Forsight of the Ainur

[Eorl of Rohan]

I've always wondered about this one. In the last topic, the suggestion came up that Mandos(Or Namo, the judge), could forsee the doom that must come upon the Noldor that remained in Middle Earth. Istari, like Olorin, could also forsee an inkling of future.

"If you do not take this hobbit with you, You will fail. And you shall not get advice nor help from me until the shadow falls on you!" I said. And Durin answered, so be it! A forsight is on you, if it is not madness." UNFINISHED TALES

I'm not sure if the quotes are right, but...

"Bilbo was MEANT to find the Ring. And so it was MEANT to come to you" -OLORIN"

I do not FORTELL, for all FORTELLING is now vain - but if you do nto fail in this quest, your hands shall flow with gold and yet gold shall have no dominion on you.

Where comes the forsight of the Ainur and even elves? And the mirror of Galadriel, which can show what is to be... How can fortelling be true unless the future is already shaped out by Illuvatar, and nothing can be done?

And to Men I will give a new gift. ... They shall be not bound up with the FATE of the world,

And there is this part about elves envying men that could evade the ---, which is like fate to the elves, and yet men do not use it for Illuvatar's glory.

Does it mean that men, and men alone, could change the future? If so, how could the fortelling then be true?

Thus became the curse of the Morgoth bauglir fulfilled, and the doom full-wrought.

The valar could change the future, becuase they can lay curses on people - right?

Am I missing something here? Comepletely confused.... If there is a link, I'd appreiciate it.

<font size=1 color=339966>[ 9:43 PM February 02, 2004: Message edited by: Eorl of Rohan ]

[Roa_Aoife]

Some things are indeed meant to be in the books. However, the fortelling of the future is not dictating fate, as is the common misconception. It is, rather, what will happen if things keep going the way they are now. Cuase and effect. The fact is that certain actions are predictable, perhaps more so to the Ainur and the Elves, who are indeed bound by fate and the will of Iluvatar, and are old enough to pick up the general patterns in history. Men have free will and the ability to change the course of events, but often fail to realize this, and may believe themselves to be trapped. As for the reference to Gandalf and Durin, Gandalf was presenting a set of choices. Each choice has a set of consequences. The effect of a single hobbit was realized by a particularly wise (understaement) individual.
Another thing to be pointed out is that in really old world myths and legends, the main antagonist is beset by a list of taboos that will inevetively be broken or a curse that cannot be escaped. Since Tolkien's goal was to give England it's own mythology, writing in this style seems the logical thing to do.

[Finwe]

I think that part of the quandary boils down the question of free will in Middle-earth. I believe there's a thread floating about somewhere in the Books forum about it.

Basically, some accounts seem to make the point that Iluvatar always knows what's going on, no matter how much you try to act using your free will. Everything you do has its uttermost source in him, and thus, he knows what is going on and when things are going to happen. In some situations, he reveals his knowledge to the Ainur so that they may carry out his wishes. Most often, it was Manwë, since the latter was the closest to him. Manwë could then tell his Eagles or some of the other Valar or Ainur to "interfere" or carry out Iluvatar's wishes.

[Roa_Aoife]

But one could also argue that knowing something is going to happen and causing it to happen are two entirely different things. Iluvatar may know one's chopices before they are made, but that does not mean He causes them.

[Finwe]

True, but he could influence them to result in something according to his will.


But if everything has its uttermost source in him and his will, then no matter what happens to Middle-earth, it will be Iluvatar's will. Ergo, he would have no motivation to influence things.


(I think we're going in circles here.)

[Roa_Aoife]

The argument is over a "supreme being" and just what this "supreme being" will do. The arguments will always run in circles unless someone here has a wonderful understanding of supreme beings.
I am a Christian, though, so I'll try comparing Eru to my God, since I believe that's whom Eru was modeled after.
While everything does have it's end and it's beginning in Iluvatar, he can be passive and allow things to happen. At the same time, nothing can happen outside his permission. In comparison to God: in the book of Job, Satan comes before God and asks permission to harm Job. God grants it to a point. Later, it becomes apparent that all the bad things were an object lesson for Job, and an important one at that. I guess the point is, Eru is in control but he takes a mostly passive stance. He might however be setting evrything to his timing.

[Eorl of Rohan]

Wait. I'm confused more then ever. Can you try to explain without getting into religion topics?

[Roa_Aoife]

Sorry bout that. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] The point is bassically, Foretelling is basically "Saw that one coming" or that this is how things will happen if nothing tries to intervene. And while Eru knows whatchoices will be made, He does not chooser to pick one over another. Elves and such have been around so long that they know the patterns of life and what the consequences of certain actions will be. When Gandalf told Durin that if he didn't take Bilbo, the quest would certainly fail, he didn't say it would succeed becuase of Bilbo. Foretelling something isn't a garuntee. It all depends on what the antagonists decide to do.

[doug*platypus]

I think that having been part of and witness to the Ainulindalë, all the Valar and Maiar would have foresight to some degree. They certainly don't act like it most of the time, however! Aulë had no idea that his Dwarves would at first be lifeless automatons and Manwë wasn't wise to the fact that Melkor had not changed his tune after his first imprisonment. Mandos and Ulmo seem to have had the best foresight. It was basically Mandos' job to know what was going to happen; also the Ainulindalë was said to live still in the music of the oceans, so we see the foresight of Ulmo which eventually led to the voyage of Eärendil.

