Post by Andorinha on Jan 17, 2009 0:38:56 GMT -6
The Sil ARCHIVE: Iluvatar: some bad or all good?
_________________________________________
Reply
Message 1 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/19/2002 7:36 PM
Other threads have noted that Melkor came from Iluvatar and questioned whether Iluvatar was all good since something evil came from him. Megn 1 pointed out that
each of the Ainur "comprehended only that part of the mind of Iluvatar from which he came." It seems to me that Melkor comprehended mainly pride and domination, unmitigated by the parts of Iluvatar's mind that were the portion of the other Ainur. The evil arose out of Melkor's lack of balance. Iluvatar, as the total of being, was the perfect balance and therefore was totally good.
To put it another way, (this is an example borrowed from somewhere and I can't remember the source) a mother's love for her child is, of course, good. However, if that love is not balanced by wisdom, truth and the willingness to administer discipline, you are going to get one spoiled, selfish, and impulsive person as the child grows. In this case, the mother's love would work a great evil on her child.
So, some things are generally good but carried to the wrong extreme would be evil, and others would be generally evil but in the right circumstances would be good. Hence the proverbs about all things in moderation, and the Biblical promise that God works all things together for good, and Iluvatar's words to that effect to Melkor.
~Sparrow
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 2 of 16 in Discussion
From: Amaranth
Sent: 4/20/2002 3:13 PM
Iluvatar gave Melkor knowledge and power, in addition to the powers he gave the other Ainur. (Why was Melkor chosen for these additional gifts? Hmmm....) Knowledge and power, in and of themselves, are good things, right? But perhaps Iluvatar didn't foresee the flip side of that particular coin: Ambition, arrogance and thirst for more power. Did those, too, come from Iluvatar? If nothing existed before Iluvatar, they, too, must've been part of him, yes? I don't know.
Okay, this is a stretch and kind of 'out there.' Iluvatar's first two Themes were harmonious within themselves. Ah, but the THIRD theme.... There's the rub! In trying to counter Melkor's discord, Iluvatar responded with discord of his own. Hence, duality came into being. There was no duality in the first two Themes; in the third, there is. "Immeasurable sorrow" comes into being and is blended with that third Theme.
And out of that third Theme came our world and all the beings in it. No wonder we're so screwed up!
So was the mistake Melkor's or Iluvatar's? As one of the Ainur, Melkor was an offspring of Iluvatar's thoughts -- not a child of Melkor, but an offspring of his thoughts. Can there be anything in Melkor that wasn't in Iluvatar? Certainly power and knowledge were part of Iluvator: In order to give those gifts to Melkor, they had to be his in the first place. But perhaps when Iluvatar created the third Theme, with its warring discord, disharmony, sorrow and duality, *Iluvatar* created duality; and these came *after* the Ainur came into being.
What would've happened if, instead of replying with discord of his own, Iluvatar had not responded to Melkor's interference with the Music? Guess it wouldn't matter since we and our world wouldn't exist.
So whose 'fault' was the discord? Melkor introduced it, but possibly because of his special gifts of power and knowledge. Iluvatar responded in like, with discord of his own. Maybe there is no answer, and maybe it's not important that there's no answer. It just IS.
So to answer Sparrow's question, my thought is that there was no good / evil -- no polarity, no duality -- until Melkor brought discord into the game. No good or evil -- just 'what is.' Later, Melkor's actions will be *labeled* by mortal beings as evil. But just because we choose give a name tag to something doesn't make it real.
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 3 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/20/2002 10:22 PM
I still put forth the theory that Illuvitar was trying to create another of himself. Or at least something that would come close. A supreme being could not just DO that. It would seem they would have to deconstruct themselves. Take all that is them, put them out as individual themes, give them free will, and somehow make them harmonize themselves back together. Then he would have another very like unto himself, but different, because of the free will.
I assume, that when it did not work at first, he allowed them to create Arda, using it as a template for them to understand what he eventually wanted. Melkor as some people pointed out could be the pride, ego part of him that did not integrate back into the whole, as he supposed it would. Hence he had to make some adjustments. Since Melkor is eternal (being an eternal part of Illuvitars nature), somewhere down the line, Melkor would have to be ILLUMINATED, and finally mesh into the WHOLE of the harmony, and Illuvitar would have another, like himself.
Hope I am not being too esoteric.
