Fwd: Ban on Priests - Kanga & Khushrokhan to BPP
KEKI SHROFF
From: KEKI SHROFF <shrof...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 7:05 AM
Subject: Fwd: Ban on Priests - Kanga & Khushrokhan to BPP
To: NEW KBS INFORMED GROUP <keki-shroff-zoroast...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: Keki Shroff <ksh...@auracom.com>
From: Dinshaw Tamboly <dinshaw...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 3:29 AM
Subject: Fwd: Ban on Priests - Kanga & Khushrokhan to BPP
To:
For information...
From: Homi R S K [mailto:hom...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2014 3:13 PM
To: Dinshaw Mehta (din...@dinshawmehta.com);
Munchi Cama (mnc.sa...@gmail.com); Yazdi Desai (ya...@writercorporation.co.in); Arnavaz Mistry
(arnavazj...@gmail.com); Khojeste Mistree
(zstu...@gmail.com);
Jimmy Mistry (ji...@dellatecnica.com); Armaity Tirandaz (artir...@gmail.com)
Cc: Jamsheed Kanga (jgk...@gmail.com);
Jamsheed Kanga (jgk...@vsnl.net)
Subject: Further to our message of 29th July
Dear Mr. Mehta and other Trustees of the BPP
Subject: Continuing to mislead the Public
1. We have been following the exchange of correspondence on the ill-conceived Ban on Priests in the Parsi press and are constrained to once again point out continuing attempts to mislead the public by 2 of your Trustees, Mr. Mistree and Mr. Desai. These 2 gentlemen broadly seek to mislead members of the community on two major counts (apart from several other matters):
(i) That the judgment restricts the legitimate functions and duties of the Trustees; and
(ii) That the judgment decides religious matters of our faith.
2. The judgment does not in any manner prevent the Trustees of the BPP from being able to discharge even one legitimate function. In our settlement meetings we have repeatedly asked these gentlemen (on 24th June and then again on 15th July 2014) to please point out even one legitimate function of the Trust that they have not been able to discharge in the last 3 years since the judgment. They have failed to enumerate even one function to this day. We now once again call upon them to publicly declare how the Judgment of Division Bench of the Bombay High Court has prevented the Trustees from discharging their legitimate duties and functions over the last 3 years. If they fail to do so it is patently apparent that they are resorting to scaremongering without any basis or foundation.
3. The judgment does not deal with or cover any religious issues. It does not deal with or decide on the powers of the High Priests, cremation, mixed marriages, Navjotes of children of mixed marriages or any other such issues. We never asked for any decision on these points. It was the Trustees (we believe at the instance of Mr. Mistree and Mr. Desai) who made every attempt to give the matter a religious colour and flavor in court. They failed, but these attempts were reprehensible and irresponsible. Our wonderful and sacred religion was misused as a pawn by these two gentlemen just to try and abrogate powers to themselves, which they do not possess. The real reason was that they wanted to become the equivalent of the ‘Syedna’ of the Parsi Zoroastrian Community, and exercise complete religious control (without legitimacy or authority) over the community. This is the crux of the matter.
4. What we prayed for and what the judgment granted is that every Parsi Zoroastrian has a right to choose the Priest of their choice for performing the customary Parsi Zoroastrian obsequial ceremonies at Doongerwadi for a Parsi-Irani Zoroastrian person who opts for the Dokhmenishini system, and that the Trustees do not have the power under the Trust Deed to curtail this right of every member of the Community. If a member of the community does not want a certain Priest they will not choose him, but every member has a right of choice. This is what the judgment has declared. We believe that all members of this community, whether orthodox or reformist or liberal, do not want to be deprived of their freedom of choice. It is for this reason, in the larger interest of the community that we preferred an appeal from the Order of the Learned Single Judge. Even this Order of the Single Judge (which has been set aside) did not decide the matter on merits and stated that we can file an appropriate proceeding. We were entitled in law to file an appeal and we filed the appeal, which lead to the erudite, scholarly and disciplined judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court.
5. We entreat all of you to please read the Judgment in its entirety. Paras 18 & 29 which were reproduced in our last letter are of particular significance and clearly belie the attempts to mislead.
6. It must be borne in mind by all members of the community that the Trustees are elected every 7 years and can change. Today, you as one set of elected Trustees are trying to lay down a very dangerous and illegal precedent. Subsequently, other Trustees may issue Fatwas of a similar or even different nature, which even you as members of the community may object to at that time. Please act responsibly in discharging your functions and duties and do not seek to exceed them.
7. These two gentlemen have also repeatedly tried to convey an impression that this matter is only about Er. Madon and Mirza. This is also false. It is not about them. It is about the right to choose and the powers of the Trustees under the Trust Deed. They cannot exceed these powers. A threat of issuing a ban against more priests has already been given by the Trustees.
8. The real reason behind the complete misuse of 3 crores rupees of BPP funds, the imposition of an unprecedented ban, the refusal to work out matters amicably and reasonably, is all motivated by the fact that these two gentlemen wish to exercise religious control over the community. This would not only be illegal but also extremely dangerous. Regrettably, in spite of pointing this out to all of you, some of the other Trustees are still supporting these two gentlemen, in disregard of the larger interest of the community and the complete misuse of money meant for charitable purposes.
9. You are fully aware that the recent judgment of the Supreme Court regarding the illegality of Fatwas is of considerable significance. Fatwas of any person or body or religious head are not binding or enforceable and cannot be implemented. This judgment squarely applies in the present matter.
10. We can do no better than end this letter by a most profound statement found in the Judgment “The cohesiveness of a faith is maintained by dialogue not division”.
With regards,
Yours Sincerely,
J G Kanga Homi R Khusrokhan
Keki B. Shroff
ksh...@auracom.com