Is This Principle Correct from a Rational and Logical Perspective?

Third Perspective

Is This Principle Correct from a Rational and Logical Perspective?

imitation is also an inappropriate and irrational action. But just as was determined in the second perspective, this principle is not exclusive to Baha’ism.

Seeking the truth and accepting what is right is an innate matter. This concept is a fundamental basis of the Shi’a Islamic belief which Bahā’u’llāh had firm belief in for years before he founded the Baha’i creed. A glance at the teachings of the Quran can reveal the origins of this so-called novel Baha’i principle. The Quran constantly invites humans to find what is right, go after knowledge, use their reason, and forbids them from blind imitation of their fathers and ancestors. The Prophet of Islam strictly recommended pondering and seeking the truth using reason and intellect when making a decision in regards to fundamental issues of belief.

It is stated in the Quran:

And when it is said to them, “Follow what God has revealed,” they say, “Rather, we will follow that which we found our fathers doing.” Even though their fathers understood nothing, nor were they guided. (Quran 2:170.)

The Quran not only prohibits people from blindly imitating their fathers and ancestors, but also warns about blind imitation of influential groups in society:

And they will say, “Our Lord, indeed we obeyed our masters and our dignitaries, and they led us astray from the [right] way.” (Quran, 33:67.)

But, what if an imitation is not blind and unreasonable? If a person, finds a wise human whose actions, behavior, and do’s and don’ts are logical and rational, should that person not be followed?

Is imitating the exercise form of a professional athlete wrong or unreasonable? Is referring to a specialist in every field, following their advice, and making use of their guidelines unreasonable?

Reason dictates that every person must research about the fundamentals of their religious beliefs. A person must personally do research and be committed to their religious principles and beliefs based on knowledge and reason. This principle is different from the incorrect belief of certain Sufi cults (Bābism which is the basis of Baha’ism was itself greatly influenced by Sufi beliefs. The influence of Sufi beliefs can still be seen in the Baha’i scripture.) that call their followers to blindly obey them and prevent them from thinking and contemplation.

Despite the external appearance of rejecting imitation completely, Baha’is have many decrees and orders that they all must imitate and follow. For example, one can refer to the book of Aqdas—the most important book in the Baha’i creed—and the book Ganjīniy-i ḥudūd wa aḥkām whose do’s and don’ts all Baha’is are obligated to submit to.

Is acting on the decrees and orders of the Aqdas not considered imitation? Is it not an imitation when `Abdu’l-Bahā orders Baha’is to submit to the decisions made by the Universal House of Justice (UHJ)? (“The affairs of the nation are connected to the men of the divine House of Justice . . . everyone must obey [them]. Everyone’s political affairs must be referred to the House of Justice,” Bahā’u’llāh, Ishrāqāt wa chand lauḥ dīgar (n.p.: n.p., n.d.), p.79.)

Baha’i's typically respond to these questions by claiming that the meaning of putting aside imitations, is imitations in undesired things, not any form of imitation! In response to this, it must be said that:

Firstly, in no part of this principle is there a distinction between desirable and undesirable imitations. In fact, evidence shows that the meaning of this principle is imitations in general.

Secondly, if this is indeed the case, then all this publicity is absurd, for not only do all religions and creeds deem blind imitation as undesirable, but all the wise people in the world believe and agree on this. So this principle cannot be considered as a novel, new discovery that sets Baha’ism as apart from all previous religions and philosophies.

Baha’i’s respond to the abovementioned argument by saying that it is true that all religions condemn blind imitations, but the important thing is to act upon this principle, for “all nations are perfect in their sayings.” (`Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Egypt), vol. 1, pp. 127–128.)

Using this criterion, how are we to judge Bahā’u’llāh’s orders to become blind and deaf (“Become blind so that you see my face, become deaf so that you hear my pleasant tone and voice, become ignorant . . .” Bahā’u’llāh, Ad`iyyih-i ḥaḍrat-i maḥbūb, pp. 427–428.) and to close the ears from hearing the words of the critics of Baha’ism? Is the fact that no Baha’i has the right to openly question the orders of the UHJ, and as soon as they start protesting and do not accept the justifications brought forward by other Baha’is, they should be excommunicated and expelled from the community, a sign of seeking the truth and acting upon it?

It is up to you to draw your own conclusions!