Glor
_________________________________________________
Reply
Message 4 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/20/2002 11:42 PM
Alas, after reading Amaranth's and Glorfindles replies and after rereading the beginning of the Ainulindale, I am not as clear on this point as I was the first time I posted. Why, indeed, was Melkor chosen for additional gifts? Perhaps Glorfindle is correct that Iluvatoar wanted another of himself. And where did the pride, arrogance, and desire to dominate come from if not from Iluvatar? And, since Melkor "had a share in all the gifts of his brethren," arguably he was or should have been the most balanced of the Ainur. There goes my evil comes from imbalance theory.
My daughter offered an interesting comment. It was to the effect of, Melkor was greater in power and knowledge than the other Ainur, therefore he was the closest in greatness to Iluvatar. There cannot be two deities so there had to be conflict. Did Iluvatar want another of himself? Is Melkor a case of Iluvatar's good intention (a companion) gone bad (a rival)?
I still want the answer to be that Iluvatar is all good. I am holding to the idea that something good (from Iluvatar) had to be distorted (through Melkor) before it could become evil. Perhaps the original evil was Melkor's becoming "not in accord" with Iluvatar; if so, then Iluvatar can still be all good by definition.
It is getting late (or should I say early) so I apologize if I am not clear.
Good night/morning!
~Sparrow
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 5 of 16 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameIarwainBen-adar1
Sent: 4/21/2002 2:39 AM
Glorfindle,
Being as all the religions begin or at least seem to begin with a one supreme creator, your hypothesis sounds quite valid to me. Even in Christianity there is the need for another like the creator and the grand experiment begins anew. Which leaves the burning question does Iluvatar answer to, or any god for that matter answer to a higher authority. Common ground and themes suggest that freewill is the one most Godlike component given to us or in this case the Atani (Man). Which would mean that possibly the Flame Imperishable is the higher authority in the Silmarillion. Where with us our higher authority would still be a matter of speculation. I hope I don't offend with this line of thought it is of course not my intent. But when discussing the creator in Tolkiens works it is always the unsaid sticky comparisons to Christianity that seem to follow. My heart aches to fall into such a confined space, but we all know good authors write about what they know. Your piece inspired me to consider these weighty ideals.
If Iluvatar is the all powerful why allow Mekor to continue? It is said that it was all part of his design, yet why allow the pain which marred all of Arda? Is the answer free will? Then if that is so then the gifts of man, Death, and free will seem to be the same gifts given to Melkor. Stay with me here. The free will of Melkor is obvious from the beginning when I refer to death you must consider that of the Valar it was Melkor alone who knew fear. Fear of what? Death is the only answer that comes to my mind. So what would the death of a Valar involve? In Melkor's case it was to be caste into the Void.
So now Iluvatar has caused all this to be, Arda is now free of Melkor and yet it is left to the usurpers man. From what I've seen man seems for the most part to be mini Melkors (sorry for the Austin Powers plug). With only a small number of worthy individuals, most of them with Elvish blood that are dwindling. The Valar, Maiar, and Elves get nothing and Man inherits Arda, all for free will. That is indeed a lot of effort for not much payoff, and it is sad that Tolkien is not around to finish the tale to the final singing. Because as it stands much of what was done seems for naught. Don't get me wrong I love the Tales, but I cannot fathom the reasoning of this long defeat in the terms of Iluvatar. It seems your theory might be a venue, but then it places Iluvatar in a position to have to comply by some higher rules, and therefore who is the guardian of the said rules. The rules being having to go through this process to create another of himself. I mean if he is the all powerful just say Ea and make his other appear and avoid the middle man? Is it because Iluvatar is also bound by the rules, and therefore has no freewill?
My Two cents Namarie,
Iarwain
_______________________________________________
Reply
Message 6 of 16 in Discussion
From: Lady_Oiolaire
Sent: 4/21/2002 11:56 AM
interesting.
in the Mormon religion, they believe that if they live their lives as fully and perfectly as is humanly possible, then they will become like God, and be able to create their own worlds.
so perhaps, Iluvitar is the end result of some former power's completion of his desires.
just my 2cents as well.
_Lady Oiolaire
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 7 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/21/2002 8:24 PM
The whole arguement, as I see it, is based upon whether or not you choose to view God (supreme being) as knowable. I am a neo-pagan, and my belief system grants that "God" is not knowable as such. Therefore we have lesser gods, elementals, if you will, that manefest aspects of "God". For to :"know" God, you would of course have to be him.
