The Nature of the Creator and His Intentions

[Luckers]

Ok, so i created this thread out of a discussion that is ongoing in the "Who says there's going to be a bloody body swap?!?!?!" thread. I basically stems around a question asked by Robert. Specifically, this question.

 

Yeah, the same catechism also says that the Creator bound all the Forsaken with the Dark One at the moment of creation. It's factuality is a tad suspect.

 

As indicated by what?  I'm genuinely curious here ... what happens in the books that makes you suspect that the Creator isn't what he's acclaimed to be?

 

I responded to that interchange in the thread, if your curious. But i will be moving beyond it in this thread. Here, i will be looking at the following questions.

 

1. Are the statements in the text an accurate portrayal of the Creator?

2. What do we actually know of the Creator?

3. What is the Creator's stance on events in the books, and what are his intentions?

 

 

Are the statements in the text an accurate portrayal of the Creator?

 

The above quote from the body swap thread raises this issue clearly, to my mind. What we know of the Creator is mostly the function of superstition, and wherever we have been able to compare it verifiable facts within the rest of the books it has been proven completely wrong. Hell, the Dark One, the only living being that could possibly remember the Creator has never, to this date, mentioned him. Even when he falls into rants about his enemies, he has only ever refered to the Dragon--and him as his ancient nemises.

 

We are talking about a character in a text, a character whose nature, purpose or even reality we have no way of addressing or verifying... or even suggestively examining.

 

Concider every other of these beliefs as we've been exposed to them.

 

1. The Forsaken sealed in the Bore at the moment of Creation. False.

2. All Aes Sedai serve the Dark One, intentionally broke the world, and now seek to do it again. False.

3. The Dragon was the left-hand of the Dark One and intentionally broke the world on his behalf. False.

4. The Dragon shall be Reborn to bring about the end of the world for the Dark One. False.

 

They are superstitions. And like all superstitions they are based in fact. Yes, the Forsaken were bound, yes the Aes Sedai were the direct source of the breaking, yes the Dragon also had a direct hand in the breaking, and yes the Dragon Reborn will have a cataclysmic effect on the modern world. But these are all simplifications.

 

What makes me thing that the Creator is anything other than what he is acclaimed to be, Robert? The mere fact of the method of that claim.

 

 

What do we actually know of the Creator?

 

The Creator bears some similarity to the idea of the western godhood, which i suspect does cloud the issue. Try and step away from that for a moment, and take a look at what we actually know of the Creator.

 

1. Supposedly he made the Wheel of Time.

 

2. When he made the Wheel, he impisoned the Dark One--at least supposedly, in reality, based on descriptions of the wheel and reality, it appears to me more as if the Dark One were excluded from the circle of the wheel, not imprisoned. It might be better termed to say that the Dark One was exiled from the Wheel.

 

3. People feel that he has some form of ability to shelter them, or protect them, or influence their lives in a positive manner. This is not a belief structue, but rather whats known as a 'deisis' a pervasive spiritual or social 'feeling'. The best analogy would be in the way certain people feel about luck, or fate. It's not a religious ideology, as such, yet in some ways it is.

 

All three of these things we have by, at best, a billion-hand long source listing. Basically, these are the socialized beliefs that everyone believes simply because everyone believes them.

 

But what have we seen of the Creators actions? As the saying goes, actions speak louder than words.

 

1. We have the voice that spoke to Rand in tEotW. Maybe.

2. A total absense from all other events.

 

The second point is tainted by the fact that we may not be aware of his actions, yet we can state given the way he dealt with Rand that he can't pull strings in the sense of forcing or pushing people to do things without there knowledge. Else, why would he have revealed himself at that stage. So, if he has been influencing events, it must be at a pretty small level, or through direct interaction with a character whose interactions we have not been privy to (which i personally concider unlikely).

 

But what can we tell from what we do know of the Creator's actions?

 

 

What is the Creator's stance on events in the books, and what are his intentions?

 

The following is based essentially on the idea of looking at what we have witnessed of the Creator seperate of what we expect him to be (A judeo-christian god-like figure--and don't suggest that you don't have some mold of such in your mind, even i do, and im as athiest as they come). Given how little we know of the Creator, it is obviously very loose logic, and i acknowledge that.

 

Firstly, we have the obvious question, why has the Creator not involved himself in the war against the Dark One. To my mind, there are three plausible answers.

 

1. He wont. For whatever reason, he chooses to remain aloof.

2. He can't. He doesn't have the power to actually go toe to toe with the Dark One.

3. He doesn't care. Or else, he has his own cares, and doesn't have time to waste on the Earth.

 

 

He won't.

 

Argument one, that he won't involve himself, is certainly supported by the comments in the Eye of the World, if you accept them as coming from the Creator. Or is it? (Muahaha?)

 

If he could act, but chooses not to, then why does he in fact involve himself? It certainly suggests some form of vested interest in the outcome of the struggle between mankind and the Dark One. So what is that interest? Is it on humanities behalf? I rather doubt it--for one thing, the function of rebirth and the lack of any form of sin-system takes away any purpose for allowing people to handle their own fight against the Shadow.

 

By which I mean, this ain't the Christian God. Letting humanity deal with the Dark One cannot be a gesture in the function of free will, since the whole 'heaven', 'hell' goal system is out of the game. If he's willing to influence events at all by aiding Rand in that manner, then he's not doing the high minded 'god' thing.

 

At least, not to my mind. Still, its a possibility. But if that is the case, the whole 'Creator steps in at the last moment to save humanity' thing... its out. If he'd been going to do that, he would have done it already, and if he had the power to do that with impunity, and it had occured in previous turnings of the wheel, then the Dark One would know it was coming. A function of pointlessness.

 

But where is the suggestion that the Creator even has the power to slap the Dark One down?

 

 

He Can't.

 

Thie brings us to option number two; that the Creator can't step in because he doesn't have the power.

 

Once again, this isn't a God/Satan relationship. Or rather, if you want to suggest that it is, go find some evidence. Because there is nothing to suggest that the Creator is some benign being withholding his hand because of the memory of the love he once bore the Dark One. But what evidence is there?

 

1. The Imprisonment Factor.

 

So, the Creator imprisoned the Dark One, therefore he must be more powerful?

 

Thats fine and dandy, but is it a realistic judgement of the situation? The Dark One and the Creator could be exactly even in strength, and due to circumstance the Creator may have won. Hell, the Dark One may have even have been stronger. Concider Lan's fight with Ryne in New Spring. Ryne was better, but due to hubris he lost.

 

Furthermore, did the Creator actually imprison the Dark One in the sense of locking him up? The answer is more that probably no. The size of the cosmic reality that we deal with is simply too large. The Creator constructed a realm that was circular, and he constructed it with the Dark One outside the circle. There isn't even the requirement for a confrontation in that action--indeed, there is actually the suggestion of the desire to AVOID a confrontation. He built walls, not to keep something in, but to keep something out. Any implication of the power balance that can be established by the act of 'imprisoning' the Dark One sort of slids in the favour of the Dark One in that.

 

So, we have the implication of an avoidance system. Something that is then backed up by the following lack of open confrontation. Yet, if the Creator feels so scared of the Dark One, why doesn't he tale a very active hand in aiding the forces of the light--supplying them with intel, only not just once, like with Rand, but all the time. Sort of a 'psst! Dude, FYI, that girl that looks like Tuon... yeah, she's totally Semirhage'.

 

 

He Doesn't Care

 

Which brings us to option number three. The Creator doesn't care, or rather, he has other games to play.

 

So we have a history of non-involvement, but also the suggestion of non-interest. So maybe he just doesn't give two hoots about the game thats being played out again and again. Maybe he's moved on to bigger and better things, like writing his memoirs, buying a penis car, and getting an offensively young girlfriend.

 

But wait, that doesn't make sense. Because we saw him help Rand (maybe). And, if you believe the hype, he created this wheel with its complex system of self-fighting the Dark One, including hoarding souls in TAR to play hero, spitting out Ta'veren to save the day (and strike cutting figures in their shirtsleeves), providing people with visions of the future so they can compose the bad poetry that we name the Karetheon Cycle....

 

Holy untenable plot points batman, it just doesn't make sense! Or does it?

 

The reality is that what we see matches a being who is more interested than doing something else then eternally battling an insane hell god. He devises a self-sufficient system that protects itself from incursion, then hides, completely incircled by it. He shows no interest in the progression of that system--none of God's 'though must live rightously because i so care about all of my childrens wellbeing'--indeed, he only involves himself at the rare moments when things are looking bad.

 

Frankly i buy this last one. I don't think that the Creator feels overly threatened by the Dark One, but nor does he have enough power to simply sweep him aside.

 

 

 

 

There is a fourth option, by the by. In imprisoning the Dark One and creating the wheel, the Creator may have depleted himself so completely that he is little more than a memory, or a dream--the dream of a godlike being, sure, but nothing to get spiffed about. It might even have been his last resort.

 

 

 

[Vambram]

Ishamael is not the champion of the Shadow or the Dark One, he is merely Nae'blis, the current leader. Moreover, since the Dark One created Shaidar Haren to serve as a body for his will, his function as the embodiement of the Dark One's will on earth is no longer even unique.

