Were the Valar “demoted” at the end of the Second Age?

[CAB]

Then Manwe upon the Mountain called upon Iluvatar, and for that time the Valar laid down their government of Arda. -Akallabeth, The Silmarillion

I have often wondered what exactly was meant by this passage concerning the changing of the world at the end of the Second Age. Recently I have developed a theory. Maybe it means that the Valar were “demoted” by Eru.

If the Valar’s task was to guide and protect the Children of Iluvatar, they did a pretty lousy job. The story of Elves and Men is filled with hatred, war, and suffering, much of which can be attributed directly to the Valar and much of which (no, not all) they could have prevented.
The Valar had made mistakes on top of mistakes. They were perhaps too interested in their own happiness and definitely didn’t understand Elves and Men.

When they realized that the Numenoreans were going to attack them (due to the influence of one of their own people, no less) they should have appreciated the magnitude of the situation. They could have sent an ambassador such as Eonwe to speak with the Numenoreans and perhaps counteract Sauron. Or (heaven forbid) one of the Valar could have left to comfort of Valinor and gone themselves. What did the Valar see fit to send? Threatening weather and cloud formations, nice choice.

The Valar’s decision to fence themselves (and apparently many of the most beautiful things in the world) in the West and then ban the Numenoreans from visiting and then failing to take proper action when troubles arose, caused Eru to have to destroy thousands of his Children. Maybe this was the final straw. He then removed the temptation of Valinor from the Earth and let the Valar live their own lives without so much responsibility for the state of Middle Earth. A responsibility they had never really lived up to anyway.

[Gordis]

Very interesting, CAB. :)

I have little to say, because I agree with you. :)
Of course, the Valar did send the Istari...

[CAB]

Of course, the Valar did send the Istari...
Yes, this is why I said demoted instead of fired, which was actually my first thought. It is also pretty clear that they got Eru’s permission to send them. Maybe before the Third Age they could have acted without asking first.

[Butterbeer]

go see my new theory in the ban of the valar thread ...

essentially discussing whether the valar were in fact, only one lazy fat man, a wiazrd of oz style character with bad breath and a fear of the common cold and who hated garlic??

...or ... ;)

(will get back to you on this when i have some time - just having a quick look around now- while i have a mo - as i wait for someone to turn up to pick up a camera)

best, BB

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

When they realized that the Numenoreans were going to attack them (due to the influence of one of their own people, no less) they should have appreciated the magnitude of the situation. They could have sent an ambassador such as Eonwe to speak with the Numenoreans and perhaps counteract Sauron. Or (heaven forbid) one of the Valar could have left to comfort of Valinor and gone themselves. What did the Valar see fit to send? Threatening weather and cloud formations, nice choice.
Do you not think they made the right choice? After they told Eru he killed the Numenorean army.

[Gordis]

Do you not think they made the right choice? After they told Eru he killed the Numenorean army.
Nay, he killed all the population of the island, newborn babies included. :mad:

And really, TD, don't you think that Ulmo and Tulkas and Osse couldn't deal with the Fleet themselves? They were Valar!

I think, the Valar really didn't want to harm Numenoreans, they recognised their own failure and just didn't know what to do. Basically they resigned the Rule of Arda.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

I think that Manwe felt that killing the Children of Eru was something he could not do without consulting Eru. It would have been like the Valar killing the elves.

[Earniel]

And really, TD, don't you think that Ulmo and Tulkas and Osse couldn't deal with the Fleet themselves? They were Valar!

I think, the Valar really didn't want to harm Numenoreans, they recognised their own failure and just didn't know what to do. Basically they resigned the Rule of Arda.
I doubt the Valar wanted to act directly against the Númenoreans, because then the blame of the destruction of the fleet and Númenor would squarely fall on the Valar, no doubt driving the rest of Men directly into Sauron's arms.

It could be that the Valar did recognise their own fault in the disaster and knew that an even bigger mess could be made in trying to set it right again. They may have asked Eru in that light to be taken off the case. Or Eru may have told them himself that he was tired of their screwing up and that Arda was better off without their interfering. :p

And who knows, it may very well have been the idea from the start that Arda at one point would have to do without stewards, like a child that comes of age and doesn't require the help from his guardian any longer. Although I doubt it was planned to be in such a situation.

[Landroval]

They could have sent an ambassador such as Eonwe to speak with the Numenoreans and perhaps counteract Sauron.
They did send ambasadors, trying to quiet things down.
He then removed the temptation of Valinor from the Earth and let the Valar live their own lives without so much responsibility for the state of Middle Earth. A responsibility they had never really lived up to anyway.
In Myths Transformed, the primary task of (at least) Manwe is to counteract Melkor - which he did with greatest wisdom. As for the rest of the problems of Eru's children, the valar aren't supposed to cross their free will; and free will has consequences.
Nay, he killed all the population of the island, newborn babies included.
Those who landed were burried in the caves of the forgottern; the rest of the fleet was drowned. As for those on Numenor, I doubt any of them could have straightened, due to the deep corruption there.
I think, the Valar really didn't want to harm Numenoreans, they recognised their own failure and just didn't know what to do. Basically they resigned the Rule of Arda.
In letter #131, Tolkien states that the numenoreans could have ruined Valinor at that time.
I doubt the Valar wanted to act directly against the Númenoreans, because then the blame of the destruction of the fleet and Númenor would squarely fall on the Valar, no doubt driving the rest of Men directly into Sauron's arms.
I wouldn't see the logic; if you are attacked in our own home, you have the right to defend yourself. As stated in the Akallabeth, the main target of the numenoreans was actually the presence of the valar (the only thing that granted the holy land its immortality) - what were the valar supposed to do, surrender to the numenoreans?

[Earniel]

I wouldn't see the logic; if you are attacked in our own home, you have the right to defend yourself. As stated in the Akallabeth, the main target of the numenoreans was actually the presence of the valar (the only thing that granted the holy land its immortality) - what were the valar supposed to do, surrender to the numenoreans?
I wonder whether the Númenoreans really could have done something to the Valar, they could have destroyed Valinor maybe, but I sort of doubt whether they'd be able to put a hand on the Valar. Fingolfin managed to wound Morgoth severly, but the rest of the Valar had, I think, invested less energy in their corporal form.

Also, I never said anything about surrendering, I just gave my idea about why the Valar called on Eru and didn't act directly themselves against Númenor.

[CAB]

They did send ambasadors, trying to quiet things down.
Yes, they sent some Elves as ambassadors about a thousand years before the Downfall. Shouldn’t they have considered sending someone a little more influential later when the situation became so bad that the King’s chief counselor was Sauron and he was considering attacking Valinor?

In Myths Transformed, the primary task of (at least) Manwe is to counteract Melkor - which he did with greatest wisdom. As for the rest of the problems of Eru's children, the valar aren't supposed to cross their free will; and free will has consequences.
Free will has consequences. The Valar also possessed free will and used it to make some awful decisions. If they had acted more wisely, the Numenoreans wouldn’t have been tempted to try and take Valinor (which shouldn’t have existed as it did anyway) and so bring about their own destruction.

Those who landed were burried in the caves of the forgottern; the rest of the fleet was drowned. As for those on Numenor, I doubt any of them could have straightened, due to the deep corruption there.
Gandalf, who seems to have been one of Eru’s more loyal servants, believed that even Gollum could be redeemed. Surely not everyone on Numenor was at a lower point than he was. I think Eru’s hand was forced (at least as much as you can ever force God’s hand). The Valar had to take much of the blame for the situation.

In letter #131, Tolkien states that the numenoreans could have ruined Valinor at that time.

I wouldn't see the logic; if you are attacked in our own home, you have the right to defend yourself. As stated in the Akallabeth, the main target of the numenoreans was actually the presence of the valar (the only thing that granted the holy land its immortality) - what were the valar supposed to do, surrender to the numenoreans?
The point isn’t that the Numenoreans should be spared or allowed to take Valinor. The point is that the Valar should have never let things progress to this point. To do so was extremely negligent.

I doubt the Valar wanted to act directly against the Númenoreans, because then the blame of the destruction of the fleet and Númenor would squarely fall on the Valar, no doubt driving the rest of Men directly into Sauron's arms.

It could be that the Valar did recognise their own fault in the disaster and knew that an even bigger mess could be made in trying to set it right again. They may have asked Eru in that light to be taken off the case. Or Eru may have told them himself that he was tired of their screwing up and that Arda was better off without their interfering. :p

And who knows, it may very well have been the idea from the start that Arda at one point would have to do without stewards, like a child that comes of age and doesn't require the help from his guardian any longer. Although I doubt it was planned to be in such a situation.
I wonder whether the Númenoreans really could have done something to the Valar, they could have destroyed Valinor maybe, but I sort of doubt whether they'd be able to put a hand on the Valar. Fingolfin managed to wound Morgoth severly, but the rest of the Valar had, I think, invested less energy in their corporal form.
I think I would pretty much agree with everything you are saying except the Valar’s reason for not destroying the Numenoreans themselves. I would guess that this was simply too big of a step for them to take without Eru’s involvement. I don’t mean the other things such as the destruction of Numenor itself and the removal of Valinor, which were probably Eru’s ideas. I mean that killing thousands of Men was something that had to be approved by Eru. Of course, in this case he approved and handled the job himself.

