Who Forasaken are masquerading as. Level 11 Spoilers

[Mr Ares]

I just remembered RJ saying something about that there were an "ordinary" afterlife in WoT. Apart from reincarnations and T'a'r. Maybe some people get reborn for x entire turnings of the Wheel, and then they go to the "ordinary" afterlife.

Or maybe it just means that people go to the afterlife between their lives.

 

If the Wheel has spun for a very long time (as is implied), and each spin is in general the same, then it seems that the DO will never escape - the prison of the Pattern is actually perfect.

Or just that it is difficult and He hasn't done it yet. If the Pattern's self-correction mechanisms aren't perfect - and ta'veren seems to be very imprecise, for one thing - then it might be that Shai'tan can force a significant enough deviation into the Pattern to allow him to break out.

This is a hunch, because I think that if RJ accepts the possibility of the DO eventually winning, then he would use it.

Ishamael believes that eventually, Shai'tan will escape and destroy the world. It is only a matter of time. This fight, just like all those before it, and any yet to come, is about delaying the inevitable. If he is right, then it is doubtful Shai'tan will break free on this turning. Because He would destroy the wolrd, or "recreate" it into something incompatible with human life.

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

Based on the evidence that Nightstrike gave, I think that the DO can not win.  He is the Contained, the Prisoner, compared to the Creator who is the Container, the Jailer.  Like RJ said, Yin and Yang.  Their roles will not change.

 

I think that the purpose of the soul, of life, is to keep the DO contained.  However, it is important to note that He will always be imprisoned.  Humans struggle and are forced to do some drastic things to keep Him there - but there is no need to worry that they might mess up.  The idea of the DO getting free is comparable to the idea of light escaping a black hole after it passes the event horizon - it simply never happens.

 

The world of WoT is a manifestation of the Creator's prison for the DO.  The Prison is best exemplified by the struggle Rand goes through, although it is likely that every hardship and struggle for everyone in the world is also a manifestation of the Prison.  The outcome of those struggles is predetermined by the Pattern to best contain the DO.  So, is there any free will at all?  Even the Forsaken, who seem to be working to ruin the Prison, may be a necessary part of it.

 

So, is there free will?  RJ has already answered us.  Everybody has free will to the extent that they can not break the laws of physics.  However, one of those laws is that the DO can not break free.  When it seems like the DO might break free, Ta'veren are chosen to keep him locked away.  They seem to lose their free will because there are actions that must take place given the initial conditions.  Mat bemoans this, but even his hesitation to be a hero plays into the Pattern's hands.

 

I found something that might give a clue about what became of Be'lal (don't know if it's been mentioned before in this thread, but here it is anyway).

I really wish we had the complete quote on that.  With only the partial quote, it is impossible to say if RJ intended to compare Be'lal with Rahvin.  Even if you assume that he must have been comparing them, there is no way to know if he said they are similar or different, or in which way.  It is unconvincing.

 

Or just that it is difficult and He hasn't done it yet. If the Pattern's self-correction mechanisms aren't perfect - and ta'veren seems to be very imprecise, for one thing - then it might be that Shai'tan can force a significant enough deviation into the Pattern to allow him to break out.

I thought that too until I read Nightstrike's post.  I'm pretty sure that the "necessity of balance" that RJ talks about is a Law, not something that can fail.  Even more convincing is the quote: "Every Age is repeated, there is nothing that makes this Age any different from any other turnings of the Wheel. The Wheel is endless."  Therefore the DO will never win, in any turning, ever.  If he could, then the Wheel would not be endless like RJ said.

 

[Alghar Khan]

"No... Every Age is repeated, there is nothing that makes this Age any different from any other turnings of the Wheel. The Wheel is endless."

That sure sounds like the Wheel will never ever be broken. The Dark One is trying his hardest anyway. Is this RJ's vision of free will? That man has the ability to choose between good and evil. So that the Creator and the Dark One don't know what they will choose. As the author to the readers, RJ tells us that the Dragon soul is so good that it will never take the Shadow's side. The Wheel is endless and so on. Or is the DO only trying so hard because he'll find his joy in the small victories he can get along the way. Kind of like "Lews Therin, I have won again" or whatever it was.

