Ask these, for when many water[s] them their every need did [provide], why then [did they] come buy?
Because Humpty-Pharazon and Numenor is a theme these days, and on my mind among many other things, I read this phrase and instantly understood it or imagined it as a question from the Eldar living on Eressea posed to or about the Numenoreans.
In essence, they are asking why, when every need and blessing was provided to the Numenoreans (except power over death, of course), as they sat among the 'many waters' lifted up from Earth on their own Paradise, did they still 'come buy'? By "come buy" we can probably assume this is a play on words or double meaning. Come buy, but also come by. Buy, meaning as to 'procure', usually with an exchange, but also 'by', as in arrive at their place? Why did the Numenoreans break the Ban and 'come by' Eressea, taking what was not theirs?
They stole some things, basically, and although we might not think of this as a 'purchase' or someone 'buying' something, it did cost them - dearly.
William wrote a post a couple months ago titled "A loaf of bread is dear". Dear can mean expensive, as he pointed out, which is what someone says when purchasing or thinking about purchasing something.
In Words of them that Slumbered, it is said that the Numenoreans drank and destroyed nectar and light associated with Lilies grown on Eressea. The Wolves that were unleashed on that island "consumed there all the fruits and bulbs gathered, and drank up the pooled light of ancient vintage". Pharazon himself, as the island of Eressea was split in half, drank from these lilies;
And yet now bereft of his soldiery fearsome even to the gods, he having drank his fill of the lilies cup, gilded though in his hand had it turned, so Pharazon bolted the heart firm to Thu's [Sauron] plan, and purposed then and there to row, if alone as king maybe, upon the shore of Lands Undying, and finally claim title wrongfully withheld for all the ages of Man...
... King of the World, and over every breath there taken in, and every cry to hear, so he named himself, Willful, Chosen, Fated: Three in One, King of Air, Earth, and Wave.
So, they drank of the lilies, and then burned it all up. Pharazon indeed was a Sitter o'er the Sea of Flame, as William's Humpty proudly proclaimed, as a Holy Land was burned.
This nectar, or whatever we should think of it as, we learn in another part of the story was used to make the Bread of these inhabitants of Eressea. When they found and took care of Asenath, they fed her bread that they specifically mentioned was leavened by the light:
Thus she [Asenath] was of the fall of your flesh much redeemed, and healed' being renewed upon the land, for our bread is leavened of the lilies that long ago drank up the light blessed, castabout the Magic Trees Remembered...
So the Bread is Dear, indeed, I am afraid. And Pharazon and the Numenoreans bought it all, not fully understanding the price they were paying.
Anyway, I originally was just going to post a picture here to show the pumpkins we sell since you can't include pictures in comments (I was just going to leave a picture in William's comment section), but then my mind started going down this Pharazon and Numenorean path again.
With that pretty interesting string of words from William's excel sheet, with the Elves asking that question, basically, I guess that even though I said that repentance is available for Pharazon, there are still some unanswered questions that these Elves might have related to what was done to them, perhaps. Why did you do it? How could you do it?
There will be an opportunity to come and buy milk and honey "without money and without price", I think. Notwithstanding our broken world. As Nephi wrote (similar to Isaiah) in 2 Nephi 26:
Behold, doth he [the Lord God] cry unto any, saying: Depart from me? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; but he saith: Come unto me all ye ends of the earth, buy milk and honey, without money and without price.
Coming and buying, though, will be done in quite a different manner than the way in which Pharazon and the Numenoreans attempted to do it. Clearly. And I think that is where the story I have been thinking through points to.
I also read WJT's question the same way, as an interrogatory regarding AP's incursion. The goblins of the world chant to "come buy" that which is not meant to be sold. And unfortunately AP heeded the call. The idea of him repenting (or even being able to) is new for me, however. I read the description of those who have no forgiveness in this world or the next and it sounds an awful lot like AP and his band of misfits. Not just AP, but I have a hard time not seeing what AP did as less bad than what Maeglin did helping Morgoth overthrow Gondolin or what possibly Daeron did to overthrow Menegroth.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious how you would read all this to not refer to AP (at least in part)
"we beheld Satan, that old serpent, even the devil, who rebelled against God, and sought to take the kingdom of our God and his Christ -- Wherefore, he maketh war with the saints of God, and encompasseth them round about.
And we saw a vision of the sufferings of those with whom he made war and overcame, for thus came the voice of the Lord unto us:
Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and **suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome**, and to deny the truth and defy my power—
They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born; For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity; Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come"
It seems to start out referring to beings like Morgoth and Sauron, but then it also seems to clearly include those who join those Devils in their horrible deeds.
Funny you should mention that you sell the pumpkins for $3 each. Three dollars is also the price Michael Talbot offers the alien squash-seller in Whitley Strieber's anecdote -- for a whole bag of squash, though; $3 bought a bit more back in 1991!
ReplyDeletehttps://narrowdesert.blogspot.com/2021/06/cucurbits-from-alien-land.html
Leo:
ReplyDeleteMy take is different on the Goblins than yours. I actually think these would represent the Elves of Eressea who were falsely made out to be the bad guys by the Numenoreans in the end (thus becoming their justification for assaulting Eressea). Sauron and Pharazon would essentially say the exact same things as found in those Goblin poem lines William quoted, telling the Numenoreans to not take of the fruit of the tree of Nimloth, which had been a gift from the Elves. All interaction or discourse with the Eldar was also forbidden - basically warning people to steer clear of the 'Goblins' and their gifts.
