Resurrect the Myth

What needs do mythology and religion serve in today's world and in ancient times? Here we discuss the relationship between mythology, religion and science from mythological, religious and philosophical viewpoints.

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

Locked
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Hello everybody!

Sophia Heller wrote the following in her book, The Ghost at the Back Door: The Absence of Myth:

"Living long outside of myth, human thought has emptied the word myth of its original value and turned it into a concept that mirrors those who use and study it."

We had a hot discussion about this book on these forums sometime back. Most of the associates were predictably chagrined at Ms.Heller's sweeping statements, and rightly so, I think. But when we think about it, isn't there a germ of truth in what she said?

Myth has been dead in the West for a long time. Greek myths are studied for academic interest: the living myth of Jesus Christ has been diminished by the Church's insistence that it be viewed as a historical event which happened in the past (the myth always happens in the here and now). The rise of the scientific method has almost made subjectivity an obscene word in scientific circles.

Ms. Heller sees myth as dead, and needs to bury it. I disagree. I see myth as dormant, in need of resurrection. (In India myth is still somewhat alive-I'll get to it in a later post). So, as the torch-bearers of Joseph Campbell, how can we associates do our mite to raise Myth from the dead?

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
SteveC
Associate
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:41 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Post by SteveC » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

As ususal, your post is perplexing. You complain of Christianity and the death of myth in the same breath. You say that myth must be alive in the "here and now." And yet, the Church is doing exactly that.

My church celebrated its hundred anniversary today. The Bishop came, and the Knights of Columbus in full regalia of funny hats and capes. The choir was assembled, my daughter played the oboe, and there was a sugar feast that followed.

Is not the Eucharist, in your opinion, a myth of the myth of the man Jesus Christ? It seeems to me that an awful lot of churches are "breaking bread" to this myth.

It seems to me that what you are asking/expecting is for people to participate in myth without accepting that it is real. (Which I guess is why I am perplexed by your post.)

You and I are an odd mirror. I believe in God and not so much the ritual. You believe in the ritual but not so much the God.
You can only see the height of a mountain from its valley.


The radical myth towards which the helix aspires is beyond the desire for money or power, yet which has greater returns than all the power and money in the world could not achieve.
creekmary
Associate
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:13 am
Location: Oklahoma, USA

Post by creekmary » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

What does Ms. Heller think Myth's original value was that it has fallen from?

I think belief is a component of viable myth. The concepts and ways of thinking that you mention seem to have discounting faith, or belief, in common. I think there has to be that unwillingness to be led only by the mind's preference for logic and facts.

I think Myth might be universal to Mankind (since it seems to be everywhere and not isolated to here and there) and so hard to be buried and put to rest.

I think resurrection is more likely, in the West, anyway. Star Wars, etc. popularity seems to indicate an awakened awareness of Myth, but it still seems that people are more comfortable watching other people's mythic journeys through books and movies than forging their own. But I guess research and observation are good first steps for anything.

Susan

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: creekmary on 2007-01-28 22:50 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: creekmary on 2007-01-28 22:51 ]</font>
User avatar
Clemsy
Working Associate
Posts: 10645
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 6:00 am
Location: The forest... somewhere north of Albany
Contact:

Post by Clemsy » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Myth in the West is a shadow of its former self. There are many discussions on these boards that address this issue, as Campbell himself addressed this issue.

In a discussion of the the movie Pay It Forward, my classes were hard pressed to complete the trio of the theme: faith, hope and __________? In one class a student ventured "chastity", and didn't get the joke until after he had looked it up in a dictionary later that day.

In an effort to 'modernize' the Catholic Church zigged when it should have zagged. A female priest presiding over a Latin Mass with the altar facing the sacristy would be a lot more attractive to me, and probably many others, than a male priest doing it in English with women filling as many minor roles as possible in a vain attempt to make up for the injustice.

