'Which is as Fate to all Things Else’

[HerenIstarion]

The poll is made at Nilpaurion Felagund’s bidding, who, evidently, found the debate of davem and yours truly about the subject interesting and requested study of general opinion.

The guidelines:

Therefore [Eru] willed that the hearts of Men should seek beyond the world and should find no rest therein; but they should have a virtue to shape their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else; and of their operation everything should be, in form and deed, completed, and the world fulfilled unto the last and smallest.

Reference:

Evil Things (page 2 and onward)
That Good Night – Gift or Punishment?
The Halls of Mandos and Elvish ‘Free Will’
The Role of Fate In Middle Earth
The Treason of Isengard: Eru’s Plan?

My own (i.e. HerenIstarion’s) opinion:

Treason of Isengard, post #16
Evil Things, post #90
Good Night, post #8
Evil Things, post #92
Halls of Mandos and Elvish ‘Free Will’, post #18

Multiple choices are allowed

[Raynor]

Considering your _specific_ guideline, I will go with the first option, having in mind the following:

Originally Posted by Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth

This then, I propound, was the errand of Men, not the followers, but the heirs and fulfillers of all: to heal the Marring of Arda, already foreshadowed before their devising; and to do more, as agents of the magnificence of Eru: to enlarge the Music and surpass the Vision of the World!

as I don't see what kind of operations the Men would be capable of when dying or beyond the circles of the world. To further my case, here is the HoME X version of the paragraph:

Therefore he willed that the hearts of Men should seek beyond the world and find no rest therein; but they should have a virtue to fashion their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else. And of their operation everything should be, in shape and deed, completed, and the world fulfilled unto the last and smallest. Lo! even we, Elves, have found to our sorrow that Men have a strange power for good or ill, and for turning things aside from the purpose of Valar or of Elves; so that it is said among us that Fate is not master of the children of Men; yet are they blind, and their joy is small, which should be great.

However, in the greater scheme of things, I consider their special freedom to be their escaping Ea, before its end.

[davem]

Well, I had to go with the first option, I'll post later.

[narfforc]

I went with the first option also. Mainly due to the Judeo/Christian belief that God gave independent thought and choice to Adam. That choice which some call concience and the knowledge of good or evil, but which allows you to choose either path and be judged accordingly. However I do see The Special Freedom as not being bound to life everlasting, and death within the physical world.

[Gurthang]

I'm not sure that I can answer this question without having 'special freedom' defined specifically. I don't suppose it will be, so I will do my best without such a definition.

First, I've always considered Death to be the Gift of Men. That is quite frankly the most freeing thing in all of Tolkien's works. The fact that the Elves, Valar, and Maiar are all bound within Ea seems almost restrictive, even cosidering how vast the world is. Men, however, can specifically leave the Circles of the World. That gives them so much 'freedom' since they are no longer trapped in Middle Earth. I should note that this 'freedom' is not exactly free, because they don't have an option not to die. That's mostly why Men shunned Death as a Gift; they decided that they would rather stay in the world. Strange to think that the 'freedom' that was 'given' them was often against their will. Anyway, I do believe that Death is meant to be freeing to Men, so I will certainly vote for that.

But I will also check the box beside "During his lifetime...". It is right there in the text, so I can't really say a lot against it. Men could make their own choices amid the Music of the Ainur, choices that the Elves and the Valar could not make for themselves.

Although (and maybe this should be it's own thread), I do question the equality of between the Music of the Ainur and Eru's Theme. I think most of us take those to be exactly the same, but it just occured to me that they don't have to be. What the Ainur 'played' was certainly what Eru wanted, and was part of his Theme, but maybe it wasn't all of his Theme. Somewhat like a real composer whose musicians play mostly what he wants, but not to the fullest potential. That doesn't really put it quite right, but I hope it helps. Anyway, take for instance Melkor's Discord. It was not supposed to be a part of the Music, but it turned out that it played directly into Iluvatar's overall Theme. The Music of the Ainur was not Iluvatar's complete Theme, but only a part, and Melkor's Discord was another. This makes me think that Men, by nature, are similar to Morgoth. The Free Will given to them is freedom outside the Music (for Ea), but not ouside the overall Theme. Basically, Men, by their actions, fill in the gaps around the Music of the Ainur so the that the Theme may be utterly complete as dictated by Eru. This would mean that the actions of Men are predestined by Iluvatar, but were not a part of the Music played by the Ainur.

I'm not sure what to think about what I just typed. It seems sound to me, but I just don't know. Any input would be splendid.

[Gurthang]

I just looked at the results. It's almost funny. I, HerenIstarion, and Son of Númenor all chose two answers. Yet we all chose different pairs. I'm interested especially in Son's reasoning for picking before and after death, but not the fact of death.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by narfforc

I went with the first option also. Mainly due to the Judeo/Christian belief that God gave independent thought and choice to Adam. That choice which some call concience and the knowledge of good or evil, but which allows you to choose either path and be judged accordingly.

Well, my comment isn't so much related to Tolkien as to narf's comment that God gave knowledge of good or evil to man. Maybe I'm reading narf's line wrong--which could easily be the case--but my understanding of this belief system which he mentions is that God set up one restriction, which was that man was not supposed to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So, the independent thought was not between good and evil, but between to eat or not to eat. At least originally wasn't that the choice? After all, were Adam and Eve aware of what the consequence of the choice was, other than simply disobeying the injunction? I mean, they couldn't have known what the difference meant--having not eaten the fruit--before they ate the fruit. Right?

[Raynor]

This would mean that the actions of Men are predestined by Iluvatar, but were not a part of the Music played by the Ainur.

I disagree; this would imply that Men can act with impunity (cf Myths Transformed, Men are free from the consequences of their actions only when the intention is good and all possible effort has been performed).

