Equal? Please...
Zoroastrian women have not always been on equal footing
with men
May 12, 2005
iranian.com
Mr. Bhujwala, thank you for your
article and clarification
of one aspect of Vida
Kashizadheh's article, but it seems you
have some misconceptions as well. For one thing, it is definitely
wishful thinking to assume that all Iranians followed monotheistic
faiths, particularly at the geographical crossroads of Asia,
Africa, and Europe. The earliest Iranian religions (from which
the divinities of the Zarthushti faith are thought to be derived)
were polytheistic, and the African (Elamite), Greek, and Semitic
populations and faiths being practiced and absorbed into Iranian
culture all held sway in the religious consciousness of pre-Islamic
Iran.
Mr. Bhujwala asserts that according to Zarthushti belief women
are not the creation of Ahriman, and here he is correct. However,
that does not mean that women have always been on equal footing
with men within the faith. The unfortunate fact is that men and
women were not equal in ancient Iran. For example, the arduous
purification rituals that women had to undergo every month and
after childbirth cannot compare to anything men dealt with. After
giving birth, Zarthushti women lived in isolation for a period
of forty days, and had to perform additional purification rituals
before coming out of such isolation. Similar purification rites
followed periods of menstruation, and these rites were attached
as much to religious belief as to sanitation.
In fact, religious
reasoning dominates in the justification of the tribulations
of menstruating women: Jamsheed Choksy writes that "Monthly
discharge of blood was attributed to lust produced in women by
Jahika [an evil, feminine spirit]. The ritual pollution that
apparently results from this discharge was deemed Nasush's
[another feminine spirit] handiwork." (Choksy 62). These
beliefs were not included in the Gathas, which are the words
of Zarathustra, but they were sanctioned by the priesthood nevertheless.
Of course, what a prophet preaches and what people practice often
turn out differently.
 A big misconception that many Zarthushtis and others hold today
is that Zoroastrianism was a religion that championed gender
equality. Although it is true that women may have had an equal
or better standing in comparison with the Abrahamic religions,
to say that genders were equal is not accurate, and there are
various characteristics and institutions of the faith that can
be pointed to in order to dispel this myth. First, in religious
texts, women are portrayed as morally weaker than men and more
susceptible to the influences of Ahriman and his cohorts; the
female divinities (Anahita, Spenta Armaiti) also play less crucial
a role than Mithra and other male divinities in combating evil
spirits.
In Sasanian Iran, while some women with economic influence
held high positions in society, it was the norm to buy and sell
women (and men, although women brought less) as merchandise in
Zarthushti households, he same as in nearly every other faith,
culture, and country at the time. Women also received less in
rations than men for equal amounts of work (Choksy 80). In everyday
life, up until very recently, women would prepare food themselves
but eat after their male counterparts during special occasions
and religious holidays. Men may become priests, but women may
not. The practice of polygamy, sanctioned by Zarathustra's
own marriage life, only ceased in the past 150 years. It is correct
to say that Zarthushtis were the among the first groups (before
the Muslims, Hindus, Catholics) to embrace progressive ideas
about women in the 20th century, but incorrect to say that this
attitude is due to historical Mazdean social practices.
Finally, I do not seek to negate Mr. Bhujwala's reasoning
as to why new converts are rejected by the orthodox community,
but isn't it a little simplistic to assume that all those
who want to convert to the faith are out to tailor it to their
worldview or to take advantage of the Parsi social network? My
own opinion as to why the orthodox Parsi community rejects the
idea of outside conversion to the Zarthushti faith is due to
considerable Indian cultural influence. A great many Hindus shared
and share the same outlook of the Parsis: those not born into
their faith, especially those of other cultures, may not convert
to their faith.
 Why should we not allow others to convert to a faith which
has influenced all major faiths of the world to such an extent
that anyone who learned about the teachings of Zarathustra could
find peace of mind? I know I do not wish to see one of the world's
greatest faiths die out because there is no longer a viable gene
pool to support an ongoing community. People all over the world
are converting anyway, even in Brasil (look up Comunidade Asha);
you might as well make sure they are learning the faith properly.
About
Maziar Shirazi is a junior at Rutgers University, New Brunswick,
New Jersey. Features in iranian.com
Work cited
Choksy, Jamsheed K. Evil,
Good, and Gender: Facets of the Feminine in Zoroastrian Religious History.
Toronto Studies in Religion. Peter Lang: New York.
|
