The Odyssey - Manual of Secret Teachings?

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

ts said:

I'm also wondering if in the general examples of the host (Lot's family in particular) aren't really just aspects of the self - Lot representing man in general, the mob representing i's or various programs, the link between the daughters (uninitiated?) and son in laws represents "the rape of the maiden" or internal struggle?, not quite sure yet what the wife represents

Maybe these particular passages are really metaphors for man's struggle and quest for knowledge? Just some thoughts.

Click to expand...

I thought about this as well. The unruly mob of suitors representing all the little i's, the wife who misses her husband representing the sexual center (the main drive of the unruly mob), the house representing the human body, and the master of the house being absent, in the case of the Odyssey. The son of the master representing the magnetic center that grows and develops through acts of hospitality (emotional center) and skill (intellectual center) finding the master and setting the house in order.

And then Zeus, Athena, and Poseidon in this case representing the action of the Absolute I, II, and III on Odysseus and Telemachus. I wonder if there's an even deeper hidden meaning to the name of Telemachus, "Fighter from a distance."

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Windmill Knight said:

Very interesting. What I understand from this is that the 'sky father' is something like a Universal Balancing Principle, or perhaps the Divine Cosmic Mind. The Cs said that the Universe was about balance, after all. The other two gods can be sto or sts influences, which can be also principles, archetypes or laws (General Law vs Law of Exception), or hyperdimensional beings as such. Or both.

Click to expand...

It's also interesting to see how the roles can change and how complex the dynamics are. In one context Athena acts as a defender/protector and in another she acts as the destoryer. In a way it would seem that the story is designed to make the reader 'think in limitless terms' where identifying the context is key. It seems the law of three is being conveyed. This makes me wonder if the three primary contained apocolypses also have unique principals as well. When I read 'a wolf pack of suiters' I was wondering if they might represent the pathological segment of humanity who try to possess the divine feminine. Interestingly their destruction was the only one that didn't need intervention from Zeus.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Perhaps there's also an esoteric meaning to this idea of hospitality. I can't find the exact quote, but Gurdjieff spoke of paying for every moment in full. If I understand correctly, he was speaking of experience, to pay for our lives by giving our entire being so as to receive the full experience of every moment. And then life becomes a positive feedback loop of being and experiencing.

If we don't treat every experience, which to me would represent thoughts and emotions, with the spirit of hospitality, giving to every experience fully - even the unpleasant ones - then we will inevitably fail the theoxony; to receive or hear the calling of the soul, the higher emotional center, our divine aspect, which inevitably results in a personal apocalypse: physical death. And then the "one just man" who remains IS the soul.

My understanding, feel free to correct me on any misconceptions.

EDIT: The more I think about the Odyssey in this new light, especially the three-ring structure, the more I'm realizing that a lot of the concepts of Gnosis were woven into this narrative format.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

This is a really fascinating project. I'm reading the Butler translation online, never having read The Odyssey before. I'm finished with Book 7 and going to start Book 8.

On the issue of hospitality and the pathological elites having made it impossible in our society, that really hits hard. It's like their Game Theory research to make it REALLY costly to make people care for each other and be truly hospitable. Nowadays, a very large amount of discernment is needed to be able to enact this kind of hospitality so as not to get "burned." It really makes me angry because I think hospitality and caring for others in very basic ways is (or should be) natural for most people.

If pathological influences were identified and quarantined in an effective way, I think it would be the norm for a society. But as things stand now, we need to exercise very careful discernment as to whom we show this type of kindness and hospitality and to whom we draw the line and mean it to stop their manipulations and predations.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

What strikes me in the whole story is how BOTH SIDES "misbehave" in fundamental ways that has impacts on the other side.

There are many passages for instance, where Ulysses does something against all reason and his men then have to pay the price (or the men don't follow an order of Ulysses, which leads them into trouble).

As an example, after having raided the Cyclops cave, Ulysses men wanted to leave and safe the booty, but Ulysses made them all stay to satisfy his curiosity of what kind of person the Cyclop was. He then was trapped and lost several of his men before he was able to blind the Cyclop and flee the scene. Which in turn guides the wrath of Neptune upon his men for having blinded his son - which according to Polythemus' curse will cause the death of all the crew - except Ulysses, who really in this case is the source of their misfortune.

Or after pillaging the city of the Cicons Ulysses wants to leave at once, but his men prefer drinking and celebrating, with the effect that the Cicons are able to gather a big army defeating Ulysses and his men. Apart from the fact that wherever they go they rape and pillage ... but maybe I also take the story to literally?

So not only are there gods who are at odds amongst each other, moody and easily angered, and whose fights have a direct consequence for the humans in question, but also the human deeds influence what the gods are up to, which in turn has a flow-on effect on the humans again.

To me this seems to be a two-way street ... as Above, so Below!

