the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

The No-God posted 18 Feb 2006, 07:02 by Classic, Commoner

I just want to see what everyone thinks the No-God is based on what little is given about it. Bare with me, I'm going to stumble through this To me, the No-God is the absence of God, a complete void. The Glossary describes the World as, "the plane where the desires of individual souls are hapless before circumstance", circumstance fixed by the desire of the God of Gods. The further one goes into the Outside, the more they are subject to Desire instead of Circumstance. In this case, the desire of the Gods, who's sheer will power allow them to form their own realms. Piety and devotion become important so that an individual may be allowed entrance into one of these realms. Thats why sorcery doesnt work on the No-God, why the Tears of God only embed themselves into his carapace. His will is so powerful as to rival that of the Gods, and if he wins out the Outside turns to Void, the No-God's desire. That's why the Inchoroi use him, if the No-God wins there will be no damnation. I've been viewing the No-God as a God despite the name, maybe veiwing it as a whirling void changes things. Maybe the No-God could control Khellus by becoming his Darkness that comes Before, by moving his soul. This may be how Khellus intends to rewrite scripture, by having a will so powerful he determines the result after a soul passes from the World and into the Outside. Maybe Khellus becomes a God. view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 07:02 by Mog-Pharau, Peralogue

So you don't believe the chorae in the Carapace are there by design? view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 09:02 by Kingmanor, Candidate

I do not think the No-God is any kind of a God. I think he a completely artifical creation. No soul, no connection to the outside. He was built on the Inchoroi homeworld and somehow "summoned" to Earwa for the first apocalypse. The books never talk about the No-God's body, or where his Carapace is kept hidden by the Consult, because its not. Its not there. The Heron Spear sent it back where it came from. I could be completely wrong too. view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 10:02 by Mithfânion, Didact

I've had trouble imagining Mog Pharau from the start. How should I imagine a "carapace"? What is that, some sort of coffin? And that coffins contains Chorea right? And it stands vertically within the whirlwind? Is there an incarnate body of some kind? I thought there would be since he is described as a "he" instead of an "it" but maybe that's not relevant. view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 16:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Well, we know the No-God was created, at least that is what we have been led to suspect. He is obviously sentient but we have heard him described as the Inchoroi's greates weapon. One important semantic distinction I would like to point out is that the No-God was never described as being Summoned... he was described as being Resurected. To me this is a very, very important difference and gives clues as to the nature of the No-God himself. One thing that that I noticed is during Seswatha's dreams, and during Kellhus' revelation upon the circumfix, is to me, the No-God's speech seems almost.... child-like. Aware of itself but unknowing of what it truly is. The repated "Look at me" "What do you see?" etc struck me as being fundamentally.... unknowing of it's nature and aspect, etc. Obviously he is intelligent, and summoned Bashrag, Wracu, and Sranc from outside of the continent of Earwa intentionally. But yea...not sure exactly where I was going just that I saw some sort of self-naivete if you will within the No-God. view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 17:02 by H, Auditor

I think the No-God is the most interesting part of the books, for me at least. I went from liking the story to loving it when the No-God made his first appearance. I'd said before, and still maintain it now, that the No-God is not inherently evil. He was created, and unleashed upon a world that could not possibly sustain him. By his every existance, he cause great harm, but that doesn't make it purposeful (on his part). There's no evidence that i could find that says the No-God actually summoned Sranc (et, al), so much as they could feel his presence and were drawn to it. The Consult certainly knew this, and is probably why they wheeled him out at Mengedda, to draw all the constructs they could to there (Sranc, Wracu, Bashrags, etc.). It was a desperate gambit, because it made the Carapace vulnerable to attack. I don't see the No-God as the 'ultimate weapon', more like a last resort. The No-God was the seal from the Outside, the ultimate goal, why allow it to be assailed, unless it was desperate? (Which, as Akka explains, it seems the battle was. The Wracu were turned back, and Scranc were held at bay. What else was there to throw but the No-God?) As for his Resurection, it would seem that the cheif soul(s) of the No-God exists in the Outside independant of the Carapace (at least, if the voice Kellhus hears is the No-God). Perhaps he is an old, dead, God? If each soul is a pin-prick though to the Outside, the No-God is a gapping maw to the Outside. The Carapace is a coffin in the sense of containing that breech. The Whirlwind is everything being drawn into the vacuum of the Outside. He is endlessly hungry, because it constantly needs to keep the beech open, devouring souls being the only way to do so. Of cource, i'm most probably completely wrong on all this, but that's how i see it so far... view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 17:02 by Kingmanor, Candidate

Everything we say here is speculation. I dont think there is near enough information in the Prince of Nothing to correctly ascertain what the No-God truly is. When we finally learn the secrets of the No-God it will be funny to go back and look at this thread and see how close or how wrong we were. And it certainly is strange the the most powerful being in Earwa says "WHAT AM I?" view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 19:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

As a correction to my earlier post, I stand corrected. After re-reading several passages in TTT and the glossary I see that the No-God was described as being summoned, he will be Resurected for the Second Apocalypse. [quote author="H"]There's no evidence that i could find that says the No-God actually summoned Sranc (et, al), so much as they could feel his presence and were drawn to it. [/quote] In the Glossary description of the Apocalypse it is said that when the No-God was summoned, and first drew breath, the Bashrag, Wracu, and Sranc harkened to his call. Sranc at least, and likely Bashrag and Wracu had been present since the begiining of the Apcalypse, prior to the summoning of the No-God (the beginnings of the Apocalypse are called the Great Sranc Wars and the hordes are mentioned in the battles prior to the summoning) but when the No-God arrived, hordes of Sranc, Bashrag, and Wracu came, hearkening to his call, from all over the world. He is able to directly control these creations of the Inchoroi as extensions of his own will so I personally find it likely he actively called them, rather than they simply being attracted.[/quote] view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 20:02 by Shryke, Candidate

I find it interesting that the No-God seems to exert some sort of control, and talks through, only those creatures WITHOUT souls. This, to me, seems to be our biggest clue as to the essence of what it is. If men and nonmen souls are like bits of god peaking through the cracks of the world from the outside, maybe the no-god is somehow analegous to the outside but for those creatures that are souless? *Shrug* just some thoughts I had on the subject. view post


posted 18 Feb 2006, 21:02 by Mog-Pharau, Peralogue

As you might surmise from my forum name, the No-God is one of if not my most favorite elements in the series. :) First, I also find it very interesting that it asks questions about itself, suggesting some fundamental incapacity to perceive itself in some way...Hmm, could this capacity be--in the metaphysics of PoN--the soul? Seswatha definitely had a soul, and the No-God asked its questiosn of him...The skin-spies are described as being soulless--save the one sorcerous one, I suppose--and their identities are also fluid. Sranc seem more or less interchangeable, or at least we haven't been shown any evidence that they possess individual identities. The Wracu are a notable exception to this. Second, it seems pretty clear to me that the Bashrag and Wracu, at least, are Inchoroi creations. The Bashrag seem to be three human bodies fused into one, while I think the Wracu are directly spoken of as creations. Or am I totally making this up? Maybe if I read this series as much as I have the Hitchhiker's Guide, I'll have it all memorized and won't have to rely on fading impressions. Third, I don't think the No-God is sorcerous or connected to the Outside at all. I don't think it can be. Chorae destroy patterns made with what I guess we can call--for lack of another term, let alone a better one--"Outside stuff," or (for brevity's sake), "Outsidium". (:wink:) The Ciphrang is basically fully composed of Outsidium, its Mark being carved "nauseatingly deep," etc. These demons are as easily destroyed by Chorae as sorcerors are. The more one uses sorcery, the more one seems to fuse with the Outside, as some nonmen sorcerors--having used sorcery for an awful long time--are said to have not been able to even come within a certain distance of chorae for fear of salting away (remember Seswatha's view of Mekeritrig's Mark in the Dream of Dagliash). If the No-God were an incredibly powerful piece of sorcery, like a Ciphrang, it probably wouldn't be able to have even one chorae imbedded in its Carapace, let alone eleven of them. Of course, the glossary says only that, "it is said to" have had those chorae, so who knows... EDIT: The carapace is described as, I think, an "iron sarcophagus," which incidentally also brings to mind something dead, so I have been sort of envisioning a multifaceted, black, dull thing, elongated and slightly wider at the top than the bottom. The facets are my own invention, but I think they look better in my mind's eye than just smooth metal. :wink: How one is supposed to see this thing through a whirlwind, however... view post


