On this blog, we quite often link to earlier posts on the same blog. When we do, we frequently find minor errors requiring correction, e.g., a name misspelt etc. In the post linked above, we have quoted from SM Stirling's The Peshawar Lancers but have omitted the page reference. My copy of this novel encompasses 458 pages of text. I might reread them all anyway - not a bad idea - but, meanwhile, does any other reader out there know the page reference for Athelstane King's reflection on the god Krishna?
The Peshawar Lancers and Conquistador are my two favourite SM Stirling novels, each conveying a sense of adventure on a new (to us) parallel Earth. These works are culminating peaks of an alternative history tradition that also includes both HG Wells and Poul Anderson. What's not to like?
See also:
blog search result for -
12 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Offhand I don't recall that bit about Athelstane King. What I do recall was mention of the Anglican Church of India holding a synod to debate whether it should accept belief in Hindu "gods." Which would be disgusting and appalling apostasy--and would outrage devout low and high church Anglicans!
And that kind of apostasy is also something no convinced Catholic can possibly accept--as when the Catholic crown prince of France-Outre-Mer politely bur firmly refused assent to that abomination. And we see similar real world apostasies occurring within Anglicanism today.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
In Abrahamic prophetic traditions, it is necessary to be neither polytheist nor atheist but monotheist and, if monotheism becomes monism, that is regarded as heretical.
In Indian contemplative traditions, it is possible to be polytheist, monotheist, atheist or monist. That is where I belong.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I don't believe in or accept monism, which is just another kind of pantheism.
To me, what really matters is what the great mass of ordinary Hindus actually believe, and I mean actual belief in the "gods," as well as practicing the barbaric customs of the caste system. I don't think most ordinary Hindus cares beans about the fine-spun philosophizing of upper caste Hindus embarrassed by what Hinduism really is like.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I believe in materialist monism.
What ordinary Hindus care about is up to them!
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
What ordinary Hindus believe s what matter, not fine-spun theorizing by high caste Brahmins.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
What everyone believes matters!
Diversity.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I say NO to a "diversity" that waters down, contradicts, or tries to explain away what a faith actually believes.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Diversity means many faiths and paths. Every tradition changes, develops and diversifies.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
No, no changes or developments in a faith, any faith, which waters down or contradicts what that faith believes can possibly be accepted if it wants to be consistent and faithful to its beliefs. That is an obvious truism!
So, I have more respect for "hard Hindus" than I do for theorizers trying to explain away into mush the parts they don't like. It would be more honest for the latter to simply renounce all of Hinduism and convert to another faith.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Everything changes and develops, including beliefs.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And I stand by what I said above.
Ad astra! Sean
As do I.
Post a Comment