Was Eru a Sadist?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Thanks for your provocative thesis, Bombadil - that's often a good way to get an excellent discussion going. Here are my thoughts:

Eru was an artist, a musician first and foremost, not a sadist! The first few sentences of the Ainulindalë show us a Creator who:

1. Sought fellowship and relationship.

...he made first the Ainur, the Holy Ones, that were the off-spring of his thought, and they were with him before aught else was made. And he spoke to them...

2. Wanted to create.

...propounding to them themes of music...

Ilúvatar... declared to them a mighty theme, unfolding to them things greater and more wonderful than he had yet revealed...

3. Wanted his creation to result in joy and glory.

...they sang before him, and he was glad.

...things greater and more wonderful than he had yet revealed; and the glory of its beginning and the splendour of its end amazed the Ainur...

4. Desired harmony.

Then Ilúvatar said to them: 'Of the theme that I have declared to you, I will now that ye make in harmony a Great Music.'

5. Encouraged others to exert their creativity and power.

And since I have kindled you with the Flame Imperishable, ye shall show forth your powers in adorning this theme, each with his own thoughts and devices...

It is all summed up in the last sentence of the third paragraph of the Ainulindalë (All of these quotes are from the first page):

'But I will sit and hearken, and be glad that through you great beauty has been wakened into song.'

A sadist is interested in exercising power over others, not letting them develop their own. He/she is destructive, not creative, and does not look for beauty to result from his/her actions. And he/she is most certainly not interested in harmony and real fellowship with others!

(I looked up 'sadism' on the M-W online dictionary; here is an excerpt:

...gratification is obtained by the infliction of physical or mental pain on others; delight in cruelty; excessive cruelty.

I can see no evidence of such gratification or delight in Eru as he is shown in the Ainulindalë.)

[edit: davem posted while I was writing this; as you can see, I do think we are given information about Eru's personality, in those very paragraphs I have quoted.]

[davem]

Well, those accounts weren't written, or even dictated by Eru Himself, so we're only getting opinions here

I still don't think we can get a clear enough sense of Eru's personality - & I'd still ask whether he has a 'personality' in the psychological sense, or an Ego or a superego, or an id - does He have a 'Self' in the Jungian sense?

In other words, can we use psychological terminology to 'psychoanalyse' Him? Can we diagnose Him as suffering from a human personality disorder? Even if we could interpret some acts in psychological terms, it being impossible to (taking the position of a creature within Middle Earth) concieve of the mind of Eru. And if we're analysing Eru as a character, we're really analysing Tolkien's concept of God, & psychoanalysing him - why would he come up with a God that behaved in a sadistic way (if we think He does).

[Olorin_TLA]

This all boils down to: "assuming there's a Supreme Being in this existence, are THEY a sadist?" because that's what Eru is.

So devout religiopus people would be likely to say no. , myself, would say yes. The reason why Tolkien would say no, and others, is that "God works in mysterious ways" etc, etc. Basically, if a mortal were to act like Eru, we'd hope Saruon ate them. But who can fathom Go, Tolkein might well say. And you'd be free to disagree.

[Lhunardawen]

Well, those accounts weren't written, or even dictated by Eru Himself, so we're only getting opinions here

The mere fact that Eru himself has said those words in the Ainulindalë leads us to what kind of being (more like deity, actually) he really is. I would not say he is being psychoanalyzed by interpreting his words, because don't we (rather subconciously) get to know more about a person when we hear him speak? Esty has actually given quotes that are quite straight to the point, thus there is no need for deep analysis.

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

"Our Father in Heaven, Hallowed be thy na..."

ZAP!

"I AM YOUR MOTHER, YOU BLIND MORON!"

Yep, Eru/God/Budda/Allah is sadistic alright. He/She/It allows freedom of speech so that we mortals can murder each other at slight disagreements, all for His/Her/Its entertainment.

But let's get back to the question: Was Middle-Earth just a chess-board for Eru? You know, that allegory is actually leave room for another question: why isn't there any instances where Eru stepped in to pull out the source of his annoyance? We read the rebellion the Evil ones. We also read of the disobedience of the Children. But never we read of Eru lifting a finger against them, except in the case of Numenor. But in the case of Numenor, Manwe actually beaconed Eru to take control of the situation.

So are we not left with the image that the Valar are the actual players in the game of chess in Middle-Earth? Eru seemed to take more of a referee's place.

[HerenIstarion]

why isn't there any instances where Eru stepped in to pull out the source of his annoyance

If I were a parent, my will would be that my children behaved properly and tied up their room, but my will would also be that they were free. If I were to find the room in a mess, I would certainly have my will contradicted in one way, but carried along in another, since my children were free to mess it up. Furthermore it is question of my priorities, what is it I like best - tidy room or free children. (I would certainly prefer both at once, but if they refuse to clean up?...)

That's for it, and I would heartily remind participants it is not the place to vent one's spleen for the injustice (have you thought, by the way, whence such a concept as 'injustice' emerges?) of the universe, but the discussion board

thank you

[Lalaith]

As Olorin has already pointed out, the question of Eru's 'sadism' can be asked of any concept of an omniscient and morally perfect Creator who allows evil and sorrow to exist in his creation.
It is a problem and paradox that has tormented philosophers and theologians since time immemorial. Many pagan religions resolved the problem by conceiving of gods who were not all-powerful and had moral flaws. Aristotle meanwhile conceived of a 'first mover' that was perfect, pure thought, thinking only of itself, thus unconcerned with our doings.
Eru does seem to be conceived more in the line of the Christian and Muslim deities, who are held to have more active and moral involvement in their creation. However it is interesting that no-one in Middle Earth actually appears to worship Eru, ask him to intercede on their behalf or even to mention him. So perhaps Eru is more of an Aristotlean 'prime mover' than he first appears to be.