The Nature of the Creator and His Intentions

[Luckers]

So the Dark One thread is an interesting read, and i almost brought this up there given the nature of its recent discussion, but ultimately i figured i should revive this in a new thread because it's old, and not directly related to that discussion...

 

Ignore it if you want, just thought it might prove interesting.

 

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.

Quote

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.

 

[Roxinos]

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

 

The fact that this is false does not necessarily lay waste to the catechism's ability to be true. There are two catechisms, in truth. One which includes the Chosen in with the Great Lord, and the other which simply has the Great Lord being bound. The one with the Chosen included is dropped after a time, and is mainly heard by people who, as you mentioned, are superstitious. Like Rand in the first book. They included the Chosen in with the Great Lord because the Chosen had reached the point of myth and so were grouped along with the Great Lord.

 

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.

 

When you assume the imprisonment is false in the first place, you can assume that the supposed imprisonment is nothing more than a bar from affecting the Pattern. We do not know the nature of his imprisonment, we only have that catechism to rely on. So while there is little reason to suppose his imprisonment is anything more than being barred from the Pattern, there is no reason to suppose his imprisonment is less than being truly imprisoned from action in general.

 

Interesting thought experiment, though, if a fruitless one, would be to suppose what existence outside of existence is like. By definition, one cannot be imprisoned without existence to imprison one with. So to bar one from existence, one would think that would be relative imprisonment. Bah. Doesn't matter. You can ignore this paragraph if you want.

 

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.

 

That's not the reigning ideology, though. You don't see nearly as many calling to the Creator's help as you see calling to the help of the Light, a more abstract deity. So you can't necessarily say "people" in general, but more "there are people who feel...."

 

and im as athiest as they come

 

This in itself taints your perception of the Creator as wholly as a "Judeo-Christian" perception does. I am an atheist as well, but the arguments I see you use towards explaining the supposed creator's actions (though, I'm fairly certain he exists within Randland) are the same arguments I've seen against the "Judeo-Christian" deity. On the surface, that is. ("He Won't, He Can't, He Doesn't Care.") Once you actually get deeper into the reasoning, you separate yourself from that, though. It doesn't necessarily mean your logic is flawed, I merely felt like pointing that out because it amused me.

 

Anyway, I'm not disagreeing with you. I believe you cannot apply the Judeo-Christian mindset to the Creator-Shai'tan relationship. I also think analyzing it is pretty pointless considering the lack of information we have about the Great Lord's point of origin (if there is any) and the Creator's just general existence. Well, except for the part about it being fun.

 

I do believe that the Creator is more in a deist-minded existence. He created this world, and now he doesn't care. Maybe he cared at one point enough to prevent the Great Lord's interference in the Age Lace. But ya-da ya-da.

[Luckers]

The fact that this is false does not necessarily lay waste to the catechism's ability to be true. There are two catechisms, in truth. One which includes the Chosen in with the Great Lord, and the other which simply has the Great Lord being bound. The one with the Chosen included is dropped after a time, and is mainly heard by people who, as you mentioned, are superstitious. Like Rand in the first book. They included the Chosen in with the Great Lord because the Chosen had reached the point of myth and so were grouped along with the Great Lord.

 

Except that that distinction has no basis--the second is only ever spoken with the first, thus the entirety is suspect. Both are uttered by the same people, and from the same basis. It is a cultural maxim, and lacking any indication of different sources must be taken with such in mind. I agree that myths--espcially catechisms like this--often have a basis in fact, i was merely pointing out that we cannot trust this for specific facts--if anything all this reveals is that a contention exists between the Dark One and the Creator--a contention that the Dark One came out on the worse for.

 

When you assume the imprisonment is false in the first place, you can assume that the supposed imprisonment is nothing more than a bar from affecting the Pattern. We do not know the nature of his imprisonment, we only have that catechism to rely on. So while there is little reason to suppose his imprisonment is anything more than being barred from the Pattern, there is no reason to suppose his imprisonment is less than being truly imprisoned from action in general.

 

I don't assume his imprisonment is false. I'm saying that by the description in the books what happened to him should be described as barring him from reality--and that is reason to suppose his imprisonment is less than being truly imprisoned from actions in general, which was precisely my point.

 

The evidence supports barring only. It is possible that more occured, but the purpose of this thread is delineating precisely what the evidence in the text permits.

