of five thousand rupees, but as sufficient help was not forthcoming from any other quarter, this important project had to be abandoned with deep regret.
Civilized man has acquired the right of publishing his honest thoughts at a high premium and heavy sacrifice. In an ardour of fanaticism zealots in the East and in the West have been prejudiced in believing that theirs is the one and only true and perfect religion and have dared to burn the books of other faiths and at times even their authors. Even today Roman Catholic priests [629] who are in power, in their narrow-mindedness black-list the names of books they do not approve of and command their congregation to abstain from reading them. A plant needs air and sunshine. Even so does the tree of literature need freedom of thought to flourish. The atheist should enjoy the same freedom of the