Free will is guaranteed for Men, as stated in letter #181 and:

Originally Posted by Letter #153

Free Will is derivative, and is.'. only operative within provided circumstances; but in order that it may exist, it is necessary that the Author should guarantee it, whatever betides : sc. when it is 'against His Will', as we say, at any rate as it appears on a finite view. He does not stop or make 'unreal' sinful acts and their consequences.

It is true that Eru is named the only wholly free agent, but that is because he can make exceptions to "all rules and ordinances".

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

So, the independent thought was not between good and evil, but between to eat or not to eat. At least originally wasn't that the choice? After all, were Adam and Eve aware of what the consequence of the choice was, other than simply disobeying the injunction? I mean, they couldn't have known what the difference meant--having not eaten the fruit--before they ate the fruit. Right?

I believe that the choice wasn't really a matter of eating, but of obedience. God had said not to eat. As far as consequences, I'm going to quote the Bible. (hope that doesn't land me in hot water.)

Genesis 2:17
But you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.

Hope that helps.

Raynor, I'm not sure what you mean, as I am unsure what impunity is. And I fail to see how the quote you provided states that Men are guaranteed Free Will. In fact, the little that I can make of it seems to agree with my theory.

[Raynor]

When I said impunity, I meant that they can act without being held accountable for what they do.

I admit that english isn't my first language, but how do you view the quote I provided as strengthening your case? Before I bring other arguments, do I understand correctly that you reject the idea that Men have free will?

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Who thought it up?

I went with the first and the second choices. My post will come later--it's quite a long one. Rest assured, though, I shall abandon all pretensions to making another flawed analogy (qq.v.), as H-I and SoN properly pointed out.

This time, I shall use quotes, nice ones, and lots of them.

EDIT: First, I'd like to address some things said so far.

What the Ainur 'played' was certainly what Eru wanted, and was part of his Theme, but maybe it wasn't all of his Theme. (Gurthang)

It is said somewhere in the letter given in the foreword to QS 77/01 (sorry, I brought only HoME I and IV with me) that even if all the music of the pantheon were combined, it would not equal the entire thought of Eru, or something like that. That's where the Third Theme (i.e., the Children of Ilúvatar) comes in.

(When I post again maybe I'll place the exact quote.)

This would mean that the actions of Men are predestined by Iluvatar, but were not a part of the Music played by the Ainur. (Gurthang)

Hmmm, let's try not to confuse predestination with the creator's omniscience, okay? That's what got me into some trouble in the first place.

After all, were Adam and Eve aware of what the consequence of the choice was, other than simply disobeying the injunction? I mean, they couldn't have known what the difference meant--having not eaten the fruit--before they ate the fruit. Right? (Bb)

Adding to what Gurthang said about obedience, it also involves Adam and Eve's choice to continue trusting in God, despite however silly it appears (cf. the Ban, which, when Ar-Pharazôn ( ) broke, had grievous consequences.)

[HerenIstarion]

The Downfall of Numenor

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Gurthang

I believe that the choice wasn't really a matter of eating, but of obedience. God had said not to eat. As far as consequences, I'm going to quote the Bible. (hope that doesn't land me in hot water.)

Quote:
Genesis 2:17
But you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.

Thank you for quoting from the second creation story, Gurthang! Which of course, you had to, as the story of man's disobedience isn't in the first version.

This is the crux of HI's poll, isn't it? What does "die" mean to a creature who has been created supposedly immortal? Where is choice if the consequence is not understood? Would they die immediately, ie, cease physiological functioning? Would they die sometime in the future? Given its traditional association with Adam and Even then realising they were naked, why, it looks like this is the first pun on die as sexual intercourse.

Informed consent is such a delicate matter.

[davem]

In the BBC documentary 'Tolkien in Oxford' there's a moment where Tolkien discusses the meaning of death (just dug this up on another website)

'When it comes down to any large story, that interests people and holds their interest for any considerable length of time, they're all human stories and are only about one thing, aren't they? Death! (pauses for effect) the ineventability of death. There was a quotation from Simonne de Beauvoir in the paper the other day - about the death in 1939 of a musical composer whom I am very fond of; Carl Maria Weber. The biographer quoted this by Simonne Beauvoir; I'll read it if I may: "There is no such thing as a natural death. Nothing that happens to Man is natural, since his presence calls the whole world into question. All men must die; but for each man, his death is an accident, and and even if he knows it, an unjustifiable violation". Now, you may agree with those words or not: but they are the keyspring of The Lord of the Rings'.

Here, he seems to be going against the idea that Death is a 'Gift'. Here he says (in agreement with de Beuvoir) that Death is an 'accident & an unjustifiable violation.' Of course, it could be argued that this was his personal feeling & that things were different in LotR - yet he says that those words are the keyspring of LotR. Does this mean that, while the idea of Death being a gift runs through the Legendarium, Tolkien himself didn't believe it?

He seems to be denying that Men's freedom begins after death (the 'accident', the 'unjustifiable violation'). The Elves may call Death the Gift of Eru to Men, but Men don't see it that way - & neither, it seems, did Tolkien. More significantly, he says these words are the 'keyspring' to LotR - which means what? That LotR is concerned with life (& I suppose with death) in this world, & not with events post mortem. So, I would say, if freedom for Men is to have any meaning or relevance in the Legendarium, it must be freedom in this world, before the 'unjustifiable violation'.

[JennyHallu]

Perhaps he meant that death always appears as an accident and a violation to mankind. Christian theology preaches death is a gift, but that is one of, if not the, most difficult concepts for man to accept.

