Zoroastrianism and History of Parsi's and The Sacred Bull (Varasyaji / Varasyo)

Significance Of Sudra or Sudreh

Sudra or Sudreh is a special shirt of nine seams worn just next to the skin made of cotton and white in colour and prepared from one whole piece of cloth. On such a Sudra round the waist is girded a kusti.

The Mazdiyasnis before the advent of Zarathustra, used to put on sudra and kusti. It was optional then. But Zoraster/Zarathustra made it compulsory. The wear of sudra and kusti with their special cut and make were blessed and given to His votaries as instruments with which the faults of the flesh can be improved upon when the path is treaded upon. Nine seams of the sudra show the significance of our birth on the globe.

1. The girdeua the first seam on the back show the burden of sins which one has to bear and square by Tarikat.
2. The gereban, the second seam on the chest in the heart region shows the significance of honest dealings and obedience to the cannons of morals thus preparing a holy halo round about the body.
3. The tiri, the third seam of a triangular shape is situated on one side of the lower round border.
   In the case of males the triangular seam is on the right side and in the case of females it is on the left side. Its significance is to attain the purity of heart and life according to the aroused consciousness and conscience.
4. The fourth and the fifth seams are the two right and left sleeves covering the arms uptil the elbow.
   They indicate that one has to attain the power of reading the thoughts and knowing activities not only of humanity but of the natural laws and the creation subject to them as animal, vegetable and minerals, these powers being that of Airaman and Saok.
5. The sixth seam is denoted by the front half of the sudra.
   It puts the wearer in mind of the fact that the life is very dear and given with a purpose. It should attain the above-said powers which by the sequence of events due to rigid observances of Tarikat with the further help of the girdle of kusti gain for him the powers of Ashi i.e. powers of Ashoi possessing perfect mastery over the five senses the cause of all passions.
6. The seventh seam is denoted by the back half of sudra which indicates the unknown and unseen Nature and Yazat, nay the very Ahûrmazd. It indicates that the Ruvan finally, when the above powers are attained at making the body lustrous and truthful, will attune with the other two members of its trinity Baodang and Faroher attaining a power called 'Naf-e-Bavri' when the Ruvan will become a peg in the divine machinery of Ahûrmazd which creates the universe.
7. The eighth seam of the straight line is situated on one side of the lower round border. In the case of men it is situated on the left side, and in the case of women it is situated on the right side. In the case of ordinary men and women who have not approached the Khaetvodath, i.e. salvation the seam in the straight line is situated on the front half of the sudra. But for those who are advanced men and have approached Khaetvodath it is sewn on the hinder half of the sudra.
8. The ninth seam is indicated by the double sewn round lower border which indicates the rameshni all joy of Ram Yazat accompanied with the fitness of the Ruvan to attain Khaetvodath i.e. assimilation of both masculine and feminine parts of Ruvan which were separated in the beginning of the creation of the body in lieu of the covenants made with Ahûrmazd. The matter is described in the chapter of the universe.

This round seam puts the wearer in mind of the fact that all events in a life of joy or woes are in the wise dispensation of Ahûrmazd. Such a life is meant to take him to salvation which shows many steps the final being those of Khaetovdath and tan-e-pasin. Woes of life should be borne with contentment as they lead to salvation as soon as possible. In short this round seam of the lower border shows that life should be contended indicating joyous peaceful contended mind named as Tushna Maiti.

Significance Of Kusti

The Pahlavi term used to designate the “holy cord or girdle” worn around the waist by both male and female Zoroastrians after they have been initiated into the faith.

KUSTĪ, the Pahlavi term (Pers. kusti, košti, Guj. kustī) used to designate the “holy cord or girdle” worn around the waist (Pahl. kust, Pers. košt “side, waist”) by Zoroastrians. The term glosses Pahl. aiwayāhan < Av. “holy cord to wrap around, to girdle”>. It is wrapped three times around the waist and is tied with two square or reef knots, one in the front and then one at the back, by both male and female Zoroastrians after they have been initiated into the faith.

