Become a Member! Recently Active Topics
The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and Tolkien - The One Ring > The Books (Tolkien) (Page 2 of 2)
Jottler
Melkor and allegory ... «Last Thread | Next Thread»
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto:
...
Jump to:  
Author Message
Elendil36
Shield Bearer


Alliance: Numenore
Last Visited: 23 Apr 2009
Joined: 27 Jul 2001
Posts: 210

Post Posted: Fri May 7, 2004 8:28 pm Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


Wink First time for everything Romestamo.

As a matter of fact, I've finally taken up HOME this week-- half way through Lost Tales 1-- a task Ive delayed now for ten years almost, because I need to know my Tolkien like I know my catechism to be able to hold my own in here.

It all changed last week when I got put in my place about the orcs-- I am still reeling from the shock of hearing 'mannish origins'. Shocked

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give Elendil36 a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message


evenstar1
Ranger of the North


Alliance: Servant to Luthien
Last Visited: 23 Aug 2008
Joined: 21 Apr 2002
Posts: 3886

Post Posted: Sun May 9, 2004 2:15 pm Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


I agree but the character of Melkor is awesome an if I wasto be a bad guy it would be him over Saruon anytime.He is a very interesting an deep character an I see an understand why he did what he did an how much it affected events.
 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give evenstar1 a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message
FanofFaramir
Petitioner to the Council


Alliance: default
Last Visited: 27 May 2004
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 2

Post Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 8:29 pm Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom
Historical Myth

I am new to this board so will probably be in way over my head, but this thread really intrigued me and I would like to give a few of my thoughts on the similarities between the Silmarilion and the Biblical account of the fall of Satan. I agree with ArPharazon and others who think the two accounts are of the same event, but I also recognize like Eluchil the interpretational difficulties in such a view. The answer I think lies in remembering that Tolkien was writing historical myth.
The Christian perspective is that the events of early history recorded in the Bible (Creation, fall of Satan, fall of man, etc.) actually happened. Consequently, the record of these things would have been passed on both verbally and through written stories and histories to successive generations. As man spread out over the globe (particularly after the Flood and Tower of Babel) these stories would have begun to follow the natural progression of history to legend to myth. Except in the case of Divine intervention which preserved the accurate accounts in the Bible (the Christian doctrine of Biblical inspiration and inerrancy), the accounts would have gradually been embellished, minimized and altered according to the interests and influences of the different groups. Some stories would be very similar to Biblical account while others would bear little resemblance (Interestingly, this has actually been observed in different "primitive"cultures that had legends similar to early Genesis long before any Christian missionaries reached them). Besides the natural evolution of historical myth, from a Christian perspective, there is also another force at work deliberately attempting to pervert the true story. In the Sil, we see this when Sauron deceives the people of Numenor into believing Melchor to be the hero and Iluvatar the villain in the original story. At any rate, the myths of the Simarilion are specifically from the perspective of the Elves ( a special created race apparently unique to Middle Earth) thus they would naturally be fascinated with the Melchor story while the other more human related stories would have held little interest or even perhaps been little known to them.
So to sum up my theory, the fall of Satan and the fall of Melchor are describing the same event. The Scripture is the inspired accurate account while the Sil is the poetic, mythical account from an Elvish perspective. In this way, Tolkien could be true to basic theological principles of the fall (i.e. the existence of evil as Elendil36 so eloquently explained) without being bound by the specific details of the Biblical account. This seems to reconcile the interpretational difficulties while being true to Tolkien's Catholic beliefs. Of course it's only my theory, and I'm open to others thoughts.

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give FanofFaramir a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message
jaimez
Petitioner to the Council


Alliance: default
Last Visited: 27 May 2004
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 7

Post Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 2:37 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom
Consider Zoroastrianism

Just a reminder that in Zoroastrianism (predating Christianity), Ahriman (aka Arimanius or Angra Mainya) was the devil figure ......a dualist religion and echoing much of the symbolism of light and darkness present in LOTD.
 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give jaimez a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message

Armenelos
Mariner


Alliance: House of Elwe
Last Visited: 05 Aug 2010
Joined: 28 Dec 2000
Posts: 6661
Location: Tampa, FL
Post Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 8:29 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


I've read a lot on some Zoroastrian ideas as well, really interesting stuff.

