-
3. The Parsi Response: Rational Religion and the Rethinking of Tradition
- Syracuse University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
71 3 The Parsi Response Rational Religion and the Rethinking of Tradition Mere chattering without understanding of mind, followed by heart and soul, is not prayer, it is a joke and a mock. —Bahmanji Framji Billimoria, A Warning Word to Parsees (1900) The impetus behind the Parsi religious reform movement derived from both the missionary debates as well as the effects of British schooling on a new generation of Parsis. Reform thus resulted from external theological attacks on existing beliefs and practices that necessitated defense and response. It also had an internal impetus in the form of new cultural and social values instilled by the new Western-style schools. Not surprisingly, the form that religious reform adopted reflected the ongoing religious debates and was believed to be firmly connected to larger goals of “civilization” and “progress.” These two contexts indelibly shaped the contours of the reform movement. Many Zoroastrians agreed on the need for change, but not on the extent or the form that this change should take. While most agreed that they needed a priesthood that was capable of responding in kind to the missionary challenges, others took a much wider and more substantive view of the question of modern religion. The Beginnings of Reform New theories surrounding the dating of the Zoroastrian religious texts challenged many of the assumptions and traditions held dear by the Zoroastrian community. Scholars, on the basis of strong linguistic evidence, agreed that the Gathas were the only part of the Avesta that dated from the time of Zoroaster. 72 | Pious Citizens The rest of the text was of a later provenance and thus certainly not authored by Zoroaster himself. The implications of this new linguistic “discovery” were tremendous. If, as most scholars now believed, only the Gathas were written by Zoroaster, then the subsequent writings were products of later times and did not represent Zoroaster’s own teaching. Scholars concluded on the basis of this linguistic evidence that Zoroastrianism as a religion had undergone significant changes in the post-Zoroaster period—changes that were frequently at variance with Zoroaster’s message. The view that religion has a history and thus is contextually determined represented a very different understanding of religious tradition than that of the hallowed practice of truth. If religious traditions were contextual and changing, then the “authenticity” and truth-value of tradition itself was thrown into question . The recognition of historicity prompted the reconsideration not only of various specific traditions but of tradition itself. Parsi reformers, following Western scholarship, now understood Zoroastrianism as an unfolding historical process. They thus identified “true” and “authentic” Zoroastrianism with Zoroaster only (and thus the Gathas only), dismissing later texts and the traditions associated with them as spurious, false, and deviations of “true” Zoroastrianism. This understanding meant of course that Zoroastrianism as currently practiced was not “true” Zoroastrianism. Parsis explained deviation as historical accretions, distinguishing them from what they claimed was “essential” and “authentic” Zoroastrian practice. In other words, those practices they deemed inauthentic were rejected as Hindu customs that had gradually infiltrated Parsi practice. Community leaders, as well as various Zoroastrian religious figures, moved to “purify” the tradition from historical accretions that had occurred both as a result of the passage of time and as a result of contact with other (in this case primarily Hindu but also Muslim) traditions. As early as 1819 but especially after 1823, the Panchayat took the lead in identifying “backward” practices as Hindu, including child marriages, polygamy, participation in Hindu festivals, excessive expenditures for weddings and other events, and the overindulgence of priests. A contemporary Parsi historian of the Panchayat describes these practices as “stupid,” “unseemly,” “savage,” and “flesh-creeping” and noted that they were “of purely Hindu origin” and “entirely at variance with the spirit of the Zoroastrian religion.”1 Reformers employed their own self-whittled yardsticks in this process of evaluating traditions and practices. [3.94.102.228] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 16:33 GMT) The Parsi Response | 73 In 1852 reformers coalesced around the Religious Reform Association (Rahmuma’i Mazdiasna), which formulated a clear set of objectives for change in religious belief and practice. The central mission was to reevaluate Zoroastrian beliefs and practices using current scholarship and social values as a yardstick. Reformers thus sought to identify which aspects of their tradition were conducive to modern society and religion and which inimical. It was no coincidence that reformers’ commitment to new social values and notions of “progress” became the measure of the authenticity and...