posted 19 Feb 2006, 01:02 by unJon, Auditor

[quote="Shryke":1g03ix2z]I find it interesting that the No-God seems to exert some sort of control, and talks through, only those creatures WITHOUT souls. This, to me, seems to be our biggest clue as to the essence of what it is.[/quote:1g03ix2z] This is interesting because in the last dream of Akka (the one that goes wrong), the no-god speaks through the Kyranean King. view post


posted 19 Feb 2006, 03:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Mog-Pharau":1hoptjwl] Second, it seems pretty clear to me that the Bashrag and Wracu, at least, are Inchoroi creations. The Bashrag seem to be three human bodies fused into one, while I think the Wracu are directly spoken of as creations. Or am I totally making this up? [/quote:1hoptjwl] The Sranc, Bashrag, and Wracu are all creations of the Inchoroi. The Bashrag were an attempt to counter the Non-men Siqu and as Scott has mentioned in a question on the Q&A section the only way the Inchoroi could make them string enough was by the fusing of skeletal structures in triplicate (at least for limbs and such.) In away Scott has said they are kind of analogous to Tolkien's Trolls. As someone else pointed out the Wracu seem to be the only one of these creations we have seen true distinct identities for. Hmm that is interesting. Anyway yea all three are Inchoroi creations. view post


posted 19 Feb 2006, 03:02 by Harrol, Moderator

One point I found interesting about the no-god was at the end of The Warrior Prophet. Systhenese(sp) brother was asked by that tribes man if he was the no-god. His reaction was as if he had been paid the highest compliment ever. Does anyone else think that this may be a clue as to whether or not the no-god is a creation of the Inchoroi or just something they found. view post


posted 19 Feb 2006, 11:02 by Mithfânion, Didact

[i:ig0dfsvj]I find it interesting that the No-God seems to exert some sort of control, and talks through, only those creatures WITHOUT souls. This, to me, seems to be our biggest clue as to the essence of what it is. [/i:ig0dfsvj] Shryke, I am not so sure Sranc, Bashrag or Wracu are soulless at all. Was this mentioned at any point, specifically? Mog [i:ig0dfsvj]The Bashrag seem to be three human bodies fused into one, while I think the Wracu are directly spoken of as creations. Or am I totally making this up?[/i:ig0dfsvj] Well the Bashrag, like the Sranc, seem to have been made using the Cunuroi genome rather than the human one. On the No-God in general: As was mentioned, the No-God is described as being summoned. I therefore do not think he is, like the Heron Spear, an original creation of the Inchoroi Tekne though I realize of course that we cannot exclude that possibility at the moment. Obviously the Inchoroi must have had earlier knowledge of the No-God (perhaps from the planet where they originally hailed from) because otherwise I don't see why they would summon him. I do know that it was mentioned that they are using the Tekne to [b:ig0dfsvj]resurrect[/b:ig0dfsvj] him, but that is a different matter. Orginally, he was [b:ig0dfsvj]summoned[/b:ig0dfsvj]. Now, note that Kellhus, in his infinte cleverness, touches on a sore point in his conversation with Aurang when he states that the No-God speaks to him and has let Kellhus know that he is displeased with Aurang, who "failed him". This clearly agitates Aurang greatly. We also have the other Inchoroi at TWP's end who once more confirms the reverence for the No-God. This further confirms (to me) that the No-God is something greater than the Inchoroi, something greater than what they could create. They did not control the No-God, but worked for him, even as he furthered their ultimate goal of mass extinction. What I personally wonder about is why Kellhsu dreams of him [b:ig0dfsvj]now[/b:ig0dfsvj]. What does this mean? It would seem to indicate that Mog Pharau's mind or spirit is still very much alive, and just waiting for it to be resurrected. view post


posted 19 Feb 2006, 15:02 by zarathustra, Peralogue

Yes Mithfânion, I would agree that the No-God was summoned just as much by the Mangaecca than being a product of the Tekne this is kind of alluded to in TTT where Aurang talks of the cunning of men ressurecting their aborted designs. I think though that Sranc Bashrag and Wracu do not have souls as this is something that the Tekne cannot normally produce apart from the one accidental skin spy. I think that is important in understanding how the No-God can control them as extensions of his will. Along with this is the fact that all children are still born; it could be said that they do not have souls. This would suggest to me that the No-Gods precence in the world can be seen as partly sealing it off from the outside i.e. no new souls can enter the world. I wonder if the No-God has a soul himself. Perhaps not as he does not seem to be properly self aware. Yet he no doubt exists as a force in the outside There is a curious passage in TTT were Cnauir talks about his new skin spy 'friends' he says that they are "keepers of the inverse flame". I think that is important but I don't know why. view post


posted 19 Feb 2006, 21:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Yea Zarathustra, it was mentioned that the No-God's coming "broke the Great Cycle of Souls" which I think means exactly what you said it does, no new souls could enter the world which is why all births were still births. As a general rule creations of the Tekne are Soulless, if they did have Souls there would be a small number among them who could work Sorcery. It is absolutly necessary that to be able to work Sorcery one must also have a soul. Which is why Maithenet was gald that the Consult were never able too replicate what happened with that one Skin-Spy. It was unique in that it had a soul. Imagine Srance, Wracu, and Bashrag Sorcerors? *shudders* view post


posted 19 Feb 2006, 23:02 by unJon, Auditor

[quote="Entropic_existence":hblq3nbv]Which is why Maithenet was gald that the Consult were never able too replicate what happened with that one Skin-Spy. It was unique in that it had a soul. Imagine Srance, Wracu, and Bashrag Sorcerors? *shudders*[/quote:hblq3nbv] I do not recall Maithenet knowing that the skin-spy was unique, just that it was the first he had seen/hear of. I don't think that we can conclude that there aren't other skin-spies with souls. Remember that they can also see Chigra in a Mandate Schoolman just like the Synthese can. Though I don't want to say that they all have souls. Just saying, well not really sure, but that we can't say that none still alive have souls. bleh, don't think this makes much sense now upon re-reading. oh well. view post


posted 20 Feb 2006, 00:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

No others with a Soul were found yes, there is always the possiblity there is another out there, but think of the odds. The Skin-Spy who did have a soul was an abberation, a freak. If the Consult had of being able to duplicate it knowingly we would definitly have seen more. So yes could there be more? Of course But it is the exception to the rule, rather than a defining case. view post


posted 20 Feb 2006, 01:02 by unJon, Auditor

I'm still not convinced about the magnitude of the abberration. The Consult has a good reason to not teach the skin-spies the Gnosis: they would be Marked. So if the skin-spy was to take over a non-sorceror position, he would have to not know the Gnosis or else it would be easy for any Sorceror to notice the infiltration. For example the skin-spy that takes over Skeas (sp? the emporer's advisor in TDTCB) would have to not know the Gnosis or the Imperial Saik would sniff it out immediately. While I'm not sure that I believe it myself, I think that we cannot rule out the possibility that all skin spies have souls. It helps explain how they can see Chigra. And then the proportion of skin-spies that can learn sorcery might be the same as the proportion of humans that are among the few (admittedly still a small number). view post


posted 20 Feb 2006, 04:02 by Mog-Pharau, Peralogue

Hmm...now, does Maithanet believe in what he preaches? Moenghus seems to say he was sent to prepare the way, thus intimating that he is simply pretending toward the ends of stopping the Consult. view post


posted 21 Feb 2006, 05:02 by Kingmanor, Candidate

Maithanet pretends just as much as Kellhus does. Neither truly believes what they preach. Just a means to an end. view post


posted 21 Feb 2006, 16:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

You can't apply that as a blanket statement to either one, whether they believe or not is often far more complex. I think it is pretty clear that Kelhus does believe some of what he preaches, even if he embellishes, simplifies, and manipulates as a tool to achieve his own ends. But he set against the Consult now, so at least some of what they preach, they do honestly believe :) Some anyway.... how much is the real question :) view post


posted 23 Feb 2006, 02:02 by RiderOnTheStorm, Candidate

What the No-God reminds me of most is the warped child that powers the virtual reality universe in Tad Williams Otherland series. Its been a few years since i read Otherland so i dont remeber specifics and cant make page to page comparisons but that is what good ole Mog reminds me of. view post