Death is the ultimate frontier and thus the ultimate terror. We live our lives in a frenzy of activity knowing it is coming. Perhaps when Tolkien referred to the accident and violation of death being the "keystone" of LotR he meant that fear and loathing of death is why the story happened. If Man realized death was intended by Iluvatar as a gift, would they have strove so hard to keep it away?

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by davem

Here, he seems to be going against the idea that Death is a 'Gift'. Here he says (in agreement with de Beuvoir) that Death is an 'accident & an unjustifiable violation.' Of course, it could be argued that this was his personal feeling & that things were different in LotR - yet he says that those words are the keyspring of LotR. Does this mean that, while the idea of Death being a gift runs through the Legendarium, Tolkien himself didn't believe it?

Yet he often reffers to our world as 'fallen' or 'corrupt' - which would mean that in this kind of world Melkor's marring of the gift is prevalent ("But Melkor has cast his shadow upon it, and confounded it with darkness, and brought forth evil out of good, and fear out of hope "). Aragorn, who embraces this gift as he 'should', has the most beautiful ending:

Then a great beauty was revealed in him, so that all who after came there looked on him in wonder; for they saw that the grace of his youth, and the valour of his manhood, and the wisdom and majesty of his age were blended together. And long there he lay, an image of the splendour of the Kings of Men in glory undimmed before the breaking of the world.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Christian theology preaches death is a gift, but that is one of, if not the, most difficult concepts for man to accept. (JennyHallu)

Actually, at first death was a curse. It only became a gift after Jesus's sacrifice gave humanity full access to God. As Paul said:

For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.

Phil 1.21

Although yes, it's very difficult to accept. Only the knowledge of the Resurrection--that someone actually broke the curse of death--makes it all easier to take. If the Resurrection is a lie, we Christians look pretty pathetic.

My long post will come later. I promise. I'm halfway through HoME V now.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I. Original Conception

[Rúmil: ][Eru] devised that Men should have a free virtue whereby within the limits of the powers and substances and chances of the world they might fashion and design their life beyond even the original Music of the Ainur that is as fate to all things else.

HoME I, The Music of the Ainur--emphasis mine

Remember that by this time, death for Men was nothing special.

How come, when Death as a gift to Men was introduced, the wording was not much changed?

Therefore [Eru] willed that the hearts of Men should seek beyond the world and should find no rest therein; but they should have a virtue to shape their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else; and of their operation everything should be, in form and deed, completed, and the world fulfilled unto the last and smallest.

TS Ainulindalë--emphasis mine

This argues much for the special freedom of action for Men in Arda. I think we find undertones of this in the Sketch of the Mythology:

If Turgon does Ylmir's will [to prepare for battle against Morgoth] Tuor is to abide a while in Gondolin and then go back to Hithlum with a force of Gnomes and draw Men once more into alliance with the Elves, for 'without Men the Elves shall not prevail against the Orcs and Balrogs'.

HoME IV, The Earliest 'Silmarillion' 16--emphasis mine

The importance of the aid of Men survives into the Quenta:

[Ulmo: ]Forget the treachery of Uldor the accursed, and remember Húrin; for without mortal Men the Elves shall not prevail against the Balrogs and the Orcs.

HoME IV, The Quenta 16 (QII)--emphasis mine

All these attention Ulmo has for Men became in the later stages of the mythology focused on one Man:

II. Tuor

This is Ulmo's speech to Tuor in the most recent form available:

[Ulmo: ]But behold! in the armour of Fate (as the Children of Earth name it) there is ever a rift, and in the walls of Doom a breach . . . Yet Doom is strong . . . And now the Curse of Mandos hastens to its fulfilment, and all the works of the Noldor shall perish, and every hope which they build shall crumble. The last hope alone is left, the hope that they have not looked for and have not prepared. And that hope lieth in thee; for so I have chosen.

UT I 1--emphases mine

There is an rift in the armour of Fate. The Music of the Ainur is as fate to all things else, except Men. Hmmm . . .

[Ulmo: I]t is not for thy valour only that I send thee, but to bring into the world a hope beyond thy sight, and a light that shall pierce the darkness.

ibid--emphasis mine

Now, this is all so very interesting, the concept that somehow, Men can bring hope from beyond the world into it.

( . . . to be continued, I still have to scour Athrabeth)

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Raynor

I admit that english isn't my first language, but how do you view the quote I provided as strengthening your case? Before I bring other arguments, do I understand correctly that you reject the idea that Men have free will?

I'm actually borderline on that topic. I can definitely see points in either direction, but I am probably leaning towards Men not having Free Will, as in not independant from Eru's plan. This probably comes from my own belief, though, that God has a plan and everything is set within that plan. Hence, our every action is already dictated and is 'fate'.

Originally Posted by Nilpaurion Felagund

[Ulmo: ]But behold! in the armour of Fate (as the Children of Earth name it) there is ever a rift, and in the walls of Doom a breach . . . Yet Doom is strong . . . And now the Curse of Mandos hastens to its fulfilment, and all the works of the Noldor shall perish, and every hope which they build shall crumble. The last hope alone is left, the hope that they have not looked for and have not prepared. And that hope lieth in thee; for so I have chosen.

UT I 1--emphases mine

There is an rift in the armour of Fate. The Music of the Ainur is as fate to all things else, except Men. Hmmm . . .

This, to me at least, strengthens my theory. It says there is a rift in the armour of Fate, a gap if you will in the Music that is as fate to all but Men. So there are gaps in the Music the Ainur played, and the roles of Men is to fill in those gaps. And the filling in of these gaps will bring out a whole product (Music plus gaps filled by Men) that is the whole plan of Eru.