 

Interesting thought experiment, though, if a fruitless one, would be to suppose what existence outside of existence is like. By definition, one cannot be imprisoned without existence to imprison one with. So to bar one from existence, one would think that would be relative imprisonment. Bah. Doesn't matter. You can ignore this paragraph if you want.

 

No, indeed, I think your right. Barring someone from reality would be a style of imprisonment, and if this is the case would explain much about the Dark One's motives--my point was merely in what this situation establishes about the nature of the Creator vs. the Dark One. Specically, how do they compare in terms of power and strength.

 

That's not the reigning ideology, though. You don't see nearly as many calling to the Creator's help as you see calling to the help of the Light, a more abstract deity. So you can't necessarily say "people" in general, but more "there are people who feel...."

 

It's not a reigning ideology (its a deis, which i believe i spoke about--belief in luck is not a reigning ideology either), but it is a consistent one. People of every creed, race and status have been seen utilising the concept of the Creator sheltering them--the references to the Light are indeed more common, but we are discussing the nature of the Creator here, and my comments do stand--characters across the text have asserted those beliefs about his nature. A general feeling amongst the populace, if you wish it cited that way.

 

This in itself taints your perception of the Creator as wholly as a "Judeo-Christian" perception does. I am an atheist as well, but the arguments I see you use towards explaining the supposed creator's actions (though, I'm fairly certain he exists within Randland) are the same arguments I've seen against the "Judeo-Christian" deity. On the surface, that is. ("He Won't, He Can't, He Doesn't Care.") Once you actually get deeper into the reasoning, you separate yourself from that, though. It doesn't necessarily mean your logic is flawed, I merely felt like pointing that out because it amused me.

 

My, my. That comes accross a tad passive aggressive. Let me see, you say that my nature as an athiest taints my argument as much as if i were presenting a fully christian argument--I don't know if it effects your position, but I major in comparative religion and have two honourable mentions for my papers on buddhism and post milintinarian judeo-zoroasterianism. I'm also Catholic by birth.

 

I don't say that to be contentious, or (god forbid) arrogant. I say it merely to point out that making conclusive deductions based on a persons ideological standing is somewhat... well... crass.

 

But perhaps you are correct. In what way do you feel my atheism has influence my arguments as they are stated? After all i am not postulating that the Creator does not exist--or that he is not a god--one of my options quite clearly deals with that possibility. Indeed, you state that the arguments i use 'against' the Creator are the same arguments you've seen used 'against' the Judeo-christian god... with forgiveness may i ask what on earth you are on about? My arguments speak to the Creators potential nature, based on the evidence suggested within the novels. There is nothing in my entire post that is 'against' him.

 

We are not discussing the judeo-christian god... were we, my points would be quite different.

 

 

[Roxinos]

It's not a reigning ideology

 

I think you misinterpret what I meant by reigning ideology. But then again, perhaps not. I'm merely calling into question your supposition of the extent to which that particular catechism ("may the hands of the Creator shelter you" and whatnot) is spread throughout the various cultures and larger cultural identity.

 

But perhaps you are correct. In what way do you feel my atheism has influence my arguments as they are stated?

 

I realize I did come off as a bit passive aggressive. But I did not mean to suppose that your arguments have been influenced negatively, but more that you have used (on the surface) arguments which have been used against theism. Merely that and nothing more. As I said, I merely pointed it out because it amused me.

[Cockta]

Well it's about time someone made a thread like this. Thanks Luckers!  :)

[Luckers]

I think you misinterpret what I meant by reigning ideology. But then again, perhaps not. I'm merely calling into question your supposition of the extent to which that particular catechism ("may the hands of the Creator shelter you" and whatnot) is spread throughout the various cultures and larger cultural identity.

 

To date we have heard members of all the Westland nations utter comments related to that catechism. We have also heard the Sea Folk, the Aiel and the Seanchan AND Age of Legenders utter similar comments.

 

It is no religion--indeed, belief in the light is a much stronger ideology--but belief in the Creator exists across all the cultures we've been exposed too. The only societies we've not witnessed this belief in are the Sharans and the Land of the Madmenian--neither of which we've had exposure to. And the Amayar, whom we've only seen in one chapter just before they all kill themselves.

 

I'm not sure what else you could have been refering to.

