That the Chorus comes upon the idea that Oidipous’s actions are divinely instigated comes as a welcome surprise. The Chorus infers that a god must have incited Oidipous to gouge out his eyes, because this is not something a mortal would otherwise do. The audience knows that in fact the god did instigate this action by a circuitous series of manipulations extending over decades. On the other hand, it is not certain that the god would have insisted upon this particular action if Oidipous had not persisted in his blindness. Even now it is not at all clear that Oidipous has achieved insight; his recognition of the Chorus as his lone enduring support over the years suggests that he still fails to see that the god, rather than being his enemy, has always represented his most substantial source of potential support. [Ad] [Ap] The Chorus also seems even now to regard the gods as a convenient target for blame rather than as a missed opportunity. The blindness that both Oidipous and his subjects express in the present moment directs the audience away from oversimplification; the gods rarely intervene directly. Rather, since they work indirectly through a combination of mantic utterances, divine manifestations such as the Sphinx, exotic media such as the plague, mortal utterance such as that of the drunken reveler, and mortal action such as the blow that killed Laios, the impact of their interventions is dependent upon the way in which the mortals respond to them. [Apa] [Mw] To the mortal who submits to the god for guidance and carries out the instructions the god gives, divine interventions will eventually prove to be salubrious. To the mortal who does not submit to the god for instruction, fails sufficiently to clarify the instruction, or ignores instructions that have been given, divine interventions will eventually bring pain. [Mipd] [Mw]