The kustī is a single cord of six interwoven strands, each made up of twelve white threads of lamb’s or, less frequently goat’s, wool—that is, a total of seventy-two (72) threads. Cotton can be used as well. The six (6) strands are braided together at each end to form three (3) tassels, which contain twenty-four (24) threads each. The holy cord’s symbolism was elaborated over the centuries. The six strands were equated to the six gāhānbārs or “religious feasts,” the twelve (12) threads to the twelve months of the religious calendar, the twenty-four (24) threads of the tassels to the chapters of the Visperad, and the seventy-two (72) threads of the entire cord to the chapters of the Yasna.

Traditionally, in Iran and India, kustīs have been woven by women from āthornānor priestly families, both as a pious duty and as a means of supplementing their families’ modest incomes. Sometimes the cords were woven by mobeds or magithemselves—a practice now very infrequent. During the 1920s, behdin or Zoroastrian women in the towns and villages around Yazd were trained to weave the cords. Parsis at the city of Navsari in Gujarat became well known for supplying the holy cords to coreligionists in India and in other Zoroastrian diasporas, such as Great Britain and the United States. As in Iran, income from sale of the cords augments family earnings. Parsi girls attending the Tata Girls’ School at Navsari are still taught how to weave kustīs. Other Parsi women learn the skill from their elders; for example, Mrs. Najamai M. Kotwal, mother of Dastur Dr. Firoze M. Kotwal, instructed Parsi girls for almost three decades. Production of the cords is considered a joyful activity during which the women sing, laugh, and share religious and lay stories.

Tying the kustī around the waist with three encirclements (Pahl. kiš) is believed to represent hūmat, hūxt, hūwaršt or “good thoughts, good words, good deeds,” which is the religion’s credo, and thereby serve as a boundary to protect the body against the forces of evil. So it is said to be luminously stǝhrpaēsaŋha- “star-spangled”, encircling each devotee’s midsection like the zodiac demarcating the axis of the sky. According to the Čīm ī kustī or “Reasons for the Holy Cord”, a Sasanian-era text preserved in both Pahlavi (or Middle Persian) and Pazand versions: “The place of all beauty, light, and wisdom is the higher part, the head, which like paradise is the station of lights … that lower half, the place of darkness and desolation, is like hell … and the purpose of wearing the holy cord is to demarcate the two regions.” This theme of separating mental from physical recurs in post-Sasanian texts, such as the Gizistag Abāliš, when explanations are provided as to why Zoroastrians must always wear the kustī. Essentially a religious symbol transformed into an article of devotional clothing, thekustī and its recurrent exercise of untying and retying remind each wearer about the centrality of piety and the need to follow the religious path throughout life.

The rite of wearing a kustī probably dates to pre-Zoroastrian times. A similar practice among the Hindus goes back to Vedic ritual, where men of the upper three castes are invested with a holy cord at a religious initiation—the ceremony of the second birth (Skt. upanayana-)—between the ages of eight and twelve. Those Hindus wear the cord diagonally around the body over the left shoulder and under the right arm, slipping it aside when necessary but never untying it. Although a date for the kustī’s introduction into the Zoroastrian faith cannot be determined precisely, its use may have been present among the prophet Zarathushtra’s earliest followers due to their prior familiarity with the practice. Possible origins of its usage are variously mentioned in the Zoroastrian texts. According to the Yasna (10.21), it was introduced by a holy sage named Haoma Frāšmi. The Dādestān ī dēnīg, on the other hand, attributes its first use to the legendary Pishdādian ruler Yima Xšaēta or Jamšēd, centuries before the birth of Zarathushtra; and later Ferdowsi too would echo this tale in the šāh-nāma. Other legends hold that Zarathushtra commended the custom to those who accepted his preaching.