Reincaration? posted 23 Feb 2006, 08:02 by Cu Roi, Candidate

This thought occured to me while writing in another forum. I intended to sleep but wanted to be sure that I wasn't imagining things. Entropic_existence, where does it say that the coming of the No-God interrupted the great cycle of souls? A cycle would imply reincarnation. A theme not yet touched upon in PoN. Curious. view post


Re: Reincaration? posted 23 Feb 2006, 09:02 by anor277, Didact

[quote="Cu Roi":2ei58vxb]This thought occured to me while writing in another forum. I intended to sleep but wanted to be sure that I wasn't imagining things. Entropic_existence, where does it say that the coming of the No-God interrupted the great cycle of souls? A cycle would imply reincarnation. A theme not yet touched upon in PoN. Curious.[/quote:2ei58vxb] I think the "great cycle of souls" interuption was mentioned in one of Achamian's dreams towards the end of TTT, I might find a page number a bit later. I think the reference was to the pandemic of still births that ensued after the No-God was summoned/created (which for mine was the most bloody evil thing I've ever read - in the evil stakes the No-God beats Sauron, Morgoth and Lord Voldemort, he's up there with Mrs Coulter). Anyway, the still births arguably did represent the interuption to the great cycle of souls, no new souls were introduced into the world during the No-God's existence. I don't think a reference to reincarnation is tenable. view post


posted 23 Feb 2006, 15:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Yea it was either in one of Achamian's Dreams or in one of the Glossary entries but not sure which or a page number right now, but it was the exact wording used. As Anor pointed out a cycle doesn't need to imply reincarnation. Soulds do cycle through Earwa even if they aren't reused. view post


posted 15 Mar 2006, 19:03 by Anonymous, Subdidact

DELETED view post


posted 15 Mar 2006, 20:03 by H, Auditor

But the fact that he doesn't know what he is would point to his not being a 'god' and actually have been created somehow... view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 00:03 by anor277, Didact

[quote="H":znwwqqi7]But the fact that he doesn't know what he is would point to his not being a 'god' and actually have been created somehow...[/quote:znwwqqi7] The carapace of the No-God was also covered with chorae. He is obviously a different order from the Ciphrang, lesser gods who were affected by chorae. The nature of the No-God and his relationaship to the Consult will be one of the most interesting discoveries we make in the next novels. While the Consult "raised" him, it is hard to see such a terrifying being under the control of Shauriatis, Mekeritrig, etc. By the same token the Sranc, the Bashrag, the Wracu, were clearly under the No-Gods control - witness one of Seswatha's dreams where he battles a dragon "Your god (i.e. the dragons) is not a God at all". And why did the Scylvendi worship him? view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 02:03 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

I think hia name should be saying something to you No-God view post


posted 02 Apr 2006, 11:04 by Curethan, Didact

Hmm, I have a theory about the nature of the no-god. I think he may be "manufactured" through the sythesis of the Scylvendi's "dead god". The Consult are, after all, not inchoroi to my interperation. They are humans and non-men who allied with them, and have since become synthese, products of the Tekne. The No-god is sealed by choroi for a good reason to my mind. He is sealed inside the world of the three seas - dead on the "outside". This would explain why he cannot know his nature. He would be a neccesary tool for sealing the world from outside imo, a way to suck all the souls of the world up, a diversion from the normal flow of the cycle of souls. Hey, and remember that the chorae are called the "tears of god", yet they originate from the consult. view post


posted 02 Apr 2006, 13:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Curethan":2h0l4y1u]Hmm, I have a theory about the nature of the no-god. I think he may be "manufactured" through the sythesis of the Scylvendi's "dead god". [/quote:2h0l4y1u] I think you have this backwards, the Scylvendi's dead God is the No-God but we really don't know when they started worshipping him in the first place. Obviously there was knowledge among certain circles (The Inchoroi and the Consult) about the No-God but we really don't know where this knowledge came from in the first place. If it had of stemmed from the Scylvendi's knowledge though I have a feeling the existence and nature of the No-God would have been much broader. [quote:2h0l4y1u]The Consult are, after all, not inchoroi to my interperation. They are humans and non-men who allied with them, and have since become synthese, products of the Tekne. [/quote:2h0l4y1u] The Consult isn't the Inchoroi, you are right. In fact there are only two surviving Inchoroi that we know about Aurang and Aurax. The Inchoroi predate the Consult, but now the two Inchoroi are really just members of the Consult. They stand in the upper echelon of power though, along with a few other non-Inchoroi. We have reason to believe that human members of the Consult use the Tekne along with sorcery to extend their lifespans, they may even have immortalized themselves in the manner that the Inchoroi did to the Non-men but we don't know for sure. The Consult have not become Synthese however. The Synthese are merely shells created by the Tekne that Consult members (we've only seen Aurang do this but I think any member could) possess. Remember the quotes in the book describing how Aurangs true form would be back in Golgoterath surrounded by Consult Sorcerors performing a continous ritual while Aurang possessed and acted through the Synthese. [quote:2h0l4y1u]The No-god is sealed by choroi for a good reason to my mind. He is sealed inside the world of the three seas - dead on the "outside". This would explain why he cannot know his nature. He would be a neccesary tool for sealing the world from outside imo, a way to suck all the souls of the world up, a diversion from the normal flow of the cycle of souls.[/quote:2h0l4y1u] We know that the cycle was interupted by his presence during the Apocalypse, as no new births happened. But I'm not sure what you mean here, he is inside yet being used Outside? I'm not sure if he literally sucks up souls, sealed Earwa off from souls re-entering, or if his presence caused the stillbirths not by blocking the souls but caused no new births to happen and that is what blocked the cycle of souls. [quote:2h0l4y1u]Hey, and remember that the chorae are called the "tears of god", yet they originate from the consult.[/quote:2h0l4y1u] Well their origins actually predate the Consult, they were made by the Non-men Aporetic Sorcerors under the tutelage and protection of the Inchoroi, before the Consult ever formed. They were given to the Men of Eanna when those Men invaded and fought against the Non-men and did the whole "Breaking of the Gates" deal and all that. Men; however, in general I don't think know it was the Inchoroi who were the source of the Chorae or under what guise the Inchoroi gave them too them. Since the Men of Eanna felt mandated by the Gods to invade and wage war against the Non-men obscenities (as they saw them) it is no wonder they saw them as heaven sent. Without the Chorae the Men of Eanna never would have been able to match the already weakened Non-men. view post


posted 02 Apr 2006, 18:04 by zarathustra, Peralogue

Good answers from EE there. Here are a few rambling thoughts of my own about the No-God. I do see him as a physical entity when in Earwa this is because other "demons" are harmed by Chorea. Kellhus dreams of him as a half man half beast figure. A description of the No-God by Achamian is that he is less than more than a demon. The No-God is able to make tactical plans (this is shown by deciding to withold sacking of Sarkarpus in order to preserve his sorcerors from the Choric hoard there -info posted by Scott) therefore rather than being a unreasoning force or entity he is capable of consciousness and reasoning. Yet it seems he is unable to comprehend his own identity. I have been rereading TDTCB and in quite an eerie passage Cnauir asks himself twice "What do you see". This led me to see a parallel between the two of them that both are capable of intelligence yet are unable to understand their own being. Though less drastically in Cnauir's case. A couple more thoughts The Skin Spies when talking to Cnauir claim to worship the inverse flame the Nonman name for the No-God means "The Angel of Endless Hunger" so not unlike a flame in that a flame is always hungry and devours. view post


posted 02 Apr 2006, 22:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Thanks Zarathustra, and some good thoughts there. I tend to think along the lines of the No-God being impossible to define given what we know, and I look forward to discovering more in AE. The No-God may still end up being nearly indefinable in any one way. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 10:04 by Curethan, Didact

