From: Peter Metcalfe (P.Metcalfe@student.canterbury.ac.nz)
Date: Thu 18 Apr 1996 - 01:50:12 EEST
Simon Hibbs:
============
Me>> So what is to prevent Malia from being a 'good' diety in Glamour
>> or other select parts of the Empire?
>You have IMHO an unhealthy preocupation with arbitrary conceptions
>of Good and Evil. Mailia selfishly causes suffering, while Humakt
>brings an ease to pain.
Perhaps you could take the time to read threads more carefully before
making unwarranted characterisations. I see from your use of "selfishly"
and "ease to pain" that my arguments about percieved (as opposed to
inherent) evilness have not sunk in. A RW example for you to chew on:
Look at how devas and ashuras are percieved in both Indian and Persian
mythology and then tell me which one is evil.
- --Peter Metcalfe
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:30:33 EEST