[Mr Ares]

Even more convincing is the quote: "Every Age is repeated, there is nothing that makes this Age any different from any other turnings of the Wheel. The Wheel is endless." Therefore the DO will never win, in any turning, ever. If he could, then the Wheel would not be endless like RJ said.

According to a quote Nightstrike posted in another thread:

Q: Mr. Jordan, it's fairly common knowledge that the Dark One was bound by the creator outside of the pattern at the moment of creation. Would it then be safe to assume, after concepts brought to light in the new release, that the world before the opening of the prison never knew true evil? If so, then was each age before the opening of the Age of Legends different facets of some utopia? As well, without major conflict between good and evil, what caused ages to pass? Thanks.

A: Given that time is cyclic, you must assume that there is a time when the prison that holds the Dark One is whole and unbroken. There is a time when a hole is drilled into that prison and it is thus open to that degree. And there is a time when the opening has been patched in a makeshift manner. But following this line, the cyclic nature of time means that we have at some time in the future inevitably a whole and unbroken prison again. Unless, of course, the Dark One breaks free, in which case all bets are off -- kick over the table and run for the window.

So the Wheel is endless unless Shai'tan breaks free. Or one of the quotes is wrong.

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

So the Wheel is endless unless Shai'tan breaks free. Or one of the quotes is wrong.

Damn, there's always something I've missed...

 

It seems like a contradiction.  How can the wheel be endless if the dark one can break it?  He has an infinite amount of tries, so if the probability of him breaking out is greater than 0, he is guaranteed to do so eventually.

 

Perhaps we are confusing terms.  Maybe the DO can break free without destroying the wheel?  However, the DO want's to "slay the great serpent", which would imply his desire to break the wheel (both refer to time).

 

I wonder what RJ really intended.  Evidently he wants us to think that the DO can break free (everyone in the books thinks so).  On the other hand he tells us time is cyclical, that the wheel has spun forever and will continue to do so forever.

 

Okay here's some wild speculation:

The DO is the shadow form of the Creator.  The roles of the DO and Creator are reversed every time one breaks free.  The world is remade in their image, constituting the end of an Age.  Perhaps this happens every time the wheel returns to its original position.  The "Creator" is not the ultimate origin of the wheel, he merely "Created" this set of turnings.  If you have heard of the "Big Bounce" theory, you could relate this idea to physics.  The Heisenberg uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement also seem to indicate some sort of inherent duality in physics.  For more advanced ideas that RJ may have been aware of, look at supersymmetry (superpartners), and T-Duality (exchange large and small scales by inverting terms). Remember this is merely idle speculation!

[Swigaro]

 

It seems like a contradiction.  How can the wheel be endless if the dark one can break it?  He has an infinite amount of tries, so if the probability of him breaking out is greater than 0, he is guaranteed to do so eventually.

 

 

That doesn't necessarily follow.  Just because it is possible for the DO to break free doesn't mean he ever will.  Not everything that is possible, or even probable happens.  It might be likely that, given endless turnings of the wheel, the DO will break free eventually, but there are no guarantees...

[Nightstrike]

It seems like a contradiction.  How can the wheel be endless if the dark one can break it?  He has an infinite amount of tries, so if the probability of him breaking out is greater than 0, he is guaranteed to do so eventually.

Maybe the Wheel is endless until the DO breaks it. The cycle will go on forever, unless the Dragon sides with the DO. If the cycle goes on forever (the DO will never win), then it seems like Robert Jordan knew something that the DO don't know. If the cycle goes on forever, maybe the Creator knows the same thing?

 

My bet: The Wheel will be broken eventually. But it won't be broken this Last Battle. When the Wheel is broken, the good souls goes into the "ordinary" afterlife that RJ mentioned. And I think the Dragon soul will be pardoned by the Creator for eventually ending up on the evil side. The poor soul has already fought a good fight.

 

Perhaps we are confusing terms.  Maybe the DO can break free without destroying the wheel?  However, the DO want's to "slay the great serpent", which would imply his desire to break the wheel (both refer to time).

I wonder what RJ really intended.  Evidently he wants us to think that the DO can break free (everyone in the books thinks so).  On the other hand he tells us time is cyclical, that the wheel has spun forever and will continue to do so forever.