As far as I'm concerned, Vatican II sucked the magic right out of Catholicism, and left the worst parts of an obsolete dogma.
You complain of Christianity and the death of myth in the same breath. You say that myth must be alive in the "here and now." And yet, the Church is doing exactly that.
Whereas society used to orbit the Church steeple in the center of town, now the church steeple is just another bit of cultural flotsam orbiting... what? The church used to be the sun, now it's a moon and for many a minor one at that.

So yes, we are surrounded by the mythic rubble of the past. "Resurrecting" the myth, or evolving a new one, will take time, no? I believe we are in the midst of a transition period that started certainly with the Enlightenment, but took off full steam in the 20th century.

Letting go of the 'historicity' of Christian myth is key for the West. We need to get 'creative' about it all and rediscover the meaning in the message instead of getting stuck on the messenger.
So, as the torch-bearers of Joseph Campbell, how can we associates do our mite to raise Myth from the dead?
By Jove, I think that's what we're doing!

Cheers,
Clemsy


Give me stories before I go mad! ~Andreas
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Steve, Susan and Clemsy,

In the first volume of The Masks of God Joe Campbell relates the story of a little girl (I think it was from Leo Frobinus).

A father gave his daughter three matchsticks to play with: one was Hansel, the other Gretel, and the third one the witch. After some time, the girl ran to her father screaming: "Daddy, take the witch away! I can't touch the witch any more!" For the little girl, the matchstick had literally become the frightening witch of the fairy tale.

This is the lesson of The Mask. In Kerala, shaman-artistes regularly dress up as the goddess for a ritualistic dance called the "Theyyam" (most probably a corruption of Daivom - God). When the shaman has dressed up, he is simply not enacting the Goddess: he is the Goddess. The Goddess possesses him and acts through him; and the myth is enacted for the umpteenth time, in the here and the now. In every performance the myth is being played out afresh. (I believe a little of this happens in all ordinary plays, when the actor says: "I got carried away"!).

I'd say that during each Easter, Christ dies afresh and is resurrected. The Church is commemmorating an event which occurred in the past; for them, it's history. I suggest that we raise it to mythical level once again.

And Susan, I agree that movies are one of the modern mediums of myth. Bodhi has a lot of things to say about that in his Practical Campbell essays.

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
User avatar
noman
Associate
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:26 am

Post by noman » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Myth has been dead in the West for a long time. Greek myths are studied for academic interest: the living myth of Jesus Christ has been diminished by the Church's insistence that it be viewed as a historical event which happened in the past (the myth always happens in the here and now). The rise of the scientific method has almost made subjectivity an obscene word in scientific circles.

-Nandu
What is the true status of the myth in the world? Well, that depends on where you look. Joseph Campbell says we live in a moraine of myth. But he also said in an interview that he is used to being around University people and creative artists and writers. When you get out into the rural parts of America you find a deeply religious undercurrent in stark contrast to the cutting edge intellectuals. Universities tend to be extremely secular.

In 1999 sociologist Peter L. Berger edited a book titled The Desecularization of the World In it he claims that, with the exception of Europe, we are becoming less secularized – more religious; and that religion is playing a greater role in our professed secular governments.

But I understand what you mean by Myth being dead in the West. It is dead for secularists. But for those of us who know better a new mythology is emerging; a mythology that has as its deities: equality, beauty, charity, progress, scientific truth, and environmental harmony. I don’t see this new mythology as dead or dormant at all but showing itself in museums, movies, and in the $80 billion the U.S. spends on science each year.

I don’t believe there can be, as Heller suggests, an absence of myth. From the first episode of POM:
Campbell: When [the conscious mind] does put itself in control you have this [Darth Vader] the man whose gone over to the intellectual side…

Moyers: But I can hear someone out in the audience saying that’s all well and good for a person with the imagination of a George Lucas or the scholarship of a Joseph Campbell, but that isn’t what happens in my life.

Campbell: You bet it does. If the person doesn’t listen to the demands of his own spiritual and heart-life and insists on a certain program you’re going to have a schizophrenic crack-up. The person has put himself off center. He has aligned himself with a programmatic life, and it’s not the one the body is interested in at all.
By analogy, I think what’s true for the individual is also true for the culture. Those secularists that would deny myth are making the same error as Moyer’s hypothetical member of the audience who denies myth on a personal level. Cultures have a bliss as well, and our mythology is an expression of that bliss.