[Earniel]

I think I would pretty much agree with everything you are saying except the Valar’s reason for not destroying the Numenoreans themselves. I would guess that this was simply too big of a step for them to take without Eru’s involvement. I don’t mean the other things such as the destruction of Numenor itself and the removal of Valinor, which were probably Eru’s ideas. I mean that killing thousands of Men was something that had to be approved by Eru. Of course, in this case he approved and handled the job himself.
*nods*

That reasoning makes a lot of sense. But I don't think the reasons you and I posted have to be mutually exclusive.

[CAB]

But I don't think the reasons you and I posted have to be mutually exclusive.
I would agree with you here. However, I don’t think that the Valar were particularly concerned about who got the blame. The Men of Middle Earth wouldn’t have any first hand knowledge of the events, and so would probably believe any reasonable (to them) explanation they were given. In this case, that explanation would almost surely come from Sauron, who of course had no problem with telling lies. He may have said that the Valar did it, Melkor, himself, or given another reason.

If the Valar assumed that Sauron wouldn’t take shape again after the Downfall, the question still would have been open to speculation among the Men of Middle Earth. I doubt the Valar sent any emissaries to explain what happened.

The surviving Numenoreans may have suspected the truth immediately, or maybe not. I think it is unlikely they knew exactly what the Valar were and were not capable of. If he acted cleverly, as he had in the past, Sauron probably could have influenced the Numenoreans' belief about what actually happened, at least for a while. Once they realized (which probably took some years) that Valinor was gone and the Earth was round, the Numenoreans probably knew that this was beyond the Valar’s power.

Not that you said anything contrary to this Earniel, but the Valar had to receive much of the blame, whether they actually destroyed the Numenoreans by their own hands or not.

[Landroval]

I wonder whether the Númenoreans really could have done something to the Valar, they could have destroyed Valinor maybe, but I sort of doubt whether they'd be able to put a hand on the Valar. Fingolfin managed to wound Morgoth severly, but the rest of the Valar had, I think, invested less energy in their corporal form.

Also, I never said anything about surrendering, I just gave my idea about why the Valar called on Eru and didn't act directly themselves against Númenor.
I didn't say they would harm the valar; just that the valar had all the necessary rights to destroy the numenoreans.
Yes, they sent some Elves as ambassadors about a thousand years before the Downfall. Shouldn’t they have considered sending someone a little more influential later when the situation became so bad that the King’s chief counselor was Sauron and he was considering attacking Valinor?
I don't know why you presume they are elves; in HOME XII, History of Akallabeth, they are capitalised (Messengers). Either way, the valar know what is "wrong and disastrous" for them: to force lesser wills by awe(letter #156). If the numenoreans wanted their way, they could have it, up to a point.
The Valar also possessed free will and used it to make some awful decisions. If they had acted more wisely, the Numenoreans wouldn’t have been tempted to try and take Valinor (which shouldn’t have existed as it did anyway) and so bring about their own destruction.
In both Osanwe-kenta and Akallabeth, Manwe is described as the spirit of greatest wisdom - I doubt anyone else in his place (including us ;)) could have made better choices. [Also, according to Atrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, it is stated that "the designs of Eru...governed all the operations of the faithfull valar".]
Gandalf, who seems to have been one of Eru’s more loyal servants, believed that even Gollum could be redeemed.
Hope without guarantees is a pre-requisite for all faithfulls :D. [Then again, Gollum definitely still had a good side and, moreover, hobbits could resist Sauron's corruption far better than Men.]
I would guess that this was simply too big of a step for them to take without Eru’s involvement.
I wouldn't say so; they condemned a far higher race (the returning noldor) to a cruel fate (perhaps even crueler), when they cursed them - and the elves are more closer to the valar (and perhaps Eru too) than Men are.
Once they realized (which probably took some years) that Valinor was gone and the Earth was round, the Numenoreans probably knew that this was beyond the Valar’s power.
Why couldn't they? It was the valar who shaped Arda as it was (and this they did while opposing Melkor).

[Gordis]

I didn't say they would harm the valar; just that the valar had all the necessary rights to destroy the numenoreans.
The fleet, Landroval, the fleet.
The destruction of Numenor itself was a crime against humanity - I agree wity Crazy Squirrel in that.

In both Osanwe-kenta and Akallabeth, Manwe is described as the spirit of greatest wisdom - I doubt anyone else in his place (including us ;)) could have made better choices.
Manwe had his faults that proved fatal for humans:
- Manwë must be shown to have his own inherent fault (though not sin): he has become engrossed (partly out of sheer fear of Melkor, partly out of desire to control him) in amendment, healing, re-ordering — even 'keeping the status quo' — to the loss of all creative power and even to weakness in dealing with difficult and perilous situations. -Myths transformed

Then again, Gollum definitely still had a good side and, moreover, hobbits could resist Sauron's corruption far better than Men.
And children and women left in Numenor had no good sides? And horses and dogs and chickens? Also 100% evil?

I wouldn't say so; they condemned a far higher race (the returning noldor) to a cruel fate (perhaps even crueler), when they cursed them - and the elves are more closer to the valar (and perhaps Eru too) than Men are. Eves are not higher race, they are different race. Yes, closer to Ainur, because they were also bound to Arda. So, they shared the same faults.
The Noldor cursed themselves by swearing am impossible Oath by the name of Eru. Mandos merely prophesized, not cursed, strictly speaking.

[CAB]

I don't know why you presume they are elves; in HOME XII, History of Akallabeth, they are capitalised (Messengers).
In Akallabeth, when speaking to the King about the different fates of Elves and Men the messengers say: “Which of us therefore should envy the others?” That isn’t the more important part though. The more important part is that this took place about a thousand years before the Downfall. This is a long time even in “Tolkien years”.

Either way, the valar know what is "wrong and disastrous" for them: to force lesser wills by awe(letter #156). If the numenoreans wanted their way, they could have it, up to a point.
They were already being forced into something “wrong and disastrous” by (partially at least) awe of Sauron. The Valar stood back and did practically nothing and the results could hardly have been worse.

In both Osanwe-kenta and Akallabeth, Manwe is described as the spirit of greatest wisdom - I doubt anyone else in his place (including us ;)) could have made better choices. [Also, according to Atrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, it is stated that "the designs of Eru...governed all the operations of the faithfull valar".]
I can see your point of view here. Who are we to second guess Manwe or any of the Valar? But it is quite clear that many of their decisions had disastrous results. Manwe is also said to be unable to comprehend evil. How well can someone with no understanding of evil effectively govern a world that is so filled with it? I think all the bloodshed and suffering, mostly due to the tremendous influence that Melkor and Sauron were allowed to have (at least allowed after the Music, I don’t imagine that Manwe could have done much about this initial influence) gives us the answer.

Why couldn't they? It was the valar who shaped Arda as it was (and this they did while opposing Melkor).
You could be right here. I personally think that the removal of Valinor and the making of the Earth round were beyond the Valar’s capabilities while the destruction of Numenor probably wasn’t.

I would like to ask you a question Landroval. I hope you don’t think I’m getting smart with you, that isn’t my intention. I am interested in your opinion. You have argued that the Valar had a sufficient reason, the right, and the ability to destroy the Numenorean fleet and Numenor itself. Why do you think that they called on Eru? What do you think is meant by “laid down their government”?

The Noldor cursed themselves by swearing am impossible Oath by the name of Eru. Mandos merely prophesized, not cursed, strictly speaking.
Yes, I agree with that. I was recently reading an old thread about the Dead Men of Dunharrow. Someone made the same point there. It is the oath that allows the curse (or prophesy).