I think the DO will have to break free first in order to destroy the Wheel. And when he does break free, I think he wouldn't hesitate to crush the Wheel asap.

 

Okay here's some wild speculation:

The DO is the shadow form of the Creator.  The roles of the DO and Creator are reversed every time one breaks free.  The world is remade in their image, constituting the end of an Age.  Perhaps this happens every time the wheel returns to its original position.  The "Creator" is not the ultimate origin of the wheel, he merely "Created" this set of turnings.  If you have heard of the "Big Bounce" theory, you could relate this idea to physics.  The Heisenberg uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement also seem to indicate some sort of inherent duality in physics.  For more advanced ideas that RJ may have been aware of, look at supersymmetry (superpartners), and T-Duality (exchange large and small scales by inverting terms). Remember this is merely idle speculation!

Someone else had that idea. Can't remember who... The DO sound awfully evil - what a terrible thing if the Creator is equally evil.  :o

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

Just because it is possible for the DO to break free doesn't mean he ever will.  Not everything that is possible, or even probable happens.  It might be likely that, given endless turnings of the wheel, the DO will break free eventually, but there are no guarantees...

I respectfully disagree.  From my understanding everything that is possible DOES happen.  If it never happens, it is impossible.  If it happens, it is possible.  Of course, this is only true given an infinite amount of time.  (Have you ever heard the claim that, given enough time, a room full of monkey's with typewriters will write all of Shakespeare?  It's the same idea)

 

Someone else had that idea. Can't remember who... The DO sound awfully evil - what a terrible thing if the Creator is equally evil

Evil from one perspective may be good from another, just as Type IIA Superstring Theory is the same as Type IIB Superstring Theory under certain compactifications (T-Duality).

[Asgard Thorin]

No, devils are not stupid, but their rationale is based on the idea of overthrowing Deity. Smart thinking based off a flawed concept is still ultimately irrational.

Where's the flawed concept in this case?

I think he means it is irrational to try to overthrow an all-powerful entity, because by definition an "all-powerful" entity will not lose unless it wants to.  However, we don't know if the Creator is all-powerful.  If the DO can win, then his fight is not irrational.

Perhaps he does. But, as anyone who has heard of polytheism knows, Deities are not necessarily all powerful - both the Creator and Shai'tan are gods, in this instance. So why is one god overthrowing another so irrational?

Even if Shai'tan were a god-which he isn't-it wouldn't be rational; he would be an underling. Traditionally, under-deities do very badly trying to take down the stop of the prayer-chain.

Creator implies all-powerful because of Creation-the act of making from nothing; DO cannot create; the Shadow spawn were made, not created, (Very Tolkienesque). Ergo, Shai'tan is not a deity. Shai'tan is a Muslim name for Satan-who is not a god. The pantheism argument would work-if RJ hadn't based his world off of Abrahamic beliefs. I.e. Creator is The Deity, Shai'tan is a lesser being with an arrogance that makes Voldemort downright humble and philanthropic. Pantheism would apply to TSR, not this work of Tor.

[Asgard Thorin]

So the Wheel is endless unless Shai'tan breaks free. Or one of the quotes is wrong.

Damn, there's always something I've missed...

 

It seems like a contradiction.  How can the wheel be endless if the dark one can break it?  He has an infinite amount of tries, so if the probability of him breaking out is greater than 0, he is guaranteed to do so eventually.

 

Perhaps we are confusing terms.  Maybe the DO can break free without destroying the wheel?  However, the DO want's to "slay the great serpent", which would imply his desire to break the wheel (both refer to time).

 

I wonder what RJ really intended.  Evidently he wants us to think that the DO can break free (everyone in the books thinks so).  On the other hand he tells us time is cyclical, that the wheel has spun forever and will continue to do so forever.