The Islamic story of the fall of Azazel (Lucifer) is a little different. When God created Adam he commanded all of the angels to prostrate before him, but only Azazel refused, and becomes Iblis, the proud spirit of fire (Satan).

Peter Lamborn Wilson says that one might easily surmise a hidden story: "somehow God wanted Iblis to become Satan, and wanted Adam and Eve to fall, so that the full drama of creation and the manifestation of all the Names might be played out unto redemption. Satan and Adam both have "free will," yet everything is written , foreordained, and known."

Kind of reminiscent of Melkor/Morgoth's relationship to Illuvatar, no?

But back to the allegorical question, sure Melkor/Morgoth runs parallel to the christian story of Lucifer, and because of Tolkien's religion, it is probably what he took it from, but that doesn't mean Melkor=Lucifer. The reader can compare any of these characters to many different ideas, why limit yourself and box everything in and pin it down?

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give Armenelos a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger


-Rómestámo-
Ranger of the North


Alliance: default
Last Visited: 15 Oct 2004
Joined: 06 Mar 2002
Posts: 2947

Post Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 10:37 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


Quote:

jaimez :Just a reminder that in Zoroastrianism (predating Christianity), Ahriman (aka Arimanius or Angra Mainya) was the devil figure ......a dualist religion and echoing much of the symbolism of light and darkness present in LOTD.

While at first glance this parallel is present, on closer scrutiny the analogy falls down. Tolkien's cosmology is NOT dualistic ( ie Melkor and Ilúvatar are not equal and opposite). So while the symbolic opposition between light and darkness is present in Tolkien's writings, the theological underpinnings are markedly different: Melkor (like Satan) is a rebellious subordinate of the Creator God, not his equal adversary.

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give -Rómestámo- a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message

Queen_Beruthiel
Ranger of the North


Alliance: Mordor
Last Visited: 14 Mar 2010
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 2870

Post Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 1:10 pm Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


Indeed. Melkor is a created being, co-eval with Manwe and not the equal of Iluvatar. Christian doctrine insists that only God can create ex nihilo and Tolkien did not deviate from this in his legendarium.

Quote:

[Melkor] had gone often alone into the void places seeking the Imperishable Flame; for desire grew hot within him to bring into Being things of his own, and it seemed to him that Iluvatar took no thought for the Void, and he was impatient of its emptiness. Yet he found not the Fire, for it is with Iluvatar.


This is not consistent with dualism.

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give Queen_Beruthiel a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message
jaimez
Petitioner to the Council


Alliance: default
Last Visited: 27 May 2004
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 7

Post Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 2:44 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


The point of the post was simply to indicate that the idea of the adversary, the fallen angel or oppositional evil is not unique to the Christian doctrin. There is a similarity to motifs in LOTR, not an analogy, which is highly dualistic in its philosophy if not in its theology.

The joy that I take form Tolkien is that he has stripped away overt religious references and and left a core of moral decisions and lessons. Lesson's in devotion, love, sacrifice and perserverance which are common themes to all spritual lives and the exclusive preserve of no individual religion.

To tap into the universal mythic is at the heart of LOTR's power, endurance and especially it cross cultural/religious appeal.

Jaimez

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give jaimez a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message
FanofFaramir
Petitioner to the Council


Alliance: default
Last Visited: 27 May 2004
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 2

Post Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 11:26 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


jaimez said:


To tap into the universal mythic is at the heart of LOTR's power, endurance and especially it cross cultural/religious appeal.

Jaimez


True! But why is there a universal mythic? Tolkien believed the basis for all myth was the "real" and "true" stories of the Bible. Because God created a good world which evil marred, man has an innate longing for redemption and restoration. The parallels and similarities are exactly what a Christian historian/anthropologist would expect to find since man originally shared the same basic religious beliefs. The Biblical worldview also expects to find corruptions (e.g. dualism) of the original. Tolkien understood the power of myth as man's attempt to rediscover the original story. It was this line of thinking influenced by Tolkien that played a key role in C.S. Lewis coversion from atheism. Of course the proof that Tolkien created believable historical myth is that his legends sound so much like real historical myth and legend that we already have! That and the universal truths portrayed is what gives it reality and appeal!