According to Zoroastrianism, a kustī must be worn by every man and woman who has been initiated into the faith through the navjote (also naojote) or “new birth” ceremony among Parsis and the sedra-pušun or “putting on the holy undershirt” ceremony among Iranian Zoroastrians. During that initiation, which represents transition to adulthood and acceptance of responsibility for religious deed thereafter, each boy or girl dons a white undershirt (Pahl. šabīg, Pers. šabi, ṣudra, ṣedra, Guj. sudra, sudre) and ties a kustī over it around the waist. Thereafter it is a tanāpuhl ( sin to not wear the cord and undershirt, for so doing leaves the person unprotected from evil and consequently is equated to “scrambling around naked” (Pahl. wišād dwārišnīh) in the Šāyest nē šāyest and the Nērangestān. The kustī is mentioned in the third of sixteen Sanskrit ślokas by Ākā Adhyāru as a “good woolen holy cord put on the waist.” The merit accrued from tying the kustī is equated in the thirteenth Śloka to performing “ablution in the [holy River] Ganges.” Compared in the ślokas to “a coat of mail armor,” it also serves to ward off evil under other situations. So, during funerals, the kustī is held in hand to create paywand or “ritual connection” between two persons such as corpse-bearers (who hold this cord between them) while the Zoroastrian mourners, also in similar paywand, follow in procession.

Due to its religious roles, not only must the cord be worn every day during the devotee’s lifetime, it needs to be ritually untied and retied with specific prayers after the pādyāb purificatory ablution—a ceremony called the pādyāb-kusti which involves “making new the holy cord” (Pers. košti nav kardan) or “tying the holy cord” (Guj. kustī bastan).

While untying and tying the kustī, the devotee should face east from dawn to midday and west until sunset—that is, toward the sun. At night, he or she may face an oil lamp, fire, moon, or stars. In the absence of any source of illumination, facing south is regarded as an appropriate qebla, for it is believed to be the direction to the heavenly abode of Ahura Mazdā. The prayers, which are recited during the kustī ritual, are divided into three parts. The first part is called the Nīrang ī pādyāb “rite for ritual ablutions.” Recited before untying the cord, it consists of the Kə̄m nā Mazdā prayer. The second part is called the Nīrang ī kustī bastan/abzūdan “rite for tying the holy cord” which is chanted while ceremonially retying the kustī. The initial Pazand prayer of Ohrmazd Xwadāy (up to pa patit hōm) is a summary of the previous Kə̄m nā Mazdā. The prayer ends with a short Avestan passage praising Ahura Mazdā and showing contempt for Aŋra Mainyu as an act of faith, followed by a line taken fromY. 50.11. This part is completed by reciting one Ašǝm vohū prayer, two Yaθā ahū vairiiō (Ahuna vairiia, Ahunwar), and one more Ašǝm vohū . The third part, which begins with the words Jasa mē avaŋhe Mazdā, constitutes the Zoroastrian confession of faith (MPers. āstawānīh ī dēn); it also is titled stāyišn dēnīh “the praise of religion” in the Pahlavi version. The first line of this prayer is taken from Yt. 1.27 and the remaining portion from Y. 12.8-9. It concludes with the repetition of one Ašǝm vohū.

The kustī’s ritual efficacy must be renewed through the pādyāb-kustī ceremony prior to engaging in other religious acts like worshipping at a fire temple, and after sexual intercourse, urination, and defecation. It is untied and retied upon awakening each day, at the beginning of the other watches or divisions (MPers. and Pers. gāh) of the day. Most Parsis, even when living in Western countries, still wear the kustī regularly; Iranian Zoroastrians often wear it only for religious services so as not to be singled out for maltreatment by Muslims.

The Varasyaji/Varasyo Or The Sacred Bull

A white bull known as the Varasyo/Varasyaji is brought into the fire temple where the nirangdin ceremony is to be performed. A single black hair on the body of the bull disqualifies it from being used as a sacred bull. The word 'Varasyo" comes from the Avesta word 'vareca' meaning hair, because the hair of this while bull is used symbolically in the Yasna ceremony. A metallic ring used in the ritual is known as 'varas ni viti' i.e. the ring with the hair. The hair of this sacred bull is put round the ring.

The Parsis has such white bulls in their principal towns. They are held useful for two purposes.

1) is as described above for their urine, which, together with that of other ordinary bulls is consecrated.