There are some other things I like that I am hearing, and would like to respond to, but I should be getting some sleep.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

It is said somewhere in the letter given in the foreword to QS 77/01 (sorry, I brought only HoME I and IV with me) that even if all the music of the pantheon were combined, it would not equal the entire thought of Eru, or something like that. That's where the Third Theme (i.e., the Children of Ilúvatar) comes in. (someone I know)

If it still helps, I found it:

The Knowledge of the Creation Drama was incomplete: incomplete in each individual 'god', and incomplete if all the knowledge of the pantheon were pooled. For (partly to redress the evil of the rebel Melkor, partly for the completion of all in an ultimate finesse of detail) the Creator had not revealed all. The making, and nature, of the Children of God, were the two chief secrets.

Letters 131

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Nilpaurion Felagund

If it still helps, I found it:

The Knowledge of the Creation Drama was incomplete: incomplete in each individual 'god', and incomplete if all the knowledge of the pantheon were pooled. For (partly to redress the evil of the rebel Melkor, partly for the completion of all in an ultimate finesse of detail) the Creator had not revealed all. The making, and nature, of the Children of God, were the two chief secrets.

Letters 131

Thank's for the great quote Nilp. It's nice to see it in writing. (er, well, text anyway)

Any doubt that I actually had about Men having 'Free Will' outside the Music is now satisfied. Mainly, before, I was holding to the idea that Eru already had a 'plan' for everything, worked out to the minutest detail, and I still do believe that. So when the Books clearly say that the Music is as fate to all but Men, and that they can do pretty much what they want regardless of what it says, it went against what I thought should be. But, as the quote above pretty much states, the Music is not the completeness of Eru's 'plan'. So Men can have 'Free Will', as in outside the Music, while still being held to the course that Iluvatar has set for their existance. I would call that (by that I mean having every bit of your life already set in stone) predestination, and therefore, not Free Will.

Nilp, I did want to ask you:

Originally Posted by Nilpaurion Felagund

Hmmm, let's try not to confuse predestination with the creator's omniscience, okay?

I don't really see much difference. You can make a push that, although God knows what's going to happen, He hasn't done anything to cause it. Sort of like watching a movie you've already seen. But, to me, that just doesn't fit with who God is.

[Raynor]

So Men can have 'Free Will', as in outside the Music, while still being held to the course that Iluvatar has set for their existance. I would call that (by that I mean having every bit of your life already set in stone) predestination, and therefore, not Free Will.

So all the mentioning of free will in various matters (such as the choice of the half-elven between races, the choice of the numenoreans and of Men of old to end their existence, the rehousing of the elven fea) are mere jokes? So there isn't actually but one actor, which rends irrelevant morality, good will or whatever trait of character? Can you support your idea with specific refferences?

What would be the justification of fea, rational soul? Not to mention that any mind can manifest _unwill_ that is free will against invasion - and no one can cross this absolute law, not even the mightiest vala.

I know of only one instance when Men are lacking free will (from the Athratbeth):
"the Elves believed that the fear of dead Men also went to Mandos (without choice in the matter: their free will with regard to death was taken away)."
but even that seems to be just an elven belief.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Raynor

What would be the justification of fea, rational soul? Not to mention that any mind can manifest _unwill_ that is free will against invasion - and no one can cross this absolute law, not even the mightiest vala.

But I am not speaking of one of the Valar. Eru, by any standard, created all of Ea. I'm pretty sure that anything that happens within it cannot exceed what he wills. It completely undermines him as the Creator. It's like a potter making a pot, and suddenly the pot sprouts a handle where the potter did not want one.

But, alas, I do not have the time nor the references to back up my theory, as you have asked. So it shall remain thus, a theory. But I guess one that can be debated.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Gurthang

But I am not speaking of one of the Valar. Eru, by any standard, created all of Ea. I'm pretty sure that anything that happens within it cannot exceed what he wills. It completely undermines him as the Creator. It's like a potter making a pot, and suddenly the pot sprouts a handle where the potter did not want one.

But didn't the Numenorean assault on Valinor 'exceed what He willed'? Yes, he stepped in & stopped them - in a pretty extreme way: a way that suggests that he not only wanted to stop the invasion but also to punish the sinful Numenoreans as a people.

What this shows to me is that Men are free to act not only beyond the restrictions of the Music, but also to act in ways which are totally against the will of Eru - in fact, they are so 'free' that Eru cannot control them at all, & if push comes to shove, the only way He can stop them is by using his superior force.

Which of course brings us to the other great rebellion - that of the Noldor. Was that a freely willed act or part of the Music? My argument (following Flieger) has been that Elvish freedom is restricted to the moral sphere. So, the Noldor will return to Middle-earth in pursuit of Morgoth. They have no option - their freedom is in the way they return. If Feanor had agreed to surrender the Silmarils & sided with the Valar the revolt would not have happened, the Valar would probably have made the decision to go after Morgoth with a large force. Hence, the Noldor get back to Middle-earth one way or another.

Perhaps what we have with Elves is something along the lines of moral/spiritual freedom within physical constraints (ie they can make moral choices about how they will do things, but cannot control what happens to them, only how it happens). Men, on the other hand, have the same moral/spiritual freedomn but with far weaker physical constraints (obviously there are physical restraints on Men - death being the principal one of course, but they have to eat & sleep, they can't just flap their arms & fly, etc). The point is, in terms of action in the world Men's actions are known by Eru but not dictated by Him directly or indirectly, while Elves actions are both known & dictated. Where both races have freedom is in the moral sphere, which even Eru cannot control.

Sorry if I've repeated earlier points - I've only had time to skim the thread.

[Raynor]

If Feanor had agreed to surrender the Silmarils & sided with the Valar the revolt would not have happened, the Valar would probably have made the decision to go after Morgoth with a large force.