The Christian theories do not appeal to me, as I find most of them parables, and the rest un-thought out theories, mostly of man-made construct. Sorry, if I offend anyones belief system here, I am merely explaining mine.
Tolkien's creationist mythos is obviously Christian in thought, because he chooses to start with a "knowable" God.
He asserts that we "know" these things about Illuvitar. That he created the Ainur, and they did such and such. To me, I cannot even speak the name of God, for I do not know it, nor could I pronounce it.
So it follows to ME, that his whole creation mythos is like unto a Christian mythos, where they personify "GOD" and the beginnings of creation as something understandable and relatable.
Given this idea, it was from this, that I tried to extrapolate the mind of Illuvitar, and how it all followed. But as usual I hit the very dead end I gave up Catholicism because of. (sorry for the poor grammatical structure).
Even in Christian arguements, the God of the Old Testament as opposed to the God of the New Testament, gives unbearable controversy as to his manner and how he dealt with mankind.
Glor
________________________________________________
Reply
Message 8 of 16 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameVairë_Daystar
Sent: 4/22/2002 12:10 AM
I agree, Glor, that Tolkein's creation was inherently christianity-based. However, it always strikes me that Illuvator is getting just a bit ticked off with Melkor when he introduces the second theme. That, from memory is the one that he introduced through Manwe. Then, of course, he seems ultimately pissed when he ends all the music in one final cadence. Can a god who is irritated by the insubordination of Melkor be all good? I think Illuvatur has a few character flaws too, and this makes him a lot more accessible to humans, but also helps to explain how Melkor came about. This was probably very badly constructed, but I'm sure you get the point.
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 9 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/27/2002 8:09 PM
The whole arguement, as I see it, is based upon whether or not you choose to view God (supreme being) as knowable. . .
Very interesting, Glorfindle, to compare and contrast your thoughts with mine. Unlike you, I am a Christian, and like you, I believe God is unknowable. That is, I believe my finite mind cannot comprehend an infinite God. I'm sure now you understand why I want to believe Iluvatar is all good.
So, to satisfy myself, I will say:
1. The creator is all good, and all evil comes from corruption of some good trait of the creator.
2. Since the creator is not completely knowable, I will never be able to understand the divine nature and all divine actions.
And no, you do not offend my belief system when you express yours. I do not claim to have a monopoly on truth. I am sure we are both right about many things, and both wrong about others.
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 10 of 16 in Discussion
From: megn1
Sent: 4/27/2002 8:40 PM
Well said, Sparrow. Thank you.
This thread has me thinking...
Melkor comes from Iluvatar, and in fact has the largest share of Iluvatar's gifts and thoughts. Yet even he does not know all of Iluvatar's mind, and his gifts do have a limit. Perhaps this is what gives him the leaning toward evil, which is not present in Iluvatar. Melkor is not "whole." He is a part.
Which causes me to wonder if that is origin of evil - a lack of wholeness, and incomplete grasp of the mind of God, a limit to our abilities.
When Saruman becomes "the multi-colored" instead of "the white," he and Gandalf have a conversation in which Saruman says "White seves as a beginning. White cloth may be dyed. The white page can be overwritten, and the white light can be broken." Gandalf replies "In which case it is no longer white. And he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."
Thanks for making me ponder...
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 11 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/27/2002 11:06 PM
Thanks Meg for reminding me of that quote. I was quotes like that, that made me realize the genius of Tolkien.
Glor
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 12 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/28/2002 6:11 PM
Megn, you hit the proverbial nail on the head, with your comment:
Perhaps this is what gives him the leaning toward evil, which is not present in Iluvatar. Melkor is not "whole." He is a part.
You cannot have light, if you do not know darkness. You cannot know evil, if you do not understand good. Illuvitar, when trying to make another of himself, tried to make the parts of him understand the harmony to become whole. But so as to create another LIKE him but not a carbon copy, he gave them free will. Melkor, being the ego, prideful part of Illuvitar, did not take to the harmony that was to create the whole. Illuvitar's part he gave to Melkor, pride and ego, is not within itself evil. Not if it harmonizes back to be the whole being. Pride and ego is a necessary part of a whole that is tempered with fairness and humility.
