The Odyssey - Manual of Secret Teachings?

Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Black Swan said:
Laura said:
In any event, Odysseus' solution to the situation was radical and shocking. What is THAT supposed to teach us?

I still see it as an allegory for cleansing ourselves of the many 'i's,' to defeat the shallowness of our Suitors cloying for attention in order to distract and mislead so we can finally return Home triumphant with our rational, just, sane, interconnected and compassionate selves restored. :)

That's a really good way of seeing it, Black Swan. Something that I didn't see and probably is quite correct.

What I have been having a problem with for quite some time, well, since Laura started the Creating a New World thread, is just what do you do with the psychopaths when found in a group of like-minded people? If you just "cast them out", what is to stop them from finding others like themselves and then start "getting back" at those who have "cast them out?" Do you just let them come in and kill, torture and enslave everyone?

What Ra had mentioned about how STO beings in 4D do not give up and become slaves to the 4D STS guys is because that would then be giving themselves to the STS cause, which would then turn them into being STS themselves. (Great paraphrasing going on here.) So what to do?

I really haven't been able to come up with a satisfactory way of getting rid of them so that they do no harm to others. Because of that, I am wondering if what Odysseus did to the suitors might have something to do with this? However, I really have a problem with my thoughts of violence begets violence thing. :/
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

dantem said:
Just finished reading the Odyssey in Italian. I'd say that the main recurring themes are:

- Never ending struggle to gain anything
- Hospitality theme
- Theoxeny theme
- Recognition i.e Testing of Will and Conscience theme
- and why not?.. the Food theme! Is abysmally important to eat well before doing anything! ;)

I finally finished reading it in French and it wasn't that bad :D
Because of the archaic phrase structures in the french version it wasn't always easy to read.

I also thought that those themes were overly present in the story.

The characters in the book are crying and sleeping a lot as well.
The washing and clothing also seems to be very important.
Death is omnipresent especially for the secondary characters.

I thought that the Cyclop chapter was quite gory and that Odysseus was testing his luck by taunting the cyclop osit.
As for the killing of the suitors at the end, I don't know if this is meant to be taken literally either
unless the arrows and swords are meant to be the truth cutting out through deception and lies ? :huh:

I can't say I can see or understand much beyond the text so thanks for everyone who offered his/her insights into this.
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Laura said:
In any event, Odysseus' solution to the situation was radical and shocking. What is THAT supposed to teach us?

Odysseus was assisted by the gods - representing aspects of nature, in its widest sense - including those which would cause the Sixth Extinction.

Which will be necessary - some may wake up, but nothing can change for the whole of humanity unless the slate is blasted fully clean.

I think that only then can a conscious nucleus of humanity have a chance to express itself beyond growing and developing itself - preparing, in other words - and spread consciousness on a wider scale.

So I think the coming Sixth Extinction is exactly the help that is essential and needed - "help is coming".

No idea about the role of Odysseus when described as personally taking on the Suitors, though. Perhaps, when everything crashes down hard and relentlessly, full exposure of psychopathy?
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

The killing of the suitors reminds me of two things. First of all, the film Atanarjuat. {SPOILER ALERT} According to wikipedia,

Despite the emphasis on accuracy, the film takes liberties with the original Inuit myth: "At the film's core is a crucial lie," wrote Justin Shubow in The American Prospect Online,[7] which is that the original legend ended in a revenge killing, whereas in the film Atanarjuat stops short of shedding blood. "A message more fitting for our times," explained director Zacharias Kunuk.[8]

Then there's this, from Psychopathy: antisocial, criminal, and violent behavior by Theodore Millon (p. 131):

... in her important study of mental illness in traditional societies, Harvard anthropologist Jane Murphy (1976) found that the Yupic-speaking Eskimos in northwest Alaska have a name, kunlageta, for the

man who, for example, repeatedly lies and cheats and steals things and does not go hunting and, when the other men are out of the village, takes sexual advantage of many women - someone who does not pay attention to reprimands and who is always being brought to the elders for punishment. One Eskimo among the 499 on their island was called kunlangeta. When asked what would have happened to such a person traditionally, an Eskimo said that probably "somebody would have pushed him off the ice when nobody else was looking." (p. 1026)
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

I think there's a teaching regarding Hospitality, on the one hand Homer highlights how hospitality becomes a natural function of those more STO oriented, since each being cares, loves and gives all they have to others. Then we see how hospitality is being exploited by those whose interests are to leverage, exploite, enslave and whom are unable to live in reciprocity.