“You have rituals”, Campbell once said, “you’re just not meditating on them.”

I’ll give one example. In America, some people and businesses have taken up the practice of separating their garbage into separate bins; paper, plastic, glass, and other. It facilitates the recycling these products, recycling being good for the environment. Most people don’t’ realize that the environmental cost of recycling this material is about equal to environmental benefit of recycling it. There are much more environmentally profitable life style changes – such as trading in an SUV for a Prius. But I can still appreciate the ritual of garbage separation. It is a ritual act that speaks to the value of environmental preservation – a way a paying homage to Gaia if you will.

So to answer your final question, I would say our mission is to encourage people to think mythically, rather than in the way of machine-like automatrons. If we’re successful, they’ll realize that myth is not dead or dormant at all, but a vital force in their lives. As Campbell would say through the words of Bill Moyers, ‘a song we dance to even when we can’t name the tune.’

- NoMan





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: noman on 2007-01-29 20:28 ]</font>
User avatar
bodhibliss
Working Associate
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bodhibliss » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-01-29 07:55, nandu wrote:
This is the lesson of The Mask. In Kerala, shaman-artistes regularly dress up as the goddess for a ritualistic dance called the "Theyyam" (most probably a corruption of Daivom - God). When the shaman has dressed up, he is simply not enacting the Goddess: he is the Goddess. The Goddess possesses him and acts through him; and the myth is enacted for the umpteenth time, in the here and the now. In every performance the myth is being played out afresh. (I believe a little of this happens in all ordinary plays, when the actor says: "I got carried away"!).
Yes, Nandu - without that sense of participation mystique, a myth is just a story - but when we step into it, just as we do when we suspend our disbelief and step into a play, we encounter the magic and the depth in a mythic image or ritual.

We can talk about Cupid and love, but that is hardly the heart of the myth. Feel, however, the sting of Eros' shaft as it pierces your heart, the burn of desire that consumes you, the rapture that seizes you as you are overwhelmed by love for some Other, and you know that you are in the presence of something greater than yourself, something greater than all the world ...

A mythic image is charged with numinosity - a sacred experience, fully engaging one's emotions. We can speak of Artemis, see a picture of Shiva, or hear a sermon about Jesus without engaging the myth. If, however, you pray to Artemis, if you feel her breath on your neck in the woods beneath the full moon, of if you dance with Shiva, let your ego, your soul, your being dissolve into nothingness, dissolve into the Dance, or if you experience the transformative power of sacrifice and resurrection as you drink the blood and eat the flesh of God-made-Man in communion with Christ, then you are living/experiencing/engaging the myth.
Though it is true that such living ideas become manifest only in terms of some specific historical moment, their force nevertheless lies not in what meets the eye but in what dilates the heart, and this, precisely, is their essential trait.

Joseph Campbell, "Bios and Mythos," The Flight of the Wild Gander, p. 50
It's all too easy to get caught up in intellectual analysis. Campbell certainly didn't abandon intellect - but i believe his appeal is that neither did he abandon the magic. The Power of Myth isn't simply a clever phrase, but an apt description of what Joseph encountered. When he uses terms like symbol and metaphor to refer to myth, he's not just using a literary term; a symbol is a living mythic image, with a dimension beyond the literal and mundane.

When one no longer experiences that mythic dimension, the symbol or image is dead ...
The way that mythologies work their magic is through symbols. The symbol works as an automatic button that releases energy and channels it. Since the mythic systems of the world include many symbols that are practically universal, the question comes up: Why? And how does the universal symbol come to be directed toward this, that, or another cultural intention? ...

Joseph Campbell, Pathways to Bliss, p. 47
_________________

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bodhi_Bliss on 2007-01-30 00:34 ]</font>
jim baird
Associate
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 1:37 pm

Post by jim baird » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Nandu,

I tend to think of myth as the tail that's wagging all us dogs, be we scholars or not.