 

But what vast displays of power do you percieve on behald of Rand in either tEotW or tGH? Rands use of the source in both books was perfectly normal for a man who had been forced. These supposed 'surges', which i honestly do not see, were the jumps of a channeler who was pushed, or was pushing, too far. Rand, like Egwene, or indeed any member of the Black Tower, plus most damane, apparently, was merely a forced channeler. A perfectly natural function.

 

Perhaps if you could quote specifically where you think these sudden bursts of devine energy came from it would help clarify things, yet as far as im aware, the books only show a channeler who through confrontation was forced beyond the natural progression of his strength.

 

 

 

In Randland, the Creator is often referred to as the Light, correct? If that is correct, then when I read The Eye of the World chapter 51 and 52, I see clear descriptions of the Light empowering, and aiding Rand enabling Rand to do feats of power with saidin that has yet to be duplicated hardly at all by anyone of the Forsaken. To me, that is telling me that the Light, or the Creator, took at least an indirect involvement in the fight of the Dragon Reborn against the D.O. and the Forsaken there in chapter 51, and in chapter 52 we see Rand and Moiraine's interpretation of what Rand felt and saw and experienced. (see tEotW chap.51 pg 633-640 ). Also, I am referencing chapter 52 page 644. Then, when I read The Great Hunt chapter 47 pages 560-564, I see Rand's battle against Ba'alzamon from Rand's POV. In those pages, nothing supernaturally, incredibly spectactular is found in those pages. However, in chapter 49 page 572, I read the following,

"If he is alive, if he did not go with the Seanchan, I have to-" He cut off as she produced his heron-mark

sword from under her cloak. The blade ended abruptly a foot from the hilt, as if it had been melted. Memory

came crashing back. "I killed him," he said softly. "This time I killed him."

Moiraine put the ruined sword aside like the useless thing it now was, and wiped her hands together.

"The Dark One is not slain so easily. The mere fact that he appeared in the sky above Falme is more than

merely troubling. He should not be able to do that, if he is bound as we believe. And if he is not, why has he not

destroyed us all?" Min stirred uneasily.

"In the sky?" Rand said in wonder.

"Both of you," Moiraine said. "Your battle took place across the sky, in full view of every soul in Falme.

Perhaps in other towns on Toman Head, too, if half what I hear is to be believed."

"We - we saw it all," Min said in a faint voice. She put a hand over one of Rand's comfortingly.

Moiraine reached under her cloak again and came out with a rolled parchment, one of the large sheets

such as the street artists in Falme used. The chalks were a little smudged when she unfurled it, but the picture

was still clear enough. A man whose face was a solid flame fought with a staff against another with a sword

among clouds where lightning danced, and behind them rippled the Dragon banner. Rand's face was easily

recognizable.

"How many have seen that?" he demanded. "Tear it up. Burn it."

The Aes Sedai let the parchment roll back up. "It would do no good, Rand. I bought that two days gone,

in a village we passed through. There are hundreds of them, perhaps thousands, and the tale is being told

everywhere of how the Dragon battled the Dark One in the skies above Falme."

 

In my opinion, there are not any other scenes in any of the rest of the books that indicate and imply clear direct or indirect aid by the Light (the Creator himself) to Rand al`Thor. And yet, I do not see how one can believe that those scenes I am referring to here, are simply just Rand drawing upon saidin to such a incredible extent in that he is able to perform mega-powerful displays of saidin. Rand was not nearly ready to channel that much saidin which would be necessary in those two fights as they are described. Plus, in the Eye of the World, Rand is able to recognise that he is channeling saidin, but he is also believing that he is doing stuff with saidin that he had no clue as to how to do them. Finally, the climatic scene in tGH against Ba'alzamon from the point of view of Moiraine, Egwene, Min, and everyone else shows Rand and Ba'alzamon fighting in the skies above as gigantic figures of fire. Is that battle merely just another extension of only mega-powerful use of the inborn saidin abilities of those two combatants? I do not believe the answer to that question is yes.

[Luckers]

Before I begin, did you read the thread? Because, this entire response is a response to comments in the body-swap thread, and therefore i am deeply confused as to its presence here.

 

In Randland, the Creator is often referred to as the Light, correct?

 

Correct, he is referred to as such. As I addressed in the thread above.

 

Reading is helpful.

 

If that is correct, then when I read The Eye of the World chapter 51 and 52, I see clear descriptions of the Light empowering, and aiding Rand enabling Rand to do feats of power with saidin that has yet to be duplicated hardly at all by anyone of the Forsaken.

 

Unfortunately Rand is describing the experience of utilizing the power. He names the experience as 'the Light' as a combination between his very first concious experience of the nature of saidin (ecstacy of fire that burns to the bone and ice that seres to the soul) and the 'loopiness' that he experienced concurrent with that concious experience as the final stage of his power aquisition syndrome.

 

To me, that is telling me that the Light, or the Creator, took at least an indirect involvement in the fight of the Dragon Reborn against the D.O. and the Forsaken there in chapter 51, and in chapter 52 we see Rand and Moiraine's interpretation of what Rand felt and saw and experienced. (see tEotW chap.51 pg 633-640 ). Also, I am referencing chapter 52 page 644. Then, when I read The Great Hunt chapter 47 pages 560-564, I see Rand's battle against Ba'alzamon from Rand's POV. In those pages, nothing supernaturally, incredibly spectactular is found in those pages. However, in chapter 49 page 572, I read the following,

 

Which is all nice, but is in response to a completely different thread, and not this thread, and therefore im returned to my initial comment.

 

In my opinion, there are not any other scenes in any of the rest of the books that indicate and imply clear direct or indirect aid by the Light (the Creator himself) to Rand al`Thor. And yet, I do not see how one can believe that those scenes I am referring to here, are simply just Rand drawing upon saidin to such a incredible extent in that he is able to perform mega-powerful displays of saidin. Rand was not nearly ready to channel that much saidin which would be necessary in those two fights as they are described. Plus, in the Eye of the World, Rand is able to recognise that he is channeling saidin, but he is also believing that he is doing stuff with saidin that he had no clue as to how to do them. Finally, the climatic scene in tGH against Ba'alzamon from the point of view of Moiraine, Egwene, Min, and everyone else shows Rand and Ba'alzamon fighting in the skies above as gigantic figures of fire. Is that battle merely just another extension of only mega-powerful use of the inborn saidin abilities of those two combatants? I do not believe the answer to that question is yes.

 

That effect you are referring to is an effect of the combination of ta'maral'ailen and the influence of the sounding of the horn (and subsequent blur between tel'aran'rhiod and the waking world). None of it has anything to do with their ability as channelers, except the very specific use of the power in the fight between the two of them.

[RobertAlexWillis]

Thanks Luckers.  That cleared up your position for me nicely.

 

You are quite correct that we have either no direct evidence, or almost no direct evidence (depending on the whose voice Rand heard), of what the Creator is, what his abilities are, or what his intentions are.  And that conflicting and simply wrong ideas are expressed by characters.  So we are left with deduction, and deduction from incomplete information can lead to equally valid (from a purely logical standpoint) but different conclusions.  This is obviously the case here.

 

ALlow me to make a few comments ... not in anything as coherent an order as yours.

 

The Creator is, for all intents and purposes, totally uninvolved.  For the sake of argument here, I'm going to assume that the voice Rand heard at Tarwin's Gap was the Creator's.  It seems that most people assume that the Creator inititated contact with Rand, and that therefore his statement was self-violating.  But Rand was accessing a pure source of the Power of unknown proportions.  We don't really know HOW much was in the Eye.  It is just as possible that Rand initiated the connection with the Creator, and that the Creator responded with the equivalent of "Wrong number." -click-

 

The total sum meaning of his message was "I'm not in this."  So, the case for total non-involvement remains intact.

 

As to the Dark One's status of being "imprisoned" or simply "exiled" from the Wheel ... it is a mistake to think of the Wheel in physically circular terms, and the Dark One being stuck on the "outside" or the "inside".  And Jordan refers to the Dark One's "prison" in comments and questions outside the books.  The Dark One's highest servants think of him as being "imprisoned" as well as the followers of the Light ... and Shai'tan himself has quite clearly expressed rage and frustration at his current situation.  It seems pretty clear that he is, indeed, imprisoned, and not simply "exiled".  In truth, since the "Wheel" is not actually a circular physical construction, "exile" and "imprisonment" are probably one and the same, in metaphysical terms.

 

Now, back to the Creator's motives ... unless the Creator completely lacks the drive for self-preservation, then his lack of involvement indicates one of two things, which you have mentioned.  ("He won't", and "He doesn't care" fall under the same category in this analysis ...)  Either the inability to act, or the lack of a need/desire to act.  We have no direct evidence either way, but, again assuming the voice that Rand heard was indeed the Creator, then it seems to indicate not an inability, but a choice not to.  "I WILL TAKE NO PART." not, "I CAN TAKE NO PART."  Of course, he does go on to say "ONLY THE CHOSEN ONE CAN DO WHAT MUST BE DONE, IF HE WILL." which could be interpreted as meaning that if only the Chosen One can do it, the Creator cannot ... but both interpretations are reading a great deal into very little.

