We appreciate that you shared your views and feelings with us all.
I trust you completely that this is all heartfelt.
And what is said through the heart from a man of your enormous integrity deserves to be taken seriously in every way possible.
I'm personally very happy to again being able to have a dialogue with our dear brother Ali Jafarey.
I still disagree with his idea that he only quotes and does not interpret Zarathushtra's writings. I don't think the claim is true and it also creates a false sense of authority, probably not intended but still unfortunate.
I believe we all have to be humble enough to acknowledge that we ALL interpret these sacred old texts before us.
Interpretation starts when we READ a text. And why all the extensive comments on the texts if there is no interpretation? Especially the extremely intelligent and learned and devoted comments from Ali Jafarey himself??? Ali's texts are not identical to the original text, they ADD to the original text, interpretations are a force for good, expanding our religion, making us all the wiser for it.
Having said this, I enjoy studying your interpretations, Ali's interpretations, Dina's interpretations, many other interpretations, even my own little mind's interpretations. They all accumulate to make a beautiful religion even more varied and beautiful.
That Gathas ia a fantastic source of enjoyment for us all. It just isn't Ahura Mazda personified. We are ourselves! Our minds are!
2008/7/19 Parviz Varjavand <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
Dear Ostad Jafarey,
I was born and raised in a very closed and strict religion whose members had made every sacrifice possible for more than a thousand year in order to preserve its sacred fires and meaningful rituals. Yet thanks to teachers like you and good other scholars like Poordavood and Behrooz, we learned to adapt and change the structure of many of our beliefs and rituals within the past fifty years. The reason we could do that was that the foundation of the religion was sound and allowed for change that was logical. The religion was Mazdayasni and celebrated the understanding of new and constructive ideas. Our religion chose to be unique amongst religions by being receptive to constructive change.
We dared attack some of the most basic assumptions of our forefathers, so why not attack some of the mistakes that you are making. Many have commented that we have a problem because our religion is progressing along the lines of Baha'ism and other religions that belong in that grouping. Yet you hear not and act hurt when someone speaks their mind about the path you are traveling on and taking the religion with you.
I call you Ostad, kiss your hands and bow in front of you because once you were my teacher and it is my duty to respect you and your work. I also bow in front of the great dastoors and kiss their hands (what am I saying, I have never bowed down and kissed anybodies hands, it is degrading. Saluted you and others and kissed your face I have done and will do again) for keeping our sacred fires and rituals alive for thousand of years. Yet once that basic jester to loyalty is made, freedom must also have a chance to take a breath. If I tell the great dastoors that turning their backs to the daughters of our religion who marry outside the faith is wrong, why should I not tell you that making another infallible book out of the Gatha is also wrong? The path that the religion will take when that is done is the path that Baha'ism travels upon and it will take us to the wrong house.
P.S. I am answering you publicly because you did not tell me that your letter was private or not.
Dear Mr. Varjavad,
Here is an e-mail sent to me by an anonymous person. It is a reaction on what you wrote: <
Thank you for your remark <
>. It fits us well. You and Mr. Bard are the bright free thinkers. I wish your school grows on the global size.
Ali A. Jafarey