The True Master.

[Farael]

I was saying that, since Sauron cannot remain when the Ring is destroyed, it seems that the One is more pertinent to the existance of both. I don't know if Sauron can be truly defeated without destroying the Ring

Perhaps it'd be possible to kill Sauron, but there is no one in Middle Earth who is powerful enough to do so... or at least, is allowed to try (as Gandalf was not). Therefore the only way out was to destroy the ring, which could be destroyed by just about anyone.... brave and strong enough to carry that burden all the way to Mt. Doom and toss it in there

And this is essentially what I was/am saying. Knowing that Sauron and the Ring are the same (will), the Ring possesses more dominant characteristics than Sauron himself. Making it the Master.

Does it? The only characteristics the Ring seems to have is the ability to corrupt anyone who wears it (but Sauron himself) and that it wants to go to Sauron as badly as Sauron wants to find it. In those aspects they are equal. Then I just argued that it might have been possible to destroy Sauron through other means, but there was no one powerful enough who was allowed to try, so we will never know what would have happened then. It is likely that Sauron would have always been able to return to "life" as long as The Ring was not destroyed, as it was a bit of a "savings account" for his will.

I'm not sure if The Ring had more dominant characteristics, if anything they were equal yet The Ring was Sauron's creation and it contained his will, not a true will of its own (I know I have said before it had a will of its own but on second thought, it's Sauron's will expressed on the Ring). Still, I believe they are so closely related and interconected that they are the same thing. Neither can achieve its full potential without the other and neither would exist if the other is destroyed.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Farael

Does it? The only characteristics the Ring seems to have is the ability to corrupt anyone who wears it (but Sauron himself) and that it wants to go to Sauron as badly as Sauron wants to find it.

Truthfully, I think it is a split decision. I think for every point I make, which is completely valid, there is an equally valid counterpoint. But I will continue, because I feel that the Ring is somehow more... something, and I like trying to think it out.

The reasons I say the Ring has more dominant characteristics are as follows:

Sauron is searching with a large portion of his resources to find it. In this I see Gollum, as I pointed out in my first post. He is so infatuatied with the Ring that he bends most of himself to get it back. I think if Sauron had been less concerned about finding his 'precious', he could have swept Gondor and Rohan much sooner and taken Middle-Earth rather easily.

As pointed out, the Ring does want to get back to Sauron. But to do this it does nothing. It simply is carried by a someone who will eventually succomb to the will of the One. In this way, by doing nothing, it will get back to Sauron. By simply existing, it is a driving force.

The Ring's effects are lasting. Gollum, and to a lesser extent Bilbo and Frodo, were eternally effected by bearing the Ring. Perhaps Sauron could overpower someone's will, but I think that once he stopped bending his will upon them, they would not feel such a pain as the Ring left. Of course, that's only conjecture.

Finally, I still say that the Ring seems more essential to the survival of the seperate-but-one will. It's destroyed, Sauron's finished. It's not destroyed, Sauron's still out there.

[davem]

I can't help but think of the folktale of the Giant's Heart. The Giant places his heart in an object, puts it in a safe place & can go about his nefarious business in the knowledge that he cannot be killed.

Of course, Sauron negates this advantage by keeping the Ring on his person. Having said that, he does ensure that the Ring is all but impossible to destroy, both physically (it has to be thrown into the Fires of the Sammath Naur) &, if you will psychologically/spiritually (it will corrupt anyone who tries to take it to the Fire).

Actually, its a pretty good strategy - its as near impossible to destroy the Ring as it can be. The mistake Sauron makes is to think 'nearly impossible' is the same thing as impossible.

In one sense Sauron & the Ring are 'one', in another they are seperate entities, because Sauron has effectively split himself in two - Sauron is in Barad Dur, the Ring is with the Ring-bearers. The Ring, for instance, cannot physically kill Frodo, Sauron, if he got his hands on him, could - or worse.

Originally Posted by Farael

Well, first of all he would have to use a part of his will to mantain his physical shape, as it is not his "natural" state and therefore he has to spend at least some of his will not to go back to his abstract form. Also by having a body you are more susceptible to other kinds of temptations which could corrode your will... even innocent stuff like food and drink can afect it, yet while he was just a creature of will he had no need for such thing.

In Osanwe Kenta (published in Vinyar Tengwar 39) Tolkien writes:

The Incarnates have by the nature of sama ('mind') the same faculties (ie Osanwe or 'thought transmission')*; but their perception is dimmed by the hroa ('body'), for their fea ('spirit') is united to their hroa & its normal procedure is through the hroa, which is itself part of Ea, without thought.The dimming is indeed double; for thought has to pass one manle of hroa & penetrate another. For this reason in Incarnates transmission of thought requires strengthening to be effective...