[Landroval]

The destruction of Numenor itself was a crime against humanity - I agree wity Crazy Squirrel in that.
On one hand, "of all His designs the issue must be for His Children's joy", cf Atrabeth; on the other, everything that is born out of a cat will eat mice - those numenoreans would have resorted to opressing Middle-Earth sooner or later, and when I say oppressing I mean not just enslaving, but torturing and sacrificing people to Melkor (heck, they even killed each other in madness).
Eves are not higher race, they are different race
"The Elves represent, as it were, the artistic, aesthetic, and purely scientific aspects of the Humane nature raised to a higher level than is actually seen in Men. They also possess a 'subcreational' or artistic faculty of great excellence" cf Letter #181.
The Noldor cursed themselves by swearing am impossible Oath by the name of Eru. Mandos merely prophesized, not cursed, strictly speaking.
Only Feanor and his sons swore the oath and only a part of the Curse reffered to them specifically. For the rest of the exiled they were cursed because they spilled blood, for which they will render blood. Not to mention that after the war of wrath, "the curse was laid to rest".
In Akallabeth, when speaking to the King about the different fates of Elves and Men the messengers say: “Which of us therefore should envy the others?”
True, but in Silmarillion, it is also stated that "Death is their fate, the gift of Iluvatar, which as Time wears even the Powers shall envy" - those messengers could be maiar, if you ask me.
The more important part is that this took place about a thousand years before the Downfall.
And it didn't achieve anything - things kept getting worse.("But Atanamir was ill pleased with the counsel of the Messengers and gave little heed to it, and the greater part of his people followed him; for they wished still to escape death in their own day, not waiting upon hope.") What would the valar get if they kept insisting or if they threatened more openly than they did? It was a lost case.
They were already being forced into something “wrong and disastrous” by (partially at least) awe of Sauron. The Valar stood back and did practically nothing and the results could hardly have been worse.
I don't think that the name of the game is "do things right or I will slap your hand". The valar had a limited role in governing Ea, they weren't its absolute masters and the Men (and their purpose) is definitely less scrutinable to them than the elves are (who, even they, are "things other than themselves").
How well can someone with no understanding of evil effectively govern a world that is so filled with it?
Then again, the real question is what is the only prerequisite?
(Can hate overcome hate?) Nay, Manwe was wiser; or being ever open to Eru he did His will, which is more than wisdom
I think all the bloodshed and suffering, mostly due to the tremendous influence that Melkor and Sauron were allowed to have (at least allowed after the Music, I don’t imagine that Manwe could have done much about this initial influence) gives us the answer.
I like the explanation given in BoLT for all of Melkor's evil:
Thou Melko shalt see that no theme can be played save it come in the end of Ilúvatar's self, nor can any alter the music in Ilúvatar's despite. He that attempts this finds himself in the end but aiding me in devising a thing of still greater grandeur and more complex wonder: -- for lo! Through Melko have terror as fire, and sorrow like dark waters, wrath like thunder, and evil as far from my light as the depths of the uttermost of the dark places, come into the design that I laid before you. Through him has pain and misery been made in the clash of overwhelming musics; and with confusion of sound have cruelty, and ravening, and darkness, loathly mire and all putrescence of thought or thing, foul mists and violent flame, cold without mercy, been born, and death without hope. Yet is this through him and not by him; and he shall see, and ye all likewise, and even shall those beings, who must now dwell among his evil and endure through Melko misery and sorrow, terror and wickedness, declare in the end that it redoundeth only to my great glory, and doth but make the theme more worth the hearing, Life more worth the living, and the World so much the more wonderful and marvellous, that of all the deeds of Ilúvatar it shall be called his mightiest and his loveliest.
Why do you think that they called on Eru? What do you think is meant by “laid down their government”?
There was a "real peril (since the Numenoreans directed by Sauron could have wrought ruin in Valinor itself)", cf Letter #131; I find that explanation satisfactory; when two elephants roll, the grass gets beaten . :cool:

[Gordis]

everything that is born out of a cat will eat mice ).
You mean they were genetically corrupted? I will never believe it. It just doesn't happen.

- those numenoreans would have resorted to opressing Middle-Earth sooner or later, and when I say oppressing I mean not just enslaving, but torturing and sacrificing people to Melkor (heck, they even killed each other in madness).
In MADNESS, most likely caused by Sauron's influence. They did everything he told them to do: sacrificing people on the Black altars etc. and still the promised immortality was not obtained. It is enough to get mad.

"The Elves represent, as it were, the artistic, aesthetic, and purely scientific aspects of the Humane nature raised to a higher level than is actually seen in Men. They also possess a 'subcreational' or artistic faculty of great excellence" cf Letter #181.
Yes one hyperinflated side of human nature. Does it make them higher race?

And it didn't achieve anything - things kept getting worse.("But Atanamir was ill pleased with the counsel of the Messengers and gave little heed to it, and the greater part of his people followed him; for they wished still to escape death in their own day, not waiting upon hope.") What would the valar get if they kept insisting or if they threatened more openly than they did? It was a lost case.
As I said, they could have lifted the Ban, at least issuing some "tourist visas". The humans would have seen soon enough that there was no immortality in Valinor. Or, PERHAPS there was? Perhaps the Valar lied, and Sauron was right? Men never found out. :(

There was a "real peril (since the Numenoreans directed by Sauron could have wrought ruin in Valinor itself)", cf Letter #131; I find that explanation satisfactory; when two elephants roll, the grass gets beaten . :cool:
Yes, don't you DARE touch our green lawns! :mad:

[CAB]

I can’t agree with your viewpoint concerning the Valar Landroval. They aren’t God, that position is held by Eru. If they aren’t God, then they are fallible. In my opinion, the spirit of the quote you gave, concerning Melkor’s deeds serving Eru’s will in the end, would very easily apply to the Valar with a few changes. Of course they didn’t purposely oppose Eru’s will, but their mistakes were much like Melkor’s evil. Both were “evil yet good to have been”.

[Landroval]

You mean they were genetically corrupted? I will never believe it. It just doesn't happen.
I don't know if we can say 'genetically'. But all Men fell when they followed Melkor, and their fall will last till the end of time, when Eru will remove all marring. The same with the numenoreans who chose to follow Sauron; this is even called in Letter #131 the Second Fall of Men - a fall as undoable as the first one.
In MADNESS, most likely caused by Sauron's influence. They did everything he told them to do: sacrificing people on the Black altars etc. and still the promised immortality was not obtained. It is enough to get mad.
You sound almost apologetical :confused:
Yes one hyperinflated side of human nature. Does it make them higher race?
They are less influenced by Melkor's marring, have higher control over their urges, they are more chaste (sp), etc.
As I said, they could have lifted the Ban, at least issuing some "tourist visas".
One cannot say if the ones in Aman are 'deathless' unless one witnesses their life span; for a Man to witness that would mean a crossing of Eru's rules.
The humans would have seen soon enough that there was no immortality in Valinor.
True, no immortality for the elves, only a very long life span/
Perhaps the Valar lied, and Sauron was right? Men never found out.
In Myths Transformed, the condition of a Man who lives in Aman beyond his life span is described as one of a beast.
Yes, don't you DARE touch our green lawns!
Care to rephrase...
Of course they didn’t purposely oppose Eru’s will, but their mistakes were much like Melkor’s evil.
'And of the counsels of Manwe's heart what tale shall tell?'
I don't see how one could equate mistakes with evil. No action can be a mistake in itself - it becomes so only in relation with the outer-world. Yet what defines an action as evil is its intentions and nothing else.
If we dare to attempt to enter the mind of the Elder King, assigning motives and finding faults, there are things to remember before we deliver a judgement. Manwe was the spirit of greatest wisdom and prudence in Arda. He is represented as having had the greatest knowledge of the Music, as a whole, possessed by any one finite mind; and he alone of all persons or minds in that time is represented as having the power of direct recourse to and communication with Eru. He must have grasped with great clarity what even we may perceive dimly: that it was the essential mode of the process of 'history' in Arda that evil should constantly arise, and that out of it new good should constantly come. One especial aspect of this is the strange way in which the evils of the Marrer, or his inheritors, are turned into weapons against evil.

[CAB]

Landroval, we will just have to disagree on this one. You haven’t convinced me and it is clear that Gordis and I aren’t convincing you. I have this last little bit to say.

First, a lot of people will disagree with your definition of evil, me included. You might consider looking at the Evil in Middle Earth thread here at Entmoot. It is a very interesting thread, though a bit long. I actually didn’t call the Valar’s mistakes evil (at least thats not what I meant). I meant that their mistakes acted much like Melkor’s evil in that they served Eru’s plan in a way unforseen (yes, even by Manwe in my opinion). Technically though, many of the Valar’s mistakes could be considered evil.

Also, if Manwe truly had the full understanding that you attribute to him then it means that he intended for the kinslayings to happen, he intended for everyone on Numenor to be slaughtered, he intended for Men to follow Morgoth and Sauron for thousands of years, etc., etc. Doesn’t that seem out of character to you? I prefer to think that he made honest mistakes rather than believe that he planned to allow (and even cause) so much evil for the Children of Eru and the rest of the world.

The last thing I would like to say is this. I do think that Manwe and the other Valar had faith that, if they acted as they thought best, then they would be successfully serving Eru’s will in the end, despite the mistakes made along the way.