However, the free will allowed Melkor to be consumed with the gifts he had, and mistake them for being whole enough to stand alone and create on his own. Hence, this is where he turned to evil. I think that one reason Melkor is seen as being more powerful than other Ainur, is because the gifts of pride and ego, when used wisely, in harmony with other gifts, can be some of the most powerful forces out there. It can create heroism and bravery. It helps make a warrior effective. Pride in country, nationalism, ego of rightousness and ability to be brave.
But these gifts have an inherent downfall. In themselves, without the harmony of the other gifts, one can become prideful to a selfish extent, and one's ego can lead from determination to domination. The more powerful the gifts, the more present the danger.
So to assuage Sparrow's need to believe Illuvitar is wholey good, I say YES he is. And agree with Megn in that what makes Melkor evil was his inability to handle the gifts Illuvitar gave him, and deny the harmony that would have made him whole with his creator.
Glor
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 13 of 16 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameVairë_Daystar
Sent: 4/28/2002 9:32 PM
Wow, that was great, Glorfindle. I really like that idea. Lots to think about here - this is such an interesting thread.
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 14 of 16 in Discussion
From: Pherquarewen
Sent: 4/28/2002 10:15 PM
If you are The Light, you know darkness because it is not like you. Since Iluvatar is absolute goodness, he knows evil because it is that which is not like him. He does not merely do things that are good - he is the explanation of all that good means.
Melkor was given a good gift in a free will. Which one of us would choose to be a robot over being a human? My answer is NO WAY would I choose to be a robot.. Melkor took his gifts and corrupted them.
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 15 of 16 in Discussion
From: MysticMagycPony
Sent: 4/29/2002 6:39 AM
hmmmmmm.................
Is it assumed, or did I read in the threads of this tapestry that only good comes from good???
Can a creature be created good and in exercising free will thus corrupt his intended path into one of malicious evil?
Glor, I'm with you on this one.....
MysticMagycPony
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 16 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/29/2002 9:01 PM
Thank you, Thank you, Megn1, Glorfindle, and MysticMagicPony. My mind is now at ease.
I am satisfied that what gives Melkor his leaning toward evil is that he is part.
I am relieved that it was Melkor's failure to harmonize that was evil.
I am assured that the evil did not come from Iluvatar but was a corruption of his gifts.
Thank you to everyone who participated in this thread and helped clear that up for me!
_________________________________________
Reply
Message 1 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/19/2002 7:36 PM
Other threads have noted that Melkor came from Iluvatar and questioned whether Iluvatar was all good since something evil came from him. Megn 1 pointed out that
each of the Ainur "comprehended only that part of the mind of Iluvatar from which he came." It seems to me that Melkor comprehended mainly pride and domination, unmitigated by the parts of Iluvatar's mind that were the portion of the other Ainur. The evil arose out of Melkor's lack of balance. Iluvatar, as the total of being, was the perfect balance and therefore was totally good.
To put it another way, (this is an example borrowed from somewhere and I can't remember the source) a mother's love for her child is, of course, good. However, if that love is not balanced by wisdom, truth and the willingness to administer discipline, you are going to get one spoiled, selfish, and impulsive person as the child grows. In this case, the mother's love would work a great evil on her child.
So, some things are generally good but carried to the wrong extreme would be evil, and others would be generally evil but in the right circumstances would be good. Hence the proverbs about all things in moderation, and the Biblical promise that God works all things together for good, and Iluvatar's words to that effect to Melkor.
~Sparrow
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 2 of 16 in Discussion
From: Amaranth
Sent: 4/20/2002 3:13 PM
Iluvatar gave Melkor knowledge and power, in addition to the powers he gave the other Ainur. (Why was Melkor chosen for these additional gifts? Hmmm....) Knowledge and power, in and of themselves, are good things, right? But perhaps Iluvatar didn't foresee the flip side of that particular coin: Ambition, arrogance and thirst for more power. Did those, too, come from Iluvatar? If nothing existed before Iluvatar, they, too, must've been part of him, yes? I don't know.
Okay, this is a stretch and kind of 'out there.' Iluvatar's first two Themes were harmonious within themselves. Ah, but the THIRD theme.... There's the rub! In trying to counter Melkor's discord, Iluvatar responded with discord of his own. Hence, duality came into being. There was no duality in the first two Themes; in the third, there is. "Immeasurable sorrow" comes into being and is blended with that third Theme.
And out of that third Theme came our world and all the beings in it. No wonder we're so screwed up!