Telemachus is unable to confront that situation, his assets are being consumed by pigs that are never satisfied, and they are even plotting marry his mother to become owners of everything his father has earned itself.

So hospitality not only shows who the host is, it also shows us whom the guest is.

Yes, Odysseus' solution was radical and shocking, but once a host becomes aware of how him/her has been infested by "parasites guests" whom may end devouring and killing everything, exterminating the plague that pest your home is the only way to be that wich you choose to be. Since no poor or dead can offer hospitality to others.
In this stance Athena provides Odysseus with the necessary force and courage to fight the suitors.

Later on Athena wisely asks Zeus what to do in seeing that Odysseus can't stop himself:
Then Athena said to Zeus, "Our Father Cronion, king of kings, answer me this question--What do you propose to do? Will you set them fighting still further, or will you make peace between them?"

And Zeus answered, "My child, why should you ask me? Was it not by your own arrangement that Ulysses came home and took his revenge upon the suitors? Do whatever you like, but I will tell you what I think will be most reasonable arrangement. Now that Ulysses is revenged, let them swear to a solemn covenant, in virtue of which he shall continue to rule, while we cause the others to forgive and forget the massacre of their sons and brothers. Let them then all become friends as heretofore, and let peace and plenty reign."

And here we see an analogy of the need for STO oriented beings to discern and act accordingly, doing that wich is strictly necessary in every situation, always taking care of not becoming blinded by emotions, osit:
But Ulysses gave a great cry, and gathering himself together swooped down like a soaring eagle. Then the Zeus sent a thunderbolt of fire that fell just in front of Athena, so she said to Ulysses, "Ulysses, noble son of Laertes, stop this warful strife, or the Cronion will be angry with you."
Without Athena Odysseus may have ended carried away by this same force and courage that was necessary at first.
Could Athena symbolize the higher intellect and Zeus the laws of consciousness?
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Ana said:
So hospitality not only shows who the host is, it also shows us whom the guest is.

The intricacies of this whole hospitality thing are beautifully processed in the first act of 'The Valkyrie' by Richard Wagner - where Siegmund encounters his twin sister Sieglinde under the auspices of the host Hunding while being at odds or even at war with him.
Siegmund then goes on falling in love with his sister and committing incest at the end of act one - just to be slaughtered later on in act two by Hunding and his servants while the impregnated Sieglinde escapes with the help of Valkyrie Brünhilde in order to -later on- give birth to Siegfried who eventually will conquer Brünhilde, then no longer a Valkyrie but rendered a mere mortal as a punishment for rescuing Sieglinde.

From all this (and much more) it's rather easy to comprehend why Friedrich Nietzsche was initially so en armoured with Richard Wagner since quite a lot of the themes and memes from the ancient classical world of Homer correspond to the equally ancient German and Norse lore that Wagner used for his Ring of the Nibelung.
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Laura said:
In any event, Odysseus' solution to the situation was radical and shocking. What is THAT supposed to teach us?

Nienna Eluch said:
What I have been having a problem with for quite some time, well, since Laura started the Creating a New World thread, is just what do you do with the psychopaths when found in a group of like-minded people? If you just "cast them out", what is to stop them from finding others like themselves and then start "getting back" at those who have "cast them out?" Do you just let them come in and kill, torture and enslave everyone?

Nothing is to stop them at all. If it's just getting kicked out, they do not feel any sense of connectedness to other beings, the way normal people do. They might be out of easy meals and that is what will make them "sad".

Nienna Eluch said:
What Ra had mentioned about how STO beings in 4D do not give up and become slaves to the 4D STS guys is because that would then be giving themselves to the STS cause, which would then turn them into being STS themselves. (Great paraphrasing going on here.) So what to do?