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Only after her judgment on the suitors does “Mentes” give Telemachos
the provocative details about Odysseus seeking poison for his arrows (Od.
1.257–64). She prefaces mention of the poison with a wish to see Odysseus
now as he was then, fully armed, with helmet, shield, and two spears
(Od. 1.256). Just before seeing Mentes, Telemachos was fantasizing about
his father returning, scattering the suitors (Od. 1.115–17). The juxtaposition
of his mental picture with Mentes’ arrival suggests that Telemachos
will associate Mentes’ visit with his father. When Athena suggests a violent
potential in Odysseus, armed with two spears, seeking poison for his
arrows, she points, if indirectly, to his slaying of the suitors,10 the contained
apocalypse that this negative theoxeny, the suitors’ violation of hospitality,
now moves toward. Odysseus will be armed with two spears when he goes
against the suitors (Od. 22.101, 125, though this is standard equipment
for the Homeric warrior). While in Book 1 the violence is only implied,
when Odysseus first returns to Ithaka, Athena demands such destruction,
declaring she expects “his immense floor to be splattered with the suitors’
blood and brains” (Od. 13.395).

Click to expand...

This reminds me of a certain passage from Gnosis I by Mouravieff, page 169.

When our interior world is purified by the penetration of 'B' influences,
the rays of the cosmic Sun; when the interior cage is built and organized as a
command post; when we have ceased to lie to ourselves; what attitude
must we then take to the world and to other people? As we have seen, this
problem is far from easy to solve. Let us try to recognize it more clearly. By
so doing, we will be brought nearer to the solution. For the latter to be
correct, it is important that we do not hurry things. If it is written: 'the
kingdom of heaven is forced, and it is the violent men who hold it,' then we must
not forget to compare this text with the principle according to which the
kingdom of God is within us and not outside us. It is therefore proper to
resort to force and violence above all towards ourselves. This method is
always useful, and is sometimes necessary to eliminate the roots of Illusion
within us, the mother of lies to ourselves. In our actions in the milieu in
which we live, we must take care not to believe that those around us
automatically follow our evolution stage by stage, and that they are at
each moment at the level we have reached by following conscious and
sustained efforts which they have not made. Such an idea would certainly
be absurd; but does not man live in the absurd?

Click to expand...

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

First of all, thank you Laura for undertaking this exercise with us. It's already rewarding, even after 'just' reading the background information here.

I too had the problem of taking the appearance of the gods too literary. Due to this, some things didn't fit for me. For example, I wondered why a god can do this ...

She went on her way, into the house of godlike Odysseus
and there she drifted a sweet slumber over the suitors,
and struck them as they drank, and knocked the goblets from
their hands.
Odyssey 2.394–6

Click to expand...

... whereas most of the time the gods can't do anything directly and Odysseus himself has to act for them.

I also don't know what to make of the "modified divine council" where ...

... a mortal, a patriarch and prophet, serves in place of a god.24

Having Moses act in a role traditionally assigned to a god is
thus a radical innovation. But in an even more surprising innovation, it
is Yahweh who serves the traditional function of the angry lesser god,
while Moses serves the function elsewhere given the sky father, to mediate
and adjudicate the concerns of the wrathful, lesser god.

Click to expand...

Although, as hinted, the outcome of such "modified divine councils" still depends entirely on the god:

Abraham proceeds in much the same way as Moses in Exodus 32, getting
Yahweh to agree to spare the cities if he can find first fifty, but eventually
ten, righteous men (Gen. 18:23–32).

The dynamic is the same. Their dialogue
is clearly adapted from traditional divine councils, the same subtype
we have observed in the Odyssey (Od. 12.376–88, 13.127–58, 24.472–87) and
Gilgamesh (Gilg. VI.iii–iv).

The dialogue features the same radical innovation
seen in Exodus 32: it is Abraham who attempts to mediate, the
usual role of the sky father, while the wrathful Yahweh is in the traditional
role of the lesser god.

The outcome is different, however. Yahweh goes
ahead with the destruction of the entire cities, the usual, middle level of
apocalypse, not the contained apocalypse noted in all five other instances.

Click to expand...

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

I got the impression when i read the Odyssey a few years ago that the story had three layers, with Penelope being the inner emotional aspect, Telemachus being the mental/conscious external aspect, and Ulysses being the higher/soul aspect. Penelope is confined in the house, and is harassed by the unwanted guests who want to feed on her. In the same time they drain the body (the house) and the mind (Telemachus). They could represent attachments or the predator mind, especially when one considers their odd mentality. Ulysses is absent and has his own fights and interactions in the higher realms. It is only the action of Telemachus to travel and seek for the Ulysses that makes the Gods release this later from the Cave of Calypso. So the actions in the three levels seemed to be related with different degrees of liberty. Telemachus has a contact with the higher realms only through inspiration (the guidance of the Mentor) and somehow through high strangeness (when Mentor transforms into an eagle in front of him and Nestor). Ulysses is completely in that realm, and Penelope doesn't have access.