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give FanofFaramir a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message
jaimez
Petitioner to the Council


Alliance: default
Last Visited: 27 May 2004
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 7

Post Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 2:03 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom
Universal mythic

I am not sure what Tolkien believed on myth...havn't read those sources, but would be surprised if he really did espouse the belief that all myth originated in the stories of the bible. Given that many of the bible stories (especially old testiment) have provable roots that go back to Egypt, Babylon and beyond. The statement also seems to assume that myth could not exist before the writing of the bible which is clearly wrong.

I talked about the universal mythic as the common "lesson stories" that are common to all societies. They usually start as oral traditions for dealing with commonly encountered problems in life with reference to the past. Often originating in tribal societies (where they are commonly conceived as ancestral wisdom) and based on real events, they become generalised as they are told, retold and eventually written down. This is why these elements cause deep emotional responses when used in films and books.....

Why do we have a universal mythic...I suppose the answer is because we are human;-)

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give jaimez a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message

Telperion
Rider of the Mark
10 Year Member

Alliance: Valinor
Last Visited: 04 Jun 2008
Joined: 15 Aug 2000
Posts: 693

Post Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2004 10:45 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


Quote:

The relationship between Melkor and Lucifer probably warrants its own thread. Melkor is more closely a match for Satan (the 'Adversary' ) than Lucifer.


Very interesting thought...since it is easy to think a Valar/God would have more power than an Angel. But the Christian Angels are a mix of many more ancient ideas from Zoroastrianism taken into Judism and then add a pinch from certain divine beings from the religions of Greece/Rome.

The Christian Angels basically took over the elemental functions of the old Gods from the Empire...so I guess you could argue an Angel has the same power as a pagan God like Jupiter.

Then we have the idea of the different Choirs of Angels and the different Orders of Ainur.... both the same idea of one divine race with different castes.

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give Telperion a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message

laureanna
Ranger of the North


Alliance: House of Cirdan
Last Visited: 21 May 2010
Joined: 05 Jun 2003
Posts: 3583
Location: sunny california
Post Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 5:51 pm Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