So was the mistake Melkor's or Iluvatar's? As one of the Ainur, Melkor was an offspring of Iluvatar's thoughts -- not a child of Melkor, but an offspring of his thoughts. Can there be anything in Melkor that wasn't in Iluvatar? Certainly power and knowledge were part of Iluvator: In order to give those gifts to Melkor, they had to be his in the first place. But perhaps when Iluvatar created the third Theme, with its warring discord, disharmony, sorrow and duality, *Iluvatar* created duality; and these came *after* the Ainur came into being.
What would've happened if, instead of replying with discord of his own, Iluvatar had not responded to Melkor's interference with the Music? Guess it wouldn't matter since we and our world wouldn't exist.
So whose 'fault' was the discord? Melkor introduced it, but possibly because of his special gifts of power and knowledge. Iluvatar responded in like, with discord of his own. Maybe there is no answer, and maybe it's not important that there's no answer. It just IS.
So to answer Sparrow's question, my thought is that there was no good / evil -- no polarity, no duality -- until Melkor brought discord into the game. No good or evil -- just 'what is.' Later, Melkor's actions will be *labeled* by mortal beings as evil. But just because we choose give a name tag to something doesn't make it real.
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 3 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/20/2002 10:22 PM
I still put forth the theory that Illuvitar was trying to create another of himself. Or at least something that would come close. A supreme being could not just DO that. It would seem they would have to deconstruct themselves. Take all that is them, put them out as individual themes, give them free will, and somehow make them harmonize themselves back together. Then he would have another very like unto himself, but different, because of the free will.
I assume, that when it did not work at first, he allowed them to create Arda, using it as a template for them to understand what he eventually wanted. Melkor as some people pointed out could be the pride, ego part of him that did not integrate back into the whole, as he supposed it would. Hence he had to make some adjustments. Since Melkor is eternal (being an eternal part of Illuvitars nature), somewhere down the line, Melkor would have to be ILLUMINATED, and finally mesh into the WHOLE of the harmony, and Illuvitar would have another, like himself.
Hope I am not being too esoteric.
Glor
_________________________________________________
Reply
Message 4 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/20/2002 11:42 PM
Alas, after reading Amaranth's and Glorfindles replies and after rereading the beginning of the Ainulindale, I am not as clear on this point as I was the first time I posted. Why, indeed, was Melkor chosen for additional gifts? Perhaps Glorfindle is correct that Iluvatoar wanted another of himself. And where did the pride, arrogance, and desire to dominate come from if not from Iluvatar? And, since Melkor "had a share in all the gifts of his brethren," arguably he was or should have been the most balanced of the Ainur. There goes my evil comes from imbalance theory.
My daughter offered an interesting comment. It was to the effect of, Melkor was greater in power and knowledge than the other Ainur, therefore he was the closest in greatness to Iluvatar. There cannot be two deities so there had to be conflict. Did Iluvatar want another of himself? Is Melkor a case of Iluvatar's good intention (a companion) gone bad (a rival)?
I still want the answer to be that Iluvatar is all good. I am holding to the idea that something good (from Iluvatar) had to be distorted (through Melkor) before it could become evil. Perhaps the original evil was Melkor's becoming "not in accord" with Iluvatar; if so, then Iluvatar can still be all good by definition.
It is getting late (or should I say early) so I apologize if I am not clear.
Good night/morning!
~Sparrow
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 5 of 16 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameIarwainBen-adar1
Sent: 4/21/2002 2:39 AM
Glorfindle,
Being as all the religions begin or at least seem to begin with a one supreme creator, your hypothesis sounds quite valid to me. Even in Christianity there is the need for another like the creator and the grand experiment begins anew. Which leaves the burning question does Iluvatar answer to, or any god for that matter answer to a higher authority. Common ground and themes suggest that freewill is the one most Godlike component given to us or in this case the Atani (Man). Which would mean that possibly the Flame Imperishable is the higher authority in the Silmarillion. Where with us our higher authority would still be a matter of speculation. I hope I don't offend with this line of thought it is of course not my intent. But when discussing the creator in Tolkiens works it is always the unsaid sticky comparisons to Christianity that seem to follow. My heart aches to fall into such a confined space, but we all know good authors write about what they know. Your piece inspired me to consider these weighty ideals.
