Emeth and the Worship of Evil

In our last post we attempted to learn the true nature of the Calormene god Tash. We saw that Tash is not simply an imaginary chieftain god in the made-up mythology of Calormen. Rather, Tash is an actual being who is Aslan’s opposite, evil incarnate. Speaking from the perspective of other works of Lewis, we would say that Tash is the Chief devil, occupying the lowest rung of the Lowerarchy. He is the dark Oyarsa who rebelled against God, and transformed the world into a battleground between good and evil. Our question was, if so, how were the Calormenes to know that what they thought was a god, was really the devil? 

Let us begin our analysis with Emeth. We will have much to say about Emeth (whose name translated from Hebrew means Truth) in future posts, but for now we would like to understand how he finds his way into the Narnian post-world paradise. Emeth is a Calormene and a devoted servant of Tash. Yet, because his worship of Tash was not vile and because he strove to find truth, he is called a servant of Aslan and attains salvation. Understandably, this has caused much consternation especially amongst Evangelical Christians (see for example here and here) who believe that salvation is attainable only through faith in Christ and not through works. Nonetheless, the existence of someone like Emeth demonstrates that one can have been fooled into thinking that Tash, evil incarnate, is actually good. Evil can and will pose as good and develop arguments as to why he is good, while all the time subtly promoting evil. 

When evil poses as good it will ensnare and sometimes trap innocent lives. In the That Hideous Strength, N.I.C.E. poses as a source of law and order while at the same time torturing innocents, brutally enforcing police law, and murdering dissenters. What posed as good, was actually the worship of evil - and not just in these actions. But as we learn later in the story, the core of N.I.C.E. is the true worship of Satan. 

The worship of Tash presumably started in a similar way. By mixing in some good morals with the evils of human sacrifice and the like, Tash convinced common folk to worship him, while actually leading them towards the side of evil. Some, like Emeth, do not succumb to the temptation of evil and believe that they worship a kind and just god. Such people are eventually shown the truth (as Emeth's name suggest) and are accepted by Aslan. Others, like Aravis, see the evil and escape. Most, however, eventually fail. Arsheesh adopted the foundling Shasta, certainly a moral and righteous deed, but later sold him into slavery. 

Shift also attempts to pose evil as good. He convinces innocent Narnian citizens to kill the dryads. He argues that the selling of Narnians to Calormen as slaves is for their own good, He declares that, “True freedom means doing what I tell you.” All in the name of the good Aslan! However, he is actually serving Tash. It is no wonder Shift eventually declares Aslan and Tash are one. For Shift, the antichrist, is attempting to merge the two so that worship in the name of Aslan will actually be worship of Tash. 

Were evil obviously so, most people would simply reject it. It is when evil poses as good that it becomes such a danger. Unfortunately, and throughout Lewis' writings, we see that this strategy is successful and by the time evil is recognized as such, many have been completely corrupted. 

The Sound of Silence: Addendum

Previously, we defined two types of silence:

(1) Silence as a lack of hearing,

(2) Silence allowing for hearing.

We have seen that characters is Narnia experience both types of silence. At times, such as on the Dark Island, they are unable to hear the music of the spheres. Even though there is other noise that their ears of sensitive to, this noise cannot conceal the silence they experience. At other times the silence serves as a means of hearing the music of the spheres. In the silence following the dwarf’s whipping of the White Witch’s reindeer, Edmund is able to perceive the music of the spheres in the spring that has blossomed around him. In both of these definitions the subject him or herself is listening.

The Psalmist, as interpreted by the Sages, speaks to the appropriateness of silence when praising God:

Praise befits You in Zion, O God; vows are paid to You (Psalms 65:2)

The rabbinic reading of this verse differs from the translation above. Specifically, the focus is on the word “befits” (in Hebrew: דומיה), can also be translated as “silence” (in Hebrew: דממה). With that change the first part of the verse becomes:

To you, O God, silence is praise.

The Talmud quotes the words of the Psalmist in the context of limiting the amount of praise one can offer to God. The Talmudic logic is as follows. It is impossible for finite humans to recite all of God’s praises. As formulated in the prayers of Shabbat morning, “Though our mouths were full of Song like the sea… we would be unable to praise You sufficiently...” We must always fall short. However, falling short in praise of the King of Kings borders on blasphemy. Therefore, at least at times, the best strategy is silence.

The importance of silence in Lewis’ work in general, and in the Chronicles of Narnia in particular, is highlighted by Dr. Michael Ward in his monumental work Planet Narnia (of which we will have much more to say in future posts). Ward (page 21) also defines two types of silence: the bad and the good. An example of the bad silence is an astronomical body that does not sing the music of the spheres (Earth, in Lewis’ novel Out of the Silent Planet). The good type of silence is encompassed in the Chronicles of Narnia itself which, as is Ward’s thesis, manifests its most important themes in ways that are not stated.