Do you mean, as in sooner than they did? In that case, I would have to disagree:

Originally Posted by Notes on motives in the Silmarillion, ii, Myths Transformed, HoME X

But in this way Morgoth lost (or exchanged, or transmuted) the greater part of his original 'angelic' powers, of mind and spirit, while gaining a terrible grip upon the physical world. For this reason he had to be fought, mainly by physical force, and enormous material ruin was a probable consequence of any direct combat with him, victorious or otherwise. This is the chief explanation of the constant reluctance of the Valar to come into open battle against Morgoth. Manwe's task and problem was much more difficult than Gandalf's. Sauron's, relatively smaller, power was concentrated; Morgoth's vast power was disseminated. The whole of 'Middle-earth' was Morgoth's Ring, though temporarily his attention was mainly upon the North-west. Unless swiftly successful, War against him might well end in reducing all Middle-earth to chaos, possibly even all Arda. It is easy to say: 'It was the task and function of the Elder King to govern Arda and make it possible for the Children of Eru to live in it unmolested.' But the dilemma of the Valar was this: Arda could only be liberated by a physical battle; but a probable result of such a battle was the irretrievable ruin of Arda.
...
The last intervention with physical force by the Valar, ending in the breaking of Thangorodrim, may then be viewed as not in fact reluctant or even unduly delayed, but timed with precision

The point is, in terms of action in the world Men's actions are known by Eru but not dictated by Him directly or indirectly, while Elves actions are both known & dictated.

I don't think that 'dictated' is the best possible label; after all, they do have such 'freedoms' such as the severance of marriage, reincarnation or answering the summoning of Mandos.

[davem]

Ok then, If Feanor had agreed to surrender the Silmarils to Yavanna, thereby avoiding the Revolt & its consequences, & asked permission to lead a force into M-e to confront Morgoth, Manwe would have been free to agree. The effect would have been the same: Noldor in M-e to lead the long struggle against Morgoth.

The problem we face is how to account for the fact that Elves apparently have no freedom to act against the dictates of the Music, but are still moral beings, not robots.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by davem

But didn't the Numenorean assault on Valinor 'exceed what He willed'? Yes, he stepped in & stopped them - in a pretty extreme way: a way that suggests that he not only wanted to stop the invasion but also to punish the sinful Numenoreans as a people.

And what's to say that the Numenorean assualt was not a part of Eru's ultimate plan? If all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru, then he had already put into his plan that they would 'rebel'. Which means that it was also his plan to intervene and drown Numenor. A certain flood from the Bible is coming to mind.

[Aiwendil]

Gurthang wrote:

If all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru, then he had already put into his plan that they would 'rebel'.

This assumes that "all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru" - which seems, to me, to be quite unsupported by the text. Even setting aside the (strong) argument that a world without free will contradicts Tolkien's Christian ethos, it seems clear from the Ainulindale that Men are free. This is actually made even more evident in the first version, the Lost Tales "Music of the Ainur", and I see no reason to think that the underlying idea ever changed.

A certain flood from the Bible is coming to mind.

But, on anything like a traditional interpretation of Genesis, the flood was not part of God's original plan. God's original plan was for humans to live in the earthly paradise of Eden.

Davem wrote:

My argument (following Flieger) has been that Elvish freedom is restricted to the moral sphere.

This is one place in which Flieger's argument makes little sense to me. Flieger seems to take it for granted that Elves do not have free will - i.e. their actions are pre-determined. But Flieger clearly thinks that they have moral freedom, and she seems to allow them freedom with respect to their immediate actions (which she must do, because such immediate actions generally follow from one's internal/moral stance). But there are numerous cases in which an Elf's immediate, short-term actions have very clear and direct large-scale results. It seems too far a stretch to me to say that, had Feanor not urged departure at Tirion, the Noldor still would have returned to Middle-earth, or that had Maeglin not betrayed Gondolin it still would have fallen, or that had Thingol not sent Beren on his quest he still would have been slain in a quarrel with the Dwarves.

Flieger's entire argument here seems to be based on the "extra" freedom given to Men in the Ainulindale - from which she surmises that Men have free will and Elves do not. I do not think this is a trivial conclusion. It seems to me that Elves do have free will, moral and actual. There are other ways to interpret the additional freedom given to Men.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

This assumes that "all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru" - which seems, to me, to be quite unsupported by the text. Even setting aside the (strong) argument that a world without free will contradicts Tolkien's Christian ethos, it seems clear from the Ainulindale that Men are free. This is actually made even more evident in the first version, the Lost Tales "Music of the Ainur", and I see no reason to think that the underlying idea ever changed.

See my theory (yes, I am not convinced wholly of it yet) that I typed up in post #5.

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

But, on anything like a traditional interpretation of Genesis, the flood was not part of God's original plan. God's original plan was for humans to live in the earthly paradise of Eden.

I will only say that I disagree with you. I think that saying more would lead to a discussion that is altogether not allowed on the Downs'.

[davem]

Flieger's entire argument here seems to be based on the "extra" freedom given to Men in the Ainulindale - from which she surmises that Men have free will and Elves do not. I do not think this is a trivial conclusion. It seems to me that Elves do have free will, moral and actual. There are other ways to interpret the additional freedom given to Men.

My reading of Flieger is that she sees Elves having freedom of thought & the freedom to choose how they will do things, but not the freedom to choose what they will do. The problem is, Tolkien says the Music is as Fate to all but Men.

I suppose we could interpret that to mean that only Men are free from 'fate', while all other races have their fates set out in the Music. But maybe its less definite. When Tolkien says Men are not bound by the Music he is possibly talking about the whole race, rather than individuals. This would mean each individual (or at least certain individuals) has freedom of action as well as free will, but that, overall, Elves will follow the pattern set out in the Music.

