Why take a body? Why make a Ring?

[littlemanpoet]

I didn't really mean to suggest that Melian had all this in mind when she revealed herself to Thingol. Rather, that she loved him and intended to become his Queen (if that title is appropriate), and all that would ensue therefrom; and it was Eru who knew just what that would all be. I really meant that all those things were results of a once-in-time choice. Sort of like real life, eh?

But I'm not getting answers on the newly stated Dark question:

If Sauron didn't need to be incarnate in order to subcreate, own, possess, ruin, torture, and make a Ring to do the same, why become incarnate at all? Was it something that Eru required in order for Valar to be part of the History of Arda? Were there ever any really non-incarnate Valar in Arda? Ulmo does not fit this description, as he was incarnate as Water rather than as Human(oid).

[Lalwendë]

Just cross posted with you - with some other thoughts. Sorry!

Hmm, but Ulmo's 'form' is an elemental one, one which necessarily interacts with the world. The other Ainur also either take on 'humanoid' (don't like that word) or 'elemental' forms. Those who take on 'elemental' forms seem to become personifications of those elements - e.g. Varda as the stars, Yavanna as plants. They very much become part of the fabric of Arda.

So I would say that Sauron too had to take on a form or an 'aspect' in order to interact with Arda too. When Sauron is without physical form all he can do is 'influence', he cannot physically interact with the world. However, there was still the Ring, so something 'physical' of him still existed. So could we say he never really went away for that time? Also, the Ringwraiths existed throughout that time, bound to him.

[littlemanpoet]

The problem with saying that Sauron can only influence and not interact, when without Hroa, is that he somehow managed to get the Ring from the sinking Numenor to Middle Earth proper, as Raynor reminded us a few posts back. How did he do that? By the power of the Ring, perhaps? Or was Sauron partly in the Ring, such that he could be considered to have been incarnate even though his body has been destroyed? I think it is an unnecessary conundrum, and the answer is that a fëa does not need to be in a hroa in order to interact/influence/change Arda, depending upon the power of the Maia we're discussing, of course.

As for Gandalf, there is a bit of a mystery there. That Gwaihir says he can see through him could indicate a couple of things:
1. Gwaihir can see hroa-less fëar
2. Gandalf's hroa was transparent

I lean toward the second, because Gandalf perceives Frodo as somewhat transparent, lying in the bed at Rivendel (quite early in the tale!); I think we can take it here that Gandalf is looking at Frodo with his hroa eyes, by the way.

So Gandalf has been taken out of Time and placed back in Time. This must have been accomplished by Eru since such an action is beyond the capability of any of the Valar. The battle with the Balrog has, first of all, killed Gandalf. His hroa is dead. But his fëa is taken clean out of Arda, not sent to the Halls of Mandos; then it is sent back again to the very same Time and Place (give or take hours/days/whatever). And the fëa is reconnected with its hroa, but revivified and made less "fleshy" by his battle with the Balrog. This has precedent throughout the Legendarium; not only with Frodo, but with the greatest of the Elves; the more purified (burning with the inner fire of their own fëar usually) the Eldar become, the more transparent they become. This seems to be evident with Elrond too.

(It's interesting how fëar are represented as the element of fire...)

[Raynor]

At the time of the making of the Girdle of Doriath, Melian told Thingol that she foresaw the coming of Beren, and he would be more powerful than her magic, since a higher doom drives him. Now, unless Eru revealed to Melian these things only after she met Thingol, she must have known all along about Beren and his doom, her girdle, and, most likely, her presence and role in Middle Earth near Thingol.

Originally Posted by Lal

Those who take on 'elemental' forms seem to become personifications of those elements - e.g. Varda as the stars

I don't think that Varda is described as 'elemental', since, as stated in the Valaquenta:

Originally Posted by Of the Valar

Too great is her beauty to be declared in the words of Men or of Elves; for the light of Iluvatar lives still in her face.

Concerning the issue of interaction/influence, I would say that even semantically they are almost similar; or, to be more exact, influence is a particular case of interaction. So far, we know of no limitation of the valar and maiar in their incarnate form; the opposite is, actually, true.