 

In short ... there's not enough to say for sure ... either way.  Clearly, those who follow the Light believe that the Creator is more powerful.  Rand and Lews Therin are both sure that he doesn't get involved because he doesn't care (the whole garderner not weeping for one petal falling bit in KoD).

 

What encouraged my original response was what seemed to me your implication that the Creator's imprisonment of the Dark One had to indicate fear, and therefore, a relative lack of power.  But, that conclusion is not supported by any evidence, nor is it logically necessary.  There are reasons to imprison someone or something other than personal fear.

[Child of Lir]

Interesting points.

 

We are taught that the Wheel and Pattern always seek balance: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction (RJ's physics background showing through here); for every good act, there is an evil one. And so for every Creator there is a Destroyer?

 

Now, if I was the Creator, I would not want the Destroyer ruining all my good work, so I'd remove him from the action. The problem with this is that things don't appear to be in balance - I am free to act creatively, but he isn't free to act destructively.

 

However, the Creator's freedom versus the DO's imprisonment actually is a kind of balance - they are mirror images of each other, equal and opposite reactions, and whilst things remain in this state the world manages to tick along quite nicely. This suggests to me that freeing the DO, resulting in imbalance, requires one of two solutions to restore balance: either the DO is imprisoned again, or the Creator is imprisoned. Of course most of the world hopes the DO is imprisoned again, but it raises an interesting scenario if the roles were to be reversed.

 

As to the Creator's role, maybe that's all his role was - to Create? If the world is destroyed, He can create another. We have no evidence of an anthropomorphic Creator, nothing to suggest that he cares about the people of the world, so we have to avoid second-guessing his motives from a human (and therefore emotional) standpoint. Perhaps He just sticks to the rules of the game - not interfering - and sees what happens? All in all, He is a very curious creature. Let's hope he makes a last-minute appearance and grants us all illumination!

[Darkness Incarnated]

The Creator 'imprisoning' the Dark One does not necessarily mean that the Dark One is more powerful than the Creator, and thus the latter is afraid of the former. A certain saying comes to mind here, that it takes more courage to walk away from a fight than staying to fight. Not exactly applicable here, I guess, but the Creator's nature is not exactly common knowledge, thus we don't know whether he would opt to fight if the Dark One attacked him (though I think he would). What I am driving at is, it's totally possible the Creator may decide not to fight the Dark One, not because he can't, but because he simply doesn't want to.

 

One question that comes to mind is, why didn't the Dark One prevent the Creator from 'imprisoning' him in the first place, if he is more powerful?

Where is the Creator by the way? Inside or outside the pattern? The Dark One does seem to express some frustration at his situation, as Robert said, which may or may not mean that it (the situation) is a result of circumstances beyond his control. 'Even I [the Dark One] cannot step out of Time'. Did the Creator create Time? If so, that would mean something as to their abilities? As in, the Creator making something that more or less defeats the Dark One.

[Luckers]

You are quite correct that we have either no direct evidence, or almost no direct evidence (depending on the whose voice Rand heard), of what the Creator is, what his abilities are, or what his intentions are.  And that conflicting and simply wrong ideas are expressed by characters.  So we are left with deduction, and deduction from incomplete information can lead to equally valid (from a purely logical standpoint) but different conclusions.  This is obviously the case here.

 

Well, yeah, I totally agree, though i think you left out an issue... specifically the ease with which we percieve such a character within the realm of the archetype of the western godhead.

 

But other than that i suspect you hit the nail on the head.

 

For the sake of argument here, I'm going to assume that the voice Rand heard at Tarwin's Gap was the Creator's.

 

What type of idiot would do that. What a silly assumption. No one with half a brain would even concider.... oh... wait...

 

heh.

 

You were saying? (no seriously, im not funny, and im done).

 

But Rand was accessing a pure source of the Power of unknown proportions.  We don't really know HOW much was in the Eye.  It is just as possible that Rand initiated the connection with the Creator, and that the Creator responded with the equivalent of "Wrong number." -click-

 

That honestly had not occured to me. This does make the 'He Won't' argument more tenable... though to be fair, it sits eqaully strong in both the 'He Can't' and 'But Mummy, I don't want to help the humans fight the Dark One' catagories.

 

As to the Dark One's status of being "imprisoned" or simply "exiled" from the Wheel ... it is a mistake to think of the Wheel in physically circular terms, and the Dark One being stuck on the "outside" or the "inside".  And Jordan refers to the Dark One's "prison" in comments and questions outside the books.  The Dark One's highest servants think of him as being "imprisoned" as well as the followers of the Light ... and Shai'tan himself has quite clearly expressed rage and frustration at his current situation.  It seems pretty clear that he is, indeed, imprisoned, and not simply "exiled".  In truth, since the "Wheel" is not actually a circular physical construction, "exile" and "imprisonment" are probably one and the same, in metaphysical terms.

 

I do disagree with this. The Dark One's rage and frustration is focused more on the inability to gain something, not a constriction on his action (I'm excluding the comment re: balefire here, for the obvious reasons). The Forsaken's comments stem from the fact that they actually were imprisoned--in the seal constricting the Dark One's access to the world. Yet this is not so much indicative of the nature of the Dark Ones prison, as the unfortunate nature of their own. Beyond that, they are the product of the same mentality as the modern idiots. But meh.

 

In terms of the actual specific nature, i disagree on the same weak grounds that you presented it... being, what it sounds like to me. And in the text it sounds more like he is trying to claw his way in than claw his way out. His focus has always been on what he could do with the wheel, and his frustration has been his inability to do so. His stated goal is remaking the world in his image. These are all the goals of a possesive nature, not an escapist. At least, to me.

 

We have no direct evidence either way, but, again assuming the voice that Rand heard was indeed the Creator, then it seems to indicate not an inability, but a choice not to.  "I WILL TAKE NO PART." not, "I CAN TAKE NO PART."  Of course, he does go on to say "ONLY THE CHOSEN ONE CAN DO WHAT MUST BE DONE, IF HE WILL." which could be interpreted as meaning that if only the Chosen One can do it, the Creator cannot ... but both interpretations are reading a great deal into very little.

 

I don't disagree with anything you say here, though i would point out that he simply might not have said "I CAN TAKE NO PART" out of pride and embarrassment. After all, we have seen a capacity for silly emotions in the Dark One--jelousy, pride, arrogance. Why not in the Creator?

 

In short ... there's not enough to say for sure ... either way.  Clearly, those who follow the Light believe that the Creator is more powerful.  Rand and Lews Therin are both sure that he doesn't get involved because he doesn't care (the whole garderner not weeping for one petal falling bit in KoD).

 

I missed that, but good catch. And I agree about the lack of any information... lol, that was actually the whole point about this thread, to get people to stop assuming things about the creator and actually look at what we KNOW. And it all stemmed from your question about what made me think the creator to be anything other than what he was acclaimed to be. Damn good question.

 

By the by, where is the suggestion that the people of the Light believe the Creator to be more powerful? I know that the idea that the Creator won't act deals with the lack of the belief that the Creator will step in last minute, but where is the suggestion that he could?

 

What encouraged my original response was what seemed to me your implication that the Creator's imprisonment of the Dark One had to indicate fear, and therefore, a relative lack of power.  But, that conclusion is not supported by any evidence, nor is it logically necessary.  There are reasons to imprison someone or something other than personal fear.

 

Yeah, i see how it could have been seen that way--actually, back in the day i genuinely believed that, so im not surprised it came through. Hopefully this thread clarifies my intentions.

 

And about imprisonment, for clarity, my point was about exclusion. My suggestion was that the Creator built walls to keep the Dark One out. THAT, is a function of fear. But again, hopefully this thread clarified that.

 

As to the Creator's role, maybe that's all his role was - to Create? If the world is destroyed, He can create another. We have no evidence of an anthropomorphic Creator, nothing to suggest that he cares about the people of the world, so we have to avoid second-guessing his motives from a human (and therefore emotional) standpoint. Perhaps He just sticks to the rules of the game - not interfering - and sees what happens? All in all, He is a very curious creature. Let's hope he makes a last-minute appearance and grants us all illumination!

 

That is actually a very intriguing point. Add to it the idea that the timelines has occured over and over again....

 

The Creator 'imprisoning' the Dark One does not necessarily mean that the Dark One is more powerful than the Creator, and thus the latter is afraid of the former.

 

Umm... actually my comment was that the fact that the Creator imprisoned the Dark One does not meant that the CREATOR is inherently more powerful than the Dark One. I'm afraid you got it backwards.

 

A certain saying comes to mind here, that it takes more courage to walk away from a fight than staying to fight. Not exactly applicable here, I guess, but the Creator's nature is not exactly common knowledge, thus we don't know whether he would opt to fight if the Dark One attacked him (though I think he would). What I am driving at is, it's totally possible the Creator may decide not to fight the Dark One, not because he can't, but because he simply doesn't want to.

 

Certainly, i agree with the possibility of that... indeed, i believe i covered it in my third option... that the Creator doesn't care to fight the Dark One. I may not have been clear at the time, but to be clear now, this is what i think to be the case.