Lastly tengwesta ('spoken language') has also become an impediment. It is in Incarnates clearer & more precise than their direct reception of thought. By it also they can communicate easily with others, when no strength is added to their thought: as, for example, when strangers first meet. And, as we have seen, the use of 'language' soon becomes habitual, so that the practiceof osanwe (interchange of thought) is neglected & becomes more difficult. Thus we see that the Incarnate tend more & more to use or to endevour to useosanwe only in great need & emergency, & especially when lambe ('tongue-movement' ie speech) is unavailing.
* as the non-Incarnate

So, to incarnate makes a Valar/Maiar physically more powerful - they can slap you around for instance, but it also isolates the individual form other beings, & makes them dependant on the physical - from a need for food, clothing, shelter to having increasingly to rely on physical forms of communication (writing: the Ring verse, & speech).

The creation (or should we say 'manufacture' of the Ring is kind of the ultimate form of incarnation: rather than incarnating his fea in a living body, Sauron incarnates a part of it at least in an object: Sauron is pushing 'incarnation' to its extreme.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Farael

Well, first of all he would have to use a part of his will to mantain his physical shape, as it is not his "natural" state and therefore he has to spend at least some of his will not to go back to his abstract form. Also by having a body you are more susceptible to other kinds of temptations which could corrode your will... even innocent stuff like food and drink can afect it, yet while he was just a creature of will he had no need for such thing.

Sauron was beyond this. At the end of the Third Age he had become truly incarnate, in that he required a body to operate. He could no longer change his appearance or reclothe himself at will. If the Ring had not existed, his "death" at the hand of Elendil would likely have been the true end of him.

Originally Posted by davem

Actually, its a pretty good strategy - its as near impossible to destroy the Ring as it can be. The mistake Sauron makes is to think 'nearly impossible' is the same thing as impossible.

I don't think this confusion ever entered into it. The idea didn't even occur to him that someone would want to destroy the Ring. If it had, he probably would've been camping out at Mount Doom himself. Or maybe he'd have collapsed its opening, or sealed it with some invisible barrier.

Originally Posted by davem

So, to incarnate makes a Valar/Maiar physically more powerful - they can slap you around for instance, but it also isolates the individual form other beings, & makes them dependant on the physical - from a need for food, clothing, shelter to having increasingly to rely on physical forms of communication (writing: the Ring verse, & speech).

You mean to be clothed makes an eala--in a sense--more powerful. In Tolkien's work the difference between these terms is essential, so I don't believe it's a minor quibble to point out that to incarnate implies a weakening of the being's spirit. Incarnation of an eala is never a willful act in Tolkien's work, and to be incarnate brings the possibility of being slain as an Incarnate (capital denotes those whose nature is incarnate). Meaning that the spirit that is released is greatly depleted and may never be able to take physical form, which it now requires to have any effective existence.

Originally Posted by davem

The creation (or should we say 'manufacture' of the Ring is kind of the ultimate form of incarnation: rather than incarnating his fea in a living body, Sauron incarnates a part of it at least in an object: Sauron is pushing 'incarnation' to its extreme.

I don't think the same word or principle applies. When an eala incarnates, what he becomes is the physical manifestation of his "spiritual self". That's why Tolkien mentions the dark lords finally being unable to look fair and ever after appearing terrible. The Ring is not a physical incarnation of a portion of Sauron's power, it's an object infused with his power. As an aside, I believe that the will that is attributed to the Ring itself is not, in fact, due to any will put into the Ring, but is due to Sauron's will imposed on the Ring from afar. After all, he is said to 'always be in rapport with it.'

I think your analogy of the giant's heart fits well.

[The 1,000 Reader]

On the incarnate matter, if Sauron and Morgoth wanted to be powerful and ever-lasting, why did they even make themselves bodies to begin with? It just sounds plain stupid to me.

[Farael]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

On the incarnate matter, if Sauron and Morgoth wanted to be powerful and ever-lasting, why did they even make themselves bodies to begin with? It just sounds plain stupid to me.

Possibly because as spirits they would have less control on the physical realm... sure, they could adopt a temporary shape (and that is probably how it started, as we see both Morgoth and Sauron able to appear as very beautiful and noble as well as very frightful and terrible) yet after a while they could no longer leave or change their physical shape.

Besides, we 'know' that by being incarnated they had really great physical powers... and that's what both Melkor and Sauron wanted, power and control over the physical world, as they knew the spiritual world belonged to Eru and the Valar

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

On the incarnate matter, if Sauron and Morgoth wanted to be powerful and ever-lasting, why did they even make themselves bodies to begin with? It just sounds plain stupid to me.

Yeah, there appears to be a necessity for a corporeal form for directly influencing physical things. It's probably a discussion in itself, however.