[Landroval]

First, a lot of people will disagree with your definition of evil, me included.
I am not aware I defined evil so far :); perhaps my phrasing was inadequate. I meant that evil is purely found on intentional level, regardless of outer conditions or the outcomes.
A surgeon/gardener/(whatever manager) is sometimes forced to remove certain "parts" of an organism, to prevent its complete failure; true enough, even a sadist would do probably the same thing, and, in an _extreme_ case, it would have the same beneficial outcomes for the sick person (not that it intended them anyway). What differentiates one action from the other is the purpose of the doer. For example, according to Atrabeth, Eru shortened Mankind's life span after they started following Melkor - so as to see what is real and what is good; in a much more intense manner, and on a more restricted level, this is done with the numenoreans (if I remember correctly, not even when following Melkor did the Men resort to such evils as the numenoreans did).
I actually didn’t call the Valar’s mistakes evil (at least thats not what I meant). I meant that their mistakes acted much like Melkor’s evil in that they served Eru’s plan in a way unforseen (yes, even by Manwe in my opinion). Technically though, many of the Valar’s mistakes could be considered evil.
I must admit I am a bit confused on whether you consider their mistakes as evil or not.
Also, if Manwe truly had the full understanding that you attribute to him then it means that he intended for the kinslayings to happen, he intended for everyone on Numenor to be slaughtered, he intended for Men to follow Morgoth and Sauron for thousands of years
I don't see the connection between Manwe's understanding of how things are (and the way they are is an expression of Eru's will, since all creation depends in every moment and detail on Eru, according to Atrabeth - I don't have the text handy) and these presumed intentions. What one could say is that the way things are is only understood by Eru and it's His intention that actually makes them so.

[CAB]

I guess I have a little more to say after all.

I am not aware I defined evil so far :); perhaps my phrasing was inadequate. I meant that evil is purely found on intentional level, regardless of outer conditions or the outcomes.
That is what I was disagreeing with. By the strict definition of the word, evil intent isn’t necessary to make an action evil. Don’t get me wrong though. In general, I use the word just as you said, and so do most other people.

I must admit I am a bit confused on whether you consider their mistakes as evil or not.
Evil intent: no. Evil results: yes, in many cases.

I don't see the connection between Manwe's understanding of how things are (and the way they are is an expression of Eru's will, since all creation depends in every moment and detail on Eru, according to Atrabeth - I don't have the text handy) and these presumed intentions.
I think that the connection stems from the fact that Manwe is in charge. He is the decision maker. This connection only applies if Manwe knew the full consequences of his decisions. This seems to be your opinion of him. I could be misunderstanding you I suppose.

I’ll try to explain my thinking this way. I am not Wayfarer, so there may be some flaws here, but this is basically how I see things:

1. If Manwe had a true understanding of Eru’s will and knew the full consequences of his actions then he made the Ban (and did many other things) in order to draw the Numenoreans to attack Valinor so that they could be destroyed. These events were part of Eru’s plan since it is impossible to go against it (as you correctly pointed out Landroval). Manwe would have purposely taken thousands of lives in the name of the grand design.

2. If Manwe had a true understanding of Eru’s will but didn’t know the full consequences of his actions then he made the Ban (and did many other things) because Eru told him to, either directly or in another way. In this case Manwe’s knowledge of anything other than Eru’s plan was worthless because all his actions would have to follow that plan to the letter regardless of Manwe's personal judgement. He would essentially be Eru’s puppet, a complete slave to fate (fate being Eru’s will).

3. If Manwe didn’t have a true understanding of Eru’s will but did know the full consequences of his actions then he made the Ban (yada, yada) in order to draw the Numenoreans to attack Valinor knowing that they would be destroyed but not necessarily knowing that this was part of the grand design. Manwe doesn’t seem like the bloodthirsty type.

4. If Manwe didn’t have a true understanding of Eru’s will or know the full consequences of his actions then he made the Ban (etc.) because he believed it was the proper thing to do given his limited knowledge. I don’t mean limited when compared to anyone other than Eru (and maybe Mandos in regards to consequences of actions), but still less than complete knowledge. He probably wouldn’t be planning for the Numenoreans to be destroyed (unlike scenarios 1 and 3) while still maintaining some free will (unlike scenario 2 and probably 1 also). Personally, I think this is the true scenario.

[Edit: I guess I should say what I mean by “true”, especially since I am assigning it my own meaning. In this case true understanding means that Manwe had 100% accurate knowledge of Eru’s will in regard to any decision he (Manwe) personally had to make as the King of Arda. He may not have known “why” but did know “yes or no”.]

The main problem with this view (specifically scenarios 3 and 4), I think, is that Manwe must have known that everything done is true to Eru’s will. Perhaps if the Valar faced some sort of judgement from Eru in combination with an acknowledgment of free will (which doesn’t seem unlikely) this problem with situations 3 and 4 would be removed.
What one could say is that the way things are is only understood by Eru and it's His intention that actually makes them so.
Agreed. I think this fits with scenario 4.

There is at least one more option. Since everything that happens must be part of Eru’s design, then Manwe might have acted as he did knowing that he couldn’t do wrong (wrong in the sense that he opposed Eru’s will). Looking at things this way, Manwe, and everyone else, could simply do as they please without giving their decisions any thought at all. If Manwe and the other Valar faced Eru’s judgement (and I think they did), then this would probably be the most unlikely option of all.

[Gordis]

Excellent post, CAB.

I fully agree with you that evil intent isn’t necessary to make an action/inaction evil.

Landroval was speaking of a surgeon killing a patient by mistake. It is evil, though unintentional. He could have asked a more skilled surgeon to do the operation, he had overestimated his own knowledge and skills, he should have practiced and learned more and so on.

The same applies to a person negligent in his duties, or the one who decided not to act when he should have acted: they have no evil intent, but their inaction leads to a catastrophe. And so on

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

I disagree. I would say that the outcome would be one of evil, but the action itself wouldn't be if there was no evil intent.

[Gordis]

Tell this to employees of a nuclear plant who were innocently chatting while the reactor was overheating. :D

[Landroval]

By the strict definition of the word, evil intent isn’t necessary to make an action evil.
"Evil" is, I believe, a purely human term; if an animal kills another animal or climate kills weak animals, as far as nature is concerned, this isn't evil, just life. So, what would you define as evil? Otherwise we are going in circles.
This connection only applies if Manwe knew the full consequences of his decisions.
Which is impossible, since "in every age there come forth things that are new and have no foretelling, for they do not proceed from the past"; this makes prediction almost impossible.
This seems to be your opinion of him.
No, just that he is the wisest being in Ea, save Eru.
In this case true understanding means that Manwe had 100% accurate knowledge of Eru’s will in regard to any decision he (Manwe) personally had to make as the King of Arda. He may not have known “why” but did know “yes or no”.
Well, as I quoted the Atrabeth previously, "the designs of Eru governed all the operations of the faithful Valar" - so I guess that Manwe did know what Eru would like or not from what Manwe was aware was his options.
The main problem with this view (specifically scenarios 3 and 4), I think, is that Manwe must have known that everything done is true to Eru’s will.
I am not sure I follow..
Landroval was speaking of a surgeon killing a patient by mistake.
When? :confused:
The same applies to a person negligent in his duties, or the one who decided not to act when he should have acted: they have no evil intent, but their inaction leads to a catastrophe.
Does anything in Tolkien's work hint that Manwe should have acted sooner concerning the numenoreans, or in a different manner? What makes you think this wasn't the best course of action? In Myths T., Tolkien refuted those who would criticise Manwe (presumedly) delayed action against Melkor - and gave credit to his wisdom (I do too;)).

[Radagast The Brown]

I agree with Landroval... and I think there's no point accusing them of evil as we don't know the possible consequences of any other action that could've been taken. Perhaps the outcome was the least-evil possible... and really the end wasn't that bad, and rather positive even. :)

[CAB]

I disagree. I would say that the outcome would be one of evil, but the action itself wouldn't be if there was no evil intent.
"Evil" is, I believe, a purely human term; if an animal kills another animal or climate kills weak animals, as far as nature is concerned, this isn't evil, just life. So, what would you define as evil? Otherwise we are going in circles.
You aren’t arguing with me here, but the dictionary. Read the definition of evil, or for a more in depth answer, look at Wayfarer’s posts on the Evil in Middle Earth thread (if you don’t want to read the whole thing). You can argue the meaning of evil with him if you like, but I wouldn’t recommend it. I would think you would remember those posts TD. You started that thread after all.

Which is impossible, since "in every age there come forth things that are new and have no foretelling, for they do not proceed from the past"; this makes prediction almost impossible.

No, just that he is the wisest being in Ea, save Eru..
Right. Manwe didn’t know everything, he was less than Eru, so he was capable of making mistakes.

Well, as I quoted the Atrabeth previously, "the designs of Eru governed all the operations of the faithful Valar" - so I guess that Manwe did know what Eru would like or not from what Manwe was aware was his options. .
I see a problem with this point of view if you think that mistakes weren’t part of Eru’s design. To me it is clear that they were. You could say that the Valar were flawed by definition (only Eru is flawless, they were less than Eru, therefore the Valar were flawed) Wasn’t Aule a faithful Vala? Wasn’t the creation of the Dwarves a mistake? Eru immediately corrected him as if it were. If Aule could make a mistake, why not Manwe?