Hey, thanks for the feedback guys. :D Very interesting points there, obv. I'm not the first to detect a link between the no-god and the dead god of the Scylvendi. I'll try and clarify the cycle of souls thing, EE. It seems to me that the passage of (human) souls from Earwa is determined by the gods to which they pay homage (do a good job worshiping in their chsen way, get a ticket to one of their pocket realities in the afterlife). For it to be a cycle, souls must obviously come the other way too. Thus, souls' passage from the world to the "outside" and vice versa must in some way be linked to the gods. Remembering that the Scylvendi were originally one of the five tribes of men and were not allied to the consult [u:jailrro7]before[/u:jailrro7] the summoning of Mog-pharau, the fact that they worshipped only one god (I think he was the god of war too?) suggests that he was quite a major diety. Perhaps by summoning him [u:jailrro7]completely[/u:jailrro7] into the world (a more powerful version of summoning, and a good reason that such practices would lead to damnation), the Inchoroi were able to kind of subvert and short circuit the link that he originally played in the human cycle of souls. Thus, instead of passing into the outside or inhabiting the bodies of the babies for which they were destined on the way into the world, the souls were drawn to him ... creating a kind of whirldwind that constanly surrounded him even? This would make the Consult's aim of sealing the world off from the outside almost complete, they could've just sat in the Incu-Holinais and waited for everyone to die of old age, I guess... His carapace would be some kind of prison or casing for a pocket dimension that binds him. Well, it kinda makes sense to me... Oh yeah, and the only kind of diety that the Consult would venerate would be their instrument of liberation from damnation, he doesn't need to serve any other purpose to be the closest thing they would ever get to regarding as "holy". view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 11:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Curethan":2fqfjp9b]His carapace would be some kind of prison or casing for a pocket dimension that binds him.[/quote:2fqfjp9b] Hmm, the tekne equivalent of daimotic sorcery? Only more effective? The only difficulty I have is this: how does denying a newborn (newly conceived) child a soul stop it from being born alive? Apparantly, being animated, organic, and capable to reacting to your environment does not require a soul (e.g. skin spies). I'm unsure about animals; did Daybreak have a soul? (I've always wondered about Akka's line "a sourcerous bird?" upon spotting the synthese; I've never been able to assess just how absurd the thought was to him.) I had the impression that some cratures have the property to absorb souls from the outside, while others have not; and that the plan was to kill off enough of those creatures to stop souls from pouring "in". (Perhaps souls have a kind "gravity" and by lessening the pull from this world cause "outside" to be drawn to a "heavier" world?) I'd argue that "life" doesn't require souls, so how does creating a "soul sucker" from a "God-in-a-box" cause still born babies? I've seen the No-God similar to you (I think), but I've never been able to reconcile that view with that the No-God seems to be anti-life, rather than anti-soul. Interesting questions, I think. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 13:04 by Curethan, Didact

Perhaps it is the act of him absorbing, then perhaps using or transforming the nascent souls that results in the the stillborn children. Thus the end justifies the means. Earlier, when I described the dead-god as manufactured, I meant to imply that my impression of the synthese led me to think that the Inchoroi's creations were synthesised from fauna native to Earwa and the Tekne. When they made first contact with the non-men they had no mouths with which to communicate, but they quickly progressed to the point where they could manipulate the "genetics" of the non-men to make them nigh immortal with the Tekne, so it stands to reason that many of their creations would be pervsions of creatures they found on Earwa - a synthesis of the Tekne and the Onta, maybe. It seems that the summoning of the No-god etc happened after they had been given knowledge of the Gnosis by the renegade school... (Interesting that they could make chorae [i:1o8naqk4]before[/i:1o8naqk4] that though.) view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 13:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Curethan":2fbl33vs]Perhaps it is the act of him absorbing, then perhaps using or transforming the nascent souls that results in the the stillborn children. Thus the end justifies the means.[/quote:2fbl33vs] Checking if I understand: So, it's possible to start life without a soul, but if you start with one, and then it's wrested from your body this results in a system shock that leads to death. So, the No-God would not re-direct the flow of souls instantly, but snatch them after an "incubation period". Interesting thought. [quote:2fbl33vs]Earlier, when I described the dead-god as manufactured, I meant to imply that my impression of the synthese led me to think that the Inchoroi's creations were synthesised from fauna native to Earwa and the Tekne.[/quote:2fbl33vs] [quote:2fbl33vs]...so it stands to reason that many of their creations would be pervsions of creatures they found on Earwa - a synthesis of the Tekne and the Onta, maybe.[/quote:2fbl33vs] Hmm, I always thought the "tekne" was pretty much just bio-tech, meaning that I saw the "synthese" not so much as "synthesised from fauna native to Earwa [b:2fbl33vs]and[/b:2fbl33vs] the Tekne", more like "synthesised from fauna native to Earwa [b:2fbl33vs]using[/b:2fbl33vs] the Tekne". Also, I would view the "onta" as the rawmaterial the "tekne" works with. (Science and technology working with the "thingly world"). [quote:2fbl33vs]It seems that the summoning of the No-god etc happened after they had been given knowledge of the Gnosis by the renegade school... (Interesting that they could make chorae [i:2fbl33vs]before[/i:2fbl33vs] that though.)[/quote:2fbl33vs] Perhaps they didn't have the expert knowledge with them. They crashed without a "seal-off-a-planet-expert", but with a copy of "Chorae making for dummies". Meaning they had to start from scratch. Or perhaps their technology worked differently on their Homeworld because of some hidden variable. What if - on their homeworld - the connection between the outside and "here" was much weaker, and the chorae were basically devices to "communicate with the outside". In a world where the connection is already strong the devices might augment that connection to the extent that the "communicator" is instantly pulled into the outside, or disperses into the here and now because the illusions that constitute "being" fall away (which would then explain why even beings from the outside, such as Ciphrang, are threatened by this). Just rambling, really. Head's swimming. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 21:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Curethan":7y8o4a19] Very interesting points there, obv. I'm not the first to detect a link between the no-god and the dead god of the Scylvendi. [/quote:7y8o4a19] There is a link, I just think you had it backwards is all. Lokung is the No-God but I think the idea of the No-God comes before Lokung as oppossed to the other way around. [quote:7y8o4a19] I'll try and clarify the cycle of souls thing, EE. It seems to me that the passage of (human) souls from Earwa is determined by the gods to which they pay homage (do a good job worshiping in their chsen way, get a ticket to one of their pocket realities in the afterlife). For it to be a cycle, souls must obviously come the other way too. Thus, souls' passage from the world to the "outside" and vice versa must in some way be linked to the gods. [quote:7y8o4a19] Definitly, I wasn't disputing the cycle at all :) We don't know for sure if reincarnation actually happens or not, in fact the only options usually mentioned are damnation, salvation, or oblivion. But it is described as a cycle, which implies reincarnation. [quote:7y8o4a19] Remembering that the Scylvendi were originally one of the five tribes of men and were not allied to the consult [u:7y8o4a19]before[/u:7y8o4a19] the summoning of Mog-pharau, the fact that they worshipped only one god (I think he was the god of war too?) suggests that he was quite a major diety. [/quote:7y8o4a19] I'm don't recall any information from the books that talked about the Scylvendi's religious beliefs pre-apocalypse so I can't comment on that. I also only have access to TTT. I also don't recall exactly when the Scylvendi allied with the Consult, they appear to have at the least been allied with them since the beginning of the Apocalypse and they may have even been close to them before this. I don't think we've been given any information or details about this. [quote:7y8o4a19] Perhaps by summoning him [u:7y8o4a19]completely[/u:7y8o4a19] into the world (a more powerful version of summoning, and a good reason that such practices would lead to damnation), the Inchoroi were able to kind of subvert and short circuit the link that he originally played in the human cycle of souls. Thus, instead of passing into the outside or inhabiting the bodies of the babies for which they were destined on the way into the world, the souls were drawn to him ... creating a kind of whirldwind that constanly surrounded him even? This would make the Consult's aim of sealing the world off from the outside almost complete, they could've just sat in the Incu-Holinais and waited for everyone to die of old age, I guess... His carapace would be some kind of prison or casing for a pocket dimension that binds him. Well, it kinda makes sense to me... Oh yeah, and the only kind of diety that the Consult would venerate would be their instrument of liberation from damnation, he doesn't need to serve any other purpose to be the closest thing they would ever get to regarding as "holy".[/quote:7y8o4a19][/quote:7y8o4a19][/quote:7y8o4a19] The only thing I would point out is that the No-God is called the No-God for just that reason, I don't think he was an actual recognized diety from the Outside at any point in time. Of course We won't know anything about this until AE, if then. :) view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 21:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Ok I'm going to post some thoughts based on the discussion above, but I'm too lazy to start quoting from multiple posts! :) Hehehe anyway Animals do not inherently have souls, but once in awhile an animal "awakens" and gains one. This is similar to the skin-spies. They are inherently soulless but at least once it happened that an aberation was born that had/gained a soul. Humans, Inchoroi, and Non-men are the only inherently souled creatures on the planet. Relating this back to the No-God and stillbirths I tend to see it as anti-life. But then again, Sranc were capable of reproducing during this period I believe, as were animals. So his presence was not anethema to all life, merely human. While we have soulless, intellgient, complex creatures that exist perhaps the soul is an inherent and necessary part of being human. In short... I can see two mechanisms by which the No-God interupted the cycle (merely somehow preventing new births) or by causing no new souls to be able to enter by his presence which caused the stillbirths. I tend to lean towards the former, but I don't discount the later. The Tekne and Sorcery work on completely different principles, although I am sure in some sense the Consult have blended the use of the two. The Synthese for instance are merely empty shells constructed by the Tekne, and the bulk of the Tekne seems to be more along the lines of genetic engineering/bio-engineering than anything. The Inchoroi, and now the Consult who has surpassed what the Inchoroi had left as far as knowledge goes, have had their technological sophistication refered to as being expert crafters of flesh. The origins of the Chorae lie with the Non-men. There was a group practicing Aporetic Sorcery, which as we know turns on paradox. The Non-men as a whole banned it because it was too dangerous and the Inchoroi ended up taking them in (this is prior to the formation of the Consult by quite some time). The Inchoroi and their Erratic Non-men allies used them during the wars that followed, and gave them to the men of Eanna to use against the Non-men as well during their religiously motivated invasions. I hope these observations and comments help clarify a few things in the discussion as well as providing some meaningful stuff to work with :) Lets keep it up folks. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 22:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote:1buq4hrb]The origins of the Chorae lie with the Non-men. There was a group practicing Aporetic Sorcery, which as we know turns on paradox. The Non-men as a whole banned it because it was too dangerous and the Inchoroi ended up taking them in (this is prior to the formation of the Consult by quite some time). The Inchoroi and their Erratic Non-men allies used them during the wars that followed, and gave them to the men of Eanna to use against the Non-men as well during their religiously motivated invasions.[/quote:1buq4hrb] Ah, yes. I missed that (or never noticed that). Thanks for the clarification. :) *** I'm aware that the tekne and sorcery work differently; I'm just speculating whether it is possible to manipulate the outside via non sorcerous means. Indirectly. Perhaps by simulating a human, stealing a soul, and causing a chainreaction. I'm having trouble with a world that has an "outside," and where I'm forced to take souls as an actuality. But I do suspect that a god with no connection to the "outside" left would, indeed, be unable to comprehend itself. I find Curethan's theory interesting, and not unplausible. I've mused the No-God's just a biological weapon, but he's a bit more complex. An AI-driven biological weapon, perhaps? With a remote control called "heron spear"? *grin* The idea that a soul is necessary to humans is interesting, but, then, "sealing the world off from the outside" would mean no more humans. IIRC, this hasn't been hinted at in the discussion between Khelluss and Möenghus. Which says nothing, really. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 22:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Yes, bottom line is we don't know enough about the nature of the No-God to get much past the random speculation stage of theory building. I'm not sure if the Consult would be too concerned with no new humans being born anyway, they've probably made themselves pretty much immortal anyway, and as long as they ciorcumvent damnation they are fine. Like I said I lean more towards the fact that the presence of the No-God prevented life as opposed to blocked souls. It also may have some sort of connection/origin to the Outside, but it is not a diety in the traditional sense. Or should I say, not a God/Diety as one is defined within the world of tPoN. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 22:04 by Gregor Lux, Candidate