 

One question that comes to mind is, why didn't the Dark One prevent the Creator from 'imprisoning' him in the first place, if he is more powerful?

 

Well, i addressed this too. Quite specifically, in fact. I believe my analogy was Lan and Ryne--Ryne was a better swordsman, but lost for the circumstances. Turak and Rand work as well.

 

My point was merely that the fact that the Dark One was imprisoned does not mean that the Creator was more powerful... AND THAT IS MY ONLY POINT. I am not saying that I think it fact that the Dark One is stronger, i am saying that the question above is not a reasonable basis for the assumption of who was stronger.

 

The Creator imprisoned/excluded the Dark One, but we have no idea of the specific circumstances of that incident. Maybe the Dark One was drunk at the time.

 

I joke, but seriously, read my comments under the 'He Can't' '1. The Imprisonment Factor'.

[cloglord]

I thought, after reading both threads in question, I'd chime in, because I like nothing more than to argue with an atheist.  My first point is simple.  if the vreator is in fact THE creator, then by definition, he/it is roughly equivilent to western ideas of God.  Since all indications we get from the superstitions of the denizens of Randland seem to be in reverance to THE Creator instead of some sort of Quasi-creator middle man, it seems to me that it is a safe assumption to make, in the context of this argument, that the creator in question is the creator of everything.  Your points in the previous posts about there being a dirth of knowledge about the creator are true, but you are forgetting a major venue for recieving information about the creator, his/its creation.  While it is true that we lack verifiable, firsthand experience, with the Creator within the books, it is too easy to overlook the things we know to be true about the pattern and the wheel of time.

 

First, we know that the pattern is circular and cyclical, it is infinite.  Secondly we know that there are an infinite number of realities that stem from every possible choice.  Both things are indicative. from my perspective this means that both in size and scope, the pattern is an infinite creation, and logically requires its creator to be a creator of infinite power to have accomplished such a feat.  Of course the argument could be made that the creator is not omnipotent, but that argument would limit the scope of his/its creation, and since we know that the pattern knows no temporal or spacial bounds, it requires a creator that is similarly unbound.

 

Of course this is the very essence of the western model of God, an omnipotent creator.

 

An interesting point is raised by this line of thought however.  How can the creator be external to his/its creation, if his/its creation is infinite in scope?  Doesn't the nature of a limitless creation, preclude the existence of an external creator?  of course it does.  It nessecitates God being a part of his/its creation, and as creation, as we define it here, is EVERYTHING, then it means that EVERYTHING is a part of God.  By this logic, the creator  IS his creation, he/it is self creating, self sustaining, eternal, omnipresent, omnipotent, and omnesscient.  Which gives us an interesting new option in answering the question of whether or not the creator will intervene, simply, he/it already is.  By the nature that God has chosen for him/itself, it is already using the threads of the pattern to counter the influence of the DO.  Instead of using anthropomorphic hands, he/it is using threads, by definition parts of him/itself, to thwart to DO. 

 

I can anticipate the argument that if the DO is external to creation, then creation is not all inclusive, there are a few possible answers to this argument.  The first, is that we really don't know enough about the nature of the DO's prison to make the assumption that he is exiled or external to creation.  He could simply be outside of one aspect of creation, such as time, which would effectively keep him static in an everchanging universe.  Such a perspective would certainly qualify as imprisonment, but not preclude the DO from being a part of creation, it would only prevent him from effecting it.  Secondly, we might be as guilty of anthropomorphizing the DO as Luckers would say we have been about God.  All instances we have from the books about the DO are from the POV of humans.  What if the DO is simply the absence of creation?  What if that sense of absence is enough to convince those humans that they are seeing/hearing/feeling a voice?  What if the DO is just a set of inconcievable stimuli given to a human unable to comprehend its scope or purpose, and those stimuli cause these people, IE the forsaken to act in certain destructive ways?  Simply we do not know even less about the DO than we know about the creator.  As the least we can posit certain things about the creator, based on the existence of his/its creation.  We have nothing by which we can determine the nature of the DO, but the secondhand feelings/senses of fallable creatures.

 

Simply, if creation exists, there must have been a point of creation.  If there was a point of creation, then there had to have been a creator.  If creation is not infinite in scope, then by definition it must be a part of a bigger creation.  This means the in order for there to be existence at all, it eventually must be considered to be a part of an infinite creation.    If there is an infinite creation, then the creator of said infinite creation must also be infinite, and be a part of its creation.  In order for the infinite creator to be a part of its own infinite creation it must be self-creating and self-sustaining. 

 

Unless a person denies their own existence, (an act which BTW confirms one own existence,) then it is impossible to deny the existence of a creator.  Admittedly a creator that we cannot define wholly, but a creator none the  less. Somepeople, might even call such an entity God.           

[Luckers]

Cloglord, i think you misunderstood my purpose here. I was not suggesting that the Creator was not a God, specifically. I was suggesting that he was not the Christian God, and from there i went on to look at what we can suggest about his nature. That resulted in four possibilities, one of which IS the image of God that you espouse.

 

Here, hopefully ill make it clear by addressing your post. To do this i need to do two things. The first is addressing the limits you establish--i.e. that if he is a god, then he must be this type of god only. To do this i will at times need to oppose your points by suggesting alternative explanations. This does not mean that i think your explanations couldn't be true--as i said, the information availiable suggests, to my mind, four different possible explanations. The other thing is merely a re-iterance of my point--which i do only for clarity in my own mind, really. I hope that is clear, because im going cross-eyed just trying to say it. Lol.

 

I thought, after reading both threads in question, I'd chime in, because I like nothing more than to argue with an atheist.  My first point is simple.  if the vreator is in fact THE creator, then by definition, he/it is roughly equivilent to western ideas of God.

 

Well, the issue is that no, he doesn't. The Christian God created existence out of Tanem, it's true, but that isn't what defines him, it's merely something that he did. Strictly speaking the Christian God is defined by his tri-omni nature. Omnipotent (all-powerful) Omniscient (all-knowing) and omni benevolent (all-loving). The argument that they both created existence in their seperate mythos they therefore must be similar in nature is an inherent fallacy, and is actually the specific reason i created this thread. It goes like this.

 

1. God Created Existence.

2. God is tri-omni.

3. The Creator created existence.

4. Therefore the Creator is also tri-omni.

 

It's an assosiation fallacy. Just because two seperate things have one exact point in common does not mean they are therefore the same. This thread specifically addresses the ease with which i think people fall into the path of making an assosiation fallacy, so i wished to examine what we do know of the Creator, and see whether such a belief is supported by the text. It is not.

 

First, we know that the pattern is circular and cyclical, it is infinite.  Secondly we know that there are an infinite number of realities that stem from every possible choice.  Both things are indicative. from my perspective this means that both in size and scope, the pattern is an infinite creation, and logically requires its creator to be a creator of infinite power to have accomplished such a feat.  Of course the argument could be made that the creator is not omnipotent, but that argument would limit the scope of his/its creation, and since we know that the pattern knows no temporal or spacial bounds, it requires a creator that is similarly unbound.

 

Of course this is the very essence of the western model of God, an omnipotent creator.

 

Actually it doesn't. Firstly, we know that the weheel is both self-sustaining, and in its very nature expansive. I'm put in mind of a supercomputer. The Creator created the device, but the function of its existence beyond that is self-perpetuating.

 

But you miss the point, the establishment that the Creator is not all-powerful is merely one of the possibilities given what's suggested in the texts. He could have easily been all-powerful, but he is not the Christian God, making assumptions about his personality based on that of the christian god is fallacious.

 

I would point out here that your god is not the only omnipotent mythological figure. They've been littered throughout history. Some, like Ahura Mazda is very similar in personality, others, like demiurge, which is described in exactly the same wording in terms of creationistic powers and the expanse of his nature (all powerful, all knowing) but is utterly unlike the Christian God in personality. HE doesn't care for humanity, and the creation of the world served the purpose of keeping his Father, the Unknown One, from distracting his mother from him. Following that he turned his attentions to his mother, Sophia (wisdom), and never again bothered with the Earth.

 

I'm sure you see the similarities.

 

The point is not to suggest that the Creator might not be all-powerful, all-knowing (a God, essentially), it is that we don't know of his nature. The simple fact that both beings created the world, or the both beings are so expansively unbound by time and space, does not mean they are the same beings with the same sort of temprement.

 

And lacking that we can have no form of pre-assumption about the Creators goals, which is what this thread is about. From a point of no assumption we look at what he has done, and we are left with three (four) possibilities, one is that he is not the expansive godlike creature you imagine, but the other two both allow for that creature, and one even allows for him to be the nice guy sort that the Christian God is thought to be. Here they are again.

 

1. He is all powerful, he does care, but he won't get openly involved for some higher purpose (I called this He Won't). This is the god you are describing.

 

2. He is all powerful, but he doesn't care. This is the demiurge type God.

 

3. He isn't all powerful, just powerful. He can't get involved because he simply doesn't have the strength to sweep aside the Dark One. They are equal, or possibly the Dark One is slightly stronger. This is the Ahura Mazda type god. (or for that matter any of the polytheistic of polyidolatristic faiths--this is the most commen type of God in various religions. Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu just sum it up the best with their enmity and inability to fight (As exact opposites they are s precisely matched that any action between them is simply impossible because it is exactly cancelled out)).