I really haven't been able to come up with a satisfactory way of getting rid of them so that they do no harm to others. Because of that, I am wondering if what Odysseus did to the suitors might have something to do with this? However, I really have a problem with my thoughts of violence begets violence thing. :/

But from my dealings with my very own house psychopath, force is the only thing that they understand. But as anyone who has ever been angered to a significant degree because of the action of another can understand, it must be tempered. So self control is critical. You can talk to them day and night and it will change nothing of the situation. Talking is only effective or worthwhile if the parties involved are listening and understand what the other is communicating. Anyway just my 2 cents. :)
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Hi,

I am not sure if this fits in this thread but I have an original issue from carmina homerica odyssea, from 1858, unfortunately I am not able to master the greek language( it seems to be in old greek), so I like to make the book available ( for free) if someone is interested, maybe it could be of interest to have an issue that is near to the original. My cousin and me have tried to read the book ( she lives on Crete), but she says it is too hard to translate this book, and the language seems to be old greek, as I menitoned before, so I like to give the book to the „ network“ if you are interested.......

Regards Nimue
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

I'm a few pages behind but this came to mind: I was thinking of Odysseus as the comets. He slays the suitors who eat up his resources. The suitors could be seen as us humans with our agriculture. Or they could be psychopaths who destroy and consume everything.

Then there are some in his house that pass the virtual theoxony that he spares. I also like the idea posed here that the suitors are little i's, and the cooperation between Telemachus and Odysseus.
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Approaching Infinity said:
The killing of the suitors reminds me of two things. First of all, the film Atanarjuat. {SPOILER ALERT} According to wikipedia,

Despite the emphasis on accuracy, the film takes liberties with the original Inuit myth: "At the film's core is a crucial lie," wrote Justin Shubow in The American Prospect Online,[7] which is that the original legend ended in a revenge killing, whereas in the film Atanarjuat stops short of shedding blood. "A message more fitting for our times," explained director Zacharias Kunuk.[8]

Then there's this, from Psychopathy: antisocial, criminal, and violent behavior by Theodore Millon (p. 131):

... in her important study of mental illness in traditional societies, Harvard anthropologist Jane Murphy (1976) found that the Yupic-speaking Eskimos in northwest Alaska have a name, kunlageta, for the

man who, for example, repeatedly lies and cheats and steals things and does not go hunting and, when the other men are out of the village, takes sexual advantage of many women - someone who does not pay attention to reprimands and who is always being brought to the elders for punishment. One Eskimo among the 499 on their island was called kunlangeta. When asked what would have happened to such a person traditionally, an Eskimo said that probably "somebody would have pushed him off the ice when nobody else was looking." (p. 1026)

Interesting AI, the original Inuit myths and names. Not to stray to far from the Odysseus theme, found this, too, by Jane M. Murphy Ph.D

Anthropology and psychiatric epidemiology - 'Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica'

_http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1994.tb05913.x/abstract

ABSTRACT said:
Psychiatric epidemiologic research has been criticized by anthropologists for ignoring cultural variation in the definitions of psychiatric disorders. While recognizing the importance of this issue, it is suggested here that a considerable amount of ethnographic evidence indicates that many types of comparative effort can be carried out without cultural injustice. It is also urged that anthropologists provide a system for classifying cultures so as to foster an understanding of the ways in which shared beliefs and meanings can influence psychiatric illness. Categorizing populations as Western versus Non-Western or Developed versus Developing is inadequate as a basis for studying the cultural context of psychiatric illness in different parts of the world.

Which is another, albeit likely related discussion burying into the mines of myths and cultures; a book perhaps worth reading.

Thanks for everyone's thoughts on this Odysseus thread, it has been a most interesting learning effort, with offshoots, too.
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Beetlemaniac posted Robert Romanyshyn On Technology as Symptom & Dream from a Jung site on the "feminine energy" thread which illuminates the possibilities of returning soul to the world. The interview deepened my understanding of the importance of metaphor and myth in the world war to dethrone the disembodied mind from its illicit occupation of the seat of the soul threatening man's planetary home. The work resonates with Odysseus's return home to reclaim what is his from unlawful suitors eating his stores and attempting to seduce his wife. The linear mind of science has unlawfully occupied the soul's home. I copied a short portion of the interview, but its entirety is recommended.

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic said:
Dolores: Cyberspace as a waking dream? Can you say more about what you mean?

Robert: An historical analogy might help here. In the Homeric world of ancient Greece human consciousness was organized more or less as a mythic way of experiencing the world. With Plato and the subsequent development of western consciousness, mythic ways of knowing and being are replaced by rational and empirical styles of consciousness. The latter pretends to an objectivity which the former supposedly lacks. But rational and scientific modes of consciousness also have a mythic depth to them. Jung and Von Franz are especially good at making this point, and I increasingly lean on both of them in my work.