In Ward’s construction of the Chronicles of Narnia, silence comes to the forefront in The Horse and His Boy the chronicle that manifests Mercury, the god of eloquence and communication. In that book, we find much about language including Narnian and Calormene poetry (of which we have spoken often about on this blog), Calormene storytelling, and Aslan describing himself as “One who has waited long for you to speak.”

Ward notes that in this book Aslan teaches the heroes of the Chronicle, “to speak in a new way, a way that encompasses silence.” This is demonstrated in reaction of Shasta and the other heroes upon meeting Aslan. Shasta “gaped with open mouth and said nothing.” Aravis and the horses, “felt no inclination to talk to one another about his after he [Aslan] had gone.”

Their reaction is similar to the Talmudic one when faced with the responsibility of praising God: silence. This, in Lewis’ description, is a good silence. In our description it is a silence which allows one to contemplate and pay more careful attention to the music of the spheres. When faced with the infinite God, finite humanity (or Narnian horses) realize that no praise or description is appropriate.

Calormene Poetry: On Carbuncles and Olive Trees

In our last post on Calormene poetry we analyzed the verse that compares affection towards one's children to soup. Continuing our study, we now analyze the second part of the poet’s verse which bespeaks the value of children, “Offspring are more precious than carbuncles (assumed to be the red precious stone).” Once again this maxim seems reasonable, what can be more valuable than our children? Even precious stones are less valuable than our own offspring! Nevertheless, such an equation is not found in the bible. The bible does utilize precious stones, gold and silver as comparisons for valuable commodities, including wisdom, a good reputation, God’s commandments, and the Torah itself, but not to children.

Before answering why, and analyzing what the bible does compare children to, let us see how this maxim of the Calormene poet is carried out in practice. How do Calormenes treat their children? The Horse and His Boy provides us with a number of examples. Most strikingly we have Aravis, the only daughter of Kidrash Tarkaan, and great-great granddaughter of Ilsombreh Tisroc. Aravis was betrothed by her father to the Grand Vizier of Carolmen, Ahoshta Tarkaan. Ahoshta is far older than Aravis, is ugly (at least according to Aravis), and appears to already be married (or at least has children from another woman). While, perhaps, some Calormene girls would accept this marriage, Aravis is not interested and decides to escape to Narnia. Why did Kidrash Tarkaan agree to marry Aravis to a man she clearly does not desire and even despises? Obviously to align himself with Ahoshta who holds a powerful position and is very wealthy. Is Aravis more precious than carbuncles in the eyes of her father? Likely yes, but while carbuncles and daughters are valuable, they both have a price. In the mind of Kidrash Tarkaan alignment with Ahoshta is a price worth paying for a daughter.

Second, we have Rabadash, the crown prince to Calormen. As his father’s heir we presume that he is certainly valuable in his father’s eyes. Yet, when presented with a plan that will expand the Tisroc's kingdom to Archenland and perhaps Narnia, but at the risk of his son’s life, the Tisroc accepts. After all, he notes, he has eighteen other sons. Apparently the Tisroc’s son also has a price, the possibility of expanding the power of the Tisroc.

Finally, we have Shasta himself. While not a biological son to Arsheesh, only a truly cold-hearted man could not love a child he raised from the time it was a baby. Yet, neither the Tarkaan Anradin nor Arsheesh himself seem too concerned about pricing Shasta. Arsheesh explains that he saved Shasta first because, “the gods never fail to reward those who befriend the destitute.” Only after that does he note that he is a compassionate man. Anradin responds to this assertion by declaring that the gods have rewarded him and that Arsheesh has, “had ten times the worth of his daily bread out of him in labour.” Thus, he can now part with the boy. The conversation continues but the message is clear, no one, not even Shasta himself, feels too badly about Arsheesh pricing his adopted son and negotiating over him as if he was a carbuncle.

To what does the bible compare children? The psalmist (Psalms 127:4) regards children as arrows in the hands of a warrior, and (Psalms 128:3) as olive saplings around one’s table. The comparison to arrows accentuates that children will assist a parent in battle against their enemies. In this view, children are not simply precious items, but a parent’s most loyal partner and reliable defender. Whether the battle is physical or spiritual, children represent, in the most concrete way, an assurance that the truths and ideals being fought for will continue to live on.

The comparison of children to an olive sapling emphasizes that children grow, mature, and bear fruit like a young tree. This continued evolution of children is unlike carbuncles and other precious stones which are static and only increase in value when acted on by outside forces (market forces or a jeweler). Carbuncles thus have a set worth and can be sold for a given value, though it may be high. Children have infinite worth because they bring joy, happiness, and eventually grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

The Carlomene poet who authored the verse declaring offspring more precious than carbuncles sounds reasonable. However, once again the poet gets it wrong. First, the comparison of children to precious stones is misguided. Calormene behavior in The Horse and His Boy demonstrate that children may have value more than carbuncles, but are still sold for the right price. Second, the poet invokes an incorrect comparison. Wisdom and a good name are items that can be acquired (and lost) by properly (or improperly) utilizing money. Children have value of a different sort. They are at the same time self-perpetuating sources of joy and happiness and also a continuation and defender of one’s values and ideals.