 

4. (I don't really think this is an option) The Random. I didn't really mention this, because i think they are stupid, but there are a series of other explanations that im sure you've heard suggested before too. They are...

 

-The Creator is the Dark One. He has two personalities, or is playing with humanity, etc.

-The Creator depleted himself, or died, creating the Wheel, and now exists as nothing more than a memory.

-The Creator is Bela (seriously, jokes aside, i heard some douche actually suggesting this as a viable theory back in the day).

 

Bleh. Hope that helps.

[RobertAlexWillis]

I think we're roughly on the same page here, Luckers, so I'll just pull a couple of things out, rather than drag everyone through a point-by-point bit.

 

I do disagree with this. The Dark One's rage and frustration is focused more on the inability to gain something, not a constriction on his action (I'm excluding the comment re: balefire here, for the obvious reasons). The Forsaken's comments stem from the fact that they actually were imprisoned--in the seal constricting the Dark One's access to the world. Yet this is not so much indicative of the nature of the Dark Ones prison, as the unfortunate nature of their own. Beyond that, they are the product of the same mentality as the modern idiots. But meh.

 

In terms of the actual specific nature, i disagree on the same weak grounds that you presented it... being, what it sounds like to me. And in the text it sounds more like he is trying to claw his way in than claw his way out. His focus has always been on what he could do with the wheel, and his frustration has been his inability to do so. His stated goal is remaking the world in his image. These are all the goals of a possesive nature, not an escapist. At least, to me.

 

The essential nature of imprisonment is a restriction of access to something or someone.  We think of imprisonment in our world as being physically enclosed within walls, because we live in a physical world in which such barriers constitute an effective means of restricting access.

 

But the Dark One and the Creator are not, by all appearances, such beings.  You mentioned that you excluded the Dark One's comments on balefire and his inability to step outside of time.  But, to me, that comment is perhaps the most indicative of his situation.

 

The Wheel is the Wheel of TIME.  It can be argued that time itself is the most basic imposition of order on the universe.  Without time as a framework for event and action, everything collides into simultaneous chaos.  That sounds sort of familiar ... the Dark One is all about chaos, and he cannot step outside of time.  And that really pisses him off.

 

The simple existence of time itself limits his influence and capacity to act.  It restricts his access to reality.  And that is the most basic nature of imprisonment.  Which is why I said that, in metaphysical terms, there is probably no difference between exile and imprisonment ... they are one and the same.

 

As far as his "stated goal" being remaking the world in his image ... well ... HE never actually said that.  Thats an assumption about Shai'tan as much as some of these other things are assumptions about the Creator ... not necessarily an incorrect one, but still an assumption.

 

By the by, where is the suggestion that the people of the Light believe the Creator to be more powerful? I know that the idea that the Creator won't act deals with the lack of the belief that the Creator will step in last minute, but where is the suggestion that he could?

 

Well ... Logain assumes that the Creator is the one who cleansed saidin ... out of mercy after 3000 some odd years.  His comments seem to imply that he thinks the Creator could have done so at any time ...

 

Another example is, oddly enough, Lanfear.  When she is trying to convince Rand to use the Choedan Kal with her (TFoH ch 6), she talks about them supplanting the Dark One, and even -gasp- challenging the Creator.  Her quote:

 

"With those, together, the other Chosen will kneel at our feet.  We can supplant the Great Lord himself, challenge the Creator."

 

She seems to move in an orderly progression from the enemies she regards as weakest to strongest, and the Creator is at the top.  I admit, its hardly proof, but it is indicative.

 

I cannot recall any other instance where even Ishamael talks of the Dark One (or anyone else) challenging the Creator.  If Lews Therin's philosophy of the Creator's total non-involvement was common to his day, the Chosen may share it, and expect to triumph not because Shai'tan is stronger than the Creator, but because they don't expect the Creator to get involved.

 

Like Logain and Lanfear's comments, it is never explicitly stated that "I think the Creator can beat up the Dark One."  But the assumption does seem to be there, warranted or not.

[Luckers]

The essential nature of imprisonment is a restriction of access to something or someone.  We think of imprisonment in our world as being physically enclosed within walls, because we live in a physical world in which such barriers constitute an effective means of restricting access.

 

But the Dark One and the Creator are not, by all appearances, such beings.  You mentioned that you excluded the Dark One's comments on balefire and his inability to step outside of time.  But, to me, that comment is perhaps the most indicative of his situation.

 

The Wheel is the Wheel of TIME.  It can be argued that time itself is the most basic imposition of order on the universe.  Without time as a framework for event and action, everything collides into simultaneous chaos.  That sounds sort of familiar ... the Dark One is all about chaos, and he cannot step outside of time.  And that really pisses him off.

 

The simple existence of time itself limits his influence and capacity to act.  It restricts his access to reality.  And that is the most basic nature of imprisonment.  Which is why I said that, in metaphysical terms, there is probably no difference between exile and imprisonment ... they are one and the same.

 

I'm not sure i even disagree with what you are saying here, so please understand if my response is somewhat confused. Firstly, there is a subtle difference between imprisonment and the type of exclusion the Dark One experiences, which is what I think to be significant about the whole issue... here is why, if you'll bear with me.

 

Everything you suggest about the point of the Dark One's frustration is very much true. Yet again, that is a function of the Dark One being denied something he wants, not about the Dark One being contained in some manner. My initial point, if you will recall, was that the fact that the 'Creator had imprisoned the Dark One' led to a misperception of the power balance between them. This is the subtle but significant issue.

 

Denying or excluding someone does require power, but not nessasarily more power than the person you are denying. If you build walls, or obstacles, it shows ability, but it doesn't nessasarily establish that you are more powerful... after all, why go to the trouble of creating tools to asist in your opposition of the individual if you can simply stop them yourself with both ease and impunity.

 

My point, if it makes any sense at all, is that whilst you are quite correct, and the term 'imprisonment' can be made to fit the Dark One's situation, the use of the term imprisonment distorts peoples perception of what is actually going on between the Dark One and the Creator.

 

I am saying that you are right, but that in the function of being right you prove my point, or at least act within the same scheme as it.

 

Did that make any sense?

 

As far as his "stated goal" being remaking the world in his image ... well ... HE never actually said that.  Thats an assumption about Shai'tan as much as some of these other things are assumptions about the Creator ... not necessarily an incorrect one, but still an assumption.

 

As you know, I completely agree with the school of thought that this is indeed a misperception. I merely didn't mention it because a) my post was long as it was, and b) it's not nessasarily related.

 

Why? Because even if his intention is to destroy the wheel than his frustration stems from a denial, not someone else containing, controlling or possessing his life.

 

Well ... Logain assumes that the Creator is the one who cleansed saidin ... out of mercy after 3000 some odd years.  His comments seem to imply that he thinks the Creator could have done so at any time ...

 

Another example is, oddly enough, Lanfear.  When she is trying to convince Rand to use the Choedan Kal with her (TFoH ch 6), she talks about them supplanting the Dark One, and even -gasp- challenging the Creator.  Her quote:

 

"With those, together, the other Chosen will kneel at our feet.  We can supplant the Great Lord himself, challenge the Creator."

 

She seems to move in an orderly progression from the enemies she regards as weakest to strongest, and the Creator is at the top.  I admit, its hardly proof, but it is indicative.

 

These are all functions of the developed superstition, and since none of them have ever encountered the Creator (or indeed, even understood or percieved the true nature of the Dark One, which i think you'll agree with me even Lanfear never did) its subjectivity make its validity questionable...

 

I'm not saying its not an interesting point that should be concidered in support of the prospective 'He Won't' theory, I'm just saying... its not in any way qualitative evidence. It's another one of those 'Aes Sedai serve the Dark One, the Forsaken were bound at the moment of Creation' type of things.

 

That being said, in the purpose of semantics, i do disagree with your deduction about Lanfear's comments. Oh, i think they are a progression of threat, yet a degree of familiarity is there. In the first sentence she states the Chosen, the human enemy, and dismisses them. That sentence is broken by a full stop. Then she moves on to the more powerful entities, the godlike creatures. She lists both of them, unbroken by a full stop. Familiarity dictates her first mention to be the Dark One, the entity she knows best and has some guage on, but that she lists the Creator as well. The statement is comparative, the lack of full stop makes them roughly equal threats, their precedence established by personal experience, yet even then she lists them both in the same sentence.

 

Then there is also the fact that from her perspective, Rand would obviously be concidering how to challange the Dark One, the degree of melodramatacism when she goes on to state the Creator has as much to do with the new nature of that idea. No one conciders challanging the Creator, not because he is too great a threat, but because he is not a threat in any percievable terms.

 

 

[RobertAlexWillis]

Everything you suggest about the point of the Dark One's frustration is very much true. Yet again, that is a function of the Dark One being denied something he wants, not about the Dark One being contained in some manner. My initial point, if you will recall, was that the fact that the 'Creator had imprisoned the Dark One' led to a misperception of the power balance between them. This is the subtle but significant issue.