If Iluvatar is the all powerful why allow Mekor to continue? It is said that it was all part of his design, yet why allow the pain which marred all of Arda? Is the answer free will? Then if that is so then the gifts of man, Death, and free will seem to be the same gifts given to Melkor. Stay with me here. The free will of Melkor is obvious from the beginning when I refer to death you must consider that of the Valar it was Melkor alone who knew fear. Fear of what? Death is the only answer that comes to my mind. So what would the death of a Valar involve? In Melkor's case it was to be caste into the Void.
So now Iluvatar has caused all this to be, Arda is now free of Melkor and yet it is left to the usurpers man. From what I've seen man seems for the most part to be mini Melkors (sorry for the Austin Powers plug). With only a small number of worthy individuals, most of them with Elvish blood that are dwindling. The Valar, Maiar, and Elves get nothing and Man inherits Arda, all for free will. That is indeed a lot of effort for not much payoff, and it is sad that Tolkien is not around to finish the tale to the final singing. Because as it stands much of what was done seems for naught. Don't get me wrong I love the Tales, but I cannot fathom the reasoning of this long defeat in the terms of Iluvatar. It seems your theory might be a venue, but then it places Iluvatar in a position to have to comply by some higher rules, and therefore who is the guardian of the said rules. The rules being having to go through this process to create another of himself. I mean if he is the all powerful just say Ea and make his other appear and avoid the middle man? Is it because Iluvatar is also bound by the rules, and therefore has no freewill?
My Two cents Namarie,
Iarwain
_______________________________________________
Reply
Message 6 of 16 in Discussion
From: Lady_Oiolaire
Sent: 4/21/2002 11:56 AM
interesting.
in the Mormon religion, they believe that if they live their lives as fully and perfectly as is humanly possible, then they will become like God, and be able to create their own worlds.
so perhaps, Iluvitar is the end result of some former power's completion of his desires.
just my 2cents as well.
_Lady Oiolaire
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 7 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/21/2002 8:24 PM
The whole arguement, as I see it, is based upon whether or not you choose to view God (supreme being) as knowable. I am a neo-pagan, and my belief system grants that "God" is not knowable as such. Therefore we have lesser gods, elementals, if you will, that manefest aspects of "God". For to :"know" God, you would of course have to be him.
The Christian theories do not appeal to me, as I find most of them parables, and the rest un-thought out theories, mostly of man-made construct. Sorry, if I offend anyones belief system here, I am merely explaining mine.
Tolkien's creationist mythos is obviously Christian in thought, because he chooses to start with a "knowable" God.
He asserts that we "know" these things about Illuvitar. That he created the Ainur, and they did such and such. To me, I cannot even speak the name of God, for I do not know it, nor could I pronounce it.
So it follows to ME, that his whole creation mythos is like unto a Christian mythos, where they personify "GOD" and the beginnings of creation as something understandable and relatable.
Given this idea, it was from this, that I tried to extrapolate the mind of Illuvitar, and how it all followed. But as usual I hit the very dead end I gave up Catholicism because of. (sorry for the poor grammatical structure).
Even in Christian arguements, the God of the Old Testament as opposed to the God of the New Testament, gives unbearable controversy as to his manner and how he dealt with mankind.
Glor
________________________________________________
Reply
Message 8 of 16 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameVairë_Daystar
Sent: 4/22/2002 12:10 AM
I agree, Glor, that Tolkein's creation was inherently christianity-based. However, it always strikes me that Illuvator is getting just a bit ticked off with Melkor when he introduces the second theme. That, from memory is the one that he introduced through Manwe. Then, of course, he seems ultimately pissed when he ends all the music in one final cadence. Can a god who is irritated by the insubordination of Melkor be all good? I think Illuvatur has a few character flaws too, and this makes him a lot more accessible to humans, but also helps to explain how Melkor came about. This was probably very badly constructed, but I'm sure you get the point.
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 9 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/27/2002 8:09 PM
The whole arguement, as I see it, is based upon whether or not you choose to view God (supreme being) as knowable. . .
Very interesting, Glorfindle, to compare and contrast your thoughts with mine. Unlike you, I am a Christian, and like you, I believe God is unknowable. That is, I believe my finite mind cannot comprehend an infinite God. I'm sure now you understand why I want to believe Iluvatar is all good.
So, to satisfy myself, I will say:
1. The creator is all good, and all evil comes from corruption of some good trait of the creator.
2. Since the creator is not completely knowable, I will never be able to understand the divine nature and all divine actions.