I think this is what makes our anticipation for Aspect Emperor so high - the questions surrounding the origins of the No-God and the role of the No-God in the future. I'm still making my mind up on what I think of the No-God. All I can safely think of is that it was either summoned or manufactured and many of the post are clearly helping my make my decision. (Thanks EE for you well-thought out views). My take on the future is that if and when the No-God returns it will be in a much different form than previously. Definitely something we may not expect. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 22:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Entropic_existence":uuo1s0ic]Or should I say, not a God/Diety as one is defined within the world of tPoN.[/quote:uuo1s0ic] So, did any talk about deities in PoN go beyond vague specalutions and believer's rhetoric? The closest was Khellus explaining how sorcery works, and that left the concept of "God/Gods" quite open, to my mind. The only thing we can safely say about "god/gods" is that they're things of the outside. Did I miss anything? [quote:uuo1s0ic]I'm not sure if the Consult would be too concerned with no new humans being born anyway, they've probably made themselves pretty much immortal anyway, and as long as they ciorcumvent damnation they are fine.[/quote:uuo1s0ic] The consult isn't my concern. It's that Khellus seems to think that a Dûnyain would take the side of consult to avoid damning, once they learn enough about souls. If we assume that souls are a prerequisite for human existance then that would mean that the Dûnyain would commit suicide doing so. (Though, Khellus might muse that they will remain ignorant of that to the last, or be unaware of that himself. Or, alternately, avoiding damnation at the cost of death might be the Logical decision.) view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 23:04 by H, Auditor

But that's assuming the Dunyain don't already know about souls. The fact that they just happened to breed, not only supperiour manipulators and phisical warriors, but also super socerers as well, strikes me as not so coincidental. Plus, the Dunyain themselves wouldn't belive in coincidence, 8) Not only that, but they lied to Kellhus and the others about sorcery. They had to have known that sorcery existed, and would still exist. They had to have lied for a reason... So if they understood sorcery, shouldn't they have at least a slight knowledge of the soul? Perhaps i'm off track here, but i would tend to think so... view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 23:04 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Ummm...there goal is to become self-moving souls so i would assume they know about souls. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 23:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="H":2e4tcu0p]Not only that, but they lied to Kellhus and the others about sorcery. They had to have known that sorcery existed, and would still exist. They had to have lied for a reason...[/quote:2e4tcu0p] Well, it's possible that the Dûnyain (some of them) know about sorcery, but it's not a "had to have known", I'd say. Although the dreams would have presented a hint. We know too little about the Dûnyain, really. [quote:2e4tcu0p]Plus, the Dunyain themselves wouldn't belive in coincidence,[/quote:2e4tcu0p] Why not? [quote="Warrior_Poet":2e4tcu0p]Ummm...there goal is to become self-moving souls so i would assume they know about souls.[/quote:2e4tcu0p] Yes. they know about the term "soul", but they interpret it differently: "The soul, in the Dûnyain world view, [i:2e4tcu0p]is part of the world[/i:2e4tcu0p], and therefore as much driven by prior events as anything else." [size=75:2e4tcu0p]Encyclopedic Glossary[/size:2e4tcu0p] This doesn't seem too compatible with the notion of an "outside", to me. view post


posted 03 Apr 2006, 23:04 by anor277, Didact

[quote="H":hsxd3sco]But that's assuming the Dunyain don't already know about souls. The fact that they just happened to breed, not only supperiour manipulators and phisical warriors, but also super socerers as well, strikes me as not so coincidental. Plus, the Dunyain themselves wouldn't belive in coincidence, 8) Not only that, but they lied to Kellhus and the others about sorcery. They had to have known that sorcery existed, and would still exist. They had to have lied for a reason... So if they understood sorcery, shouldn't they have at least a slight knowledge of the soul? Perhaps i'm off track here, but i would tend to think so...[/quote:hsxd3sco] This view certainly contradicts the few facts we know of the Dunyain. The Dunyain are innocent of the knoweldge of sorcery - they expunged all such records when they occupied Ishual, Kellhus was amazed (and defeated) by his first experience of sorcery, a similar revelation probably befell Moenghus. Both Moenghus and Kelllhus held that the Dunyain were masters of the mundane. They were consistent in their belief that the Dunyain had no knowledge of the arcane. Even though the Dunyain bred (unknowingly) prodigious sorcerors with souls (whatever they are) at present we would be mistaken to think that this is anything but coincidence. view post