Let’s leave the destruction of Numenor alone for a moment and look at an even more obvious mistake, the release of Melkor. I don’t see how this could be considered anything other than a screw up. The creator of evil is released and allowed to wander freely in Valinor, with all kinds of dire consequences. If it looks like a mistake, and smells like a mistake, and is made by someone who is known to be fallible (and Manwe was, because he wasn’t Eru) then it is probably a mistake. If we accept that the creation of the Dwarves was a mistake then I think the release of Melkor has to be considered one too. The results were much, much worse. I think the only other options were that the Valar were evil or had no free will (and I can’t agree with either of those).

Does anything in Tolkien's work hint that Manwe should have acted sooner concerning the numenoreans, or in a different manner? What makes you think this wasn't the best course of action? In Myths T., Tolkien refuted those who would criticise Manwe (presumedly) delayed action against Melkor - and gave credit to his wisdom (I do too;)).
The results (loudly) suggest that Manwe should have acted differently. Really, how much worse could they get?

Why did the Valar lay down their government if they were acting so wisely? Because they were in real peril? Let’s consider that for a moment.

Landroval, I won’t argue the point that the Numenoreans could cause ruin in Valinor (as odd as that seems to me) because, as you point out, Tolkien said so himself in letter 131. (By the way, just after this statement, he wrote that the Valar appealed to Eru and received the “power and permission to deal with the situation”. This directly contradicts your opinion on these matters.)

But they had to get there first didn’t they? Do you think that Ulmo and Osse were powerless to stop the Numenorean fleet. I don’t think so. There are many cases of the Valar and their servants sinking ships. They also succeeded in making Valinor all but unreachable after the Noldor returned to Middle Earth in the First Age. If your opinions are correct they had plenty of time to do this again, because they had determined that the Numenoreans were irredeemable a thousand years before. With all their wisdom, wouldn’t the Valar have assumed that an attack could come from Numenor?

If the Valar decided that the Numenoreans were a lost cause, then you can’t argue that they allowed the fleet to reach Valinor in the hope that they would turn back. And what would they turn back to anyway? Causing problems for the people of Middle Earth instead, what else? This also brings up the question of why the Valar didn’t destroy Numenor long ago if it inhabitants were beyond all hope. They were allowed plenty of time to cause evil for the other people of Arda. Why, if their destruction was simply a matter of time?

If the Valar were doing such a wonderful job, then why did they give up their government (or have it taken from them)? It isn’t because they were around only to combat Melkor, he had been gone for over three thousand years.

To me all this just doesn’t add up. I respect your opinion Landroval, and your defense of Manwe, but I can’t agree with these ideas.

I agree with Landroval... and I think there's no point accusing them of evil as we don't know the possible consequences of any other action that could've been taken. Perhaps the outcome was the least-evil possible... and really the end wasn't that bad, and rather positive even. :)
I fail to see how a happy, peace loving people becoming oppressors, Melkor-worshipers, and eventually being exterminated is positive. To me the only way this is possible is to have complete faith in Eru. I can’t really argue with this point of view, however this kind of faith means that everything has to be seen in a positive light.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Let’s leave the destruction of Numenor alone for a moment and look at an even more obvious mistake, the release of Melkor. I don’t see how this could be considered anything other than a screw up. The creator of evil is released and allowed to wander freely in Valinor, with all kinds of dire consequences. If it looks like a mistake, and smells like a mistake, and is made by someone who is known to be fallible (and Manwe was, because he wasn’t Eru) then it is probably a mistake. If we accept that the creation of the Dwarves was a mistake then I think the release of Melkor has to be considered one too. The results were much, much worse. I think the only other options were that the Valar were evil or had no free will (and I can’t agree with either of those).
I agree that the release of Melkor was a mistake but it wasn't an evil one. It was because there was no evil in Manwe that he got released.

For Manwe was free from evil and could not comprehend it, and he knew that in the beginning, in the thought of Ilúvatar.

[Landroval]

Read the definition of evil, or for a more in depth answer, look at Wayfarer’s posts on the Evil in Middle Earth thread (if you don’t want to read the whole thing).
Evil as dischord? When were Manwe's actions in dischord with Eru (and particulary in the case of the numenoreans)?
Manwe was bound by the commands and injunctions of Eru, and would do this or abstain from that in accordance with them, always, even knowing that Melkor would break them as it suited his purpose.
Manwe didn’t know everything, he was less than Eru, so he was capable of making mistakes.
He is the wisest and closest to Eru, so, to clear one thing, I ask: could anyone (but Eru) have made better decisions? Furthermore, to reffer to a previous point of our discussion:
I see a problem with this point of view if you think that mistakes weren’t part of Eru’s design. To me it is clear that they were.
I believe are in agreement; I doubt there are mistakes (at least on the part of the valar), since "no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in Him, nor can any alter the music in His despite".
I don’t see how this could be considered anything other than a screw up.
There are at least two more people who think otherwise, the Professor and me (swells chest :cool: ):
The weakest and most imprudent of all the actions of Manwe, as it seems to many, was the release of Melkor from captivity. From this came the greatest loss and harm: the death of the Trees, and the exile and the anguish of the Noldor. Yet through this suffering there came also, as maybe in no other way could it have come, the victory of the Elder Days: the downfall of Angband and the last overthrow of Melkor.
Who then can say with assurance that if Melkor had been held in bond less evil would have followed? Even in his diminishment the power of Melkor is beyond our calculation. Yet some ruinous outburst of his despair is not the worst that might have befallen. The release was according to the promise of Manwe. If Manwe had broken this promise for his own purposes, even though still intending "good", he would have taken a step upon the paths of Melkor...Of this we may be sure, we children of small strength: any one of the Valar might have taken the paths of Melkor and become like him: one was enough.
With all their wisdom, wouldn’t the Valar have assumed that an attack could come from Numenor?
That was a matter of debate until the very end: "and still all was silent, and doom hung by a thread. For Ar-Pharazon wavered at the end, and almost he turned back". And as far as deterring elements, I think there were plenty:
"Now the lightnings increased and slew men upon the hills, and in the fields, and in the streets of the city; and a fiery bolt smote the dome of the Temple and shore it asunder, and it was wreathed in flame... When therefore the last portent came they heeded it little. For the land shook under them, and a groaning as of thunder underground was mingled with the roaring of the sea, and smoke issued from the peak of the Meneltarma. But all the more did Ar-Pharazon press on with his armament."
They weren't even afraid of the host of eagles lead by Thorondor; the eagles are one of the most formidable hosts in all Arda, having defeated the dragons, while the Eagle King marred Melkor single-handedly.

[Butterbeer]

isn't all this talk of "evil", or "mistakes" or "better" or so forth and so on, rather disjointed?

I mean are you all ... when you make these various points and arguments,

... are you talking specifically and clearly from a human persepective?

because many of these are really subjective - from a human being perspective, one might view the mass genocide of an entire Island as "evil" or the release of " i'm alright Jack" Melkor as a bit of a oopsy-daisy etc ...

but is not the view of Eru or of the Valar an entirely different view, or standpoint, would they even consider such notions as "good" and "evil" in any recognisable framework or way as we do?

In terms of our morality or thoughts, would these not be rather alien to them?

Who thinks they would think of themselves that they were "above" such mortal minds and morailities as we view them from?

*only has a few momments here - hopes this point hasn't already been made??*

Gor:Tell this to employees of a nuclear plant who were innocently chatting while the reactor was overheating. :D

apart from the fact that would probably be rather hard to actually do ... :D

since when was incompetence or innocence and chatting definitions of Evil???

really Gor !!! :p

Again we come down to this central question: are we defining evil from a human perspective or from the perspectives of Valinoreans or Eru (is Eru even technically capable - at least in his mind, of being/ doing evil - as the ultimate Law????)


.

[CAB]

Evil as dischord?
No, “causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful”
Again we come down to this central question: are we defining evil from a human perspective or from the perspectives of Valinoreans or Eru
According to the definition of evil, perspective is irrelevant.

Landroval and TD (and now Butterbeer too, sheesh), I am not going to get anymore into the meaning (or really definition) of evil. Why should I when Wayfarer already did this much better than I could? All I would be doing is repeating what he already said. Not that I consider him the ultimate authority, but these posts are right here on Entmoot, are very convincing, and are written under a Middle Earth framework.

He is the wisest and closest to Eru, so, to clear one thing, I ask: could anyone (but Eru) have made better decisions?
Maybe, maybe not. It really doesn’t matter. Just because he was the best choice doesn’t mean he was incapable of making mistakes.

I doubt there are mistakes (at least on the part of the valar), since "no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in Him, nor can any alter the music in His despite".
If mistakes aren’t part of the theme then no one can make mistakes. Not Valar, Elves, Men, etc. No one. I don’t think so.

