|Please note that this discussion group is no longer active. This is only an archive.|
Date: 07 May 1999
>Well, I have been reading the articles posted here on the subject of conversion for quite a long time on one hand there are >people like Amir who seem to be more open minded (I think he is Moslem though, from the name)
First, please clarify what your definition of a Muslem is. Then if you are not quite sure about a matter, you should refrain speculating.
>then there are Parsees who are against the conversion and supporters of the purity of the religion.
Referring to Faravahar, remember that the mankind is free to make a choice. If the Parsis think and practice that way, that's their choice (not quite actually because they learn and get brain-washed by the clergy and their family).
If their belief and practice does not comply with Good Thoughts and Good Deeds then they will face the consequences as Zartosht promises.
>First of all, i don't know the attitude of the Indian >Zoroastrians, they seem to have the religion all for themselves, and behave in a way that they think >Ashu Zartusht brought the religion directly for them and them only.
Well, they are not the only one! Jews think the same way and believe that God has chosen them as the elected nation to rule the earth till eternity.
It is not important what followers of a faith thinkj or do , it's more important that every individual understands his/her faith and that's exactly what never happened (in any religion).
>What do you guys mean when you say opposing the conversion kept your religion "pure"?
Genetic purification has a deep root in Zoroastrian faith. It is however not possible to find an evidence that this has been taught by Zartosht himself. Conclusion is that this people repeat what they have heard from the clergy without even thinking about it.
>Somebody up there said "Imagine if conversion was allowed, ...how many people would be Zartoshti in name, but >actually have other beliefs". She basically believes that by stopping the conversion, those mobedhs kept the religion original.
If someone accepts the concepts of another faith, then he/she denouces the privios faith per definition. This proves her ignorance by making such statement.
>I don't know how much you guys have studied, but as far as I look Parsee Zoroastrianism looks more and more like Hinduism!
They have lived there for longer than 1300 years. It is quite natural that the Indian society, culture, religions, language affects them. As far as my studies and my contacts with Parsis show, they have created a sect inside the Zoroastrian faith which is OK. It is freedom of speech afterall. It is the individuals duty to study, think, compare and choose among all the presented arguments.
>Many of the "traditions" you want to hold on to have roots in the Hindu society surrounding you!
See the previous paragraph!
>This is taking too long, basically what I want to say is whatever the religious clergy want to say, those religious clergy like >Tansar and kartir who brought the corruption of the religion at the first place, anyway, whatever they wanna say, if you believe >in your heart in the Humata, Huvakhta, and Huvarashta, and accept with your heart what Ashu Zartosht taught, you are >Zartoshti,
You got this part wrong! It's not about acceptance of heart. It's about practicing them actively.
>whether the "Community" accepts you or not. They might be successful in excluding you from the "Community", but >the ultimate goal which is reaching the eternal salvation is at the hands of Ahura Mazdah and him only.
What happened to freedom of choice then? Ahura-Mazda doesn't give you anything. You should search it anf find it.
Thanks for writing and remember to bring apilgrimage to Appadana Temple! http://www.utd.edu/~asghari/zartosht.htm