2) is the use of their varesa i.e. hair which is used in the Yasna to serve as a kind of hair seive. This use is referred to in the Visparad(Karda X, 2 varasai Haomo angharezanai. i.e. the hair to pass, as through a seive, the Haoma juice) This bull is not used for domestic purposes.

On its death, all the liturgical services, wherein the varesa or hair is used, are stopped in the town or towns. Another white bull is immediately sought out and consecrated. Until it is consecrated, all the necessary Vendidad,Yasna and Visparad ceremonies in which its hair is used cease to be performed in the town, and are directed to be performed in other towns which have their separate bulls.

Source - Global Directory of Zoroastrian Fire Temples by Marzban J. Giara

History of Parsi's

Qeṣṣa-ye Sanjān (The Story of Sanjān). Iranians have been involved in trade with India from Achaemenid times, but the creation of a Parsi settlement in India was the outcome of the migration of Zoroastrian refugees from their original homeland in medieval Islamic Persia. There is debate over the exact date of this exodus: 716 CE, 775 (Seervai and Patel), 780s (Qeṣṣa; all quotations from this source are taken from Eduljee’s translation), 785 (Modi, 1905, pp. 1-11), and 936 (S. H. Hodivala, pp. 1-11) have been variously cited. The variations are due to the fact that the only source, the Qeṣṣa-ye Sanjān does not give precise dates but rather uses round figures (e.g., “In this way three hundred years, more or less, elapsed … in this way another two centuries passed by … In this way seven hundred years passed by …,”). Furthermore, these are dates between events not all of which can be confidently identified. There is also a further overriding problem. The Qeṣṣa states that it was written down in 1600, based on oral tradition and it must therefore be used with due caution and appropriate allowances as a historical source, given the way it was composed and transmitted.

The Qeṣṣa is, however, important as an indicator of the Parsis’ own perception of their settlement in India. The account of the exodus begins by describing how a group of devout Zoroastrians in Persia went into hiding in the mountains during a time of fierce Islamic persecution. After a hundred years they moved on to Hormuz, but still remained under threat of oppression. “At last a wise dastur, who was also an astrologer, read the stars and said: 'The time Fate had allotted us in this place is now coming to an end, we must go at once to India.’” They sailed to Diu in western India, where they settled for nineteen years: “then a priest-astrologer, after reading the stars, said to them: 'Our destiny lies elsewhere, we must leave Diu and seek another place of refuge.’” But a storm came while they were at sea, endangering their lives, so they prayed “O Almighty God! Help us to get out of this danger. O Victorious Bahrām! Come to our aid” and they vowed to consecrate a Bahrām fire if they arrived safely in India. “Their prayers were heard; the victorious fire of Bahrām abated the storm,” so they arrived safely in India. There they sought permission to settle from the local ruler, Jadi Rana. He asked for an account of their religion and laid down four pre-conditions before agreeing to grant them sanctuary: They should use only the local language, the women should adopt the local dress, they must put down their weapons and vow never to use them and, finally, their marriage ceremonies should be conducted only in the evening; the dastur agreed. In his account of their religion he emphasized the features that accorded with Hinduism, for instance, reverence for the sun and the moon, fire and water, and the cow. He also stressed that their women observed strict purity laws. In short, the settlement in India was written in the stars, their safe arrival was due to divine aid, and they were not asked to forsake any significant aspects of their religion; indeed Zoroastrianism shared much in common with that of the Hindus. Oral tradition relates that Jadi Rana felt apprehensive about granting sanctuary to people of such warrior-like appearance, but the priests convinced the king that they would be 'like sugar in a full cup of milk, adding sweetness but not causing it to overflow’ (a variant relates the placing of a gold ring in the cup of milk; see Axelrod). Tradition states that the Parsi affirmations of their religion were delivered in sixteen statements (Skt. ṡlokas; though the oldest manuscripts date from the 17th century;Qeṣṣa,). They emphasized the points where their religion was consistent with Hindu tradition, but some details do not reflect Hindu practice; for example, there was no reason why weddings should be held at night. It has, therefore, been plausibly argued that these traditions seek to explain why certain Parsi practices have evolved by imbuing them with an aura of historical legitimacy and authority, harking back to the covenant reached with the Hindu ruler when they first settled in India.