Now it seems to me that the singular and radical importance of Freud's and Jung's discovery of the unconscious was and is the possibility of moving us out of mythic consciousness, including its rational and empirical styles, to a kind of consciousness which knows that it is in a myth, or dream, or perspective, even when it does not know the myth, or dream, or perspective it is within. I call this style of consciousness metaphorical consciousness, and I describe it as a reflexive mythical consciousness, that is a consciousness which is always aware of its perspectival character.

Dolores: So the technology of cyberspace is another shift in human consciousness, a shift from mythic to metaphorical awareness? What is a metaphoric style of consciousness?

Robert: In mythic consciousness, one lives in an animate world without any doubt or question. The world is alive and we participate in that cycle of vitality in a kind of unreflective fashion. Now the rational mind of scientific-technological consciousness has disturbed that way of being in the world. The rational mind begins with doubt. Metaphoric consciousness returns us to the animate world. But having left the mythic world, we cannot return to it as we once were, naive and unreflective. Now we have to live in an animate world with the recognition that its animation is in relation to a consciousness which knows it is animated. It is no longer the case that the world is animated. Now it is the case that the world is animated in relation to and as a relation with a consciousness that recognizes the world's animation. This a subtle but important difference with major consequences.

Dolores: What are some of those consequences?

Robert: Well, one major consequence is that consciousness now becomes a radically ethical issue. In metaphoric consciousness we have to take responsibility for how we participate in continuing the work of creation. A metaphor, by its very nature, implicates the knower in what is known. What a metaphor envisions reflects who envisions it and how that one is.

If, for example, you ask me what I think of aging, and I say to you that old age is the evening of life, I tell you as much about who and how I am as I do about what aging is. And on a collective level, if we say that energy and matter are interchangeable, that e=mc squared, then we are helping to bring that world into being, with all its consequences including nuclear weapons.

You see, metaphoric consciousness does not let us off the hook. We cannot say that e=mc squared is a fact of nature simply waiting to be discovered, and that, therefore, the bomb has nothing to do with us.

Dolores: So metaphoric consciousness makes us partners in the creation of reality, and challenges us to take responsibility for it.

Robert: Yes! and if this sounds too philosophical, then consider that quantum physics brings up the same challenge. It clearly indicates that consciousness is inherent in nature, and that the consciousness of the observer participates in shaping what is observed. Quantum physics presents consciousness as an ethical issue.
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

My thoughts on Book I:

but do what he might he could not save his men, for they perished through their own sheer folly in eating the cattle of the Sun-god Hyperion

He could not save his men, as in: could not violate their free will. Their own 'foolishness' caused their death, their own 'choices' so to speak.

So now all who escaped death in battle or by shipwreck had got safely
home except Ulysses, and he, though he was longing to return to his
wife and country, was detained by the goddess Calypso, who had got
him into a large cave and wanted to marry him. But as years went by,
there came a time when the gods settled that he should go back to
Ithaca
;

''There came a time'' Would this indicate a cycle? After struggling and being stuck for a long time, an opportunity once more arises to escape? A certain Law playing a role here?

Minerva said:
This daughter of Atlas has got hold of poor unhappy Ulysses,
and keeps trying by every kind of blandishment to make him forget
his home, so that he is tired of life, and thinks of nothing but how
he may once more see the smoke of his own chimneys. You, sir, take
no heed of this, and yet when Ulysses was before Troy did he not propitiate
you with many a burnt sacrifice?
Why then should you keep on being
so angry with him?"

Sacrifices don't need to be seen literal here. What could the symbolic meaning of sacrifice be here? Perhaps in the Gurdjieffian sense, the sacrifice of oneself (one's programs/ego f.e.) for the betterment of others and himself. This could be seen as an act of respect to the Universe, and all that exists. And as a result, the Universe could show respect back: opportunities arising when the 'time' is right or other ways. And these opportunitistic situations could be seen as horrific situations where great struggle and discipline is needed and is asked for. But also there could be opportunities of ways and signs to escape out of a horrific situation. Basically the Universe helping on whatever path a person finds himself in.