I believe that when the Istari took on the forms of old wizards (became incarnate), they would have lost most of their Maiaric abilities. Presumably that would include foresight. Gandalf at least seems less than certain about pretty much everything. I think that the Istari had foresight in only as much measure as the Eldar. Interesting quote from Galadriel about how "all foretelling is now vain." Círdan was right on the money when he foresaw the need of Gandalf to have the Ring of Fire, but then he was the oldest of the Eldar in Middle-Earth, and "mighty among the wise." Probably in tune with Ulmo and Ossë as well, in a Farmer Maggot-Tom Bombadil kind of way. By which I mean they probably came over for a cup of tea and a chat fairly often.

The question must be asked, did Sauron and Morgoth (and the Balrogs??) have foresight equal to the Valar who were faithful to Manwë? Morgoth spent a lot of his time in Angband looking out at what was happening in Beleriand; I'm not certain whether that involved looking into the future as well. While still in Valinor he foresaw that his doom would come from Turgon. I can't recall a lot of other foresight shown by the baddies. Sauron at the end of the Third Age was too busy playing with his armies to foresee Gandalf smacking him upside the eyeball with the aid of Frodo.

But perhaps it was impossible for Sauron to foresee the importance that halflings would play. Making it the most brilliant scheme that could be concocted by Ilúvatar for the downfall of the Dark Lord. Maybe Sauron and Morgoth didn't pay enough attention to halflings in the Third Theme of Ilúvatar.

[Maédhros]

I think that this might add a little to this Topic:
From Vinyar Tengwar: Ósanwe-kenta

Things may seem alike, but if they are in kind wholly different they must be distinguished. Foresight which is prevision, and forecasting which is opinion made by reasoning upon present evidence, may be identical in their prediction, but they are wholly different in mode, and they should be distinguished by loremasters, even if the daily language of both Elves and Men gives them the same name as departments of wisdom".

Pengolodh here elaborates (though it is not necessary for his argument) this matter of "foresight". No mind, he asserts, knows what is not in it. All that it has experienced is in it, though in the case of the Incarnate, dependent upon the instruments of the hröa, some things may be "forgotten", not immediately available for recollection. But no part of the "future" is there, for the mind cannot see it or have seen it: that is, a mind placed in time. Such a mind can learn of the future only from another mind which has seen it. But that means only from Eru ultimately, or mediately from some mind that has seen in Eru some part of His purpose (such as the Ainur who are now the Valar in Eä). An Incarnate can thus only know anything of the future, by instruction derived from the Valar, or by a revelation coming direct from Eru. But any mind, whether of the Valar or of the Incarnate, may deduce by reason what will or may come to pass. This is not foresight, not though it may be clearer in terms and indeed even more accurate than glimpses of foresight. Not even if it is formed into visions seen in dream, which is a means whereby "foresight" also is frequently presented to the mind.

Minds that have great knowledge of the past, the present, and the nature of Eä may predict with great accuracy, and the nearer the future the clearer (saving always the freedom of Eru). Much therefore of what is called "foresight" in careless speech is only the deduction of the wise; and if it be received, as warning or instruction, from the Valar, it may be only deduction of the wiser, though it may sometimes be "foresight" at second hand.

So that would mean to me is that for the Incarnates (Elves, Men, etc) cannot have "forsesight" because they have no knowledge of the future, only the Ainur (Valar and maiar) can have "foresight". The wise (Incarnates) can only "forecast" based on their knowledge and deduction. The Incarnates seem only to have "foresight" if they received information from a Valar or a maiar.

In the case of Melkor and his ainur, I would have to say that yes, he could have "foresight", but in the case of Melkor, his knowlegde would be less than of other Ainur because he was more interested in other things than in "listening" to the Music. Sauron, IMO, would have had more "information" regarding "the music" than Melkor would. The problem when dealing with Melkor and his agents is that, because they resorted to lying, how could you know when they were lying or telling the truth?

[Durelin]

Originally Posted by Eorl of Rohan

As to this, there is a simple explanation. It was not that Man could foretell the future...but really that they died. This, at least when compared with the elves situation, was a gift. The elves were made to linger on till the end of the World, when they would sing with the Ainur again in the last Music. They were said to be tied to the Earth for all time, and they could never leave it. Men were not tied down, rather their bodies and souls passed from the Earth, and at least their spirits were able to venture to other places. The fate of the world will be but their end of being a part of the world. The Elves will always be a part of the World, and its fate will most likely be their fate. Either that, or they will help decide it, along with the Ainur. Or perhaps a combination of the two.

Now that I think about it, perhaps the fact that Man could not fortell the future was a gift as well.

Most likely foresight came as a gift, along with true wisdom, from a connection with Eru. It was Eru who held the utmost power, and through him an understanding of the World he created could be gained. This foresight, though, is not truly a gift. It is not given, but earned/gained. In the case of Melkor, I doubt he had foresight at all, and if he did, it was a false foresight, or perhaps a foresight limited by his thin connection with Eru, mainly as an enemy. An understanding of one's enemy could also gain Melkor a certain understanding of the ways of his enemies world.

The above rambling contained many ideas, some not fully expressed, I am sure, and maybe not even coherently. Also, many of these ideas are based around opinions. They are just my thoughts on the subject.

-Durelin