The Qeṣṣa outlines the common Parsi perception of the pattern of their settlement in western India. After some time the settlers approached the king for permission to build a temple to house their most sacred grade of fire, an Ātaš Bahrām. He consented and gave them suitable land. The history of that fire, known as Irān-šāh, their “king of Iran” in exile, is central to much subsequent Parsi history.

The legend states that “three hundred years more or less” elapsed while the Parsis settled in peace in Sanjān and beyond. Then the Ghaznavid ruler, Sultan Maḥmud, pledged to add Sanjān to his kingdom. His army advanced on Sanjān “like a black cloud.” The Parsis stood alongside the Hindus. The battle is depicted in epic style. The sultan’s forces included not only horsemen but elephants “… the plain was distressed by the weight of the elephants … Day and night the battle raged … The two leaders were as dragons, struggling with each other with the fury of tigers. The sky was covered with a dark cloud from which rained swords, arrows, and spears. The dead lay in heaps and the dying got no succor - such was Fate’s grim decree.” The battle went against the Hindus, who fled, but the Parsis stood firm and after three days the Muslim forces withdrew, before returning the following day with reinforcements. The Parsi leader, Ardašir, rushed on to the field like a lion and roared out a challenge. A Muslim knight “… riding a swift horse, charged at Ardašir with his lance … the two warriors were locked in combat. The two fought like lions … Ardašir managed to … drag him down, and then he cut off his head.” Then the Muslim reinforcements charged. “The din of clashing swords rose above the land, waves of blood flowed over the field like a river.” Ardašir was struck by an arrow, “blood poured out of his wound; weakened, he fell from his horse and died. When tragedy beckons even marble becomes soft as wax”. The Hindu-Parsi alliance was defeated and Muslims ruled the land. Various Parsi scholars have attempted to identify this invasion with known external history, but with no clear conclusion. Perhaps the significant aspect of the story is not its debatable historical significance and plausibility, but rather the literary manner in which it invokes imagery from the Šāh-nāma, and particularly the way the heroic figure of Rostam is evoked in the description of Ardašir.

Zoroastrians wanted to convince dear Indian King that they do not take so much space in India but they will be like that sugar added to that bowl of milk in society by serving country well.

The Qeṣṣa then focuses on the story of the sacred fire, Irān-šāh. Fearing for its safety in the face of the Muslim invasion of Sanjān, Parsi priests took it to the mountain of Bahrot, south of Sanjān, and hid it in a cave for twelve years before taking it to the village of Bansda; the dates are again disputed. Jivanji J. Modi dates the sack at 1490, while Shapurshah Hodivala puts it before 1478, probably 1465. There were two major Muslim conquests of Gujarat in the approximate period referred to in the Qeṣṣa, in 1465 and 1572; it is not clear which of the two dates is relevant. Because the route to Bansda was impassable during monsoons, Irān-šāh was eventually moved to Navsari at the behest of a legendary leader, Chāngā Āsā. The date is again a matter of debate. H. E. Eduljee considers it one of the few fixed dates in Parsi history, namely 1419. The first rivayat (rewāyat;), that of Nariman Hōšang in 1478, explicitly refers to Chāngā Āsā as leader in Navsari and his achievement in obtaining relief from the jezya (the poll tax levied on non-Muslims), but there is no mention of the transfer of Irān-šāh to Navsari through his proposal, a momentous event which would have been mentioned if it had occurred by then. There is a hint that it had been installed in Navsari by the time of the second rivayat, often referred to also as the rivayat of Nariman Hōšang (though he is not said to be the bearer of the letter) dated 1480 or 1485. In short it seems that the Irān-šāh was moved to Navsari sometime in the late 15th century, and that a precise date cannot be given. This does not bring into question the basic narrative that the Parsis settled in the northwest coast sometime in the first millennium, that they consecrated a fire of the highest grade, and that they were threatened by Muslim conquest, which forced them to take the fire into hiding before establishing it at Navsari. Such events shape community identity and their memory is generally carefully preserved, but precisely because of their importance the stories can be subject to later “elucidation.” Sanjān was at the turn of the millennium a thriving port, and it is plausible that it was a major Parsi settlement as the Qeṣṣa indicates. It was from there, for example, that the Navsari community first called for priests in 1142, but the community there disappears from Parsi history after the “sack” of Sanjān.