Of course, Men do seem to have individual fates - Halbarad foretells his own death before entering the Paths of the Dead. But was that his unavoidable fate - ie, did he have no choice but to enter the Paths oif the Dead & fall on the Pelennor. Or was it that he could see that only if he took the Paths he would die. Could he foresee multiple futures/fates for himself (ie was he generaly foresighted) or only the consequences of that particular future which he had instigated by following Aragorn.

So, if Halbarad's end was already laid before him, & he was destined to die on the Pelenor, was Feanor's end equally fated? The fact of the Music being 'as fate' certainly implies that a great deal of what happens to Elves is fated. In the light of that Statement it would seem odd if the destiny of a Man is set while the destiny of an Elf is not.

The easy answer as regards Feanor is that he actually went against the Music & led the Noldor astray, & that none of them were fated to go into M-e. Of course, it seems they were meant to go, as that was necessary for the fall of Morgoth to be accomplished.

Now, in response to that final point, I'm sure someone will come up with the old chestnut about God/Eru being able to bring good out of evil, & that He merely used the Noldor's revolt to bring about the destruction of Morgoth.

But we're still stuck with the fact that the Music is 'as fate' to the Elves, & the question of how much freedom of action as well as of thought/will they have.

[Raynor]

I would say there is a great freedom in deciding how to do a certain thing, even if you are 'fated' to do it; the way you do it can bring about the exact opposite of a 'normal' result.

To give but a few examples of the freedom of the elves:

Originally Posted by Ainulindale, Silmarillion

Therefore when they beheld them, the more did they love them, being things other than themselves, strange and free, wherein they saw the mind of Iluvatar reflected anew, and learned yet a little more of his wisdom, which otherwise had been hidden even from the Ainur.
Now the Children of Iluvatar are Elves and Men, the Firstborn and the Followers

No difference between Men and Elves; and an example to which I reffered previously:

Originally Posted by Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth

They were given a choice [to remain houseless or not], because Eru did not allow their free will to be taken away. Similarly the houseless fear were summoned, not brought, to Mandos

Moreover, considering that in letter #153 Tolkien describes them as having "certain freedoms and powers we should like to have" so I would conclude that the only freedom Man have exclusively is the leaving of the world, and that the only fate the elves have to obey is to leave Middle-Earth (due to the decay of their bodies, resulting from the fire of their spirit and the marring of Melkor). Also in the Silmarillion, Ulmo argues that elves should be left to walk freely in Middle-Earth and Melkor instills in them the desire to rule freely their own realms.

[Aiwendil]

Davem wrote:

My reading of Flieger is that she sees Elves having freedom of thought & the freedom to choose how they will do things, but not the freedom to choose what they will do. The problem is, Tolkien says the Music is as Fate to all but Men.

I do think that Flieger's view is an interesting and a valid one; I merely think that she overstates the case for it. There are problems with it, I think - for example, as I said before, it's not at all clear that what Elves will do is fixed irrespective of how they do and think things.

Clearly, Elves (even in Flieger's view) have freedom to choose what they will do immediately, for one's immediate actions have moral value. Also, it's worth noting that even such things as speech are, fundamentally, actions. Flieger's point, then, rests on the assumption that, whatever an Elf's immediate thoughts and actions might be, fate will contrive it that things turn out the same. Again, I don't see how this can possibly be so when one examines a few examples. I noted above Feanor's speech at Tirion, Maeglin's treachery, and Thingol's request for a Silmaril as examples of choices clearly laden with moral value (and therefore, even in Flieger's view, taken freely) that nonetheless have non-trivial consequences. It's hard to see how those large-scale consequences would be the same regardless of the choices of those involved.

I think there are other ways to interpret Tolkien's statement that the Music is as fate to all but Men. My own view is that, in Tolkien's world, fate and free will are not necessarily mutually exclusive. It seems to me that Tolkien, in setting up both fate and free will as real features of his Legendarium, was quite probably reflecting what he saw as a real and strange feature of our world.

In any case, there are, as you note, several examples of 'fate' applied to Men in the Legendarium. Though some might be dismissed as prophecy rather than fate (a distinction that must be made in some cases), others cannot be. The prime example is Morgoth's curse in "The Children of Hurin".

[davem]

Another problem, perhaps, is that Ainulindale is the work of the loremaster Rumil, which begs the question of whether the idea of only Men being free of the constraints of the Music has its origins in the teachings of the Valar or in Elvish belief.

What occurred to me on reading your post is the question of when we are dealing with fate & when we are dealing with a self-fulfilling prophecy. In the case of Turin I can't help thinking it is the latter, but with Halbarad I'm not so sure.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I haven't finished III and IV of my argument, but I'll throw it aside to intervene now.

davem:

Elves [have] freedom of thought & the freedom to choose how they will do things, but not the freedom to choose what they will do. (dave M)

We may have always been on the same side of this debate, but I was always leery of this argument of yours. The way I see it, both Elves and Men have freedom to choose what they do. As H-I loves so much to quote whenever the issues arises:

[Aragorn: ]Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house.

LR III 2

For instance, Fëanor revolted and left Valinor against the will of the Valar, but there was a remnant that did not go. And Finarfin chose to turn back on his decision to leave the Blessed Land. There was a choice there for every Noldo to go wherever he chose to.

Another case, while Celebrimbor and the smiths of Gwaith-i-Mírdain accepted Annatar's lies and 'aid,' Gil-galad refused to let the disguised Gorthaur into his domain. Again, there was a choice.

What's so special with Men, then? [Warning: speculation ahead]

The problem with Elves is, since their hroa is made of the stuff of the Earth, and since Earth is Morgoth's Ring, they have a tendency to fall to Morgoth's will. (cf. in BoLT, the Spell of Bottomless Dread that is laid on all the Noldoli after their defeat at the battle of Unnumbered Tears, except in Gondolin). In fact, everything, if left to its own devices, will fall to Morgoth's Will, since he practically dominated the Music of the Ainur . . .