To the extent that we can recognize its symbols and its expressions around and in us, we are more or less "conscious".

Something like that.

Rilke said that we are "bees of the invisible", and that "when we feel, we evaporate". He also said that in the night, while we sleep, "cosmic winds feed on our faces".

I see myth as being a category of idea that tries to include all the ineffable aspects of what we think we are doing here, such as the poet's statements above.
User avatar
bodhibliss
Working Associate
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bodhibliss » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

duplicate post deleted

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bodhi_Bliss on 2007-01-30 00:31 ]</font>
SteveC
Associate
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:41 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Post by SteveC » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-01-29 07:55, nandu wrote:

I'd say that during each Easter, Christ dies afresh and is resurrected. The Church is commemmorating an event which occurred in the past; for them, it's history. I suggest that we raise it to mythical level once again.
I look at it similarly. In fact, I often say "Save Jesus" because he is still on the cross, and will remain there as long as we continue to sin against one another.

ergo, my sins are just as much a problem as yours as is everyone elses. Therefore, before we can save Jesus, we first need to save ourselves and one another.

Yet, all Jesus asks for is mercy. We have created systems upon systems of justice, and only a few of mercy. When everyone and everything is merciful, then Jesus will be saved.

This, in part, is why I am against the idea of the apocolypse as a negative event. The beginning of utopia is the end of the world.

So, you see, I do embrace myth in a cosmic sense, but I think people are often stumbling over the rituals. Just as God said he no longer wanted burnt sacrifices to himself, the bar gets higher as man advances in years. What he demands is mercy, and what we give is what we shall receive. So, "we reap what we sow" and "the first will be last, and the last will be first" and "the meek will inherit the earth" and "a tree is known by its fruit" etc., can all easily be true within the right context of a mythical reality.

It is conflict that is the real "myth" because it is based on a lie. Whereas the "myth" of utopia is real.
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

NoMan (or Shanti),

Your post is, as always, extremely erudite.

Yes, I agree that religion is alive and well, but does it embrace myth? In my opinion, most organised religions have died a "Myth Death": it being most pronounced in Islam, where belief is reduced to a code of conduct, and all products of imagination is discouraged. Christianity is also dead in that sense; but it still continues to produce great art and literature (as Campbell said, the artist is the modern Shaman). The central strain of Hinduism is also dying, as the power-mongers make it more and more literal.

As far as I am concerned, literal interpretation of a myth is more damaging than total negation.

I agree with your interpretation of the "Garbage Separation Ritual". In fact, I think I will return to such rituals in a future post.

I agree with you that we can contribute by encouraging people to think mythically, but how? Any suggestions?

Bodhi,

I think both of us think so much alike that communication is perfect in most situations!

Jim,

From your brief but powerful post, I think you are a person who lives in myth. Can you elaborate on how you recognise the symbols of myth in everyday life?

Steve,

No, you have not gotten my exact meaning. Jesus is not on the cross; he was never on the cross in the historical sense. Every Easter, he is crucified, dies and is resurrected again.

I see Jesus as the main myth of Christianity: the myth of eternal return, the God-king who dies and is resurrected. (In some similar myths, the God-king is also eaten, which is what Christians do when they eat the sacred wafer and drink mass wine.) In the mythical realm, there is no time: like there is no time in dreams. So things just keep on happening eternally.

Which is why I feel the ritual, when properly observed, is the all-important doorway to myth. When the sacred wafer actually becomes the flesh of Jesus and the wine his blood.

But you have stated your myth succinctly: it's the myth you live by.

Myths are not lies: they are the key which connect us to the ultimate reality.

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
SteveC
Associate
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:41 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Post by SteveC » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-01-30 11:20, nandu wrote:

No, you have not gotten my exact meaning. Jesus is not on the cross; he was never on the cross in the historical sense. Every Easter, he is crucified, dies and is resurrected again.
I respect the mythology of our lives, but I really do not understand the historical revisionism.