The imprisonment by Atlas could be seen as a situation with a Petty Tyrant who keeps one imprisoned from the main aim and purpose in Life. Which for him, probably was to go home. And perhaps our goal is the same? To go home? To connect to our 'roots' once more? Perhaps, we first would need to struggle towards going home (i.e. cleaning ourselves), and perhaps, with the help of the Universe and the colinear network, this Aim becomes more possible.

Both the Universe and this colinear network can be seen as the 'Gods/Godesses' helping every individual that they (the 'God/Godesses') seem to 'like' or see 'as worthy' (which can mean: helping those who are willing to give something back also).
It's like the C's saying that help is on the way, meaning that it is us. The Universe working also through us, to help us.

However, some, even with such Aim and opportunities offered by the Universe, show no enough interest, nor Will, and become entrapped 'eternally' by Petty Tyrants or by other means. To which a 'God(ess)' could reply: "See now, how men lay blame upon us gods for what is after all nothing but their own folly." Own folly, or own choices. Folly, probably because it is based on subjectivity.

Jove said:
Neptune will then be pacified,
for if we are all of a mind he can hardly stand out against us.

For if we are all of a mind. I.e. all on one certain frequency, on one level, perhaps knowledge-wise? And since knowledge protects, strength-wise? Every God/Goddess having a certain strength, and combined together, it's hard for Neptune to stand against them. He'd stand no chance. Perhaps an indication of the strength of a colinear network?

I also find it interesting how Minerva (goddess) showed on earth, looking like a man/chose to look like a man. Wonder what that means? That she contains both of the masculine and the feminine 'energies'?

Telemachus said:
Singing comes cheap to those who do not pay for it,
and all this is done at the cost of one whose bones lie rotting in
some wilderness or grinding to powder in the surf. If these men were
to see my father come back to Ithaca they would pray for longer legs
rather than a longer purse, for money would not serve them;

This means that they've had their opportunities to 'pay up', and after a certain time, their opportunities might have run out, and much damage has been done to such an extent that no more 'paying up' could serve them. And perhaps that there would be nothing in them or very little in them that would be willing to 'pay' in a sincere, humane way, perhaps because they have probably lost their humanity among the process?

Minerva said:
but it seems
the gods are still keeping him back, for he is not dead yet not on
the mainland. It is more likely he is on some sea-girt island in mid
ocean, or a prisoner among savages who are detaining him against his
will I am no prophet, and know very little about omens, but I speak
as it is borne in upon me from heaven
, and assure you that he will
not be away much longer; for he is a man of such resource that even
though he were in chains of iron he would find some means of getting
home again.

That sounds to me as an indirect ''sign'' towards Telemachus, that this is a heaven-sent message. That she may be a goddess. Kinda like we get ''signs'' in our lives that indicate ''heaven-sent'' messages for us to pay attention, in some way?

Telemachus said:
so long as my father
was here it was well with us and with the house, but the gods in their
displeasure have willed it otherwise,

Perhaps another indication of the cycle and the laws that play a role. After good times, coming bad times.

Telemachus said:
Nor does the matter end simply with grief for the loss
of my father; heaven has laid sorrows upon me of yet another kind;

It seems that his situation has changed from 'happy' to 'sad' as well, but in his own way, different from his father's situation, which might indicate the different lessons each of them 'have' to go through.

Minerva said:
Then, having done all this, think it well over in your mind
how
, by fair means or foul, you may kill these suitors in your own
house.

Thinking it over means to me, to not act with haste. Thinking of the most effective way. Also interesting how he says, ''suiters in your own house''. Perhaps the many little I's, as one also wrote here. It also makes me think of Gurdjieff's analogy of the house and the many people in it, with no one in charge. Minerva says: "show your mettle, then, and make yourself a name in story" Could this mean: Take up the courage and get in charge? Make yourself a name in story... Making yourself an identity? A ''One'' person rather than many-I's in one? Also, Telemachus said when speaking to the suitors:

"for speech is man's matter, and mine above all others- for it is I who am master here."

Minerva said:
"Do not try to keep me, for I would be on my way
at once. As for any present you may be disposed to make me, keep it
till I come again, and I will take it home with me. You shall give
me a very good one, and I will give you one of no less value in return."

