What is a Maia?

[Aragorn the Maia]

You people mention Saurn being a Maia and Balrogs being former Maia's [Or Maia's being former Blarogs(?)]. I just wonder what is a Maia? Gandalf and Isarumon are Maia's right? Thanks.

[ragamuffin92]

Hi, Aragorn--welcome to Entmoot.
I'm sure one of the more learned members will answer you soon, but a Maia (the plural ia "Maiar") is an angel, for lack of a better term. Prof. Tolkien described them that way, too. The Valar are much more powerful angels--like archangels. So Sauron the Maia is a fallen angel (like a very poweful demon). His boss, Melkor (Morgoth) is a fallen Vala, so he is more or less like Satan.

The wizards (Gandalf, Saruman, Radagast, and the 2 Smurfs, errrr, the Blue Wizards) were good angels sent to oppose the work of the bad angels (Morgoth and Sauron). I'm not sure about the balrogs. I read it somewhere, but forgot. They apparently also were some kind of demonic/angelic beings, and servants of Morgoth.

[Ñólendil]

If you don't mind me asking (of course you don't), why did you name yourself Aragorn the Maia if you're not sure what a Maia is?

[Neithan]

The 7 balrogs (Tolkien "belived" there to be 7 of them) where Maiar. Ungoliante was also a Maiar,as well as Sauron and the 5 istaris. But the istari`s came into ME in the beginning of the 3.age. As for the other Maiar,they probably came in the beginning of time and in the awakening. When Illuvatar created Arda, he made it a bit unfinished, and left the job of finishing it to the Valar. Each Vala had several Maiar under him/her. In their service, if you wish.:) When the Valar had finished "developing" Arda, they left for Valinor. But some of the Maiar probably stayd back in ME. Melkors Maiar ofcourse had "gone bad" and took horrible forms. Such as balrogs and monsters. Ofcourse we all rememner Ungoliante. She was said to be so horrible that even Morgoth was a bit scared of her.:) There is also a popular theory about Tom Bombadill. Many belive him to be a Maiar. But some also belive him to be a Valar. The Valar Aule. There`s also a theory about him being the secret fire, but I think that one`s a bit far-fetched.:)

But everyone`s got a theory about Tom!

Even me!:D

[Aragorn the Maia]

I just knew someone was gonna ask that question. I was about 80% sure what a Maia was so I decided to just go out on a leaf...

[Gandalf]

Neithan: explain this to me ... If the Balrogs were all Maiar, then why are their names not mentioned in Silma, because I think I remember a list with names of the Maiar in the chapter "About the Maiar" or something like that. I doubt they are even could be Maiar, as the Elves slayed quite a number of them. Or are you referring to another kind of Balrog, perhaps a kind that Morgoth didn't create?

As for Maiar, they are Ainur of a lower rank. I guess Angels indeed is a nice way of calling them.

As for Bombadil, "As he was the first he will be the last".

[Neithan]

As for Gandalf`s post;

The balrogs WHERE Maiar. That`s not even open for discustion.
That`s a fact stated by JRR Tolkien him self.
You can not expect to find the names of every single Maia,no matter how hard you try. There`s simply too many of them.
If you don`t find the information you want,I recomend you to look in "The history of Middle Earth" vol.1 - 12, or use " The Encyclopedia of Arda" wich is located at:

http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/

[Gandalf]

I'll have a look ...

[Gandalf]

Odd enough you were correct, just re-read a lil chapter in Silma, guess I missed that part before.

[olorin]

Perhaps this is splitting hairs, but in reference to Niethan's post:When the Valar had finished "developing" Arda, they left for Valinor. Wasn't valinor a part of Arda? And wasn't Arda everything that the Valar worked on? But I might be confused.

[Ñólendil]

No, you're right. By 'Arda' he probably meant 'Middle-earth'.

[Gandalf]

It was probably just a mistake.