 

Okay here's some wild speculation:

The DO is the shadow form of the Creator.  The roles of the DO and Creator are reversed every time one breaks free.  The world is remade in their image, constituting the end of an Age.  Perhaps this happens every time the wheel returns to its original position.  The "Creator" is not the ultimate origin of the wheel, he merely "Created" this set of turnings.  If you have heard of the "Big Bounce" theory, you could relate this idea to physics.  The Heisenberg uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement also seem to indicate some sort of inherent duality in physics.  For more advanced ideas that RJ may have been aware of, look at supersymmetry (superpartners), and T-Duality (exchange large and small scales by inverting terms). Remember this is merely idle speculation!

Hey, :), longtime no type-to.

Anyway, breaking the wheel could merely mean preventing it from turning, locking it in a perceived perfection away from the Wheel Wright. Kinda Belgarionish, but what the 'Elle Macpherson. I might be right. It goes back to what I said; ultimately devilry has equality with irrationality. (Say that ten times fast.)

[Charlz Fel]

Just because it is possible for the DO to break free doesn't mean he ever will.  Not everything that is possible, or even probable happens.  It might be likely that, given endless turnings of the wheel, the DO will break free eventually, but there are no guarantees...

I respectfully disagree.  From my understanding everything that is possible DOES happen.  If it never happens, it is impossible.  If it happens, it is possible.  Of course, this is only true given an infinite amount of time.  (Have you ever heard the claim that, given enough time, a room full of monkey's with typewriters will write all of Shakespeare?  It's the same idea)

 

 

Just to clarify here: If we assume that the probability of the Dark One breaking free is more or less constant, and the wheel goes on indefinitely, then with probability one [technical term: "almost surely"], the Dark One will break free at some point.  There are several ways out of making this inevitable.

 

Approach 1: Just because something has probability zero, does not make it impossible.  If you start drawing random angles, it is possible to draw a 20 degree angle; it just happens that the probability is zero.  Perhaps the Creator hit that 20 degree angle on the nose.

 

Personally, I do not like this approach very much.  Something with probability zero may not be technically impossible, but it never happens.  However, there is an alternative.

 

Approach 2: Suppose that the wheel is capable of "learning," and more effectively than the Dark One.  Thus, in each cycle of the wheel, the probability of the Dark One breaking free decreases.  Suppose that in the wheel's first cycle, the Dark One had a 1/10 chance of breaking free.  In each cycle thereafter, the probability of breaking free was half the probability of breaking free in the cycle before.  Then the total probability of breaking free, ever, is

 

1/10 x (1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + ...) = 1/10 x 2 = 1/5.

 

I'm not endorsing either of these as necessarily the correct explanation, but I think they are worth considering.

[drizzt_scimitar]

Getting back on topic, I think that theories like this are when you have to think about Occam's razor.

 

Occam's razor basically states that if there are multiple possible explanations for the same phenomenon, and only one can be true, it is usually the simplest one. Every time I think of theories that sound cool, but then become extremely difficult to justify, I think about this. Basically, the simplest explanation is usually right, so if you have to come up with more backstory or tenuous solutions to problems in your theory to make the theory work, it probably is incorrect. That's not to say that it isn't correct, it is just very unlikely. Extremely complex and contrived theories can still turn out to be true, but if they do, it is very bad writing, and goes into the realm of deus ex machina.

 

Therefore, even if RJ hadn't basically said that Be'lal is gone for good, Be'lal being Taim is extremely unlikely, for all the reason's people have already posted.

 

I know that Occam's razor makes theory-making less fun, but it does lead to more probable theories if you take it into account.

[Mr Ares]

Even if Shai'tan were a god-which he isn't-

Wrong. He is.

it wouldn't be rational;

Why not?

he would be an underling.

No, He isn't.

Traditionally, under-deities do very badly trying to take down the stop of the prayer-chain.

As Shai'tan isn't an under-deity, this is not relevant.

Creator implies all-powerful

No it doesn't.

because of Creation-the act of making from nothing;

Corrected.

DO cannot create;

Assumption, unfounded.

the Shadow spawn were made, not created,

Same thing.

(Very Tolkienesque).

Tolkien not relevant.

Ergo, Shai'tan is not a deity.

Wrong. He is.

Shai'tan is a Muslim name for Satan

Yes.

-who is not a god.

Yes, but still not relevant. Shai'tan in the books is not being from Islamic mythology. Name same, being not.

The pantheism argument would work-if RJ hadn't based his world off of Abrahamic beliefs.