As to your D&C 76 quote, Sidney Rigdon was responsible for drafting much of that, I think. That dude had a big thing for that kind of stuff (e.g., see the Salt Sermon), so, eh... I think Sidney has a few things to learn.
My belief is there is a difference between being the Shadow and being made sick by that Shadow. The Numenoreans were sick. You try to cure sick people, not bury them. Pharazon specifically received special attention from Sauron personally at the end in making him his tool of destruction. and he was thoroughly exploited. Neither you nor me has had that special honor, I don't think, and I am not sure how we would fare in that same situation.
Sauron isn't around anymore (we have Asshat now), so perhaps Pharazon and those Numenoreans get a chance to see how they will choose without that evil being invading their hearts and minds, and using them as puppets.
And maybe they still choose the same, and they really are wholly evil and just want to do evil things, but I'd like to think there is a chance for that to be demonstrated rather than assumed.
WJT:
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting that in my response to Leo I brought up Nimloth, which was the white tree that bore edible fruit, and then right after I visited the post you just linked where you had a whole section on interstellar fruit trees titled "Melon trees on the moon?", involving the Moon Hoax (which I'd never heard of).
Nimloth and its fruit was a gift from the Elves, who revered the Moon above anything else. And, of course, in my story the Elves are extraterrestrials or aliens, in the sense that they come from and live on other worlds than ours.
I like that reading of the goblin poem. I'm not too sure on discounting section 76 personally. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right places but I can't find where it's a product of Rigdon. It appears to have been a joint vision that both Joseph and Sidney put their names to. The other concern I have is if this is the approach with AP, why isn't it the approach with all the other bad eggs (AP isn't the only cracked egg in my reckoning)? Can't we say all of them were and even now are under the influence of the Shadow? You could even argue Morgoth himself isn't really bad but just badly influenced. And maybe that is how you view it. If not, I wonder why AP gets the special exception among the list of bad guys? Why is AP on the cure side of the line and Asshat, Sauron, Morgoth, et al are on the bury side of the line?
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying discount the whole section - I am just saying that if Sidney had a hand in writing it, even if jointly, I wouldn't be too concerned in matching up everything exactly.
ReplyDeleteAs to your question, I think that is what ultimately becomes fully apparent. Who is the Shadow and who needs to be freed from or cured of it? I am saying there is a difference.
AP isn't like Asshat, Sauron, or Morgoth in my book. Not yet, at least. They each became sources of evil, whereas AP's price and arrogance opened him up to become a tool of evil. That evil was literally sitting behind his throne in personified, bodily form (as Sauron). Pharazon almost turning back at the end suggests there might still be something inside him that can be found and redeemed.
As for Asshat, Galadriel was pretty clear their run in with him at the end of LOTR was his last chance. She could see pretty far, I think, and understood and meant what she was saying. I think his actions since and up to our day bear this out. He has become a source of Evil, and can't blame any other than himself for what he does.
You may be ultimately right about AP - he is an irredeemably cracked egg - but I am not there yet. I am not sure I would have fared any better after having opened myself up to such an Evil influence. Perhaps if he were given a chance without that influence, we might know him better.
In other words, the answer to the Elves' question in those WJT words might be simply "Because they were really, really sick", and in this story the sick might get a chance to be made better and healed. And those who were and are whole might have a chance to forgive them and assist them on their path to wholeness.
After reading the entire poem (it really is long!) I can't equate those goblins with the Elves. The goblins' wares seem to represent temptation, and a character falls into sickness after partaking.
ReplyDeleteWG:
ReplyDeleteI think that is only because you are not as familiar with the story of the Numenoreans. Due to Sauron's influence among them, the meaning of Good and Evil was completely inverted, with one consequence being the Elves were portrayed as Evil and their gifts something to be avoided.
In fact, your summary of the poem lines up almost perfectly with how Sauron was said to describe the effect on someone who would eat the fruit from Nimloth. He forbade that anyone would eat the fruit, and used Izilba (Eowyn-Ilmare in our story) as an example of what would happen to someone who dared to eat it:
"By one known to you as Izilba was the fruit of this tree grasped wrongfully, and consumed, and yet to her it brought painful wrenching of death..."
So just as in your summary, if you eat the fruit, you become sick (and die).
This was a lie, of course, but that is my overall point: The perception of Elves as evil creatures to be avoided was totally a lie.
So, yes, I agree I don't see the Elves as these Goblins, either. I am just saying that the Numenoreans came to view them as such in their total confusion between Good and Evil. Things got pretty messed up.
No, I'm familiar enough with the story -- particularly that section -- to see the comparison breaks down with context.
ReplyDeleteThe goblins' fruit ultimately killed one woman, the cause of Lizzie's strongest warning to her sister. As Laura sickens further, Lizzie investigates the goblins; they want her to eat fruit then and there, like Laura did, but when Lizzie refuses, they attack.
The Numenoreans' perception of the Elves as evil was completely false. The poem goblins' actions show they truly were evil and the warnings were necessary. Two different situations.
WG:
ReplyDeleteExactly - I am imagining the poem or story as told by a Numenorean. Meaning the poem tells the false story. Is that clearer?
I mean, I am not really even interested in the overall poem even - just those lines originally quoted by WJT are relevant for me - but since you expanded the scope a bit, I am just saying it still holds very well from what you summarized.
I don't think that was clear before, but I'm currently too lost in my own head to discern the root of the error.
ReplyDelete