[Lalwendë]

I also find a problem in how Sauron got the Ring from Numenor. The answer to it could also lie in the nature of the Ring of course. But we do see one Maia without physical form and that's Saruman, and from the description of what happens to him, it wouldn't seem possible that he could interact with the physical world - after all, surely if he could, then wouldn't he have smote the Hobbits or somesuch? Instead he immediately appeals to the Valar and is rejected. Though perhaps this explains why they send the wind to dissipate him?

Now, there is another possibility as to why Sauron (and indeed Melkor) would want to take on a physical form. The possession of a Hroa actually provides some degree of 'protection', an additional barrier of Unwill to prevent the mind from being perceived. And if you have dark deeds in mind, then you do not want them to be revealed.

And yet more ideas... Of course Melkor and Sauron wanted to interact with the Elves, and then with Men and other mortals. Possession of a Hroa would instantly make this easier as a tangible person would be more readily accepted than a spirit. That's just simple psychology, and note also that both our Dark Lords also take on a 'fair' form at first, instantly attractive and appealing. There is also the issue of language, a pertinent one considering the central importance of language to our author. Incarnates have become users of language as habit instead of using sanwe, though Tolkien makes it clear they still have this ability, in some it lies latent and in others they do use it a little even when using language. Is it possible that it was essential to have a Hroa in order to use language?

[Raynor]

Though perhaps this explains why they send the wind to dissipate him?

How do you interpret dissipate in this case?

after all, surely if he could, then wouldn't he have smote the Hobbits or somesuch?

We know from Myths Transformed that when Melkor was executed:

Originally Posted by Notes on motives in the Silmarillion, iii, HoME X

When that body was destroyed he was weak and utterly 'houseless', and for that time at a loss and 'unanchored' as it were.

I would say that a similar situation occured with Saruman, who was far less powerful than Melkor, and thus even more severely (and for a longer term) weakened by the loss of his hroa.

Is it possible that it was essential to have a Hroa in order to use language?

It depends on what sort of language; Tolkien differentiates between lambe and tengwesta. Lambe, language, has the same root as lamba, which is the phisical tongue, a relation which rose "from elementary observation of the important part played by the tongue in articulate speaking, and from noticing the peculiarities of individuals, and the soon-developing minor differences in the language of groups and clans", cf. Appendix D, Quendi an Eldar, HoME XI. The eldar also used tengwesta, "a system or code of signs": a lambe is a tengwesta built of sounds. As such, it is most likely that thought transmission used some sort of tengwesta; the root "ten" means to point at, and it is free from any limitation to the kind of signs used.

The possession of a Hroa actually provides some degree of 'protection', an additional barrier of Unwill to prevent the mind from being perceived.

While a hroa does hinder thought transmission, I don't think that, in fact, it serves as a protection, seeing that a hroa weakens a maia's (or vala's) abilities, in which I would include the strength of the unwill - although you may be right. I am thinking of Saruman who let some of his secrets slip to Sauron, while looking in the palantir.

[Lalwendë]

Raynor, I like your interpretation of what happened to Saruman, not least as I rather like Saruman (even if he was a bad guy!), so I don't like to think he was quite literally blown to the four winds. However, I doubt he could have been 'destroyed' by the Valar; even were it possible I don't think it would have been permissible. I think he was simply trying to seek his way back 'home' to the Undying Lands and they refused him admittance, so he was left to seek his way in Middle-earth. Hmm, wonder if this is why he too made himself a 'ring of power'? To help re-house himself? Could make a good story...

Anyway. I was under the impression from Osanwe-kenta that sanwe was an inherent ability and did not need the use of any form of recognisable language, and that language only grew up as people found they did not need to use sanwe through proximity. Language does seem to be restricted to Elves and mortals (and to those they taught language to), so I get the feeling it is not something the Ainur were accustomed to using - there's the example of the 'debate' between Gandalf and Saruman at Orthanc which the listeners are 'shut out' of; are they reverting to the usual mode of communication of the Maiar here?