Did the Pharoahs not exist because we cannot see them today? Are the pyramids not evidence of their existence?

Where does the myth end and reality begin? Shall we deny what we choose, like those who insist we did not land on the Moon, that 9/11 was a plot of the US government and that the German extermination camps were not real?

There is a slippery slope between myth and delusion, isn't there? Does the history of ourselves have no value? Am I Superman (in both the Clark Kent and Ayn Rand sense) because I want to be? I doubt that is a heroic journey.
User avatar
bodhibliss
Working Associate
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bodhibliss » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-01-30 11:20, nandu wrote:

I see Jesus as the main myth of Christianity: the myth of eternal return, the God-king who dies and is resurrected. (In some similar myths, the God-king is also eaten, which is what Christians do when they eat the sacred wafer and drink mass wine.) In the mythical realm, there is no time: like there is no time in dreams. So things just keep on happening eternally.

Which is why I feel the ritual, when properly observed, is the all-important doorway to myth. When the sacred wafer actually becomes the flesh of Jesus and the wine his blood.
Well expressed - for the Christian caught up in the participation mystique,Christ isn't crucified just once in history, or even every Good Friday - but that death and dismemberment is experienced in every communion mass.

Of course, there has been a gradual secularization of this central ritual and of related myhic imagery within the Christian tradition, a change which surfaces full-blown in the Protestant Reformation - and Catholics and Portestants then fought a hundred year war essentially over the difference between transubstantiation and consubstantiation - no matter what you call it, you still drink the wine and chew the wafer.

The difference is that in Protestant faiths the communion mass only represents the body and blood of Jesus, while in Catholicism and some other Orthodox traditions the bread and wine actually, physically, miraculously becomes the flesh and blood of the Lord in the believer's mouth.

The later Protestant approach is more abstract and representational than the Catholic experience of the same rite - the latter closer to Hindu and Buddhist ritual, with an element of the numinous to it. Campbell grew up with the ritual imagery of the Catholic High Mass, where the priest faced the altar and the Mystery, addressing God rather than the congregants, and the ritual was chanted in Latin, rather in the common everyday language we use to talk about scrubbing the floor and earning money and such.

Even if one's head weren't fully involve, one could still experience the Sacred Mystery.

With such a background, a Protestant service was a revelation to Campbell - no altar, minister addressing the audience behind a podium - had more the feel of a lecture than a religious experience to him.

I imagine this is part of the reason for the cinematic power of The Passion of the Christ - for many the film was a powerful cathartic ritual, the familiar tale charged with a depth of emotion never before experienced by even faithful church-goers, and an immediacy far more intense than that evoked by the now abstract symbols of communion.

I grew up in a strict, spare sect meeting in rented halls - but the Sabbath and church always had a special sacral texture to me - so could have assured Campbell there is still a sense of the sacred in a Protestant service ... but nevertheless the dynamic he notes, that increasing secularization of the Symbol in western culture can be traced through the Protestant Reformation and the evolution of empirical science and the cartesian world view on down to the present day.

In this sense, the myth is dead.
And in our tradition, of course, mythological images have lost their relationships to affects and are interpreted in terms of rational devaluations or (as in the Hebrew and Christian traditions) in terms of historical events which may or may not have taken place and, in either case, are of little importance to a person's psyche
today.

Joseph Campbell, Mythic Worlds, Modern Words
As you point out, the historicity of Christ should be of little importance - and, indeed, though we presume from the preponderance of third- and fourth-hand accounts that Jesus actually existed and was crucified, even that is by no means certain - after all, whether or not there was a "real" Jesus, his life has been mythologized and the man deified, like others before him.

But traditional Christianity does suffer from a mythic myopia, literalizing and historicizing the myth - which, over time, can't help but remove later generations from the experience of the myth, to just talking about the myth.