While reading again in the English translation this time, i see more details. It is emphasized the way to interact between "excellent persons" and how they do interact with the Universe (or its manifestations, the gods). The aspect i thought about yesterday was the visit of Telemachus to Menelaus and Nestor. Athena could have asked Jove to liberate Ulysses from Calypso's island from the beginning, but she waited until Telemachus made an action, that he took contact (under her inspiration) with two "excellent persons" who are committed to the truth. It can be a hint into networking in STO manner. The hospitality and the dialogues are described in such a beautiful way!

And the other remark is about eating (fat meat) and sleeping (when it becomes dark). For some reason it is emphasized that these two are important (in Telemachus travel).

On a personal side, the discussion about hospitality made me remember my grandmother. She used to invite strangers to pass the night at home, mostly students who miss the last bus to go home, and she prepared to them the best room (more often her youngest son's room when he was not there), and cooked the best meals she could. When her sons and daughters protested, she just used to say that the house is not hers, that she just occupies it while she is alive. The guests kept contact with her for many years and on occasions visited her with their wife and children, they became her new friends even if she didn't speak their language :)

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

I think that the hospitality question teaches about differences of souled humans and organic portals and psychopaths. Or more precise about differences in the way of thinking and living of normal souled people and psychopaths. In allegory way it shows how people should really think and behave and how psychopaths think and behave.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

This is a grand exercise, thank you for initiating it!

Read The Odyssey in college many years ago and am inspired by a reread.

The posts by Laura of Louden's work is fascinating and has me thinking. Having only reread through Book 4, not much I want to comment on until I familiarize myself with the entire epic.

truth seeker said:

Windmill Knight said:

Very interesting. What I understand from this is that the 'sky father' is something like a Universal Balancing Principle, or perhaps the Divine Cosmic Mind. The Cs said that the Universe was about balance, after all. The other two gods can be sto or sts influences, which can be also principles, archetypes or laws (General Law vs Law of Exception), or hyperdimensional beings as such. Or both.

Click to expand...

Perhaps the guest (defense attorney) represents STO in the form of (hidden/disguised) knowledge and the prosecuting attorney/STS represents entropic forces?

Click to expand...

Yes, my thoughts as well. Though the role can shift between defense attorney and prosecutor as in the case of Athena. She defends Odysseus and condemns the suitors as prosecutor and judges their fate.

Thanks again.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

It strikes me that this motif of the theoxeny can be applied to all levels of society - transpersonal (all beings in the same "world"), interpersonal (neighborhood communities) and personal (the process of the Work and Gnosis).

If this is the case, then it's inevitable that the negative theoxeny will occur on some level.

If the individual answers the call of the Absolute II to "become the hero", go on a quest, and find their higher self, it results in a positive theoxeny for the integration of the personality, fusing of the magnetic center, and achieving access to I, Consciousness and Will, successively. Then this results in a negative theoxeny for the little i's, illustrated in graphic detail by the myth of Ulysses, where "Athena demands such destruction, declaring she expects 'his immense floor to be splattered with the suitors’ blood and brains'". Especially the use of the word "brains" to me represents the Will taking control of the mind, even violently.

However, if many people don't answer this call of the Absolute II, then on the level of a community, which could roughly parallel the situation of the person, all the little i's take over and wreak havoc on themselves and their neighbors, which in one way or another would result in a negative theoxony and judgement on the community, leading to their doom; the action of the Absolute III.

And then on the level of the transpersonal - all of human society - we can see the result of souled individuals not answering the call. The world is horribly out of balance towards STS, and it may result in creation "wiping the slate clean". "Bring on the comets!" as they say.

It's also curious to me that Kronos, Saturn, is cast in mythology as the Father of the Gods. I wonder if this represents the Law of Equilibrium, or the Law of Octaves. The power that "time" has over all things that exist, that everything that has a beginning must have an end, and not even the gods are immune to this. From the perspective of humans, they seem immortal, but perhaps they represent the lifecycle of planets or stars, or 4D and higher beings. There was a time in the mythology when the Titans ruled; the primordial forces that led to the creation of the Earth and the solar system.