I posted the message below about this last year, but being a green n00b, and posting it in the wrong forum (Manwe) it was pretty much ignored. So at the risk of unnecessary spamming, here it is again, slightly altered because I'm not quite such a green a n00b now. Maybe.

~~~

I’ve just noticed a striking difference between Tolkien’s creation story and the Bible’s creation story. I don’t want to get into a creationist argument. Suffice to say I’m Catholic and do not take the Genesis story literally, but as a lesson. For me, the most important concept that the Genesis story conveys is that all of the world started out basically good. Man has free will and an understanding of good and evil. It is Man’s voluntary actions that create evil. The Catholic Church calls this tendency to do evil “original sin” – the sinful nature that is inherent in every person from his birth.

Tolkien, though, had Melkor weave discord and evil into the very fabric of the world, before the Children arrived. But the Children (Elves and Men) were created from Iluvatar’s music only, and had no discord in them. Melkor then corrupted some of the elves, either completely (into orcs) and or partly (the various elves with F- names). By the time of the kin-slaying, it appears the discord of Middle Earth had permeated the Elven population. Men, though, were given “virtue to shape their life beyond the music of the Ainur, which is the fate to all things else.” This would indicate that for Middle Earth, Tolkien placed the “stain” of original sin in the earth (and thus in Elves), rather than in Men, and Men had the virtue to resist it (sometimes). So does anyone (elf, human, dwarf) have original sin in Middle Earth?

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give laureanna a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message

Telperion
Rider of the Mark
10 Year Member

Alliance: Valinor
Last Visited: 04 Jun 2008
Joined: 15 Aug 2000
Posts: 693

Post Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:37 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


Quote:

The joy that I take form Tolkien is that he has stripped away overt religious references and and left a core of moral decisions and lessons. Lesson's in devotion, love, sacrifice and perserverance which are common themes to all spritual lives and the exclusive preserve of no individual religion.

To tap into the universal mythic is at the heart of LOTR's power, endurance and especially it cross cultural/religious appeal.


This is great! I totally agree with you Jaimez! Smile

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give Telperion a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message


wilko185
by stok other ston


Alliance: House of Finrod Felagund
Last Visited: 01 Apr 2010
Joined: 18 Nov 2001
Posts: 7880

Post Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 7:40 am Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


laureanna said:

Tolkien, though, had Melkor weave discord and evil into the very fabric of the world, before the Children arrived. But the Children (Elves and Men) were created from Iluvatar’s music only, and had no discord in them. Melkor then corrupted some of the elves, either completely (into orcs) and or partly (the various elves with F- names). By the time of the kin-slaying, it appears the discord of Middle Earth had permeated the Elven population. Men, though, were given “virtue to shape their life beyond the music of the Ainur, which is the fate to all things else.” This would indicate that for Middle Earth, Tolkien placed the “stain” of original sin in the earth (and thus in Elves), rather than in Men, and Men had the virtue to resist it (sometimes). So does anyone (elf, human, dwarf) have original sin in Middle Earth?

Just bumping this interesting post with some quick points.

- The "Marring" of Arda which was there from the start, is present in the Elves in some way. Premature death of elves is attributed to it, for example. I need to look up some quotes on this.

- We don't get to see Man's beginnings in the Sil story, they come over the mountains into Beleriand with some "darkness behind them", and we are told that unlike the Elves who had Oromë to guide them at their awakening, they had only Morgoth, who made a rare personal foray when he heard of their awakening. There thus seems to be a "hole" in the narrative for some Eden-esque Fall in Man's history.

 

.. the very monsters and huge fishes of the sea, war not amongst themselves in their own kind: but believe me, man at man's hand receiveth most harm and mischief.


-- Pliny
View user's profile Send private message
Morinehtar
Shield Bearer


Alliance: default
Last Visited: 22 Jul 2004
Joined: 26 Jul 2003
Posts: 179

Post Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:09 pm Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


Quote:

laureanna : Tolkien, though, had Melkor weave discord and evil into the very fabric of the world, before the Children arrived. But the Children (Elves and Men) were created from Iluvatar’s music only, and had no discord in them. Melkor then corrupted some of the elves, either completely (into orcs) and or partly (the various elves with F- names). By the time of the kin-slaying, it appears the discord of Middle Earth had permeated the Elven population. Men, though, were given “virtue to shape their life beyond the music of the Ainur, which is the fate to all things else.” This would indicate that for Middle Earth, Tolkien placed the “stain” of original sin in the earth (and thus in Elves), rather than in Men, and Men had the virtue to resist it (sometimes). So does anyone (elf, human, dwarf) have original sin in Middle Earth?