What transforms the bread and wine into flesh and blood (which is not the flesh and blood of a human carpenter from Galilee who lived 2000 years ago, but that of the Christ), is the savior mythos :
People with a certain value and impact of character act very much as magnets for mythic materials that float always in the air. As they become attached to these figures, they form themselves inito constellations around them, illuminating their character and tehir teaching. The biography of the Savior is therefore a way to find out what the teaching of the savior is. There is, however, a certain basic savior mythos that is in the atmosphere of human history making. This mythos is drawn on in all such cases. We can observe this story in the Buddha and Christ, the motifs of whose stories are astonishing close. Yet another tradition of saviors is found in India, in the saviors of the Jains. There are twenty-four world savers, (Titankas) or passage makers (Tirthankaras) of the Yondershore. Their biographies also contain the elements of the savior mythos found in those of the Buddha and the Christ.

Joseph Campbell, Thou Art That, p. 63
Speaking of historical revisionism, traditional Christianity does attempt to confine the savior motif to one unique historical incarnation, and pointedly ignores all others (suggesting all earlier savior-gods are somehow counterfeits of Christ before-the-fact).

I presume when you speak of resurrecting the myth, you aren't necessarily speaking specificall of Jesus or Zeus or Isis or Buddha or Shiva so much, as of the underlying mythos which empowered all of these images in turn - and doesn't seem we're talking about resurrecting knowledge of the historical or literary details of specific myths, but an actual experience of mythos

... which is why i refer to Campbell's school of thought as experiential mythology

_________________

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bodhi_Bliss on 2007-01-30 17:52 ]</font>
SteveC
Associate
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:41 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Post by SteveC » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

hmmm... experiential mythology?

Isn't everything experiential?

We all arrive where we are by trying everything. But then we go back over the old ground and discovered what we missed on the first pass.

In any case, trying to live a moral life in an immoral world is a hero's journey. Jesus is not unique in his wisdom, only in his presence. Wisdom has never changed, it is we who are changing. (like the lotus petals unfolding in our experience)

We are each a seed in the womb of time. The hero's journey is to impregnate the Earth with wisdom.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: stevec on 2007-01-30 22:03 ]</font>
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am


No, you have not gotten my exact meaning. Jesus is not on the cross; he was never on the cross in the historical sense. Every Easter, he is crucified, dies and is resurrected again.
I should have said "There is very little historical evidence for an actual person called Jesus Christ." Ask any secular historian.

But that is of no importance. As Bodhi rightly said:

As you point out, the historicity of Christ should be of little importance - and, indeed, though we presume from the preponderance of third- and fourth-hand accounts that Jesus actually existed and was crucified, even that is by no means certain - after all, whether or not there was a "real" Jesus, his life has been mythologized and the man deified, like others before him.
The value of Christ is not as a historic figure but as a mythic figure. Organised Christianity drills the historicity of Christ into the head of the flock, so that other myths can be seen as "falsehoods". This is a political stratagem; a sort of brainwashing.

This is true of all myths. For me, Krishna is a passion, but I don't think that he ever "existed" in the historical sense. He inhabits the mythical realm, where time and space are of no importance. This realm is the ground of all being; which all of us are trying to connect to. It is more "Real" than "Reality".

What you said about "The Passion of Christ", Bodhi, was especially relevant when the Ramayana and Mahabharata were telecast as TV serials in India during the late eighties. Watching the TV on Sunday morning at 10 o'clock became a ritual in most Indian homes, even Christians and Muslims! There are people who even used to do the puja in front of the TV. A fine example of the myth in action.
Where does the myth end and reality begin? Shall we deny what we choose, like those who insist we did not land on the Moon, that 9/11 was a plot of the US government and that the German extermination camps were not real?
Experience shows that we deny what we choose, and accept what we choose. I'll get to that in a later post.
There is a slippery slope between myth and delusion, isn't there?
Depends on how you view it... but this is an interesting point, and I expect the other associates will address it too. I'll do so, but later. I need to collect my thoughts.
Am I Superman (in both the Clark Kent and Ayn Rand sense) because I want to be? I doubt that is a heroic journey.
Rem Acu Tegesti! That is exactly the purpose of the heroic journey, but definitely not in the Ayn Rand sense. But that is the topic for another thread.

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
Locked