Early Parsi settlements in Gujarat

The Qeṣṣa outlines the dispersal of Parsis around Gujarat. It has generally been interpreted as indicating a migration from Sanjān northwards to Broach (Bharuch), Navsari, Ankleshwar, and Cambay, but, as Eduljee points out, the Qeṣṣa does not claim that it relates the only migration of Zoroastrians from Persia. The early settlements were in locations with harbors, some of which could accommodate large ships that crossed the oceans, for example Cambay and Broach, while others, such as Navsari, were harbors used by ships pursuing the coastal trade. The sea-borne trade between western India and the Persian Gulf (and to East Africa and China) dated back centuries (Kearney). The Parsi migrants were not therefore venturing into unknown territory, but to a region with which Iranians had long traded. It is plausible that there were several groups who migrated over the years. As noted below, there were a variety of traditions about the settlement in the early 17th century. The Qeṣṣa-ye Sanjān is the tradition that has become the focus of communal and consequently academic attention and should be viewed, as convincingly demonstrated by Susan Stiles Maneck and Michael Stausberg, not primarily as a historical source but as an example of a particular genre of Persian poetic literature (it is composed in Persian couplets), with theological and apocalyptic overtones that owe much to Islamic convention, especially in the opening doxology, the praise to God “the Giver, the Merciful, the Just … You have made Adam out of clay” (Qeṣṣa,).

There are a number of hints about early Parsi settlements in a range of sources, some Muslim, some notes on old manuscripts, and some early buildings. An extensive collection of such notes is in Seervai and Patel. Some of the earliest are: the Kenheri cave inscriptions of 1009 CE; reports of the presence of Parsi traders in Cambay in the 11th century; the settlement in Navsari, which is said to date from 1142; and a copy of theVendidad made in Ankleshwar in 1258. A new daḵ-ma was built near Broach in 1309 because the old one (undated) was dilapidated. Some grants of land were made to Parsis around Thana in the 11th century, and there is a communal memory and ritual recall of a Parsi massacre at Variav in the 12th century (though the legend takes various forms, see Qeṣṣa,). With such fragmentary evidence it is difficult to plot a coherent chronological history.

There are indications of Iranian Zoroastrians in India about whose history we know little. In the 19th century some western academics and Parsis were excited by what were first thought to be long lost ancient Zoroastrian mystical texts, the Dabestān-e maḏāheb and Dasātir. They were soon shown to be modern texts reflecting the beliefs of some Zoroastrians interested in Sufism and Hindu and Buddhist mysticism. The Dabestān relates that it was the product of one Dastur Āḏar Kayvān and some of his followers. He settled in Patna in his later years and died there in 1617-18. It is not implausible that other Zoroastrians interested in mysticism might also have traveled to India, not only to escape persecution but also in search of enlightenment.