 

I realize I did come off as a bit passive aggressive. But I did not mean to suppose that your arguments have been influenced negatively, but more that you have used (on the surface) arguments which have been used against theism. Merely that and nothing more. As I said, I merely pointed it out because it amused me.

 

I understand that you didn't mean offence, and in truth im not offended, but i am still a little confused--two of my suggested possibilities directly argue FOR a devine nature to the creator--one, that he is godlike but doesnt act because he doesn't care to, and two that he is godlike, but doesn't act because of a personal reason (like caring for free will). In only one do i suggest him to be nondevine.

 

Am I misunderstanding you? It's certainly happened before, lol.

[Roxinos]

It is no religion--indeed, belief in the light is a much stronger ideology--but belief in the Creator exists across all the cultures we've been exposed too.

 

I'm not questioning belief in the Creator. I'm questioning belief in the Creator as a potentially benevolent deity. That is what the catechism supposes.

 

I understand that you didn't mean offence, and in truth im not offended, but i am still a little confused--two of my suggested possibilities directly argue FOR a devine nature to the creator--one, that he is godlike but doesnt act because he doesn't care to, and two that he is godlike, but doesn't act because of a personal reason (like caring for free will). In only one do i suggest him to be nondevine.

 

The entirety of it, as a matter of fact, is what I'm referring to. Both supposing divinity and then not supposing. Ignore the content of your speech and focus on the headline: "He Won't, He Can't, He Doesn't Care." I pointed that out before as well. That's specifically what I was referring to. I was merely pointing out the parallelism.

 

but I major in comparative religion and have two honourable mentions for my papers on buddhism and post milintinarian judeo-zoroasterianism. I'm also Catholic by birth.

 

I figured since you put your credentials out there, I'll put mine as well.

 

I'm an 18 year old who starts college in a couple of days. I plan on majoring in English. I don't pursue religious studies, but hear about it and think on it as a hobby. I do the same for many things including history. But my method of arguing has had history teachers ask me if I actually intend on pursuing the subject, to which I can only reply, "No. I just do this for fun." I'm a non-denominational Protestant by birth.

[Luckers]

I'm not questioning belief in the Creator. I'm questioning belief in the Creator as a potentially benevolent deity. That is what the catechism supposes.

 

Hmm. An interesting distinction. Yet to date the only evidence of belief in the Creator without a benevolent deity spin is Moridin's thoughts about the garderner who doesn't grow sad if his garden is destroyed. Lews Therin and Rand both find the thoughts interesting and apt, yet both clearly react as if the thoughts are new in nature.

 

As far as other cultures go, I believe all such comments refer to the creator in this beseeching manner, as to a benevolent being. Still it is an interesting thought and i shall have to investigate it further.

 

The entirety of it, as a matter of fact, is what I'm referring to. Both supposing divinity and then not supposing. Ignore the content of your speech and focus on the headline: "He Won't, He Can't, He Doesn't Care." I pointed that out before as well. That's specifically what I was referring to. I was merely pointing out the parallelism.

 

I still don't entirely get what you mean, but i do realise its not what i thought you meant. Sorry for snapping your head off.

 

I figured since you put your credentials out there, I'll put mine as well.

 

I'm an 18 year old who starts college in a couple of days. I plan on majoring in English. I don't pursue religious studies, but hear about it and think on it as a hobby. I do the same for many things including history. But my method of arguing has had history teachers ask me if I actually intend on pursuing the subject, to which I can only reply, "No. I just do this for fun." I'm a non-denominational Protestant by birth.

 

Lol. I began that way. Religion was originally my +1 subject. Frankly it just drew me--its like studying history, but like studying it from the point of view of peoples mindsets... how they thought, how they saw the world. I find it fascinating.

[Charlz Guybon]

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.

 

I think the third option is more likely. Didn't Rand have an LTT inspired thought where he likened the creator to a gardner and the earth to a blossom. To paraphrase, the gardner grew countless flowers (worlds) and would not be distressed by one blossoms falling from the stem.

[Luckers]

Yeah, i agree--i just havn't updated this theory since KoD came out.

 

By the way though, it wasn't LTT's thought, it was Moridin's--Rand experiences the thought the same as he does LTT thoughts, and concludes it to be LTT, but then notices that LTT is nodding along as if listening to a third party--Moridin.