posted 04 Apr 2006, 00:04 by stormchaser, Candidate

[quote:ysb1am6z]I'm not sure if the Consult would be too concerned with no new humans being born anyway, they've probably made themselves pretty much immortal anyway, and as long as they ciorcumvent damnation they are fine. [/quote:ysb1am6z] And yet, at one point doesn't the Synthese Old Name say to a skin spy, with obvious yearning that is almost sexual in intensity: "Imagine a world where no womb quickens", or something very like that (I'm quoting from memory). This would seem to imply that the Consult does indeed care about humans being born - or not, as the case may be. The idea that human births might come to an end seems to positively excite them. I'd say they care. As for damnation, exactly what does that mean in this context? To my knowledge there isn't much discussion of the afterlife at all in the book, and I don't recall a mention of any specific Hell that the damned must go to. In the absence of Hell, why is damnation such a big deal, especially if you're immortal anyway and may never face it? Does it seem reasonable to you that the issue of potential damnation alone has provided the motivation for all the evil of the Consult, up to and including the summoning/creation of the No-God? I think the damnation thing may only be an excuse - in reality these are people who have been thoroughly corrupted over the years by the Inchoroi and their works, so that by the time of the book at the dawn of the Second Apocalypse they probably just plain enjoy evil for evil's sake. If they can avoid damnation, all well and good, but I suspect they might act as they do even without that possibility, view post


posted 04 Apr 2006, 02:04 by Curethan, Didact

Oh. I think that new births are a very important thing for the Inchoroi and the consult to stop. Remember they used the womb plague as a very effective means of wiping out the non-men. (At that time humans were seen as little more than beasts and thus escaped attention) Reducing the number of souls (or total extermination) on the plane and stopping the influx of new/re-incarnated souls would seem to be key to their plan to "seal off" the outside. They may be immune to ageing, but that does not stop them being killed or subject to the influence of "outside powers" (I too baulk at designating them "gods" in the classic sense) and thus succumbing to damnation. Although I'd have to say damnation must be a pretty horrible fate for the consult to fear it so. Also, I'm not sure that Kellhus felt that the Dunyain would ally with the consult, wasn't he specifically saying that Moenghus would, and that was why he had to kill him? view post


posted 04 Apr 2006, 08:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Curethan":350n37cb]Also, I'm not sure that Kellhus felt that the Dunyain would ally with the consult, wasn't he specifically saying that Moenghus would, and that was why he had to kill him?[/quote:350n37cb] Yes, but he emphasised that Möenghus was "still Dûnyain", didn't he? (You're right, though, I made an unquestioned assumption.) view post


posted 04 Apr 2006, 09:04 by Curethan, Didact

Yah, I believe Khellus said that Moenghus had commited acts as he travelled the three seas that would damn him , and that was why he would ultimately ally with the consult. Also, I was reading the glossary and was struck by a phrase there-in, namely "(the) soul that encounters him passes no further". It references the battle plain of Mengedea where the No-god was destroyed. And the Scylvendi swazond are "believed by some to be the markers of stolen strength". Whether or not these things are relevant to the nature of the No-god is debatable, but I it might be part of where I get my crazy theories. Hmmm view post


posted 04 Apr 2006, 14:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

For details about the Gods and such there is a little info from the books, and more in the TTT glossary. We don't know all the little details but we know who the recognized Gods of the Inrithi are, as well as the single God of the Fanim. Scott has also mentioned in the Q&A board I believe that "The No-God is called the No-God for exactly that reason" or something along those lines. The No-God seems to me to be an opposite of a God in many ways. The Dunyain would not side with the consult because of the issues of souls, they would side with the Consult to remove the influence of the Outside. The Dunyain see everything as one big equation. The Outside is a wild card variable which makes the equation impossible to solve to any specific degree. So in order for the Dunyain to attain their mission of being self-moving souls, they would need to remove the Outside from play. It isn't directly motivated by Damnation, in fact one could say that the possibility of Damnation by the Outside is merely an example of how the influence of the Outside bars one from being truly self-moving. The afterlife, we actually have gotten details about it from the books, and from the TTT glossary, as well as some clarifications from Scott. As I said in an earlier post there are essentially three possibilities: Redemption, Damnation, or Oblivion. Redemption) According to philosophers Gods have spheres of influence in little "pocket realms" of the Outside if you will (someone earlier used this phrase I think it was Curethan and I liked it). Their influence extends to the planet that the continent of Earwa is on and as you move away from the planet the influence becomes less and less. Now there is a reason why the Inrithi maintain ancestor lists as well as devoting themselves generally to one God (or one aspect of the Gode depending on how you view things.). Certain Gods are seen as rewarding your devotion (see the TTT glossary for how each God is viewed in this way) by granting your soul a place in their little reality after you die and your Soul passes to the Outside. Or, your ancestors who have earned a place in one of these little paradises may intercede on your behalf if they have the influence, and that will gte you there. Oblivion) This is what the Consult hopes for, and what the Scylvendi believe is the only option (I think). This means you basically didn't grab the attention of the Gods or of any Agencies of the Outside (such as Demons) or if the Consult succeeds it means the Outside has no influence over the souls when someone dies. Here you simply fade away into nothingness basically. Damnation) This is the fun one, and of course the religious views dictate that all Sorcerors are damned for practicing Sorcery. Other than Gods (there may be a few Gods who are seen as punishing Gods but I can;t recall if any are or not) there are other Agencies in the Outside, most of which that are not Gods would be termed as Demonic. Damned Souls are Damned because they come to the attention of these guys, who play with your soul for eternity. Sorcerors who practice the Daimos, it is hypothesized, are particularly damned because they automatically ear mark themselves for the attentions of the Demons they have summoned throughout their careers. view post