That was a matter of debate until the very end: "and still all was silent, and doom hung by a thread. For Ar-Pharazon wavered at the end, and almost he turned back".
So, what was the other option? You have said that the Valar considered the Numenoreans irredeemable. So they wouldn’t leave Valinor, return to Numenor and start acting nice, would they? They would eventually go back to bringing evil to the people of Middle Earth. You said so yourself.
those numenoreans would have resorted to opressing Middle-Earth sooner or later, and when I say oppressing I mean not just enslaving, but torturing and sacrificing people to Melkor (heck, they even killed each other in madness).
Is this a desirable result?
And as far as deterring elements, I think there were plenty:
"Now the lightnings increased and slew men upon the hills, and in the fields, and in the streets of the city; and a fiery bolt smote the dome of the Temple and shore it asunder, and it was wreathed in flame... When therefore the last portent came they heeded it little. For the land shook under them, and a groaning as of thunder underground was mingled with the roaring of the sea, and smoke issued from the peak of the Meneltarma. But all the more did Ar-Pharazon press on with his armament."
It wasn’t enough. I guess you would say that wasn’t a mistake either, even though it plainly failed? Also, wasn’t this intimidation by awe? I thought the Valar weren’t supposed to do that.

They weren't even afraid of the host of eagles lead by Thorondor; the eagles are one of the most formidable hosts in all Arda, having defeated the dragons, while the Eagle King marred Melkor single-handedly.
Umm...I think the eagles in this case were clouds, Landroval. Read back a couple of paragraphs (in the Silmarillion, not here) from the quote you gave above about the lightning and “fiery bolt”.


Manwe was bound by the commands and injunctions of Eru, and would do this or abstain from that in accordance with them, always, even knowing that Melkor would break them as it suited his purpose.
Sure. I don’t think Manwe would disobey Eru’s direct orders. But how often did he receive these orders? I don’t remember Eru being involved in the release of Melkor in the Silmarillion scene. Also, if every time there was an important decision to be made, Manwe called on Eru, then he wasn’t a great leader, he was Eru’s mouthpiece. What would he need all that great wisdom for?

The weakest and most imprudent of all the actions of Manwe, as it seems to many, was the release of Melkor from captivity. From this came the greatest loss and harm: the death of the Trees, and the exile and the anguish of the Noldor. Yet through this suffering there came also, as maybe in no other way could it have come, the victory of the Elder Days: the downfall of Angband and the last overthrow of Melkor.
Who then can say with assurance that if Melkor had been held in bond less evil would have followed? Even in his diminishment the power of Melkor is beyond our calculation. Yet some ruinous outburst of his despair is not the worst that might have befallen. The release was according to the promise of Manwe. If Manwe had broken this promise for his own purposes, even though still intending "good", he would have taken a step upon the paths of Melkor...Of this we may be sure, we children of small strength: any one of the Valar might have taken the paths of Melkor and become like him: one was enough.
Ok. Lets go ahead and get to what I consider to be the root of our disagreement. You seem to look at a quote like this and take it as the absolute truth. I don’t. You can rip me on this if you like. :) (Hey, my first smiley face!) To me there are too many inconsistences in Tolkien’s work to simply accept one quote or another. I think we have to look at the whole package. I look at the history of Middle Earth as being filled with things that Manwe and the Valar could/should have done differently, the whole story really depends on this. Personally, I think Tolkien wrote passages like the one above after he realized the light that the Valar would have to be seen in considering how they acted in Arda and the consequences of their decisions. This quote was probably meant entirely as justification. I prefer to consider the whole story rather than give this too much weight. I’m not saying that I simply disregard this kind of quote, but there has to be a balance (at least for me).

but is not the view of Eru or of the Valar an entirely different view, or standpoint, would they even consider such notions as "good" and "evil" in any recognisable framework or way as we do?

In terms of our morality or thoughts, would these not be rather alien to them?
This may be true for Eru, but I don’t see the Valar this way. There are many cases of them showing emotions that we are familiar with (especially Melkor). I think that the Valar were much more similar to us than to Eru.

Excellent post, CAB.
I didn’t thank you for this before, Gordis. I do so now. I was hoping that the post you were referring to wouldn’t be considered “so much hot air”.

[Landroval]

No, “causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful”
Weren't you the one to ask us to read Wayfarer's definition of evil: Dischord.Put simply, Evil is Dischord (http://entmoot.tolkientrail.com/showpost.php?p=393011&postcount=45) . Would you say that everything that causes ruin/injury or pain is evil? I can find countless counter-examples (I already reffered to a doctor who 'hurts' a patient in order to cure him).
Why should I when Wayfarer already did this much better than I could? All I would be doing is repeating what he already said. Not that I consider him the ultimate authority, but these posts are right here on Entmoot, are very convincing, and are written under a Middle Earth framework.
Incidentaly, your and his definition are not the same.
So, what was the other option?
Frankly, only the professor could answer that.
Just because he was the best choice doesn’t mean he was incapable of making mistakes.
If no one can make better decisions than he can, I don't see the point in bitching about him :D
If mistakes aren’t part of the theme then no one can make mistakes.
This is over-generalisation; we know that all the thoughts of the valar (at least those concerning the music) stem from Eru, and therefore cannot be mistakes. Men, on the other hand, are free from the fate told in the music.
It wasn’t enough. I guess you would say that wasn’t a mistake either, even though it plainly failed? Also, wasn’t this intimidation by awe? I thought the Valar weren’t supposed to do that.
It wasn't enough? Would you recommend a full assault of the host of the valar on numenor? Concerning the awe part, in my opinion it doesn't reffer to a situation of war, and the valar have been part of wars from the start of Ea; on the good side :D .
I think the eagles in this case were clouds, Landroval. Read back a couple of paragraphs (in the Silmarillion, not here) from the quote you gave above about the lightning and “fiery bolt”.
I can give you the same advice ;):
Then the Eagles of the Lords of the West came up out of the dayfall, and they were arrayed as for battle, advancing in a line the end of which diminished beyond sight; and as they came their wings spread ever wider, grasping the sky.
Also, if every time there was an important decision to be made, Manwe called on Eru, then he wasn’t a great leader, he was Eru’s mouthpiece.
I don't see any problem with that.
What would he need all that great wisdom for?
For less important decisions maybe?;)
You seem to look at a quote like this and take it as the absolute truth. I don’t. You can rip me on this if you like.
I see; do you know any quote that contradicts this one? Or do you dismiss it simply because you don't like it? Isn't this quote about Manwe consistent with the one I gave from Atrabeth about the valar, or the one from Myths T. about his timing of the war of wrath?

[CAB]

Weren't you the one to ask us to read Wayfarer's definition of evil: Dischord.Put simply, Evil is Dischord (http://entmoot.tolkientrail.com/showpost.php?p=393011&postcount=45) . Would you say that everything that causes ruin/injury or pain is evil? I can find countless counter-examples (I already reffered to a doctor who 'hurts' a patient in order to cure him).

Incidentaly, your and his definition are not the same.

Oh, really?
Evil
Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.
Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet.
Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens.
Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation.
Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper.


Notice that Sense 1, 2, and 5 apply to the discussion. 2 and 4 are meanings unrelated to the concept of real evil. Notice that three possible meanings are: Morally wrong, caising injury, and characterized by anger.


Okay, here I think we're getting somewhere... Aulë is not consciously doing evil, even if there are evil results to his actions.

I don't have a problem with this. As I said, a person is not nescessarily evil because they do evil acts.


On the other hand... utilizing a strict definition such as that above, then we can't always say someone is good because they have good intentions - they might still be doing an act of evil (and, as can be said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions).


Whether or not you call something Evil has no bearing on whether or not it is Evil. It doesn't matter if you consider murder to be wrong - either it is or it isn't, and that doesn't change regardless of what the majority thinks.


It's true by definition. People decide what the word means - in this case, Evil is defined as 'Morally wrong' 'causing harm'. Then we can look at things like Murder, Rape, and so forth, and say 'This is an Evil act, because it fits the definition of Evil'.


Frankly, only the professor could answer that.

I see. Well it doesn’t get much easier than that.

If no one can make better decisions than he can, I don't see the point in bitching about him :D
True, but I haven’t been complaining. I have been stating my opinion.

This is over-generalisation; we know that all the thoughts of the valar (at least those concerning the music) stem from Eru, and therefore cannot be mistakes. Men, on the other hand, are free from the fate told in the music.
Aren’t we talking about what happened after the Music? Wasn’t Melkor a Vala? Aren’t the Maiar simply lesser Valar? Were they incapable of making mistakes also? What about Melian’s descendants? They had angelic heritage. Could they make mistakes? Where do you draw the line? I draw it immediately under Eru.

It wasn't enough? Would you recommend a full assault of the host of the valar on numenor? Concerning the awe part, in my opinion it doesn't reffer to a situation of war, and the valar have been part of wars from the start of Ea; on the good side :D .
Were there no other options? Shouldn’t they have tried something else? Also, the time of the great armament wasn’t open war any more than many time periods in Middle Earth, such as late in the Third Age, when the Istari weren’t supposed to use intimidation.

I can give you the same advice ;):
And out of the west there would come at times a great cloud in the evening, shaped as it were an eagle, with pinions spread to the north and the south; and slowly it would loom up, blotting out the sunset, and then uttermost night would fall upon Numenor. And some of the eagles bore lightning beneath their wings, and thunder echoed between sea and cloud.