 

It fits with Elan Morin Tedronai's philosophical background besides.

[Hybrid]

Well, considering all the Creator/Dark One arguments that have been going on in other threads, it's about time that we had a thread like this.

 

I believe that the Creator and the Dark One are equal in power.  This ties in to the whole yin/yang philosophy of the Wheel of Time: equal but opposite.  The nature of the Wheel of Time is one of balance, seen best with the ta'veren effect of altering chance.  Overall, it does not affect the world for better or worse.  Likewise, good must balance evil.  That is the underlying philosophy of the Wheel of Time.

 

In addition, the Creator may not intervene because he does not need to.  The Dark One is the embodiment of paradox.  As long as he is imprisoned on one world, he is imprisoned on all of them.  If he is freed on one world, he is freed on all of them.  That is, the very nature of the Dark One may prevent him from ever being freed.

 

The lack of intervention may tie into the equal but opposite philosophy as well.  The Creator represents good, but does not (or may not) intervene in the struggle.  The Dark One represents evil, but does (or has to) intervene.  This is similar to the nature of saidin and saidar, where one must seize saidin but surrender to saidar to control them.

 

A different idea I've come up with is that the Creator is not an entity like the Dark One.  This one's a little loony, but it's based on the equal/opposite philosophy.  The Dark One is an actual entity who can affect the world and converse with his minions.  The Creator is a presence throughout creation.  The Creator cannot intervene because he is the Wheel.

 

Hopefully that's all clear.  I'm no philosopher, and I rarely ever think my ideas through before writing them down.  These ideas don't really tie together; I'm just tossing them out to see what you guys think.

[Ashaman Kovan]

Maybe the Wheel IS the creator. It could have started out as some kind of supernatural sentient being and then as time went by and it began creating worlds people etc it somehow digressed into this...Machine I suppose. The wheel is responsible for spinning out peoples souls. Yeah it does hold on to the good guys so they can be brought back by the horn but it also spins out the badguys, the dark one can't be responsible for putting the Chosen ones souls into bodies every time they live. But the thread also spins out the good guys. So I think it's more like the wheel is the machine, it's neutral but it also is "Stronger" than the dark one. I don't where the dark one would have originally come from in this scenario but it's obvious that the wheel is stronger. The dark one can take souls of his followers and put them into new bodies if they are killed. But he doesn't have control of ALL souls. He can't go in and stop people from being reborn. If he could do that there would be no dragon to fight him. So in effect, the Wheel is the All powerful originally flawless machine and the DO is just a stick in it's spokes. IDK this will probaly get shot right the hell down by all the people with Honorable mentions and Majors in comparative theology.  ;D

 

Oh wait here is the DO nature. He's the quintessential bully who comes along and sees a bike (The wheel) it doesn't belong to him and for some reason he's unable to ride it, it just won't work for him, so his bullying nature compels him to eternally poke sticks in it's spokes to try and break it since  IF HE CAN'T RIDE IT NO ONE WILL!!!!!! MUAHAHAH..HA...HAHA..HA.

[Hybrid]

Asha'man Kovan, that's pretty much what I was going for with my last idea.  I just wasn't quite brave enough to put it into words. ;D

[Ashaman Kovan]

Awesome. Then i'm not the only one with this idea.

[Ashaman Kovan]

No one has anything to say about my idea huh?  :-[

[wvlr]

Interesting thread Luckers - Didn't you have something like it before??    OH Well - No matter.

 

I know that your assorted Senarios tend to cover most alternatives - but not adequately I think.

 

Amongst MANY others here is one possible - that does border on one or more of yours but not sufficiently in my view.

 

*************************************************************************

 

First clue - This guy is called the Creator, not the Caretaker, not the Meddler, not the Redirector, not the Adjuster, not the Protector.    So might he be just that.    Maybe he creats multiple "Mega-verses" (Universes with all the attendent parallel verses) somewhat similar to a scientist (creating a series of peti dishes to see how one set of bacteriam (good) fairs against another (DO)) or a software programmer (creating multiple programms to see how they work)

 

It is not so much that the Creator can't or won't interfer, but the act of interfeering would effectively destroy all his work so far   -    AND/OR    -     Take time from his real work of creating the next version.

 

That is assuming that our human brains are even slightly capable of understanding/comprehending the purpose/will of ANY real or fictious Diety - which I seriously doubt.    But it is still fun to try.