. . . until Eru intervened.

Now, consider Men. Their fëa ultimately belongs beyond Eä. So, they bring something from beyond it to the World. The fate of the World, to fall to Morgoth's will, is not their fate.

Let's unravel the threads above.

Fëanor revolted. The Noldor falls under the Doom of Mandos. Valinor is hidden. All their attempts to plead for Valarin intervention fails.

But then, Beren takes a Silmaril (the only thing from Valinor that does not fall under the curse) from Morgoth's crown. Elwing takes it away from the clutches of the Sons of Fëanor. Eärendil sails for Valinor with its aid. They bring about the much-needed aid and Morgoth is physically overthrown.

All mortals there.

Sauron, having duped the Elves into making rings, fashions the One, which is a curse to Middle-earth, since it ensures Sauron's continued existence. The only way to destroy it seems impossible. In any case, it is on his finger.

But then, Isildur takes the Ring from his hand. Sméagol finds it and hides it deep in the Misty Mountains. Bilbo finds it, then Frodo goes to Mordor with it. Gollum guides them there, and, when he finally recovers his precious and dances in the wrong place, he falls and takes the Ring to its destruction.

All mortals there, too.

The way I see it, the Third Theme (primarily, perhaps basically Men) is the only weapon that successfully works against Melkor's domination of the Music. That is why . . .

[Men] . . . have a virtue to shape their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else; and of their operation everything should be, in form and deed, completed, and the world fulfilled unto the last and smallest.

TS - Ainulindalë

[davem]

Originally Posted by NF

The problem with Elves is, since their hroa is made of the stuff of the Earth, and since Earth is Morgoth's Ring, they have a tendency to fall to Morgoth's will. (cf. in BoLT, the Spell of Bottomless Dread that is laid on all the Noldoli after their defeat at the battle of Unnumbered Tears, except in Gondolin). In fact, everything, if left to its own devices, will fall to Morgoth's Will, since he practically dominated the Music of the Ainur . . .

. . . until Eru intervened.

Now, consider Men. Their fëa ultimately belongs beyond Eä. So, they bring something from beyond it to the World. The fate of the World, to fall to Morgoth's will, is not their fate.

Well, in terms of Hroa, both Elves & Men are in the same position, so I can't see that Elves are more prone to fall to Morgoth's will than Men. In fact the sense I get is that elves are less likely to be decieved by Morgoth/Sauron than Men. When Elves fall it is seen as more out of the ordinary than when Men do.

I accept that Men's Fear are destined to pass beyond the Circles of the World, so that makes the relationship between fea & Hroa different in Men to what it is in Elves, but I don't see that it implies that Elven Fear is qualitatively different from that of Men.

As I said, we're stuck with the clear statement that Men have greater freedom of action than Men. Yet, the fact that Tolkien states that Ainulindale was written by Rumil, an Elf, means that we have to ask why an Elf would write (in a text written for other Elves, not for Men) that Men have freedom of action where Elves do not.

Of course, the infamous Translator Conceit comes in here. Do we have Rumil's original Ainulindale, or an adaptation/redaction? Its a simple fact that by bringing in the TC Tolkien calls into question the absolute validity of all the M-e writings. They are all copies of copies of copies, translations of translations of translations. There are many stages of transmission where errors (both accidental & deliberate) could creep in. Also, we have to take into account that in translation, even the best efforts of a translator may produce a false or incorrect version of the original. In short, Ainulindale is not a clear, unchalengeable, account by Tolkien himself, but a translation of a work by an Elven Loremaster which had passed through many minds & hands before it reached him.

We don't even know if Rumil intended it to be taken literally, metaphorically or symbolically. This is an interesting question to me, as we all seem to assume a 'fundamentalist/literalist' approach to the Legendarium. Our approach is like the Fundamentalist Christians who believe that the world was created 6,000 years ago & that dinosaurs were wandering around with Men pre-Deluge. Yet we've no idea if Tolkien meant the writings to be taken that way. It would seem that at times he did, at other times he didn't. Some times its as if he's using the TC to make a claim of authenticity, to confirm the dependability of the accounts, because they can be traced back through stages to the original author. At other times he seems to imply that the process of copying & translation through numerous stages has taken us so far from the original account that we can't depend on the literal truth of the documents.

[Raynor]

The problem with Elves is, since their hroa is made of the stuff of the Earth, and since Earth is Morgoth's Ring, they have a tendency to fall to Morgoth's will. (cf. in BoLT, the Spell of Bottomless Dread that is laid on all the Noldoli after their defeat at the battle of Unnumbered Tears, except in Gondolin). In fact, everything, if left to its own devices, will fall to Morgoth's Will, since he practically dominated the Music of the Ainur . . .

Now, consider Men. Their fëa ultimately belongs beyond Eä. So, they bring something from beyond it to the World. The fate of the World, to fall to Morgoth's will, is not their fate.

I side with davem on this issue; in Author's notes on Quendi and Eldar, HoME XI it is said that "no Elf of any kind ever sided with Morgoth of free will, though under torture or the stress of great fear, or deluded by lies, they might obey his commands", while in Of the begining of days, Silmarillion, it is said that

Yet the Elves believe that Men are often a grief to Manwe, who knows most of the mind of Iluvatar; for it seems to the Elves that Men resemble Melkor most of all the Ainur, although he has ever feared and hated them, even those that served him.