Then men grew afraid. ‘Behold the Eagles of the Lords of the West! they cried. ‘The Eagles of Manwe are come upon Numenor! And they fell upon their faces.
This comes just before the quote you gave. So, according to you, Tolkien went straight from eagle shaped clouds to actual eagles without any explanation. I thought he was a better writer than that. And apparently these supposed real eagles didn’t attack anyone, they just flew overhead. I can see why the Numenoreans weren’t afraid of them. On the other hand they must have been awfully big since their wings were “grasping the sky” and apparently they also had glowing feathers underneath. I have certainly seen many birds flying at sunset, but (unlike clouds) none of them glowed underneath. Odd.

I don't see any problem with that.
I do. I also wonder why the Valar would hold any cousels if the decision would be made by Eru anyway.

For less important decisions maybe?;)
Sure, could be. Seems like a waste of wisdom though.

I see; do you know any quote that contradicts this one?
I don’t consider only quotes, but the entire story, as I just explained. But if you want quotes pointing out Manwe’s fallibility:
For Manwe was free from evil and could not comprehend it
Manwë must be shown to have his own inherent fault (though not sin): he has become engrossed (partly out of sheer fear of Melkor, partly out of desire to control him) in amendment, healing, re-ordering — even 'keeping the status quo' — to the loss of all creative power and even to weakness in dealing with difficult and perilous situations. -Myths transformed
Both of these were posted earlier on this thread.

There are also some logical problems with the quote you gave earlier. Why couldn’t the Valar destroy Angband (without Melkor) after they destroyed Utumno (with Melkor)? If releasing Melkor was a good idea, then wasn’t capturing him in the first place a bad idea? How would Manwe be breaking his word if he heard Melkor’s plea and rejected it?

Or do you dismiss it simply because you don't like it?
Please don’t put words in my mouth, Landroval.

To me there are too many inconsistences in Tolkien’s work to simply accept one quote or another. I think we have to look at the whole package.
I’m not saying that I simply disregard this kind of quote, but there has to be a balance (at least for me).

[Gordis]

I stay aside in this battle of giants. :) I was never smart enough to discuss the Nature of Evil. I know instinctively what is, and what isn't, but I hardly can define it.

But in almost all cases I agree with you, CAB! :)

[CAB]

I stay aside in this battle of giants. :) I was never smart enough to discuss the Nature of Evil. I know instinctively what is, and what isn't, but I hardly can define it.

Wow Gordis, that almost sounded like sarcasm. I know you didn’t mean it that way though. :) (2nd smiley)

I don’t feel qualified to get into a deep discussion of evil either. That is why I have (almost entirely) leaned on Wayfarer’s explanation.

For me, this isn’t the real issue though. The problem I have is with giving absolute credence to a few quotes while (apparently) disregarding (or at least undervaluing) all the opposing evidence found in Tolkien’s works. I think we have to use Tolkien quotes + story + logic to come to any real (or if real is impossible, then “reasonable”) answers.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

There are also some logical problems with the quote you gave earlier. Why couldn’t the Valar destroy Angband (without Melkor) after they destroyed Utumno (with Melkor)? If releasing Melkor was a good idea, then wasn’t capturing him in the first place a bad idea? How would Manwe be breaking his word if he heard Melkor’s plea and rejected it?
He wouldn't be breaking his plea, but would you want a leader or a King who made his mind up before a case had been made. Melkor may well have changed, but they could not know. They had to hear his case first and when they did they (well most) believed he had changed.

[Radagast The Brown]

I fail to see how a happy, peace loving people becoming oppressors, Melkor-worshipers, and eventually being exterminated is positive. To me the only way this is possible is to have complete faith in Eru. I can’t really argue with this point of view, however this kind of faith means that everything has to be seen in a positive light.I meant that the end of the third age was positive, the end of the story as we know it, not of Numenor. :)

I just don't think we're in position to claim "the Valar were wrong", as we can't see the whole picture and they probably could.. neither you nor I can truly tell the consequences of any other action that may have been taken by the Valar.

[CAB]

He wouldn't be breaking his plea, but would you want a leader or a King who made his mind up before a case had been made. Melkor may well have changed, but they could not know. They had to hear his case first and when they did they (well most) believed he had changed.
I wouldn’t want such a leader. But the point is that in the Silmarillion it is said that Melkor’s case would be heard after three ages. In the quote that Landroval gave it is implied that Manwe promised Melkor’s release after three ages. This is just one of many inconsistences in Tolkien’s writings. Which one do we accept as true? Landroval’s quote is (I would have to guess) the more recent, so I would argue that this would be a point in its favor. However, the quote from the Silmarillion is part of a (relatively) complete story and was published as such, unlike the other quote. To me, the tie-breaker is that the Silmarillion quote makes more sense. Why would Manwe agree to release Melkor, as dangerous as he was to all Arda, just after his capture, without any proof that he had changed (or would change)? Like you said, they needed to hear his case first.

I meant that the end of the third age was positive, the end of the story as we know it, not of Numenor. :)
Yes, but do the ends justify the means? Was there no other way to defeat Sauron? Perhaps a way that didn’t involve the slaughter of (nearly) an entire nation? Why not? Sauron ended up being defeated by a couple of Hobbits. Yes, I know it was a little more complicated than that, but was all this bloodshed really necessary? I doubt it.



I just don't think we're in position to claim "the Valar were wrong", as we can't see the whole picture and they probably could.. neither you nor I can truly tell the consequences of any other action that may have been taken by the Valar.
I would agree and disagree. No, we can’t tell the full consequences of any action that wasn’t actually taken. But, if the Valar could then that means they willingly allowed (or even caused) great evil for the inhabitants of Arda in the name of the great design. If this fits with your view of the Valar, fine. It doesn’t fit with mine. I don’t think they would willingly cause evil or kill Eru’s children (at least not in very large numbers). If so, why didn’t they destroy the Numenoreans themselves?

I know I am not a member of the Valar, but does being a Vala excuse one from all questioning of one’s actions? There is no real explanation given for why things were allowed to progress until the Numenoreans had to be exterminated. If there was a good reason, maybe the Valar would have given it. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to give some justification for such an action (or, more accurately, inaction)? Wouldn’t it be easier for Men to learn a lesson if they knew what that lesson was?

Anyway, we can’t judge the results of actions that weren’t taken. Again, I agree. But why can’t we judge the results of actions that were taken? Some of the results were: many wars, hatred, suffering, etc. I don’t think the Valar allowed this purposely (but if you argue that they had full comprehension of the big picture, then you must think that they did). I recognize that in most cases things could have been worse than they actually ended up being. However, the destruction of Numenor (for one) is another matter. I don’t think the results could have been much worse than they were, but I don’t see why they couldn’t have been better (much better).

[Landroval]

Oh, really?
It would have been much kinder on your part to just give or link to the specific definition of evil instead of expecting me to chase or guess what you had in mind.
1. Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.
2. Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet.
3. Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens.
4. Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation.
5. Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper.
1 is a circular definition, it doesnt leave us none the wiser; 2 and 5 are unacceptable since 2 doesnt apply in all cases since something harmful can be good and something pleasant (or constructive) can be bad and 5 can be applied to both good and evil persons (but in itself doesn't define them).
I see. Well it doesn’t get much easier than that.
You can’t start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions from it, relevant to our discussion.
Aren’t we talking about what happened after the Music? Wasn’t Melkor a Vala? Aren’t the Maiar simply lesser Valar? Were they incapable of making mistakes also? What about Melian’s descendants? They had angelic heritage. Could they make mistakes? Where do you draw the line? I draw it immediately under Eru.
This doesn't help at all your previous statement that "If mistakes aren’t part of the theme then no one can make mistakes" - first because Men are not bound by the music and second because new things are continuously introduced by Eru, beyond the initial Themes.
Were there no other options? Shouldn’t they have tried something else?
Again, is it anywhere stated that a better course of action was available? Or that the valar were wrong in dealing this way?
So, according to you, Tolkien went straight from eagle shaped clouds to actual eagles without any explanation.
So, according to you, Manwe puffed up numerous eagle-shaped clouds for the heck of it?
There follows a 'scenario' in which Sorontur King of Eagles is sent by Manwe, and Sorontur flying against the sun casts a great shadow on the ground. It was then that Elendil spoke the phrase ("Behold, the eagles of the Lord of the West are coming with threat to Numenor ")
On the other hand they must have been awfully big since their wings were “grasping the sky”
Thorondor alone had a wing span of 30 fathoms.
I also wonder why the Valar would hold any cousels if the decision would be made by Eru anyway.
Eru gave his plan in the Ainulindale and the valar carried it out; after they entered Ea, the valar had little if any means of contacting Eru by themselves (save Manwe).
For Manwe was free from evil and could not comprehend it
This part is clearly addressed in Osanwe kenta:
Manwe could not by duress attempt to compel Melkor to reveal his thought and purposes, or (if he used words) to speak the truth. If he spoke and said: this is true, he must be believed until proved false; if he said: this I will do, as you bid, he must be allowed the opportunity to fulfill his promise.
Of the risks of doing otherwise, I reffered to previously.
If releasing Melkor was a good idea, then wasn’t capturing him in the first place a bad idea?
That action was sanctioned by Eru, according to the Silmarillion.
Please don’t put words in my mouth, Landroval.
I am not; you are arguing against yourself when you say we should look at the greater picture since the quote you gave concerning Manwe in Myths Transformed is part of a cohort of other profound changes, concerning which Christopher said:""It seems to me that he was devising – from within it – a fearful weapon against his own creation". Not to mention that in the same text, Manwe is praised as the wisest being.
Wouldn’t it be easier for Men to learn a lesson if they knew what that lesson was?
The lesson was quite easy for most of those who were oppressed by the numenoreans; there is a God ;).
But why can’t we judge the results of actions that were taken?
And by what standards can we judge them? We don't have their knowledge, nor their wisdom. If you argue that the valar should resort only to actions that have immediate positive results, we will have to agree to disagree. Most, if not all, of us have to take difficult decisions that affect us or the others; those decisions shouldn't be avoided just because their immediate/visible result is not positive; it is the same with the mandate of the valar.