Hi laureanna Smile .

While the Eruhíni were propounded by Ilúvatar alone, it must be remembered that they arose with the Third Theme. Like any piece of music, later themes or movements are related to the ones that precede them (as in the World of Time, the Present is related to the Past). Thus, despite the Ainur having no part in the making of the Third Theme, the products of this theme were brought into being utilising the materials of Arda that had already been altered by the Marrer.
Quote:


To gain domination over Arda, Morgoth had let most of his being pass into the physical constituents of the Earth - hence all things that were born on Earth and lived on and by it, beasts or plants or incarnate spirits, were liable to be 'stained'.

'Myths Transformed', Text VII , Morgoth's Ring .

Arda itself was 'Morgoth's Ring' - everything within it that had a physical existence had some 'Melkor ingredient' that could influence the Incarnate being towards evil. Thus ALL incarnates, Elves, Dwarves, Men, Ents and Hobbits, partook of some 'Melkor-nature'.

However this is not theologically equivalent to 'Original Sin', not involving a choice (although in practice it has much the same effect once roused) :
Quote:

'Matter' is not regarded as evil or opposed to 'Spirit'. Matter was wholly good in origin. It remained a 'creature of Eru' and still largely good, and indeed self-healing, when not interfered with: that is, when the latent evil intruded by Melkor was not deliberately roused and used by evil minds . Melkor had concentrated his attention on 'matter', because spirits could only be dominated completely by fear; and fear was most easily exerted through matter (especially in the case of the Incarnates, whom he most desired to subjugate). For example by fear that material things that were loved might be destroyed, or the fear (in Incarnates) that their bodies might be hurt. (Melkor also used and perverted for his purposes the 'fear of Eru', fully or vaguely understood. But this was more difficult and perilous and required more cunning. Lesser spirits might be lured by love or admiration of himself and his powers, and so led at last into a posture of rebellion against Eru. Their fear of Him might then be darkened, so that they adhered to Melkor, as a captain and protector, becoming at last too terrified to return to the allegiance of Eru, even after they had discovered Melkor and had begun to hate him.)

Note 10 , 'Author's Notes on the 'Commentary' on the Athrabeth .' Morgoth's Ring .

Tolkien regarded both (some of) the Elves (the Noldor) and ALL Mankind as fallen . That implies that a choice was made. In the Letter to Milton Waldman he summarizes the salient features of the Legendarium - and it is clear he deliberately keeps the Fall of Man 'off-stage' as it were.
Quote:

As I say, the legendary Silmarillion is peculiar, and differs from all similar things that I know in not being anthropocentric. Its centre of view and interest is not Men but 'Elves'. Men came in inevitably : after all the author is a man, and if he has an audience they will be Men and Men must come in to our tales, as such, and not merely transfigured or partially represented as Elves, Dwarfs, Hobbits, etc. But they remain peripheral – late comers, and however growingly important, not principals.

In the cosmogony there is a fall : a fall of Angels we should say. Though quite different in form, of course, to that of Christian myth. These tales are 'new', they are not directly derived from other myths and legends, but they must inevitably contain a large measure of ancient wide-spread motives or elements. After all, I believe that legends and myths are largely made of 'truth', and indeed present aspects of it that can only be received in this mode; and long ago certain truths and modes of this kind were discovered and must always reappear. There cannot be any 'story' without a fall – all stories are ultimately about the fall – at least not for human minds as we know them and have them.

So, proceeding, the Elves have a fall, before their 'history' can become storial. ( The first fall of Man , for reasons explained, nowhere appears – Men do not come on the stage until all that is long past, and there is only a rumour that for a while they fell under the domination of the Enemy and that some repented.) The main body of the tale, the Silmarillion proper, is about the fall of the most gifted kindred of the Elves , their exile from Valinor (a kind of Paradise, the home of the Gods) in the furthest West, their re-entry into Middle-earth, the land of their birth but long under the rule of the Enemy, and their strife with him, the power of Evil still visibly incarnate. It receives its name because the events are all threaded upon the fate and significance of the Silmarilli ('radiance of pure light') or Primeval Jewels. By the making of gems the sub-creative function of the Elves is chiefly symbolized, but the Silmarilli were more than just beautiful things as such.

[...]

But the chief artificer of the Elves (Fëanor) had imprisoned the Light of Valinor in the three supreme jewels, the Silmarilli, before the Trees were sullied or slain. This Light thus lived thereafter only in these gems. The fall of the Elves comes about through the possessive attitude of Fëanor and his seven sons to these gems . They are captured by the Enemy, set in his Iron Crown, and guarded in his impenetrable stronghold . The sons of Fëanor take a terrible and blasphemous oath of enmity and vengeance against all or any, even of the gods, who dares to claim any part or right in the Silmarilli. They pervert the greater part of their kindred , who rebel against the gods, and depart from paradise, and go to make hopeless war upon the Enemy.