Moreover:

Originally Posted by Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth

Whereas their own fear, being designed to remain in Arda to its end, imposed long endurance on their bodies; for they were (as a fact of experience) in far greater control of them.
...
His attempt to dominate the structure of Ea, and of Arda in particular, and alter the designs of Eru (which governed all the operations of the faithful Valar), had introduced evil, or a tendency to aberration from the design, into all the physical matter of Arda. It was for this reason, no doubt, that he had been totally successful with Men, but only partially so with Elves (who remained as a people 'unfallen'). His power was wielded over matter, and through it. But by nature the fear of Men were in much less strong control of their hroar than was the case with the Elves. Individual Elves might be seduced to a kind of minor 'Melkorism': desiring to be their own masters in Arda, and to have things their own way, leading in extreme cases to rebellion against the tutelage of the Valar; but not one had ever entered the service or allegiance of Melkor himself, nor ever denied the existence and absolute supremacy of Eru

It is apparent from these refferences that Men are more prone to corruption (esspecially due to their lesser control of fea).

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Well, in terms of Hroa, both Elves & Men are in the same position, so I can't see that Elves are more prone to fall to Morgoth's will than Men. In fact the sense I get is that elves are less likely to be decieved by Morgoth/Sauron than Men. When Elves fall it is seen as more out of the ordinary than when Men do. (davem)

[I]n Author's notes on Quendi and Eldar, HoME XI it is said that "no Elf of any kind ever sided with Morgoth of free will, though under torture or the stress of great fear, or deluded by lies, they might obey his commands" [ . . . ] (Raynor)

Sorry, I should have clarified myself. I didn't mean that they voluntary obey Morgoth's Will, rather that they are more swayed by the infiltration of Morgoth's power into marred Arda. Sharkû, apparently, has already thought of the same thing that I was trying to say (q.v.)

As I have mentioned once in chat, it is my belief that the nature of Arda being marred in, or even, as the incarnation of Morgoth, is an important reason for the Dwindling of the Quendi to be observed in the later Ages. The very fact that both exist make a connection likely, but there is also the further observation to be made that the fate of Elves is explicitly said to be tied to Arda and thus inevitably tainted by the incarnation of Morgoth, naturally so in the "mortal" lands and considerably less so, if hardly at all, in Aman. (Sharkû)

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I'm a little perplexed by the JRRT interview and his quote from Bouvoir. Carl Maria von Weber, a contemporary of Beethoven, died in 1826. More likely is the serialist composer Anton Webern, who died in 1945 (not quite 1939)- but I can't imagine a Shoenberg disciple being one of JRRT's favorites.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

My personal feeling is that Eru gave free will to all his "children," both the Ainur and the Eruhini. The Valar have certainly done things Eru would have rather they didn't. Why would He have chastized them for bringing the Elves to Aman and not trusting Him to protect them while they dealt more expediently with Melkor if they had not chosen a path that went contrary to His will? In fact, if all beings but Men are bound to the Fate of the Music, then how is it possible for any of them to make mistakes? All pain and suffering and horror, no matter how awful it may be, must then have been a part of the Plan, and nothing that is done can circumvent or alter the Destiny that was laid down in the Music.

For myself, I can't buy that. It seems very apparent to me that all of Eru's thinking creations have the options of free will. The one great difference between them is Death. Men know they are going to die, and pass beyond the circles of the world. The Elves and the Ainur of Ea do not. While the Ainur can reasonably presume that they will return to the Timeless Halls and rejoin the rest of their brethren after the end of Ea, the Elves do not know what will become of them. Men, on the other hand, have in their mortality a certainty of what will become of them. If they believe that Death is a gift, and that through it they will pass into another life outside the mortal world, they know that there is more for them beyond it, and that whatever they might have suffered in their life before death, there is hope for a second chance after. If they don't believe it, they at least know that their pain and suffering will end with death. Not so for the immortal. The Elves have either the "imprisonment" of Mandos or a return to the same old life in the same old world to look forward to. The Ainur do not die, and though they may become diminished and impotent, they too are trapped. Only through Death is there a way out of this seemingly vicious circle.

And mortality, with its limitations, also gives an impetus to achieve. If you don't do it now, when will you? Can you wait forever to get around to doing or learning or building, or even loving? The Elves and the Ainur do not feel the press of time in the same way; they may have ambitions, but there is seldom the same sense of immediacy to them as there are with Men -- they CAN take their time, because they've got a lot of it ahead of them. And in this, one can see why it is also said that toward the End, even the Valar would become weary of the world. By then, it will likely have become a cage from which they cannot escape because of their bargain with Eru, made when they entered Ea. They have lost the freedom to go beyond it, and the Elves were designed to remain within it. But not so with Men. To beings stuck in an inescapable cage, being set free through Death would indeed come to envied as a Gift.

I have other thoughts about how this reflects on the events surrounding Gandalf's death and return to life (especially as Tolkien discusses it in Letter 156), but that's another kettle of fish.

[skip spence]

This is an interesting thread. I haven't got time to read it now in full but I will write a few lines nevertheless. Pardon me if it's already been said.

The children of Illuvatar and the dwarves all had a free will from their perspective. Anything else is absurd. If you have no free will, you might as well stay in bed. After all, it's predestined.

Without free will you can't make any moral choices. Frodo would be no better or worse than Úgluk the Ork. Elves, dwarves and even the Ainur would be mere puppets, much like Aule's dwarves were before Eru granted them - that's right - free will.

But if you look at it from the omnipotent Eru's perspective and his Great Music, it isn't quite as simple. No one, not even Manwe, can fully comprehend his great plan. A man trying to understand the designs of Eru would be like an ant trying to learn advanced integral calculus. Maybe men do have the special gift of being able to make their own destiny whereas the other talking people don't. From Eru's perspective this would be possible, but from ours, it wouldn't be comprehendable.

Or is it just me?

(I might return with a better thought out post when I've got time to browse the books and the thread)