posted 04 Apr 2006, 22:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Entropic_existence":2ql9xm3k]For details about the Gods and such there is a little info from the books, and more in the TTT glossary. We don't know all the little details but we know who the recognized Gods of the Inrithi are, as well as the single God of the Fanim. Scott has also mentioned in the Q&A board I believe that "The No-God is called the No-God for exactly that reason" or something along those lines. The No-God seems to me to be an opposite of a God in many ways.[/quote:2ql9xm3k] [b:2ql9xm3k]Gods, etc.:[/b:2ql9xm3k] I had the impression that all we know is what people [i:2ql9xm3k]think[/i:2ql9xm3k] about Gods, that is, the meanings they lay into the words. We also know that daimotic sorcery results in creatures "here", but what they are outside, and whether they are even distinct entities out there, do we really know that? We know that sorcery works, and that chorae work. The existance of worship/believe is no evidence for Gods. So what do we know about Gods, [i:2ql9xm3k]beyond[/i:2ql9xm3k] what we know about what the word means to the various peoples of Earwa (all the knowledge seems to be restricted to: sorcery, chorae and demons. Perhaps, the No-God. [b:2ql9xm3k]No-God:[/b:2ql9xm3k] Yes, I, too think that the No-God is the opposite of a god. But, then, to make a comparison (i.e. to actually tell that it's the opposite of a god) the No-God must differ from other things (say humans) in the same way than Gods do, or the statement that the "No-God is the opposite of a God" would be meaningless. It's like light is different from darkness, but both are similar when compared to sound/silence (Eyes vs. Ears on the one hand; presence vs. absence, on the other). So, if Gods and No-God relate to each other in antagonistic ways there must be a factor that allows us to make this comparison. What is it? What property defines a God, whose absence could - possibly - define the No-God. Again, I find Curethan's hypothesis, a connection to the outside, interesting. What happens if you isolate a God from the outside (or is this as meaningless as "seeing sound and hearing light"?) [quote:2ql9xm3k]The Dunyain would not side with the consult because of the issues of souls, they would side with the Consult to remove the influence of the Outside. The Dunyain see everything as one big equation. The Outside is a wild card variable which makes the equation impossible to solve to any specific degree. So in order for the Dunyain to attain their mission of being self-moving souls, they would need to remove the Outside from play. It isn't directly motivated by Damnation, in fact one could say that the possibility of Damnation by the Outside is merely an example of how the influence of the Outside bars one from being truly self-moving.[/quote:2ql9xm3k] That's true on the basic level. But it's more complex than that, because the nature of the "outside" might be such that it threatens the very devotion to the Logos. That's quite complicated, so bear with me: The meeting between Khellus and Möenghus is critical, here, because they're the only indepth examples of Dûnyain we have. But what they say to each other cannot be taken at face value, because the words are meant to be heard by the other. Since the scenes are all written from the Point of View of Khellus, Möenghus remains a bit more in the dark. Möenghus acknowledges that the world is "open" (whereas the Dûnyain think it closed). But he hasn't seen an indication that the outside is different from the "inside", when it comes to the Logos. ("Sleeping god, we must awaken him metaphor", TTT, Overlook, 367). In other words, Möenghus doesn't see (or claims not to see) the outside as a threat, but mearly as a complication, utlimately as tractable to the Logos as the inside. Khellus, then, tells Möenghus, once he comes to "believe" that he is damned, Möenghus will "see tyranny in what is holy" and he will "war as they war." (375) Now, I'm not sure whether the words are a "true" assessment of what Khellus believes about Möenghus, or if they are a modified version of what he believes, tailored for Möenghus to hear. From the thoughts in his PoV, though, I'd say he does believe in damnation as an actuality. Then we get Khellus' point of view: "For the Dûnyain it was axiomatic: what was compliant had to be isolated from what was unruly and intractable." And then goes on to ponder his conclusions from the probability trance, about how Möenghus will attempt to take over from Kellhus and fake a war against the consult. But, this conclusion is based on Khellus' experience with the outside. If both have at least somewhat accurately presented their view of affairs (which they would have to, as the other would spot a simple lie quickly), Möenghus and Khellus have perceived a "different" outside. Möenghus does not see the outside as "unruly and intractable"; but instead he considers it masterable just like the world. Whereas Khellus' musings are based upon a chaotic outside. Khellus "chides" Möenghus for "still being Dûnyain", whereas Möenghus calls Khellus mad. Now, if you look at it from a bigger picture; if both are correct, that is, if Möenghus is still Dûnyain, and Khellus has indeed gotten mad, then both see in the outside a reflection of their inside. Now, I've always found it ironic that the Dûnyain want to escape the "Darkness" but call themselves the "conditioned". I've always wondered in how far they reflect on their impetus to submit to their Principles, rather than to embrace the darkness. The Logos, being outside of the before/after, cannot give any such impetus. They cast their "Darkness" into terms that make it seem undesirable, and have a program to escape it. I think, in their devotion to their principles, they have created their own patch of darkness. Their devotion to the Logos, I would argue, could be their blind spot. So, if Möenghus is correct, and the outside is just "a fractured and distorted reflection of what lies within", and if Khellus is also correct and Möenghus is still Dûnyain, then this might mean that Khellus is, indeed, mad, in that he has perceived the blind spot of the Dûnyain. Their devotion to the Logos as darkness. They may both have seen what moves them, but not recognised it as such. Now, what would happen if a third Dûnyain watches the interaction? Would he realise the correlation between personality and evaluation of the outside? What would be the conclusions? What would a Dûnyain do, if the Logos forced him to see that a Dûnyain's devotion to the principles contains a blind-spot, a crucial bit of Darkness? People tend to shoot the messenger. Ultimately, are the Dûnyain really an exception? (They do know why they hide in Ishual.) And - even more scary for a Dûnyain - what if it turns out that - despite all the world born darkness - souls always move on their own accord (in the outside)? *** Ultimately, I have severe troubles with the notion of the outside. I don't know if anything I say about it makes any kind of sense. I suppose I'm a staunch materialist at heart. Never understood words such as "soul" or "god"; it's all above my sphere, really. Which is probably the source of my fascination. view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 01:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Yes, basically all of our information stems from characters interpretation of things, and Scott himself is loathe to set down the "rules" so to speak from a perspective that isn't from the point of view of people in the world. After all it is a work and a world where metaphysics, meanings, and perception are key. What I meant by the Dunyain's motivation is that the thought of damnation itself, in my opinion, would not be the prime motivator. Moenghus knows there is an Outside, and yes he perceives it differently, I'm under the impression that he doesn't think the Outside really has any control over what happens in the world. (The whole sleeping God thing) However, if Kellhus is right (and the POV that Kellhus has, other than specifics of what he preaches seems to match up with perceptions of the Outside we have from other sources such as the Inchoroi and Consult) than the Outside and the Gods do have influence. If there is influence than the Dunyain can never achieve their mission. If Damnation is real after all, and you know it is real, than you cannot become self-moving because your motivations will stem from this knowledge/belief of reward/damnation as opposed to from within. I don't think Kelhus is mad, even though Moenghus thinks that he is. Moenghus and Kelhus shared such different experiences after the Scylvendi Steppe that they are bound to have gained radically different world views. Ultimately who is right? Perhaps neither, perhaps both it is hard to say. view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 07:04 by Curethan, Didact

Obviously we don't have enough information, that's what makes speculating on these forums fun. We sharpen our perceptions of the ideas presented in the novels on each other's views and gain further enjoyment from the story thereby. :) (gosh this thread is rather nebulous really) A couple of points (as I see them); The Dunyain do not lie. As conditioned ones, they are taught to deal only in empirical truths as defined by their teachers. The only time Kelhus tells a bald faced lie throught the series is when he misrepresents himself as a prince. Even then, the lie was not his, and I recall him being somewhat suprised at the concept and it's efficiency. The truth is their lever for manipulation and a part of their conditioning. Of course the truth differs to each person, however, the Dunyain's use of the logos apparently alows them to cut to the barest truth. The logos itself is very interesting, being defined as that which allows humans to strive against the darkness that comes before, implying that those that are self-aware (note that the No-god does not seem to be) have some latitude of moving whithin the strictures of their predetermined circumstance and personality. Dunyain "conditioning" focuses on aprehending and manipulting the truth of these factors. So lying is not seen as part of the logos, and would be seen as useless. My understanding of the outside etc is that it is the unknowable part of the universe. Earwa itself is a part of the outside, but is largely self contained in the way that it's inhabitants percieve it. (Remember the "pocket realms" of the gods.) It could be likened to a habitat at a zoo in some ways (a very wobbly analogy), the creatures within are only dimly aware of the greater world outside - which itself can have a large effect on them. The different faiths in the three seas have vastly seperate views of the outside, yet they both find vindication in their views. The struggle between Inrithism and Fanimry could well reach beyond the manipulations of the Dunyain at large. Obviously, one united faith is required to oppose the inimical machinations of the Consult and the No-god, who are definately the opposite of the denizens of the outside [b:1e2wetnw]and[/b:1e2wetnw] the logos. Sorcery is the act of making the world conform to language, and language is also the very root of the logos, that which enables self awareness and understanding what has gone before and what may be. Although the Dunyain have no understanding of sorcery and repudiate its efficiacy - remember that it's power lies in analogies, abstractions, paradox and the duality of thought and speech. All quite useless in dealing with the logos, which demands clarity, truth and certainty. Only when one must struggle to deal with lies, misunderstanding and one's own unreasonable emotions do such things become necasary. The Psukhe is very interesting, being related to emotion rather than intellect. The duality of these two concepts within the souls of men is, imo, paramount to many of the concepts that Scott is exploring through this series (and one of the primary concerns of philosophy). The Logos is devoted to mastery through intellect, but lacks direction without the motivation of emotion. The reality of demons in the narative leads me to believe that the gods are similar entities, only more powerful, able to meddle to some extent in the Earwa from without. As to their nature, I would imagine that it would in some ways be shaped by the will of men. I would speculate that they are forces shaped by memes, souls can enter and leave Earwa, and they are the connection to gods and the outside. Whew, I wonder if any of that makes sense. Or if it's on-topic. view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 10:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