The Rivayats

Chāngā Āsā, credited with the bringing of the fire to Navsari, was a pioneer in another important development in Parsi history. Conscious of the lack of ritual knowledge in his community, and supported by leading Parsis in Surat and other centers, he arranged for a Zoroastrian layman (behdin) of Broach, Nariman Hōšang, to go and seek guidance from the Zoroastrian authorities (dastur) in Yazd and Kermān. He appears to have gone without any letters of introduction, indeed with no knowledge of Persian, so he spent a year in Yazd learning the language while earning a living by trading in dates. The reply he brought back in 1478 was addressed to Chāngā Āsā, as well as to the leaders of the various settlements. Of the 26 Rivayatswritten between 1478 and 1773, 13 were written before 1600, an era otherwise sadly lacking in sources on Parsi history. The Rivayats provide information not only on Zoroastrian belief and practice, but also offer a glimpse into the conditions experienced by Iranian Zoroastrians. They were concerned with the Parsis’ lack of knowledge and urged them to send two priests (ērvad;) to Iran to study the religion, as they themselves suffered from a shortage of priests and could not spare any of their own to be dispatched to India. They praised Chāngā Āsā for negotiating freedom from the poll tax for Navsari Parsis. Sanjān is not named among the settlements greeted in the Rivayat, presumably indicating that the Parsis had moved on. Certain Indian centers were mentioned regularly in the Rivayats, namely Navsari (which had always the largest number of people addressed), Surat, Ankleshwar, Broach, and Cambay (or Khambat). It is a feasible that these were regarded as the main Parsi settlements at the time. ARivayat sent in 1511 expresses regret that Iranian Zoroastrians had been unaware of their co-religionists in India, despite the earlier Rivayats. The Iranian Zoroastrians sent manuscripts of various Zoroastrian texts to India. The signatories of theRivayats were from Torkābād, Šarifābād, Khorasan, Sistān, and Kermān. A common theme in several Rivayats is the terrible hardships suffered by Iranian Zoroastrians, who interpreted their suffering as signs of the final assault of evil before a savior would come and the renovation commence. In contrast, the Parsis were beginning to occupy important social positions such as patels or desais (village leaders and tax officers). The period of Mughal rule (1573-1660) was a time of relative peace and security, in contrast to the earlier period of oppressive rule from the Delhi Sultanate (13th-15th cent.).

Early religious organization

Over the years a system of ministerial districts (panthak) was established, allocating different areas to the religious care of specified priestly lineages. We do not have a precise date when these agreements were reached. The oldest manuscript detailing them is dated 1543 (Sanjana, pp. 98-99). The Panthaks were: (1) Sanjān between the rivers Pardi to Dahanu (nowadays based in Udwada); (2) Navsari between the rivers Pardi to Variav and the River Tapti; (3) Godavra, from Variav to River Narmada near Broach; (4) Pahruc from Ankleshwar to Cambay; and (5) Cambay. Some of the regions, for instance, Sanjān and Navsari, long predate that period. As the Parsis moved around the region, disputes, sometimes violent, erupted over priestly rights and privileges.

The transferring of the sacred fire (ātaš) from Bansda was greeted with joy in Navsari, but it resulted in what might be called substantial “ecclesiastical problems.” The families of priests who had tended the sacred fire from its consecration in Sanjān came with it to Navsari. The initial agreement was that only the “Sanjanas” (priests from Sanjān) should tend to the sacred fire and all other family rites in the town should be performed by the resident priests of Navsari, the Bhagarsaths (the sharers, i.e., of the priestly duties that the original priests sent from Sanjān had shared among themselves). The problem was a delicate one, because Parsi priests then (and now) are not paid a salary for rites performed. When the lay people of Navsari requested Sanjana priests to perform their family ceremonies, bitter disputes arose. In September 1686, seven Bhagaria behdins and two Sanjana mobads were killed. The behdins took one Bhagaria, Minocher Homji, into their fold and established a dar-e mehr in his home (which is still known as Minocher Homji Agiary;). It was a long-lasting conflict involving appeals to secular courts. Eventually it led to the moving of the sacred fire, which had been temporarily moved to fortified Surat 1733-36, because of Marathi Pindari invasion, and from Navsari to Bulsar in 1740, the date established by Shapurji Hodivala (1927,) on the basis of the date of the permission (parvāna) given by the Gāēkwād/Gāēkwār (ruler of Baroda) to move the sacred Irān-šāh. At Bulsar the sacred fire was kept in the house of a priest, since there was no special building, for approximately two years. Despite an appeal in 1741 for it to be returned to Navsari, it was taken in 1742 to the village of Udwada, which was in the Sanjana Panthak, but with a second line of dasturs representing the lineage of the two priests who brought the fire to Udwada (S. K. Hodivala, 1927). There had been a Parsi community at Udwada beforehand, for it had a daḵ-ma built in 1697, but it appears to have been a poor community. There was some rivalry with the larger community in Bulsar.