Wrong. Two gods opposed. One good, one evil - see Manichaeism, Zoroastrianism. Not Christianity, etc.

I.e. Creator is The Deity,

A, not the.

Shai'tan is a lesser being

No. Equal.

Pantheism would apply to TSR, not this work of Tor.

?

[Asgard Thorin]

Even if Shai'tan were a god-which he isn't-

Wrong. He is.

it wouldn't be rational;

Why not?

he would be an underling.

No, He isn't.

Traditionally, under-deities do very badly trying to take down the stop of the prayer-chain.

As Shai'tan isn't an under-deity, this is not relevant.

Creator implies all-powerful

No it doesn't.

because of Creation-the act of making from nothing;

Corrected.

DO cannot create;

Assumption, unfounded.

the Shadow spawn were made, not created,

Same thing.

(Very Tolkienesque).

Tolkien not relevant.

Ergo, Shai'tan is not a deity.

Wrong. He is.

Shai'tan is a Muslim name for Satan

Yes.

-who is not a god.

Yes, but still not relevant. Shai'tan in the books is not being from Islamic mythology. Name same, being not.

The pantheism argument would work-if RJ hadn't based his world off of Abrahamic beliefs.

Wrong. Two gods opposed. One good, one evil - see Manichaeism, Zoroastrianism. Not Christianity, etc.

I.e. Creator is The Deity,

A, not the.

Shai'tan is a lesser being

No. Equal.

Pantheism would apply to TSR, not this work of Tor.

?

Look, Mr. Mars, creation means to make from nothing.  That is what it means. Forgive me for being blunt, but says it doesn't and you prove you don't know what you are talking. Period.

[Majsju]

In a good many creation myths, including the jewish, Creation means turning Chaos into Order, not some deity magically pulling stuff into being from nowhere.

Incidently, Order vs Chaos happens to be a very strong theme in WOT...

[Mr Ares]

Look, Mr. Mars, creation means to make from nothing. That is what it means. Forgive me for being blunt, but says it doesn't and you prove you don't know what you are talking. Period.

RAW does the name thing so much better than you do. Also, I did check a dictionary before I posted that.

[Asgard Thorin]

The word translated as "create" in Genesis is mistranslated.  In Hebrew it is roughly "Bara" or "Barau", which is much closer to "organize", like Maj intimated.

 

Last time, I lost my temper a little. For that I apologize.

Making something is not the same as Creation. God made the universe, then organized it. To use something a little less grand, patents and copyrights.

 

Do authors, painters, and inventors or any other creator get legal recognition for what they build with their hands? No, of course not. They get that recognition for the idea, the mental creation, the thought, which they then translate into something tangible. They are recognised for their intellectual property, mentally creating it. The idea is creation, legally recognized when that creation is tangible. Legally, anything written down is copyrighted from the moment the author pens it. There is a more formal method, but the idea is legally recognised the instant the word is written. The writing of it is not creation, the thinking of it is, but an idea has to be realized, and as people we have to do that physically. I heard a joke once. An atheist was arguing about the origin of man. He piled every element and atom required for a human body together in a wheelbarrow, basically dirt and water. He said this is a man. We don't need God. God said, "Neat. Next time make your own dirt and water first."

 

I like what the person said about Ockham's Razor. That probably doesn't apply here, though, because combining the suspension of disbelief with the author's will we get a different set of logic laws. Robert Jordan opened this can of worms when he said what he said about balefire not quite being absolute. If recycling Be'lal were his will, he left himself an opening. Since Be'lal is the only Forsaken not developed at all, (combined with a bunch of other reasons) it seems logical from one stand point for RJ to bring him back. We will have to wait for Book Twelve (or possibly Thirteen; the idea has been kicked around of making it Book Twelve parts I. and II. You can bet money that if it isn't two-parted in English, it will be in at least one of the translated tongues.)

Anyway, this whole thread is based on the idea, hotly debated(and how has it been debated!) of whether or not Robert Jordan's will included recycling Be'lal. Good evidence has been presented on both sides.

[Asgard Thorin]

Look, Mr. Mars, creation means to make from nothing.  That is what it means.