[Guest Dreadlord]

I remember a while ago I came up with  a bit of a theory on why the Dark One is involved but the Creator isnt.

 

One day, the Creator decides to create something. He created a world, and he put life on that world. He also crated the Wheel of Time which would guide was became known as the Pattern, and he bound the Wheel to that Pattern so the Wheel would correct anything that went wrong on this new world, enabling him to put his attention elsewhere.

 

As always, the Dark One sought to destroy these wonderful things, because he coudlnt make them himself, yet just before he broke the Wheel, the Creator imprisoned the Dark One within the Pattern woven by the Wheel, so that the Wheel itself would take care of the Dark One.

 

The Creator continuosly stands aside while the Dark One attempts time and again to break free. Its all like an experiment to a point, the Creator wants to see how well his Wheel can deal with what the Dark One throws at it. So far, the Wheel has been successful, by spinning out its Champions and Heroes, its Ta'veren and Dragons, and each time it has succeeded, hence there has been no need for the Creator to intervene.

[RAND AL THOR]

Dreadlord's suggestion just reminds me of a 19th century scientist eagerly examining his new invention to see how it performs.

Though that is the point, of course.

 

enabling him to put his attention elsewhere.

 

Where?

[Guest Dreadlord]

You tell me

[Jethro]

I think we are asking questions that will never be answered and dont really need to be asked. I can understand why people would ask why the Creator has done diddly squat throughout the series but its not that important a question, is it? If the Creator did anything it would spoil the story, and there is no reason why the Creator has sat on the pointy bit of the fence all this time that would satsify the readers.

 

 

[Luckers]

Interesting thread Luckers - Didn't you have something like it before??    OH Well - No matter.

 

Yeah i reposted after the Death of the Dark One thread. I thought it might be relevant.

 

 

[Vassili]

Personally, I think the gardener scenario makes the most sense. It can adequately explain why a benevolent and powerful Creator doesn't step in and save WoT. I think that the WoT uiniverse is one of many, possibly countless many, Universes in the creator's "garden". Its not that he doesn't care about WoT, its just that it is too insignificant to the whole for him to give it special attention. Besides, he created WoT to take care of itself. There could by many DO's, or maybe one DO trying to destroy all the universes at once. In the first case, the Creator probably does kill a few DOs now and then, just like a garden squashes a bettle now and then. A gardener is infitely more powerful than a bettle, but nonetheless all gardens still have beetles. Why spend time killing countless DOs when you could just create Universes that fight for themselves? The second possibility lends itself to the idea that the wheel keeps the DO out, not trapping it in. If that were true, we are only viewing a tiny part of the true battle that is between a very active Creator, and a very active DO, and is never ending. Picture two people fighting with an ant (the WoT universe) crawling beside them. The DO wants to kill all the ants. The Creator is protecting them. Some occasionally get stepped on, but as long as the creator keeps fighting the ants as a whole live on.

[Valinthros]

I usually dont involve myself much on anything that borders on theological discussion because it's based on a belief system and the points tend to be hard to prove.  The same is partly true in this instance, as we have no clue what the Creator's or the DO's situation truly is.  My input here is theoretical just like everyone elses.  ;)

 

First, I'd like to point out some things that we know for a fact.  Every character in the WOT terms the wheel as being the DO's prison.  Which means one of two things.  This is in fact exactly what the WOT is, a prison for the DO, that fights for itself to keep the DO from breaking free and inflicting harm on something/someone else.  The Creator, as per RJ, created the WOT.

 

The assumption that the people make in that the WOT is the DO's prison could obviously be RJ's red herring.  Meaning that it's not a prison at all, just designed to keep the DO out of the wheel.  I tend to lean towards what RJ painted for us, that it IS the DO's prison.  That is a matter of preference of course.

 

The gardener theory from Morridin.  As has been mentioned, and I agree with it, Ishy/Morridin has a very skewed view of the creator.  Lews Therin as well has a skewed view of alot of things, because of his mental stability, and because of his personal loss.  I'd be pretty angry with a creator that didnt help when I was trying to save his creation.  Add in that if in fact the words during Rand's fight at the EoTW were the Creator, those words directly conflict with Morridin's idea.  Since they suggest that the creator is watching this particular 'flower'.  I personally think Morridin/Ishy needs to re-evaluate his philosophy.