 

Denying or excluding someone does require power, but not nessasarily more power than the person you are denying. If you build walls, or obstacles, it shows ability, but it doesn't nessasarily establish that you are more powerful... after all, why go to the trouble of creating tools to asist in your opposition of the individual if you can simply stop them yourself with both ease and impunity.

 

And that is the root of the signifigant but subtle issue I was attempting to raise ... thinking of the word "imprisonment" in terms of "walls" means thinking of the Pattern as a bounded, physical construction, and the Dark One as being either physically "outside" or "inside".  I don't believe that is the actual case at all.

 

Exclusion is imprisonment.  Its not being shut "out" or shut "in", its being shut "away".  In the physical world, we use walls to "contain" someone within a structure.  But we're not talking about the physical world here.  It appears that the simple existence of time is enough to keep the Dark One "away".  Separation, denial of inclusion is the essence of it, and the Dark One has been denied that.

 

Also, I define "power" a little differently than you seem to be defining it.  "Power", as I see it, is that ability to make things happen, using whatever means necessary.  So, being able to build a "wall" is a form of power.  Being able to trick someone, or get the drop on them, is a form of power.  You mentioned the example of Lan and Ryne earlier, as an example of someone with less "power" being able to defeat someone with more.  But I disagree.  Ryne was a better swordsman, but he was not more "powerful".  Lan's strength of will and determination made him more "powerful", even though he may not have been the better swordsman.

 

In much the same way, I don't think it matters who would win a metaphysical "arm wrestling" match.  Pure strength is not the only measure of "power".  Ultimately, the only measure of "power" is the result.  Given things as they stand, the Creator is more powerful than Shai'tan.

 

These are all functions of the developed superstition, and since none of them have ever encountered the Creator (or indeed, even understood or percieved the true nature of the Dark One, which i think you'll agree with me even Lanfear never did) its subjectivity make its validity questionable...

 

I agree.  You just asked me "By the by, where is the suggestion that the people of the Light believe the Creator to be more powerful?" so I referenced some examples.  Logain or Lanfear's beliefs are rooted in what could, ultimately, be mistaken superstition, but the idea is there.

 

And while you may disagree with my interpretation of Lanfear's semantic progression ... I'm afraid I'll have to stick by it.  The format is a classic one in dramatic literature of all stripes, and not only would RJ know that, but given Lanfear's penchant for drama, I imagine she knows it too.  Its an orator's tool to convince the audience, and she's there trying to convince Rand that basically, "we can do anything".  "Saving the best for last" is a colloquialism for a reason ...

 

Because even if his intention is to destroy the wheel than his frustration stems from a denial, not someone else containing, controlling or possessing his life.

 

I'm sorry, but denying someone something that they want, from all appearances pretty badly, is indeed "containing, controlling, or possessing" their life.  A being is the accumulation of his/her/its choices, and denying some choices is exactly what imprisonment is all about.

[Luckers]

And that is the root of the signifigant but subtle issue I was attempting to raise ... thinking of the word "imprisonment" in terms of "walls" means thinking of the Pattern as a bounded, physical construction, and the Dark One as being either physically "outside" or "inside".  I don't believe that is the actual case at all.

 

You may not think that, but the texts suggests only that.

 

Exclusion is imprisonment.  Its not being shut "out" or shut "in", its being shut "away".  In the physical world, we use walls to "contain" someone within a structure.  But we're not talking about the physical world here.  It appears that the simple existence of time is enough to keep the Dark One "away".  Separation, denial of inclusion is the essence of it, and the Dark One has been denied that.

 

Well, frankly, i disagree with you. Imprisonment is shutting someone in, controlling their ability to effect events by specifically shutting down their ability to interact with things. It is very much different to partitioning something so that someone cannot touch it.

 

I'm sorry Robert, but i find your ongoing criticism absurd. I acknowledge the function of dening someone access as being a 'form' of imprisonment... Irrespective it is irrelevant to the discussion. My positions forms from the fact that the Creator never specifically exerted control on the Dark One. He made it so the Dark One could not touch something, yet this is not personal interaction, which specifically serves my point.

 

Forgive me, I am confused.

 

Also, I define "power" a little differently than you seem to be defining it.  "Power", as I see it, is that ability to make things happen, using whatever means necessary.  So, being able to build a "wall" is a form of power.  Being able to trick someone, or get the drop on them, is a form of power.  You mentioned the example of Lan and Ryne earlier, as an example of someone with less "power" being able to defeat someone with more.  But I disagree.  Ryne was a better swordsman, but he was not more "powerful".  Lan's strength of will and determination made him more "powerful", even though he may not have been the better swordsman.

 

My friend, you are defining the destinction between different forms of power, which is precisely my point.

 

When we speak of imprisonment we speak of the ability to confine and control a persons life. That is one form of power. When we speak of what the Creator did to the Dark One, we speak of him partitioning something so the Dark One can't touch it. That is another form of power.

 

Lan's strength of will triumphed because it stemmed from a different source or understanding of powerful interaction. Ryne looked only to the power of the body, and Lan didn't obey.

 

Power is a function of many sources, which seems to be the basis of your confusion. It can be physical, conceptual, social and so on and so forth. The specific point i make is exactly this. The frame of the interaction between the Creator and the Dark One during the incident in which the Dark One was supposedly imprisoned (excluded from the Wheel) does not specify a conflict between the two.

 

You go on about how the Dark One being excluded is precisely a form of imprisonment given there nature, and yet you don't understand that that is pointedly irrelevent to this discussion. Yes, that is the nature of what occured, but it does not signify anything in the question of the comparative strengths.

 

In much the same way, I don't think it matters who would win a metaphysical "arm wrestling" match.  Pure strength is not the only measure of "power".  Ultimately, the only measure of "power" is the result.  Given things as they stand, the Creator is more powerful than Shai'tan.

 

Which is precisely my point. Given as things stand, what the Creator has done has indeed proved more powerful than Shai'tan. This does not indicate that the Creator himself is more powerful than Shai'tan, or even as powerful. Which brings us to precisely the issues raised in this thread.

 

I agree.  You just asked me "By the by, where is the suggestion that the people of the Light believe the Creator to be more powerful?" so I referenced some examples.  Logain or Lanfear's beliefs are rooted in what could, ultimately, be mistaken superstition, but the idea is there.

 

Then i phrased myself wrongly, and the discussion point is moot. (from my own fault).

 

And while you may disagree with my interpretation of Lanfear's semantic progression ... I'm afraid I'll have to stick by it.  The format is a classic one in dramatic literature of all stripes, and not only would RJ know that, but given Lanfear's penchant for drama, I imagine she knows it too.  Its an orator's tool to convince the audience, and she's there trying to convince Rand that basically, "we can do anything".  "Saving the best for last" is a colloquialism for a reason ...

 

Well, frankly, i disagree, and provided the progression of that argument. So....

 

I'm sorry, but denying someone something that they want, from all appearances pretty badly, is indeed "containing, controlling, or possessing" their life.  A being is the accumulation of his/her/its choices, and denying some choices is exactly what imprisonment is all about.

 

No, it's controlling, containing and possessing the item that they want, not their life. And mate, that second comment is patently absurd. Ever been denied something? Ever had someone control every aspect of your life? Compare the two states, then go apologise to the people in prison whose pain you just deeply insulted with your casual dismisal.

 

They may deserve that pain, but don't be such a fool as to play possessive child screaming to everyone 'I wan't! I wan't! I wan't!' and think your pain means as much as theirs. Now think of slaves who don't deserve such. Oh my.

[cloglord]

A few points I wanted to throw back into the mix.

 

First, I believe that the all encompassing portrait of God that I drew does in fact encompass the three aspects that Lucker's attributes to the Christian God.  The creator of an infinite universe by definition must be a part of that universe, and in order for this schema to work, it must be self-creating and self-sustaining.  This means that all power that there is within this universe is a part of God, making him/it Omnipotent, that all knowledge that there is within this universe is a part of God making him/it Omniscient, and because all of creation is a part of him/it and because all parts of said creation are nessecary for his/its continued and perfect existence, he/it is Omni-Benevalent.

 

Now we could talk about how different religions and/or sects have assigned different values and characteristics to God that are not founded on specific and firsthand knowledge of God or his/its creation, but the simple core of this holds true.  The Creator, as found in the books, is the creator of an infinite creation, and as such must follow the same rules as I have laid out.

 

I know that you don't agree that the pattern is all inclusive.  I understand your supercomputer analogy, however it does not fit.  There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine, nor is it even possible, as it would still require an initial impetus to begin it moving.  The wheel can not be truly eternal, unless it is a part of that which is eternal.  Since, the only thing that fits that description is the Creator, then it stands that the Wheel is an extension of the Creator.  See what I mean?