Letter 131 , (1951).

The 'Fall' of Man is only alluded to in the published The Silmarillion :
Quote:

'A darkness lies behind us,' Bëor said; 'and we have turned our backs upon it, and we do not desire to return thither even in thought. Westwards our hearts have been turned, and we believe that there we shall find Light.'

But it was said afterwards among the Eldar that when Men awoke in Hildórien at the rising of the Sun the spies of Morgoth were watchful, and tidings were soon brought to him; and this seemed to him so great a matter that secretly under shadow he himself departed from Angband, and went forth into Middle-earth , leaving to Sauron the command of the War. Of his dealings with Men the Eldar indeed knew nothing, at that time, and learnt but little afterwards; but that a darkness lay upon the hearts of Men (as the shadow of the Kinslaying and the Doom of Mandos lay upon the Noldor) they perceived clearly even in the people of the Elf-friends whom they first knew .

'Of the Coming of Men into the West,' The Silmarillion .

and whereas a 'version' of a Fall is recounted in The Tale of Adanel , Tolkien makes it clear that it is a Númenórean tradition based on the lore of the People of Marach with the added note Nothing is hereby asserted concerning its 'truth', historical or otherwise . What it says is that Mankind turned away from a Voice (Eru) to follow an Incarnate God-king (Melkor):
Quote:

[...] Longer recensions of the Athrabeth , evidently edited under Númenórean influence, make her [Andreth] give, under pressure, a more precise answer. Some are very brief, some longer. All agree, however, in making the cause of disaster the acceptance by Men of Melkor as King (or King and God ). [...]

Note 9 , 'Author's Notes on the 'Commentary' on the Athrabeth .' Morgoth's Ring .

Because of this 'Fall', Andreth tells Finrod that it is the human belief that Men had their (originally Immortal) nature changed.
Quote:

[...] More strictly speaking, he [Finrod] would say that Melkor had not 'changed' Men, but 'seduced' them (to allegiance to himself) very early in their history, so that Eru had changed their 'fate' . For Melkor could seduce individual minds and wills, but he could not make this heritable, or alter (contrary to the will and design of Eru) the relation of a whole people to Time and Arda. But the power of Melkor over material things was plainly vast. The whole of Arda (and indeed probably many other parts of Eä) had been marred by him. Melkor was not just a local Evil on Earth, nor a Guardian Angel of Earth who had gone wrong: he was the Spirit of Evil, arising even before the making of Eä. His attempt to dominate the structure of Eä, and of Arda in particular, and alter the designs of Eru (which governed all the operations of the faithful Valar), had introduced evil, or a tendency to aberration from the design, into all the physical matter of Arda. It was for this reason, no doubt, that he had been totally successful with Men , but only partially so with Elves (who remained as a people 'unfallen' ). His power was wielded over matter, and through it. ( Author's Note 10 , [see above]) But by nature the fëar of Men were in much less strong control of their hröar than was the case with the Elves. Individual Elves might be seduced to a kind of minor 'Melkorism': desiring to be their own masters in Arda, and to have things their own way, leading in extreme cases to rebellion against the tutelage of the Valar; but not one had ever entered the service or allegiance of Melkor himself , nor ever denied the existence and absolute supremacy of Eru . Some dreadful things of this sort, Finrod guesses, Men must have done , as a whole ; but Andreth does not reveal what were Men's traditions on this point. ( Reference to Author's Note 9) [part reproduced above]

Finrod, however, sees now that, as things were, no created thing or being in Arda, or in all Eä, was powerful enough to counteract or heal Evil: that is to subdue Melkor (in his present person, reduced though that was) and the Evil that he had dissipated and sent out from himself into the very structure of the world.

Only Eru himself could do this. Therefore, since it was unthinkable that Eru would abandon the world to the ultimate triumph and domination of Melkor (which could mean its ruin and reduction to chaos), Eru Himself must at some time come to oppose Melkor. But Eru could not enter wholly into the world and its history, which is, however great, only a finite Drama. He must as Author always remain 'outside' the Drama, even though that Drama depends on His design and His will for its beginning and continuance, in every detail and moment. Finrod therefore thinks that He will, when He comes, have to be both 'outside' and inside; and so he glimpses the possibility of complexity or of distinctions in the nature of Eru, which nonetheless leaves Him 'The One'. ( Author's Note 11, p. 345 )

Since Finrod had already guessed that the redemptive function was originally specially assigned to Men, he probably proceeded to the expectation that 'the coming of Eru', if it took place, would be specially and primarily concerned with Men: that is to an imaginative guess or vision that Eru would come incarnated in human form. This, however, does not appear in the Athrabeth .
    [Author's] Note 11

