alcohol
Edward Sevcik (sevcik@mail.utexas.edu)
Wed, Apr 19 1995 16:16:56 GMT
This topic has probably been much discussed and so I limit the
scope of my question:
The ordinances of the faith expressly prohibit the use of alcohol (and
other drugs, etc) in any form and in any quantity, unless under the
direction of a doctor for a genuine medical need. In other words, the
injunction is not against *getting drunk.* It is not against drinking to
excess and inhibiting our facultires. It is against taking the chemical
into the body, period. Correct so far?
However, the justification offered for this injunction is that alcohol
unseats our reason, endangers our minds, and weakens us, and that it
should not be taken because anyone who deliberately damages the
reasoning faculties which God has given us has left the path of wisdom.
(I am paraphrasing, of course). So, this injunction parallels the injunctions
made against letting the base passions and desires master us, leading
us away from higher thought and consideration.
Excuse me for making this point so clumsily, but here it is: There are many
things which we do in life, many activities and possessions, etc., that
will dominate us if we let them. Gambling, wearing fine clothes, food,
sex, and many other such things. Even such pleasures as conversation
and solitary meditation can become damaging if we indulge them until
they lead to gossip or mendicancy. But that is not to say that those
things are bad *per se.* It is just that an excess of them is bad. Is that not
also true with alcohol? Does putting a half ounce of rum into my Coke
once a day in the evening unseat my reason?
One might argue that the prohibition against alcohol is intended to
be similar to the obligation to fast: in other words, to be something that
we renounce, on purpose, to show our dedication to God. This justification
is sometimes used to explain certain of the Jewish dietary prohibitions.
However, the Baha'i writings don't seem to allow this response.
Does anyone have any comments?
Thanks -
Ed