 

My point about there being a forth option, is I believe still valid.  You list three possibilities.  1 That God is all powerful but won't get invloved for reasons we don't know.  2. That God is all powerful, but uncaring.  3.  That God is not all powerful and that he/it is uncapable of action.  I am suggesting a fourth option, that God is all powerful, and has chosen to act within the strictures of the construct that he has created out of him/itself.  If the Creator = Creation then when Creation is fighting for its own survival then it is really the Creator who is acting to sustain him/itself.  To use a poor analogy, when I get sick, I fight off the infection, but it does not mean that my brain must direct my immune system in its function.  Similarly, if the Creator created himself with a system for imprisoning the DO, then why wouldn't he let that system take care of its job?  It is then not a case of inaction, but it is rather a case of preemptive action.  The Creator has already set up a system to take care of the DO imprisonment situation, and now he is simply allowing it to work as designed.     

[Achmed]

In response to Cloglord, it almost becomes the whole question of free will. 

 

In response to the power arguement, its almost as though raw power doesn't really matter but rather the application of power that is more important.  For example, RJ noted that although men were more powerful, women were more dextrous in their use of power and that could be as great an advantage as straight power.

 

In another off topic example, Kobe Bryant might be the best player in the world, the most exciting, with the most moves, able to destroy on his own (The Dark One) but Tim Duncan, boring, workman like, not involved in drama, continually stops Kobe from winning a Championship and destroying the basketball world (The Creator - not neccessarily more powerful one on one, but in the system?  with the right circumstances?  The Creator triumphs.)

 

Or, as I guess you could say... Luckers vs. RAW.  When they clash, us mere mortals ... don't really worry about who's stronger... we just try to figure out who won...  ;D

[RobertAlexWillis]

My positions forms from the fact that the Creator never specifically exerted control on the Dark One. He made it so the Dark One could not touch something, yet this is not personal interaction, which specifically serves my point.

 

And what I genuinely don't understand is how you believe that denying someone something they want isn't "exerting control".  Thats exactly what it is.  Many civilizations "exert control" by putting someone inside thick walls.  The Creator exerted control over the Dark One by denying him access to the Pattern, probably by imposing order on reality through the creation of time.

 

Please explain to me how denying someone access to something they want is not "exerting control" ....

 

Power is a function of many sources, which seems to be the basis of your confusion.

 

Thats funny, I don't feel confused at all ... except when I'm reading what you're saying.   ;)

 

Yes, that is the nature of what occured, but it does not signify anything in the question of the comparative strengths.

 

How do you measure overall "strength" or "power"?  There is no means of measuring it, other than results.  And the result is, the Creator got what he wanted, and the Dark One didn't.  It really is just that simple.  The "nature of what occured" is the ONLY signifigant measure of OVERALL relative strength.

 

And mate, that second comment is patently absurd. Ever been denied something? Ever had someone control every aspect of your life?

 

Yes, I've been denied things, and no, no one has ever controlled every aspect of my life.  If that is your definition of imprisonment, then no human has ever been imprisoned.  Putting someone inside walls is not "controlling every aspect of their life".  It is simply controlling access to the outside world.  Some prisoners go crazy.  Some "find Jesus".  Some really find Jesus.  Some write great books.  Some try to escape.  Some succeed.  Some while away their days on the weight equipment.  Some spend all their time trying to get high, or get porn, or preach to others, or work on their appeal, or just being depressed, or trying to kill guards, or etc, etc, etc.  Simple incarceration does not control every aspect of anyone's life.

 

It seems we've reached the point of diminishing returns here.  I view what has been done to Shai'tan as nothing less than imprisonment, and I view that imprisonment as evidence of the Creator's overall greater efficacy, which is my view of "power".  Clearly, you don't share that view.  I don't find your arguments compelling ... and you don't find mine compelling.

 

-shrug- OK.  

[Ealdur Tinuviel]

I think exclusion is imprisonment, essentially. Because if the Dark One is excluded from the Wheel, then while he may still exist in a spatially infinite void, it isn't all-encompassing.

 

It's like this: If someone gets locked in a cell, at what point is it considered that everyone else is locked out, rather than them being locked in?

 

 

[Luckers]

And what I genuinely don't understand is how you believe that denying someone something they want isn't "exerting control".  Thats exactly what it is.  Many civilizations "exert control" by putting someone inside thick walls.  The Creator exerted control over the Dark One by denying him access to the Pattern, probably by imposing order on reality through the creation of time.

 

It IS exerting control, but its exerting a different kind of control. You must admit that there is a difference between tying someone's hands together and building walls around something they wish to touch, and that difference implies entirely different things about the power balance between the two.

 

Thats funny, I don't feel confused at all ... except when I'm reading what you're saying.

 

Without wishing to respond to the agression in that comment, i will say that that is the essence of your confusion. In reading what I am saying.

 

How do you measure overall "strength" or "power"?  There is no means of measuring it, other than results.  And the result is, the Creator got what he wanted, and the Dark One didn't.  It really is just that simple.  The "nature of what occured" is the ONLY signifigant measure of OVERALL relative strength.

 

Yes, results are a good gauge of confliction power and strength. But the are not the only element. The method of that enaction is another method. For instance whether one wins by punching their enemy in the face, or whether they win by building walls so high that their enemy can't cross them.

 

Yes, I've been denied things, and no, no one has ever controlled every aspect of my life.  If that is your definition of imprisonment, then no human has ever been imprisoned.  Putting someone inside walls is not "controlling every aspect of their life".  It is simply controlling access to the outside world.  Some prisoners go crazy.  Some "find Jesus".  Some really find Jesus.  Some write great books.  Some try to escape.  Some succeed.  Some while away their days on the weight equipment.  Some spend all their time trying to get high, or get porn, or preach to others, or work on their appeal, or just being depressed, or trying to kill guards, or etc, etc, etc.  Simple incarceration does not control every aspect of anyone's life.

 

Yeah, nice segue, ill respond by requoting what i originally said which clearly clarifies the distinction i was making, and the specific relation to this issue.

 

No, it's controlling, containing and possessing the item that they want, not their life. And mate, that second comment is patently absurd. Ever been denied something? Ever had someone control every aspect of your life? Compare the two states, then go apologise to the people in prison whose pain you just deeply insulted with your casual dismisal.

 

They may deserve that pain, but don't be such a fool as to play possessive child screaming to everyone 'I wan't! I wan't! I wan't!' and think your pain means as much as theirs. Now think of slaves who don't deserve such. Oh my.

 

If you want to discuss that point, im more than willing. If you want to suggest your point as a relevant issue, im also more than willing to discuss it. If you want to suggest your point as some sort of response to mine... well, then ill requote mine, since you clearly didn't read it. Sorry.

 

I view what has been done to Shai'tan as nothing less than imprisonment, and I view that imprisonment as evidence of the Creator's overall greater efficacy, which is my view of "power".  Clearly, you don't share that view.  I don't find your arguments compelling ... and you don't find mine compelling.

 

Clearly you didn't read my posts at all, since i do agree with that view. I do see how what the Creator did can be classified as imprisonment, and even the argument that it is evidentiary of the Creator's overall efficiency.

 

I discuss the method, and the implication of such a thing on the power balance between the two, as i said many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times. You wanna talk about my arguments, read them. It's helpful. For your clarity, here they are.

 

1. The action described shows that the Creator successfully exerted successful control over the Dark One in the form of denying him something he wanted.

 

2. This does show the Creator's higher degree of efficiency, and does establish a specific power skew.

 

3. The method the Creator used was a form of indirect influence. He controlled something as opposed to specifically denying the Dark One toe to toe.

 

4. That method does not imply any form of direct comparison to the two entities strengths.

 

5. Therefore, we cannot assume from it that the Creator would be able to outmatch the Dark One in a direct confrontation.

 

Final summary. Its like saying that an architect of a fortification must intrinsically be able to be the knight that that fortification repulses. It does imply power, and efficiency, but that comment is absurd, much as i think the assumption about the Creator to be absurd--not intrinsically wrong, its certainly possibility, its just the least likely of the options based on what is witnessed in the text (the Creators ongoing aversion) and therefore the assumption is absurd.

 

But, since you'll probably pull single comments from this to respond to, i dont know why i bother.

 

I think exclusion is imprisonment, essentially. Because if the Dark One is excluded from the Wheel, then while he may still exist in a spatially infinite void, it isn't all-encompassing.

 

It's like this: If someone gets locked in a cell, at what point is it considered that everyone else is locked out, rather than them being locked in?

 

I don't disagree, and have never commented on that. My point has always been that the nature of exclusion implies a different power system than the nature of confinement (in the sense of being locked within a cell).

[Darkness Incarnated]

But why does the Dark One wants so much--going by the books--to do whatever it is he intends to do to the Wheel? Why is he so hell-bent on [breaking it and remaking it in his own image? Utterly destroying it? (...)] He seems obsessed with this idea, for him to have been trying for so long.

 

The only explanations I can come up with are 1) In some way the Wheel--in it's current state, i.e. Light-oriented--is a threat to his own existence, 2) It's a pride issue between him and the Creator; he wants to prove a point by outdoing the Creator.

 

The existence of the Wheel, as far as I can see, doesn't hinder his own existence. Unless there's some other information I am not privy to, he doesn't need the Wheel to exist.

 

Obviously the Creator had/has a good idea of the Dark One's nature, otherwise he wouldn't have designed the Wheel in such way that it kept the DO from interfering with it. I can see the Dark One's pride ruffled by creation, and wanting to prove a point. How much does he want to destroy the Wheel? Very very much. But so far he has failed.