[Neithan]

It seems that Inoldonil read my thoughts better than I do.:)
Very practical actually.
Think I might need a secretary,or something. :confused:
But ofcourse I have an exuse for it. As usually I`ll blame it on being tired when I wrote the post.:D
Buy it anyone?:)
Didn`t think so.

But just for the record:

I wrote Arda,but I meant ME.

Sorry!

[Gandalf]

Maybe we should install a "correct Neithan's errors before he makes them"-corrector on this forum? lol

But then again, a secratary would be nice (my girlfriend would prolly kill me for saying that :P )

[Neithan]

I think Gandalf`"correct Neithan's errors before he makes them"-corrector idea is a great idea.
I hereby place Gandalf in charge of making the software needed. :D
Or he could just buy me a secretary.:D
Preferbly a Maia. lol

[Thorondor]

Before we get too far along here, let's be clear about some of Tolkien's terminology, at least as this reader sees it. ;)

Before the creation of Arda (the world we know), Eru, also known as Illuvatar, created beings that were later named, by the elves, the "Ainur". The Ainur participated in the creation of Arda and some of them elected to decend into it and become a part of it. Of those Ainur the elves recognise a select few as natural lords or leaders of the Ainur. These they call the "Valar". The other, lesser Ainur they call "Maiar". Some of these are pretty significant beings and are noted by name in the elves lore. Most of them are not.

Men, it is said, sometimes call the Ainur "gods", but the elves know better. The Ainur, Valar and Maiar alike, are beings of great power, but they are as much a creation of Eru as either elves or men. In letters, Tolkien often used the term "angelic beings" to describe them.

There are lots os Maiar, and they are of varying type or nature. Some are "fire-spirits". Most of those fell under the influence of Melkor and bacame known as the Balrogs.

Note that all of these names and classifications are given by the Elves, who's knowledge of the Ainur was good but not perfect. Note also that the Valar and the Maiar are not two distinct types of beings. They are alike, except in "majesty and power".

[Neithan]

I`ve got nothing more to say.

Thorondor is ofcourse quite correct.

[Lightice]

Eru didn't directly create Arda. He created Ainur, and gave them the instructions (the Song) and then they did all the job, by the plans, though Melkor destroyed quite a bit of it, but still, everything worked out, more or less.
Only thing Eru created directly was his Children: Elves and humans.
There's already several descriptions about Maiar, so I won't put any more here. They were, more or less correct.

[Gandalf]

I think Tolkien would murder you guys for the usage of the verb "to create".
Eru didn't "create" humans (Tolkien didn't write the christian bible you know "and god created man to his image yadayadayada), but he gave them life. I suppose it's a small difference, but still a difference.

The Ainur made Arda come into existance with the help of Eru (The Ainulindalë explains that quite lovely and clearly -- at first there was the song of the Ainur, and then Eru showed them what their music "looked" like by supposedly materializing it.).

Neithan: sure, I'm a programmer with a reason :P

[Ñólendil]

None of the Ainur had part in what I am quite sure Tolkien has called 'the creation of the Children'. Elves and Men entered in with the Third Theme, solely from Eru and no one else. They were wholly other from the Ainur. So I think it is safe to say that God created the Children of God.

[Neithan]

We`ve got to remember that Tolkien tried to write the mytoligy/saga that Britain was missing. So when he wrote he,tried to make it compatible with the bible. So I think it`s quite safe the say that Illuvatar is the same as God in the bible. I think the difference between Silma. and the bible,is pretty much the same as the difference between the bible and the coran. They all are just variasions on the same story and the same God.

I hope I`m not upseting anyone now.

[ragamuffin92]

Upset? Why, no, of course not, you $%^#@!! LOL

Seriously, there is one HUGE difference between God, as portrayed by the Bible as opposed to the Koran.The Koran states that Allah, is NOT the Father of Jesus, and does not forgive sin because of the Crucifixion. The Bible says that God (Yahweh, Jehovah) is the Father of the Messiah Jesus (His ONLY begotten Son), the sinless "God-and-man," who was sent to take the punishment for the sins of all who accept Him. The Koran does not say this.

