Eclarinal, Gabrielle Eleina P.

September 26, 2016

4ID-1 Prof. ________________________

THE BELIEVER AND THE REALIST: WHAT WAS IT THAT WAS ACTUALLY
STOLEN?

The world covers about two kinds of people, the man and the woman, the young and the
old, and/or the rich and the poor. But in this context, we have the believers and the realist. There
are two versions, on how the answer to a simple question of who the God stealer really is. But
the question doesn’t have a concrete solution, for it would only base on the person pondering
upon it. The two types of people, the believers and the realists, would have different aspects of
course, but the validity of it would depend, as was stated. The realist would straight forwardly
point out the obvious flaw to the person who actually committed the crime of stealing. But a
believer, would state that morally neglecting what is valuable, what is considered sacred even, is
even more preposterous than of a person “just” taking an idol he was originally supposed to
believe in. Thus, stealing and reprobating the significance of a hundred year old tradition. As a
realist, I must admit the intriguing response believers had lain upon, and I respect that. Though, it
shouldn’t have to provoke a person from defying his own.
It had been a long journey for Sam Cristie, a man who aspires to witness the totality of
the world, but a longer journey for Philip Latak, whose roots are of ancient and sacred but sadly
overcome by greed and forgetfulness. Why was it a longer journey for Philip, they’ve been on
the same journey with the same destination, though why was it? To Sam, this might have been
another trip of experiencing diverse cultures, a different environment, and new people. But to
Philip, though his mind was wary of his sick grandfather he left years ago, this was his home
land, and even if he had the same mindset of witnessing the world just like his companion Sam,
coming back home might have always been at the back of his mind. They had different reasons,
why they had set foot on the mountainous, fulfilling region of the Ifugao province. One wanted
to know, and the other one had long forgotten the answers. But it was a dangerous journey of
curiosity, of one too anxious to know and one too eager to recall. One had to be the God stealer,
but who? Was it Sam, who was keen on acquiring an idol for himself? Though his means were
only of obtaining a keepsake. Or was it Philip, who initiated on stealing his grandfather’s
precious God? As valuable as he knows it would be, the means of his intention was only as some
kind of reimbursement for the friendship he had with Sam. So herein would lay the two kinds of
people, the realists and the believers. See, the realist would be convinced that Philip was the God
stealer; after all, he did steal the idol away from his grandfather, even though his friend warned
him not to. He was the one who initiated on acquiring this precious memento for his dear friend,
even though he knew the consequences and its ultimate value to his own kin. The realist would
point out the regret he had of losing the person who gave him his own blood, the reality that he
could not take the blame for himself. While the believers would position that Sam was the God
stealer. Even if Philip never acquired him his grandfather’s God, he would have attained one
nonetheless; whether it be from another person in need of something he’d have in exchange, or
have one made especially for him, his own token of the vast green lands of the region, entirely
overlooking its precious tradition. To those who believed, this was their tradition and their
culture only to be taken granted by a stranger. This mattered, so what good would it have
brought Sam by promiscuously tainting an entirely different culture’s belief?
I have deliberated upon two distinct answers, one I cannot answer wholeheartedly. But to
be honest, after reading the story, the character automatically in mind of being the “God stealer”
was Philip. But then the curiosity of why would one chose Sam as the “God stealer”, struck me.
And thus, the believers had the answer. Contemplating upon which of it was valid and which of
it wasn’t, boggled me. For as an admitted realist, the believer’s had their point. It was as if I had
questioned whether or not my God exists, and it frightened me. I am a realist, but the
unconditional belief that there is a higher being above is within me. I admit Philip’s
grandfather’s claim on the soulless people gallivanting these highland city, swallowed in money
and power, intrigued and questioned me. In a way, maybe, I have lost a part of my soul. For I see
importance in material things, though knowing how highly insignificant they may be in the real
world. And I believe on the absolute existence of God, even though I understand other people’s
views about how the entire belief is irrational. But in a context, the realist in me grows deeper
every day, especially after how people brood over our country’s moral state of calamity. The
explanation might come off shallow, pointing out Philip as the God stealer, solely because of the
obvious fact that he did steal the idol, though it is the reality of the situation. And even though it
displayed how emotionally unstable he was by the end of the story, it just proves to show that
beneath all his hypocrisy on the utter belief of his people, in the end I guess he found what he
had long forgotten years ago. He was succumbed on the friendship he had with Sam, desperately
trying to compensate to a person he never owed, betraying his own kin, betraying his own
originated beliefs that brought upon him. I understand how living in a small town for a long
period of time, would make you feel suffocated, but the journey starts and ends there. What
Philip was looking for wasn’t a new beginning; it was a reason to keep believing. For if he
hadn’t left, would he have realized the greatness his culture had all along, the love his
grandfather proved and showed him beyond all his years of trying to forget?