 

 

Clearly you didn't read my posts at all, since i do agree with that view. I do see how what the Creator did can be classified as imprisonment, and even the argument that it is evidentiary of the Creator's overall efficiency.

 

I discuss the method, and the implication of such a thing on the power balance between the two, as i said many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times. You wanna talk about my arguments, read them. It's helpful. For your clarity, here they are.

 

This was addressed to Robert, but I can't help chime in...

 

1. The action described shows that the Creator successfully exerted successful control over the Dark One in the form of denying him something he wanted.

 

2. This does show the Creator's higher degree of efficiency, and does establish a specific power skew.

 

3. The method the Creator used was a form of indirect influence. He controlled something as opposed to specifically denying the Dark One toe to toe.

 

4. That method does not imply any form of direct comparison to the two entities strengths.

 

5. Therefore, we cannot assume from it that the Creator would be able to outmatch the Dark One in a direct confrontation.

 

I agree with this, BUT in no way doesn't it mean that the Creator would be unable to go toe to toe with the Dark One, as you acknowledge below. I believe actions speak louder than words. That the Creator made something the Dark One has failed to undo despite many attempts speaks for his efficiency. Isn't efficiency a way to measure power? But not the only one, I know.

 

Final summary. Its like saying that an architect of a fortification must intrinsically be able to be the knight that that fortification repulses. It does imply power, and efficiency, but that comment is absurd, much as i think the assumption about the Creator to be absurd--not intrinsically wrong, its certainly possibility, its just the least likely of the options based on what is witnessed in the text (the Creators ongoing aversion) and therefore the assumption is absurd.

 

I disagree that it's the least possible option. I understand your reasoning, but I think you dismiss it very easily. This comes back to the Creator simply opting to not go toe to toe with the Dark One, not because he can't, but because he choses not to (in my view). There is no indication whatsoever in the books that that showdown didn't actually occur (though I consider it very unlikely). The Creator designed the Wheel to successfully keep the Dark One at bay, and then stood aside (maybe to watch), or took a vacation, or the Dark One killed him and has been trying to undo the Wheel, I don't know. Although I admit that I have in mind something in the likeness of the Christian God when I think about the Creator, I don't think he is that.

What's more, I don't see why the Creator would need to go toe to toe with the Dark One? Maybe he's non-violent? I certainly would walk away from a fight if I could, especially if I had nothing to gain. Just because I built a brick wall around my yard doesn't mean the [potentially] dangerous guy I want to keep away is more powerful. 

[Luckers]

The only explanations I can come up with are 1) In some way the Wheel--in it's current state, i.e. Light-oriented--is a threat to his own existence, 2) It's a pride issue between him and the Creator; he wants to prove a point by outdoing the Creator.

 

Not that i disagree with your extrapolation of the first two options, but there is a third. Simple meglomania. Destroying something because it isn't yours is a constant theme in the state of sentient progression that we know of. Much less destroying something because you are sour, because you dislike a colour.

 

The base of destruction i so all encompassing its absurd.

 

I agree with this, BUT in no way doesn't it mean that the Creator would be unable to go toe to toe with the Dark One, as you acknowledge below. I believe actions speak louder than words. That the Creator made something the Dark One has failed to undo despite many attempts speaks for his efficiency. Isn't efficiency a way to measure power? But not the only one, I know

 

Well, the thing is that it doesn't speak SPECIFICALLY to measure power.

 

Yes, the fack that the Creators creation stumped the Dark One can speak to his greater power. I have never denied that. But it doesn't imply it, or even nessasarily infer it.

 

Many very weak people have constructed things that due to ingenuity, circumstance or happenstance have stumped a much more powerful enemy. Yes, they won, but it doesn't mean they could defeat their enemy one on one.

 

That is the very function of my point, which people seem to be misunderstanding. My claim in this thread is not that the Creator is weak, or weaker than the Dark One... it is that the evidence we have does not support such a position. It doesn't deny it, certainly, yet the assumption that he is stronger than the dark one has absolutely no backing. I am not saying it is impossible, or even implausible. I'm saying its unsupported, and in that lack of support we must concider the alternate implications.

 

I disagree that it's the least possible option. I understand your reasoning, but I think you dismiss it very easily. This comes back to the Creator simply opting to not go toe to toe with the Dark One, not because he can't, but because he choses not to (in my view).

 

I did address this. The question that is raised here is that, if he chooses not to involve himself, then why did he involve himself in the Eye of the World? If it were compassion for the humans, than that is a completely absurd moment to involve oneself, and why not involve oneself more?

 

Bah, my position on this is far better explained in my original post. (The bah, by the way, is not directed at you, but at me and my current inability to phrase my thoughts well. Lol)

 

 

[Gentled Ben]

Darkness wrote:

2) It's a pride issue between him and the Creator; he wants to prove a point by outdoing the Creator.

Then why not simply create his own Wheel, a better Wheel, an "I'll show you" Wheel? No, the Wheel constricts him, interferes with him in some way, or else it's a lust for pure vandalism, as Luckers suggested. He may be bent on destruction for destruction's sake or driven by hate or the like, and the fact that he cannot touch and destroy the Wheel produces anguish in him, but since all of the characters in the story and the story's author as well all refer to the DO as being imprisoned, I find it easy to accept that the Wheel somehow constricts him and thwarts his ambitions. It somehow limits his choices, just to mischievously dredge that up again.  ;D

[RobertAlexWillis]

Without wishing to respond to the agression in that comment, i will say that that is the essence of your confusion. In reading what I am saying.

 

I followed it with a wink, since I meant it to be a joke.  Clearly I failed.

 

If you want to discuss that point, im more than willing. If you want to suggest your point as a relevant issue, im also more than willing to discuss it. If you want to suggest your point as some sort of response to mine... well, then ill requote mine, since you clearly didn't read it. Sorry.

 

I thought I was addressing your point, because I was pointing out that it was a matter or degree, not a difference of principle.  People can be imprisoned without physical walls, and we are all imprisoned to one degree or another.

 

And I have been physically incarcerated, albeit for a short period of time, in what I felt then and still feel was a wholly unjust manner.  So, don't be so quick to assume that I am blithely dismissing the plight of the imprisoned.  And don't be so quick to assume that prisons without physical walls are any less imprisoning.

 

The fact is, you don't know what the Dark One can and can't do.  It may be that all that is left to him is banging on the walls of the Pattern.  Show me anything in the books that indicates otherwise.

 

Now.

 

We have gone way past the point of diminishing returns here.  As I said before.  So, I'm done.

[Child of Lir]

Just responding to Gentle Ben's earlier point about why the DO would want to destroy the Wheel. I am tackling this from a physics point of view, bearing in mind RJ's physics background.

 

We know that the Wheel is time, i.e. the fourth dimension (also called spacetime). One quantum physical theory holds that there are in fact ten dimensions, although we can only perceive four. The others may be folded too small for our perception (or for other reasons). Thus, assuming that the world of the Wheel functions physically in the same way that our world does, the DO being imprisoned outside of time (i.e. spacetime), suggests that he is now only present in the six remaining dimensions. From these six dimensions he can touch the world - the other four dimensions - but cannot completely be part of those four unless he can break through the "barrier" that stops him.

 

Could this barrier be the Wheel? In which case, to destroy the Wheel would allow him free reign across all the remaining dimensions, although in practice the first three would have trouble functioning without time to unite them. Would the DO care though? He would no longer be denied from any part of existence, although what remained would not be as it is now and he would have no surviving supporters.

 

It seems to me then that, for the DO to destroy the Wheel, he would be destroying his own chance at supplanting the Creator as top dog. The DO obviously doesn't need Time in order to exist, but would he really pass up the chance to wreak havoc and be worshipped by his Chosen just to get back at the Creator and break His creation? Maybe if we don't ascribe anthropomorphic attributes to him then this is just what he might do.

 

Sorry, that's a bit off topic, but Gentle Ben raised an interesting point.

[Seriodor]

Don't feel like reading the uncountable posts that are probably between my post and the orgin of this debate, but of course the creator is involved, if very inderectly. The dragon reborn, and the heroes of the horn. The dragon reborn is a soul that is carried through the ages and reborn whenever theres need, as are the heroes of the horn.

[Luckers]

Firstly, Robert, I was in a horrible mood when i read your post and i think i was looking to take umbrage. Totally sorry dude.

 

Seems silly now, since we arn't even really disagreeing on most things. Just degrees and implications of those things, and i think we both understand each other.

 

hehe. I used the word umbrage.

 

Don't feel like reading the uncountable posts that are probably between my post and the orgin of this debate, but of course the creator is involved, if very inderectly. The dragon reborn, and the heroes of the horn. The dragon reborn is a soul that is carried through the ages and reborn whenever theres need, as are the heroes of the horn.

 

Umm, go back and read those 'uncountable posts', because if I could sum up the purpose of this thread it would be why the attitude that 'of course the creator is involved' is absurd.

 

Disagree with me, fine, but dont post into a thread without reading any of its posts with generic absolutism. It's just rude.