[CAB]

This will be my last post on this thread Landroval (at least for a while). We don’t seem to be getting anywhere. As I said before, I do respect your opinion and defense of Manwe.

However, you seem to think that I am attacking Manwe. This really isn’t true. The main point I have been arguing is that he is capable of making mistakes. Not that he is evil, stupid, an unfit leader, etc. Just capable of making mistakes. Is that really so terrible or unlikely?

It would have been much kinder on your part to just give or link to the specific definition of evil instead of expecting me to chase or guess what you had in mind.
Your right. I thought that you may be interested in that discussion, but I probably should have.

You can’t start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions from it, relevant to our discussion.
But this was in regards to your hypothesis.

This doesn't help at all your previous statement that "If mistakes aren’t part of the theme then no one can make mistakes" - first because Men are not bound by the music and second because new things are continuously introduced by Eru, beyond the initial Themes.
But I believe that mistakes were part of the theme. I think everyone but Eru can make mistakes. Here is a question I would ask. (But I won’t answer you here, if you wish to reply. I think I am going to start a new thread based on this question.) How could beings that were bound by fate live along side those who weren’t? How could this work? To me it doesn’t seem possible.

Again, is it anywhere stated that a better course of action was available? Or that the valar were wrong in dealing this way?
I don’t remember such a statement. But did he have to write such a thing? It seems like simple logic to me. I don’t think we should have to throw common sense out the window just because we are dealing with the Valar.

So, according to you, Manwe puffed up numerous eagle-shaped clouds for the heck of it?
No, it was a warning. A warning that did have some effect. Note those who “fell on their faces” and “would repent for a season”. If you were a Numenorean at this time, wouldn’t you be intimidated by such signs coming from the west? I would. The great number of clouds that came just as the fleet was to set off was a final warning. Final warnings tend to be “louder” than earlier ones. Really Landroval, if those were real eagles, why didn’t they attack? The voyage took almost forty days. Did they just hover overhead the whole time? Did they continue flying east, and so leave the fleet behind? Did they actually attack the Numenoreans without this being mentioned?

Eru gave his plan in the Ainulindale and the valar carried it out; after they entered Ea, the valar had little if any means of contacting Eru by themselves (save Manwe).
I don’t see what difference this makes. The big decisions were made (or decreed) by Manwe. Manwe had access to Eru. If the decision would come from Eru what was the need for debate? How would it matter what conclusion they came to? Were they going to influence Eru? I really doubt it.

This part is clearly addressed in Osanwe kenta:
Manwe could not by duress attempt to compel Melkor to reveal his thought and purposes, or (if he used words) to speak the truth. If he spoke and said: this is true, he must be believed until proved false; if he said: this I will do, as you bid, he must be allowed the opportunity to fulfill his promise.
Of the risks of doing otherwise, I reffered to previously.
If Manwe had to take someone’s word (especially if that someone is as powerful and evil as Melkor) in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence, then it sounds like he had a weakness to me.

That action was sanctioned by Eru, according to the Silmarillion.
Exactly. It was a good idea. The questionable idea was Melkor’s release, which according to the Silmarillion, and the quote you gave earlier, was Manwe’s idea.

I am not
I am afraid you did. You accused me of dismissing a statement just because I didn’t like it, immediately after I said I don’t disregard such statements. If my tone in the following post was umm...a little less cordial than it should have been, then I apologize, but this is the reason why. Anyway, at this point I would like to forget about it. You have a lot to say Landroval and I hope we can continue to debate (on other threads of course :) ) in a friendly manner.

you are arguing against yourself when you say we should look at the greater picture since the quote you gave concerning Manwe in Myths Transformed is part of a cohort of other profound changes, concerning which Christopher said:""It seems to me that he was devising – from within it – a fearful weapon against his own creation".
Yes, profound changes that were never completed. I have little doubt that, given enough time, Tolkien would have changed the story to the point that it was much closer to your point of view. But he never got there. If we simply accept all his later statements and try to fit them into the Silmarillion we get serious problems. He didn’t get the chance to go back and change all the stories. I don’t want to disregard all the published (completed) work because of ideas he was playing with, ideas that were still changing when he died. We can’t know what his full intent was, we have to use what we’ve got.

And by what standards can we judge them? We don't have their knowledge, nor their wisdom.
At what point does one become above all questioning? If someone down the street from me, who I know is smarter that I am, and who I believe to be a moral person, does something obviously wrong, do I just say “well, who am I to question him”? Of course not. Where do we draw the line? Aragorn, Galadriel, Gandalf, Manwe? This is another line I put just under Eru. I think, for many, this line doesn't exist at all.

If you argue that the valar should resort only to actions that have immediate positive results, we will have to agree to disagree.
No, I absolutely agree that they had the long term in mind.


Most, if not all, of us have to take difficult decisions that affect us or the others; those decisions shouldn't be avoided just because their immediate/visible result is not positive; it is the same with the mandate of the valar.
True. I agree. My problem is that some of the (both immediate and long term) results seem to have been things that the Valar would have absolutely tried to avoid, and probably could have.

Ok, the primary long term goals were achieved. I think we agree there. But there was tremendous bloodshed and suffering along the way. I imagine you have to agree with me there. So, if the Valar acted as they did to get where they did (which was the successful reaching of the long term goal) then didn’t they have to plan for all this suffering and bloodshed to happen? Or maybe the long term goal was reached in a way unforseen (by the Valar, not Eru), which is my opinion. Or did the Valar make decisions based solely on Eru’s will without utilizing any of their own wisdom? I don’t think you have ever given your opinion on this (although it sounds like maybe you are leaning towards the last option).

I personally don’t believe that the Valar would willingly cause great suffering for Eru’s children. What is your opinion? Would they do this to fulfill Eru’s design? It did happen so it must have been part of Eru's plan, right?

[Landroval]

Well, then I guess we will have to leave the fun on this for another time ... To address your last paragraph:
I personally don’t believe that the Valar would willingly cause great suffering for Eru’s children.
Not for the sake of suffering itself, absolutely.
Would they do this to fulfill Eru’s design? It did happen so it must have been part of Eru's plan, right?
Yes, I believe so; reffering to another issue, the mortality of Men, Tolkien stated in draft letter #212:
A divine 'punishment' is also a divine 'gift', if accepted, since its object is ultimate blessing, and the supreme inventiveness of the Creator will make 'punishments' (that is changes of design) produce a good not otherwise to be attained
It's been great debating with you CAB. See you around :).

[Gordis]

Wow Gordis, that almost sounded like sarcasm. I know you didn’t mean it that way though. :) (2nd smiley)
No, no sarcasm. :) Sorry if it sounded that way.

I had a previous (and rather recent) experience with a discussion turning into philosophical/theological dispute. It was on another forum, but the topic was similar: 'were Melkor's actions a part of Eru's design?".
I learned that such debates never lead to an agreement, because there is Tolkien'e early POV, there is rather different later Tolkien's POV, there is Christian POV which some equal with Tolkien's later POV, and the personal POV's of all the people involved. The debate becomes a catastrophe, and leads to hurt feelings of some who really take this to heart.
I simply feel that I:
1. don't care enough to participate and
2. I am out of my depth here.

As simple as that. :rolleyes:

For me, this isn’t the real issue though. The problem I have is with giving absolute credence to a few quotes while (apparently) disregarding (or at least undervaluing) all the opposing evidence found in Tolkien’s works. I think we have to use Tolkien quotes + story + logic to come to any real (or if real is impossible, then “reasonable”) answers.
I fully agree. I think that letters can't be accepted as the absolute revelation. They were written to a given person, with their own beliefs, who often knew very little of Tolkien's world. Often the story retold in Letters is simplified, made more acceptable to the person in mind.