In a nutshell, Allah accepts man's good works for entry into Heaven, Jehovah does not. That alone says that they are not two versions of the same story, or the same God.

P.S.--Before anyone gets mad at me, I didn't make this up--I'm just reporting on what has already been written. Yell at God. :)

[Gandalf]

Don't get me started on a religious discussions ... us satanists tend to be quite knowledgeable on that subject ;)

[ragamuffin92]

It seems odd to me that a satanist would embrace "The Lord of the Rings," which, in Tolkien's own words, "...is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work."(see The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien,letter # 142)-- (FYI--I'm not Catholic, so I am not promoting that particular denomination.)

[Gandalf]

Saying that expresses your ignorance on the subject of Satanism. Most Satanists are -- unlike what you may think -- fond of good writing and poetry ;).

[ragamuffin92]

I am not completely ignorant of satanism--I know that some branches are involved in hedonism ("Do what thou wilt" enjoyment of the pleasures of life), others in actual ritualistic satan worship.
What I was referring was not satanists' literary tastes, but the fact that Satan himself is diametrically opposed to Judeo-Christian morality, which was Professor Tolkien's ultimate point of view (and this, he stated himself, it's not my opinion). Now, if you tell me that THAT statement isn't true, then I'm not the only ignorant one involved in this conversation. :)

[Gandalf]

Satanists don't believe in a deity called Satan. Christians acknowledge the existance of this being of so called "pure evil" (I suppose you could compare the christian Satan with Melkor; a fallen angel).

But yes, Satanism is quite closely related to Hedonism (eventhough not all of us are sex crazed drinking poets :P), but I don't consider myself 100%, I'm (this is gonna sound odd to some people) 50% Satanist and 50% Wiccan, both have really interesting philosofies, but they're even nicer when they're put together.

As for Judeo (or any other christian tradition) morality: I don't believe there is such a thing. Unless you call hypocrisy morality ... but that's a very long, tiresome discussion (and of course I'm not talking about all christians, I dislike to generalize, I'm talking about the Churches as institutions).
As for Christianity itself: it's a utopia (which still does mean "nowhere land"), it's impossible to be a 100% true christian. It's impossible for anyone to love everyone.

- Bram

[ragamuffin92]

I appreciate your answer, and I admit my ignorance about a lot of things, but not EVERYTHING. :)

Concerning hypocrisy and being a perfect Christian: If a person says "I'm going to Heaven because I don't sin, and you're going to hell because you do, nyah, nyah, nyah nyah nyaaaaaah, nyah...", either that person IS a hypocrite or just plain STUPID!! :p We know that we are NOT perfect, and that's why we need a Savior. (Sometimes I forget that and become self-righteous, but not for long, hopefully. :D ) Many churches (and/or denominations) have strayed from that philosophy. My nickname "ragamuffin" comes from a book, "The Ragamuffin Gospel," which says that nobody, whether a preacher, poet, prostitute, Pope, pimp, or politician, or even PIPPIN is entitled to look down on anyone else--we're all in the same boat in this life.
Talking about love, Tolkien's buddy C.S. Lewis wrote a book (The Perfect Love, I think?) where he said that human beings are not able to love anyone with COMPLETE unselfishness.
Anyway, thanks for your honest answer, and I don't want to take up a lot of Mootspace with "a very long, tiresome discussion," like you said, but feel free to PM me, if you'd like.

[Neithan]

This thread is no fun no more.:(

[Ñólendil]

Anyway, thanks for your honest answer, and I don't want to take up a lot of Mootspace with "a very long, tiresome discussion," like you said, but feel free to PM me, if you'd like.

Wonderful, it makes my job all the more easier. I'm actually amazed the two of you didn't get into a religious battle. All the same this is a topic about Maiar.