And no, you do not offend my belief system when you express yours. I do not claim to have a monopoly on truth. I am sure we are both right about many things, and both wrong about others.
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 10 of 16 in Discussion
From: megn1
Sent: 4/27/2002 8:40 PM
Well said, Sparrow. Thank you.
This thread has me thinking...
Melkor comes from Iluvatar, and in fact has the largest share of Iluvatar's gifts and thoughts. Yet even he does not know all of Iluvatar's mind, and his gifts do have a limit. Perhaps this is what gives him the leaning toward evil, which is not present in Iluvatar. Melkor is not "whole." He is a part.
Which causes me to wonder if that is origin of evil - a lack of wholeness, and incomplete grasp of the mind of God, a limit to our abilities.
When Saruman becomes "the multi-colored" instead of "the white," he and Gandalf have a conversation in which Saruman says "White seves as a beginning. White cloth may be dyed. The white page can be overwritten, and the white light can be broken." Gandalf replies "In which case it is no longer white. And he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."
Thanks for making me ponder...
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 11 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/27/2002 11:06 PM
Thanks Meg for reminding me of that quote. I was quotes like that, that made me realize the genius of Tolkien.
Glor
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 12 of 16 in Discussion
From: Glorfindle
Sent: 4/28/2002 6:11 PM
Megn, you hit the proverbial nail on the head, with your comment:
Perhaps this is what gives him the leaning toward evil, which is not present in Iluvatar. Melkor is not "whole." He is a part.
You cannot have light, if you do not know darkness. You cannot know evil, if you do not understand good. Illuvitar, when trying to make another of himself, tried to make the parts of him understand the harmony to become whole. But so as to create another LIKE him but not a carbon copy, he gave them free will. Melkor, being the ego, prideful part of Illuvitar, did not take to the harmony that was to create the whole. Illuvitar's part he gave to Melkor, pride and ego, is not within itself evil. Not if it harmonizes back to be the whole being. Pride and ego is a necessary part of a whole that is tempered with fairness and humility.
However, the free will allowed Melkor to be consumed with the gifts he had, and mistake them for being whole enough to stand alone and create on his own. Hence, this is where he turned to evil. I think that one reason Melkor is seen as being more powerful than other Ainur, is because the gifts of pride and ego, when used wisely, in harmony with other gifts, can be some of the most powerful forces out there. It can create heroism and bravery. It helps make a warrior effective. Pride in country, nationalism, ego of rightousness and ability to be brave.
But these gifts have an inherent downfall. In themselves, without the harmony of the other gifts, one can become prideful to a selfish extent, and one's ego can lead from determination to domination. The more powerful the gifts, the more present the danger.
So to assuage Sparrow's need to believe Illuvitar is wholey good, I say YES he is. And agree with Megn in that what makes Melkor evil was his inability to handle the gifts Illuvitar gave him, and deny the harmony that would have made him whole with his creator.
Glor
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 13 of 16 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameVairë_Daystar
Sent: 4/28/2002 9:32 PM
Wow, that was great, Glorfindle. I really like that idea. Lots to think about here - this is such an interesting thread.
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 14 of 16 in Discussion
From: Pherquarewen
Sent: 4/28/2002 10:15 PM
If you are The Light, you know darkness because it is not like you. Since Iluvatar is absolute goodness, he knows evil because it is that which is not like him. He does not merely do things that are good - he is the explanation of all that good means.
Melkor was given a good gift in a free will. Which one of us would choose to be a robot over being a human? My answer is NO WAY would I choose to be a robot.. Melkor took his gifts and corrupted them.
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 15 of 16 in Discussion
From: MysticMagycPony
Sent: 4/29/2002 6:39 AM
hmmmmmm.................
Is it assumed, or did I read in the threads of this tapestry that only good comes from good???
Can a creature be created good and in exercising free will thus corrupt his intended path into one of malicious evil?
Glor, I'm with you on this one.....
MysticMagycPony
______________________________________________
Reply
Message 16 of 16 in Discussion
From: sparrow
Sent: 4/29/2002 9:01 PM
Thank you, Thank you, Megn1, Glorfindle, and MysticMagicPony. My mind is now at ease.
I am satisfied that what gives Melkor his leaning toward evil is that he is part.
I am relieved that it was Melkor's failure to harmonize that was evil.
I am assured that the evil did not come from Iluvatar but was a corruption of his gifts.
Thank you to everyone who participated in this thread and helped clear that up for me!