    This is actually already glimpsed in the Ainulindalë , in which reference is made to the 'Flame Imperishable'. This appears to mean the Creative activity of Eru (in some sense distinct from or within Him), by which things could be given a 'real' and independent (though derivative and created) existence. The Flame Imperishable is sent out from Eru, to dwell in the heart of the world, and the world then Is, on the same plane as the Ainur, and they can enter into it. But this is not, of course, the same as the re-entry of Eru to defeat Melkor. It refers rather to the mystery of 'authorship', by which the author, while remaining 'outside' and independent of his work, also 'indwells' in it, on its derivative plane, below that of his own being, as the source and guarantee of its being.

'Commentary' to the Athrabeth ', Morgoth's Ring.

If this belief of Man (that Melkor either changed their nature himself or that their rebellion caused Eru to change it) is correct, then this would be the equivalent of Adam's Fall.

So it seems that this is the Fall within Arda - the loss of eternal incarnate life and expulsion from Eden being the seduction by Melkor and subsequent alteration by Eru; and the stain of “original sin” (the <tendency to do evil – the sinful nature that is inherent in every person from his birth.> ) being the arousing from its latent state of the Melkor-nature within the matter of the hröar (body) that can influence the fëar (spirit, soul) which resides within it.

[It is the belief of Andreth that Men were originally intended to be Immortal, however Finrod believes that this is not so - immortal humans would be Elves! So he considers the change by Eru must have been a reduction of extended incarnate life and the 'marring' by Melkor was the introduction of the belief that the Gift of Death was something to be feared. Finrod's version is supported by Note 4 which outlines the original plan for the unfallen ; dying in a state in which they could acquire greater knowledge and peace of mind, and being healed of all hurts both of mind and body, could at last surrender themselves: die of free will, and even of desire, in *estel*. A thing which Aragorn achieved [...] ].

Therefore can Elves, dwarves and Men have Original Sin? The answer appears to be yes - if the latent 'Melkor-ingredient' within their bodies is aroused, as it was in the Noldor by the lies of Melkor.
    ----------
Quote:

laureanna : Melkor then corrupted some of the elves, [...] partly (the various elves with F- names).

Oh, those nasty Elves Fingon and Finrod Felagund... not like those nice boys Celegorm and Curufin... Twisted Evil Wink laureanna , what do you mean? Confused
    ----------
Quote:

wilko185 : The "Marring" of Arda which was there from the start, is present in the Elves in some way. Premature death of elves is attributed to it, for example.

Hi wilko Cool !
Quote:

Now the Eldar learned that, according to the lore of the Edain, Men believed that their hröar were not by right nature short-lived, but had been made so by the malice of Melkor. It was not clear to the Eldar whether Men meant: by the general marring of Arda (which they themselves held to be the cause of the waning of their own hröar ); or by some special malice against Men as Men that was achieved in the dark ages before the Edain and the Eldar met in Beleriand; or by both. But to the Eldar it seemed that, if the mortality of Men had come by special malice, the nature of Men had been grievously changed from the first design of Eru; and this was a matter of wonder and dread to them, for, if it were indeed so, then the power of Melkor must be (or have been in the beginning) far greater than even the Eldar had understood; whereas the original nature of Men must have been strange indeed and unlike that of any others of the dwellers in Arda.

'Introductory Text to the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth ,'
(typescript C ), Morgoth's Ring.

This explains the Elvish belief - they feel that their 'waning' or 'fading' of their hröar is due to the Marring of Arda, and was not originally intended to be their fate .

 

Give a Premiere Membership!Give Morinehtar a Premiere Membership!
View user's profile Send private message


wilko185
by stok other ston


Alliance: House of Finrod Felagund
Last Visited: 01 Apr 2010
Joined: 18 Nov 2001
Posts: 7880

Post Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:07 pm Reply with quoteReplyTopBottom


Quote:

The fall of the Elves comes about through the possessive attitude of Fëanor and his seven sons to these gems.


Morinehtar , excellent stuff Smile.

As you showed in your last quote, the "shadow" on the Elves was not just due to Fëanor's error. The death of Fëanor's mother may (perhaps) be attributed to it (HOME X):
Quote:

And death is for the Eldar an evil, that is a thing unnatural in Arda Unmarred, which must proceed therefore from the marring. For if the death of Míriel was otherwise, and came from beyond Arda (as a new thing having no cause in the past) it would not bring grief or doubt.
This innate spoiling is not the same as the moral failing due to the Silmarils, and it isn't e.g. what keeps Galadriel in Middle-earth. But it's always lurking there in the background, I think. Galadriel is an instructive example - Tolkien tended to make her blameless in her moral choices, and yet she was never "without sin", and hence needed the grace of the Valar to re-admit her.

 

.. the very monsters and huge fishes of the sea, war not amongst themselves in their own kind: but believe me, man at man's hand receiveth most harm and mischief.


-- Pliny
View user's profile Send private message
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto:
...
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2
  Display posts from previous:      
The time now is Fri Sep 3, 2010 8:22 am ... All times are GMT - 8 Hours


Terms of Service ... FAQ

Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Forums Directory