Alternatively, whether Kronos represents the karmic principle, and the "film" of one's life. In the mythology, the gods appear to be bound by matters of karma as much as humans; the only difference being that the gods can see everything, and almost always act impeccably.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

mkrnhr said:

I got the impression when i read the Odyssey a few years ago that the story had three layers, with Penelope being the inner emotional aspect, Telemachus being the mental/conscious external aspect, and Ulysses being the higher/soul aspect. Penelope is confined in the house, and is harassed by the unwanted guests who want to feed on her. In the same time they drain the body (the house) and the mind (Telemachus). They could represent attachments or the predator mind, especially when one considers their odd mentality. Ulysses is absent and has his own fights and interactions in the higher realms. It is only the action of Telemachus to travel and seek for the Ulysses that makes the Gods release this later from the Cave of Calypso. So the actions in the three levels seemed to be related with different degrees of liberty. Telemachus has a contact with the higher realms only through inspiration (the guidance of the Mentor) and somehow through high strangeness (when Mentor transforms into an eagle in front of him and Nestor). Ulysses is completely in that realm, and Penelope doesn't have access.

Click to expand...

Excellent analysis. I never looked at it that way and now when you did I find it quite accurate.
I knew this is going to be an exciting thread :)

mkrnhr said:

While reading again in the English translation this time, i see more details. It is emphasized the way to interact between "excellent persons" and how they do interact with the Universe (or its manifestations, the gods). The aspect i thought about yesterday was the visit of Telemachus to Menelaus and Nestor. Athena could have asked Jove to liberate Ulysses from Calypso's island from the beginning, but she waited until Telemachus made an action, that he took contact (under her inspiration) with two "excellent persons" who are committed to the truth. It can be a hint into networking in STO manner.

And the other remark is about eating (fat meat) and sleeping (when it becomes dark). For some reason it is emphasized that these two are important (in Telemachus travel).

Click to expand...

again you are onto something

mkrnhr said:

On a personal side, the discussion about hospitality made me remember my grandmother. She used to invite strangers to pass the night at home, mostly students who miss the last bus to go home, and she prepared to them the best room (more often her youngest son's room when he was not there), and cooked the best meals she could. When her sons and daughters protested, she just used to say that the house is not hers, that she just occupies it while she is alive. The guests kept contact with her for many years and on occasions visited her with their wife and children, they became her new friends even if she didn't speak their language :)

Click to expand...

the wisdom of our old folks is amazing isn't it? My Orthodox grandmother was exactly the same, while my Catholic grandmother was exact opposite. In fact we can observe that in general Western culture which is based mostly on Catholicism has very little regard for genuine hospitality in contrast to other cultures. Just something to take the note of.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Hum, I joined late! I have read it, however,
that was in High School! My, how I loved mythology
as it was called then!

So - I took Butler's text and PDF'ed it for easier reading.

You can get it here or your PDF copy if you so wish!

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

mkrnhr said:

I got the impression when i read the Odyssey a few years ago that the story had three layers, with Penelope being the inner emotional aspect, Telemachus being the mental/conscious external aspect, and Ulysses being the higher/soul aspect. Penelope is confined in the house, and is harassed by the unwanted guests who want to feed on her. In the same time they drain the body (the house) and the mind (Telemachus). They could represent attachments or the predator mind, especially when one considers their odd mentality. Ulysses is absent and has his own fights and interactions in the higher realms. It is only the action of Telemachus to travel and seek for the Ulysses that makes the Gods release this later from the Cave of Calypso. So the actions in the three levels seemed to be related with different degrees of liberty. Telemachus has a contact with the higher realms only through inspiration (the guidance of the Mentor) and somehow through high strangeness (when Mentor transforms into an eagle in front of him and Nestor). Ulysses is completely in that realm, and Penelope doesn't have access.

Click to expand...

I've been thinking along the same lines, mainly that Ulysses is the higher self, the master who is absent from the house. This got me to look up what Gurdjieff actually said:

"Thus, in one teaching, man is compared to a house in which there is a multitude of servants but no master and no steward. The servants have all forgotten their duties; no one wants to do what he ought; everyone tries to be master, if only for a moment; and, in this kind of disorder, the house is threatened with grave danger. The only chance of salvation is for a group of the more sensible servants to meet together and elect a temporary steward, that is, a deputy steward. This deputy steward can then put the other servants in their places, and make each do his own work: the cook in the kitchen, the coachman in the stables, the gardener in the garden, and so on. In this way the 'house' can be got ready for the arrival of the real steward who will, in his turn, prepare it for the arrival of the master."

Click to expand...

Don't know how the deputy steward fits into this, but maybe I'll figure it out as I continue reading. As many here have said, it seems likely that The Odyssey, with it's characters and all, is depicting the inner struggles of man - the battle that is fought in and through his mind.

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

I guess I am reflecting now what it would mean in a broader sense to live a "hospitable" life. I certainly have had some nasty lessons in what it is like to abuse someone else's hospitality. I made it back to this forum eventually after wandering lost for a little while. But now... How to extrapolate these hospitality parables to a broader context?

Also, I am wondering what would be a deeper meaning behind these "contained catatrophes?" Just that these cosmic cycles play themselves out at various scales ranging from the personal to the worldwide?