 

The reference to imprisoned in all worlds etc...  I still get the idea that Randland is the 'main' world, and that if he fails they all do, if he does as he needs they will all remain in tact.  What I'm trying to say is that I believe that the conflict is being waged in Rand's world, and the reflections to that conflict are mirrored in other worlds.  This reasoning is passed through the books from RJ himself.  Could be false, but I doubt it.  Which means, this is the important battle.  This is the one that needs winning.

 

And so, if this is the battle that needs winning, and the Creator were a gardener...  Wouldnt you look after the sprout that mattered?

 

My hypothesis?  I think that the Creator cannot interfere because either his interference will immediately free the DO, or that he is barred just as the DO is.  I'm willing to bet that there are some rules that we arent aware of that prohibit this interference.

 

Thanks for reading!  ;)

[Mr Ares]

First, I'd like to point out some things that we know for a fact. Every character in the WOT terms the wheel as being the DO's prison.

Do you have any quotes for that? I only remember it being said that He was imprisioned outside the Pattern, not that the Wheel itself is the Prison.

 

Add in that if in fact the words during Rand's fight at the EoTW were the Creator, those words directly conflict with Morridin's idea. Since they suggest that the creator is watching this particular 'flower'. I personally think Morridin/Ishy needs to re-evaluate his philosophy.

And what were those words? I WILL TAKE NO PART. He may know what is going on, but he doesn't seem inclined to do anything to help. Seems like there may be more to Moridin's thought than you give credit for.

 

Wouldn't you look after the sprout that mattered?

Assuming any sprout does matter to the Creator.

 

My hypothesis? I think that the Creator cannot interfere because either his interference will immediately free the DO, or that he is barred just as the DO is. I'm willing to bet that there are some rules that we aren't aware of that prohibit this interference.

Saying that he cannot interfere makes his choice of words (WILL, rather than CAN, TAKE NO PART)...interesting.

[Valinthros]

Do you have any quotes for that? I only remember it being said that He was imprisioned outside the Pattern, not that the Wheel itself is the Prison.

The reference was generalized.  The supposition that the DO is in fact Imprisoned, and to break free he needs to disrupt/destroy the pattern in order to break free is suggesting that the pattern/WOT is his prison or a part thereof.  This I absolutely should have explained better.  Thanks for pointing that out Mr Ares.  ;)

 

And what were those words? I WILL TAKE NO PART. He may know what is going on, but he doesn't seem inclined to do anything to help. Seems like there may be more to Moridin's thought than you give credit for.

 

*nods*  Your memory is better than mine on the exact words.  Supposing it is the creator, from the wording he could take part but does not.  However, without knowing all the facts I cant completely concede that point.  Why?  Because we arent sure if there are any repercussions.  Confusing I know.  Consider this, if I could slam into a vehicle in front of me, and you asked me why I would not...  I really could, it might be fun to watch anyhow, but I will not take part!  Or someone unwilling to step into the line of fire to save his companions.  Is there a risk involved with the Creator stepping in?  His commentary, if it was him, doesnt give enough insight as to what those risks might be, if any.

 

Assuming any sprout does matter to the Creator.

 

Indeed I am.  If this sprout affects all others, does that not make sense?  Why then does he even speak at the EoTW?  Watching a sprout that does not matter? Of course, this is assuming that it was in fact the creator and not the DO.

 

For the record Mr Ares, I do see what you mean, why not just let it go and remake it if it fails?  Snap of the fingers, vwalah, new WOT!  The answer is I do not know.  Like all humans, I'm colored by emotion, which can cloud the reasoning when theorizing about the unknown. And so, I would like to think similar human thought process plays a part in WoT's Creator.  ;)

 

Additionally... we can neither assume that he does or does not have that ability (To just remake it) from the information we have.  We could theorize, which is what we're doing here, but nothing concrete.  If only we could find that legendary Creator POV... :P

 

Saying that he cannot interfere makes his choice of words (WILL, rather than CAN, TAKE NO PART)...interesting.

 

This one's a bit touchy.  I adressed it above.  We just dont know if there are any risks involved.

 

Mr. Ares, thank you for your input.  You brought up some very valid points, and I appreciate that.  If you have more, I am certainly keeping an open mind.