This could be an indication of balance between giving and taking, between the goddess and Telemachus. Perhaps no giving, or no act of respect, could have made her or the other gods/godesses angry. And this could have caused Telemachus to get stuck in his situation with no help from outside. Same as how C's would talk about getting stuck when there has been little giving or true commitment, or even 'faith' perhaps. So it seems that balance keeps things going. But as always, has to be sincere.

With these words she flew away like a bird into the air, but she had
given Telemachus courage, and had made him think more than ever about
his father. He felt the change, wondered at it, and knew that the
stranger had been a god, so he went straight to where the suitors
were sitting.

The way she gave him courage was by way of speaking to him. This could indicate that we, could perhaps develop our ''Higher Self'' and that Higher Self could help us in the same sort of way to encourage us to do the right thing.

Then Telemachus spoke, "Shameless," he cried, "and insolent suitors,
let us feast at our pleasure now, and let there be no brawling, for
it is a rare thing to hear a man with such a divine voice as Phemius
has; but in the morning meet me in full assembly that I may give you
formal notice to depart, and feast at one another's houses, turn and
turn about, at your own cost. If on the other hand you choose to persist
in spunging upon one man, heaven help me, but Jove shall reckon with
you in full, and when you fall in my father's house there shall be
no man to avenge you."

This has been the opportunity for the suitors to leave. If not taken, Telemachus has the faith in the Universe that it knows what it's doing.
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

SOTT's carrying an interesting article in relation to Theoxeny/hospitality/STO concepts:

Innate Tendency of Humans to Appreciate Another's Hospitality: Scholars Study the Evolution of Human Generosity
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/232540-Innate-Tendency-of-Humans-to-Appreciate-Another-s-Hospitality-Scholars-Study-the-Evolution-of-Human-Generosity

excerpt said:
Imagine you're dining at a restaurant in a city you're visiting for the first - - and, most likely the last - - time. Chances are slim to none that you'll ever see your server again, so if you wanted to shave a few dollars off your tab by not leaving a tip, you could do so. And yet, if you're like most people, you will leave the tip anyway, and not give it another thought.

These commonplace acts of generosity - - where no future return is likely - - have long posed a scientific puzzle to evolutionary biologists and economists. In acting generously, the donor incurs a cost to benefit someone else. But choosing to incur a cost with no prospect of a compensating benefit is seen as maladaptive by biologists and irrational by economists. {...}
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

I've enjoyed this discussion, especially about the "hospitality" issue. Hospitality is an important feature of my upbringing, probably owing to my matrilineal Scot-Irish background. I read a series of books, "The Pendragon Cycle", by Stephen R. Lawhead, a Celtic researcher. Although fiction, his books seem to reflect some of the same ideas of Homer's, including hospitality. It would be interesting to understand/know the source of Lawhead's ideas:

"Upon emerging from the hut I saw the first horses arriving and knew at once what Aedd had done. Without word or hint to us, the canny king had dispatched messengers to each of the other southern lords and these had instantly assembled their warbands, riding through the night to arrive at dawn. This he had done to delight his guests.

"'God love him,' Llenlleawg said when he saw the warriors standing in the yards. 'Here breathes a noble Celt indeed.'

"Like a sovereign of an elder time, Aedd had seen to the needs of his guests with a graceful, self-effacing generosity. It was a virtue still lauded in song, but now rarely encountered. One could be forgiven for believing that it had passed out of this worlds-realm altogether. But here was a man, king in more than name only, holding to the old way. This nobility lifted him up and exalted him in our eyes, and in the esteem of all who would hear of it in the days to come."

and

"I watched, fascinated by the Virgin of the Forest as she entered the meadow which contained a pool fed by a clear-running spring. She walked to the pool, holding out her hands. Two men appeared among the trees; by their look and manner I understood that they were dying of thirst. The dying men saw the water and rushed to the pool.

"The first man fell on his knees at the spring, dipped his hand and drank, but the water turned poisonous in his mouth and he died, clutching his throat. The second man approached the Virgin of the Forest and consulted her, at which she produced a cup and offered it to him.

"Taking the bowl between his hands, the man filled the cup from the spring. He drank from the cup and his life was restored; he left rejoicing in the wisdom of the maiden."

These quotes are from the volume "Pendragon".
 
Re: The Odyssey - question for all!

Have not read the book but watch the movie "The Odyssey" that came out in 1997, don't know if its the same story in the book.
 
Back
Top Bottom