I am truly astounded at times that people call what they individually use to communicate the "same" language. 

 

Amen to this, sir. Amen, I heard that, you and me both, you got that right.

 

I would advance, with a little less fire in my belly, that making from nothing is the primary definition, however.

[Asgard Thorin]

quote]RAW does the name thing so much better than you do.

 

Huh?

 

Where does your signature quote come from, may I ask?

[Asgard Thorin]

Making something is not the same as Creation. God made the universe, then organized it.

 

You're certainly entitled to your beliefs.  I'm simply pointing out that what you describe isn't anywhere in the Bible, or, for that matter, very many other Creation stories.  Your point of view is a very modern conservative Protestant one, descended from a medieval Roman Catholic one.  Your argument that Creation always has to mean "the act of making from nothing" is simply untrue.

 

I would advance, with a little less fire in my belly, that making from nothing is the primary definition, however.

 

It probably is, in conservative Protestant America ... but not very many other places and times.  Including ancient Israel and Roman Palestine 2000-ish years ago.

 

 

 

Excellent. The discussion has civilized again, which is what I'd hoped for when I lost my temper....but let's not get into a who-insulted-whom-first.

You certainly have a point, but look at Greek creation myths, Norse, every other pantheon. Then look at Genesis. You will see a marked difference. In those myths, the universes brought forth their gods or often the first gods, who were overthrown. (Giants overthrown by Asgard, Titans overthrown by Olympians, et cetera.) Then we have Genesis, where God created everything, then said let there be light. This actually sounds like the current version of the Big Bang Theory. For the first half billion years, the universe was too hot and unstable for light to exist-then it really started expanding. Basically, instead of a universe creating gods, we have God creating the universe.

And if they had completely understood every nuance of the Bible in the past, Christianity, in fact all forms of Abrahamic monotheism from Christianity to the cults that say they are Christianity to radical Islam to Orthodox Judaism would not be going so strongly today. The Anglo-Saxons outgrew Weden (or Wotan) and his lesser gods and pretty much abandoned them overnight. Four, five centuries later Iceland converted to Christianity in a year. The Vikings overall hardly opposed the final conversion to Christianity, other than the enemies of Olaff Tryggvason, and they opposed him as much for political reasons as religious ones.

There is a beautiful tale of the conversion of England.(forgive me for being a poor scholar; I know the story exists, but I can't remember the name or the Saga collection.) The priest of the old gods admits candidly that the old gods do not provide men with hope. Human life is compared to a bird flying through a fire warmed hall. It comes in one window, flies in the light briefly then is gone forever out another. They recognised that the Germanic(later called Nordic) gods were limited, ah but this new One...

Simply because the ancient scholars may or may not have considered creation to mean make from nothing doesn't mean that it did not mean that back then. When your gods can offer you nothing new you outgrow them.

 

[Mr Ares]

RAW does the name thing so much better than you do.

Huh?

Naming me after various war gods. He does it better than you. Mars is rather obvious.

 

Where does your signature quote come from, may I ask?

The Thousandfold Thought, the 3rd book of the Prince of Nothing trilogy, by R. Scott Bakker.

[Luckers]

You know Robert, going on historical evidence its unlikely Moses existed at all? His stories are parallels of the Marduk mythos, written in a style that is linguistically incorrect for the supposed time period, yet matching the linguistics of the time of the Diaspora--when the Isralites were in Babylon (Marduk town). And of course there is absolutely no historical evidence Moses existed contextually.

 

That being said Robert is completely correct about the translation issues.

[Luckers]

I agree with all of that--but scholastically Moses is a specific abnormality, even in all that confusion. Not just his name, but all of his actions.

[Shard]

Wow talk about topic derailment lol I was going to come into this thread to see how valid you guys felt the Demandred in with the Borderlanders theory was.

[Luckers]

Unlikely. Though i have no problem believing Demandred is responsible for the Borderlanders, I don't think he's directly with them. My feeling is that he is behind a number of events--but thats irrelevant. Specifically, i dont think he is with the borderlanders because i think the thirteen Aes Sedai with them are Black Ajah (my guess, the ones who freed Taim) and that they will be the female channelers who hurt Rand for the second time. I don't see Demandred in play for that.