Ya-Kela thinks that ya-Valland has:
"...curious weaknesses.'" (p. 52)
He is blind at night, awkward in the marshlands, lacking either tail or webbed feet, and ignorant of dangers like dart bushes. Of course Valland is awkward and ignorant in this environment! That ya-Kela does not understand that is a limitation on his part, not on Valland's. In a city, if he ever visited one, ya-Kela would not know to look both ways before crossing a street.
More seriously, if the stranger is not after all "'...from God...,'" (p. 53) then ya-Kela:
"'...will plunge the first spear into ya-Valland.'" (ibid.)
Many on Earth would regard the Azkashi's devotion "'...to God alone...'" (p. 54) as admirable but we have learned from experience how this can go wrong. In London, an Evangelical preacher went to the assembly point of a demonstration in order to address Muslims with remarks like:
"They say that He is not the Son of God and what a blasphemy that is!"
Not a blasphemy, just a different belief!
(What constitutes respect or disrespect to the Lord is largely a matter of tradition. Someone who entered our meditation hall was shocked to see people sitting for meditation with their backs to the Buddha.)
Here at Blog Central, we, editorially speaking, are suffering from a mild cold, therefore reading and posting sluggishly. Also, we are still giving some attention to the less-read James Blish Appreciation blog.
Go with God. (As Blish's Jorn the Apostle says.)
3 comments:
Well, if beliefs directly contradict each other, they can't both be right. Though both may be wrong.
We are used to different versions of a story in the Bible, in the Greek myths, between the book and the film etc. I think differing beliefs are like that: Jesus is the Son of God or a prophet; the Buddha can be seen as an avatar of Vishnu etc.
Of course only one of the mutually incompatible beliefs, if any, can be true but there is no blasphemy involved in believing something different from someone else.
Post a Comment