The Dûnyain's motivation, much like the outside, are things that give me a headache. EE, most of what you say makes sense to me. You're right, I think, that damnation itself isn't the focus. What gives me trouble, though, is this: [quote:a2iejded]If there is influence than the Dunyain can never achieve their mission. If Damnation is real after all, and you know it is real, than you cannot become self-moving because your motivations will stem from this knowledge/belief of reward/damnation as opposed to from within. [/quote:a2iejded] I don't quite understand that. Surely, if there is damnation it's just another problem you either have to solve or deal with. Much like gravity. No sweat. Cause and Effect (or Before/After) is a principle of the Logos, isn't it? So if the outside has certain properties that have certain behaviour result in certain consequences ("damnation"), then that's just another decision-making impetus. You can choose to behave one way or the other, knowing the consequences. In what ways would the existance of damnation be anything other than just another set of cause and effect? How does it prevent you from making your own decisions? If the point is that damnation places restrictions on your decisions, then, well, so does gravity. If the point is that damnation provides an "outside" motivation, then, may I point out that I assume the Dûnyain have to eat and sleep. These motivations don't really curb your "free will", unless you go into a hunger craze, or fall asleep on the spot. The Dûnyain response, I think, is not to abolish the need to eat, but to consciously decide when to eat, to know the effects of hunger and learn to deal with it, etc. The instrument to achieve this would be logical analysis and adequate behaviour. (Btw, I don't think that Möenghus thinks the outside has no influence, just that the influence the outside has on decisions is no different from the influence the world has on decisions, as far as the "Principle" is concerned.) *** Well, philosophically, I can imagine the No-God; if I view the world and the outside as connected by "meaning" (a blanket term for gods, sorcerous effects, souls etc.), the world being a place where things beget meaning and the outside a place where meanings beget things, then the No-God could be seen as a force opposing that link. As something to oppose meaning. Nihilism, so to speak. It's the specifics that give me trouble. Your interpretation of Gods is interesting, Curethan. So let me try a model of "No-God-creation": 1. Summon a god (Summoning as concetising in the world one thing that can flow from the meaning that exists in the outside; as a thing may have multiple meanings in this world, a meaning may have multiple things "outside"; concretising would, in that case, be a reduction of godhood for the sake of interaction in the world.) 2. Imprison the summoned god and sever the connection to the outside by casing. (And this is where my problems start; I can't make head nor tails of the severing part. It's a nice semantic trick, though. If a God is defined by meaning, and you catch one and take away the meaning from him, what remains is a No-God.) *** Why is it that at the end of a post in this thread I have no idea what I've been saying... :shock: view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 13:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Dawnstorm":2huunoox]I don't quite understand that. Surely, if there is damnation it's just another problem you either have to solve or deal with. Much like gravity. No sweat. Cause and Effect (or Before/After) is a principle of the Logos, isn't it? So if the outside has certain properties that have certain behaviour result in certain consequences ("damnation"), then that's just another decision-making impetus. You can choose to behave one way or the other, knowing the consequences. In what ways would the existance of damnation be anything other than just another set of cause and effect? How does it prevent you from making your own decisions? If the point is that damnation places restrictions on your decisions, then, well, so does gravity. If the point is that damnation provides an "outside" motivation, then, may I point out that I assume the Dûnyain have to eat and sleep. These motivations don't really curb your "free will", unless you go into a hunger craze, or fall asleep on the spot. The Dûnyain response, I think, is not to abolish the need to eat, but to consciously decide when to eat, to know the effects of hunger and learn to deal with it, etc. The instrument to achieve this would be logical analysis and adequate behaviour. [/quote:2huunoox] Damnation, as a motivation or limitation is actually much different from the need to eat, gravity, etc. These are all natural rules that exist that determine bodily needs and what is physically possible. As such their limitations on the human psyche are minimal. After all when you are making decisions you don't decide "I would like to fly" and then "Damn you pesky gravity for not allowing me." But Damnation... that's a whole different ball game so to speak. The limitations it imposes are rather arbitrary, and you don't know how they effect you. For instance how many transgressions are you allowed before you are cosigned to torment? What sort of faith and action must you undertake in order to be rewarded? What is the balance that can be struck so as to gaurentee Oblivion? etc. Like I said it is a wildcard thrown into the equations of the Logos that would prevent the Dunyain from fulfilling Mission. Then you have the issue of whether Fanimry, Inrithism, or the Cults are more correct, and which one do you follow as a guide for Damnation, etc. So only through the removal of all of these unanswerable questions would the Dunyain be able to fully achieve what they seek. view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 19:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

I've totally lost it, now. I type a post on how I disagree with you. It doesn't make sense, so I type a post on how I agree with you. It doesn't make sense either. I think that I might intuitively side with what Möenghus said: that the Outside isn't so different from the inside. (That's not to say that it has no influence, but that the influence it has is not significantly different from inside influence, and can be handled with minor adjustments.)) I think I may have to re-read the Ciphrang PoV-sections. Or perhaps I caught a contagion from the No-God and I'm turning into non-meaning... view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 20:04 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Im sorry but that made me laugh non-meaning. view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 20:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

I think the existence of Sorcery and the Onta alone speaks, to me anyway, about the difference in make up betwene the Outside and the Inside. I think my main point that as far as Damnation for instance, mortal souls cannot know the exact terms by which they may be damned or redeemed meaning that it is always a very much a wild card in any and all calculations. That and many of the options that will score you redemption are actions that would also contradict the Dunyains mission I think. (Can you imagine a Dunyain being pious and not merely on the outside?) view post


posted 05 Apr 2006, 23:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Warrior-Poet":80a6tian]Im sorry but that made me laugh non-meaning.[/quote:80a6tian] You're welcome. :lol: [quote:80a6tian]I think the existence of Sorcery and the Onta alone speaks, to me anyway, about the difference in make up betwene the Outside and the Inside. I think my main point that as far as Damnation for instance, mortal souls cannot know the exact terms by which they may be damned or redeemed meaning that it is always a very much a wild card in any and all calculations. That and many of the options that will score you redemption are actions that would also contradict the Dunyains mission I think. (Can you imagine a Dunyain being pious and not merely on the outside?)[/quote:80a6tian] Well, I see sorcery as a tranformation rule. So all that really tells me is that the outside exists. Sorcery, to me, means nothing but that the Onta can be manipulated by "outside" interference. It tells me little about the outside's nature. I don't seem to disagree with you about damnation. I think it's more that there's a difference in my perception of the Dûnyain's motivation. What do you think a "self-moving soul" would be? To me, it's being totally aware of what moves you and shift the emphasis as you see fit. What the "you" is in that case, I don't know. Applied to the present discussion this means: as long as a Dûnyain is aware of the influence the threat of damnation has on him, the mission is not in danger. He can decide against his bodily emotions to be damned and go along with what furthers the mission. To me, the Mission is about transcending your upbringing and your feelings, not abolishing them. It's still likely that they'll want to seal off the outside for the reasons you state; but I don't see the uncertainty as a principal threat to the Mission; more as a distraction because of an additional stress factor. If the "Outside", for example through sorcery, poses advantages that, according to logical analysis, outweighs that irritation, they might choose not to close off the world. Unless, of course, they see the risk that the Gods themselves come down from the heavens to end the "corrupted" experiment... view post


posted 06 Apr 2006, 02:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

I think what I meant by the Onta is that for those that perceive it, it is different from the physical world that everyone else sees, which to me implies that the Outside is different as well, as the Onta is the "true" fabric so to speak. I think with the amount of symbolism and the philsophical aspects of the books that Scott has introduced that is is more likely, in my opinion, for the Outside and the "world" to be quite different at least on most levels. But who knows :) For me I think becoming a Self-Moving soul is more thab an enhanced version of Free Will, which is how I;ve intereprested your statements. In my opinion the Dunyain want to rise above all instinct, all prior conditioning... they want to be elevated above history, convention, and the ingrained norms of human behaviour that they see as chains. Obviously the laws of Physics can't be overcome, but virtually everything else can. The thing with the threat of Damnation is that it doesn't actually mesh with the logcail reasonings of the Logos, and often impedes the Shortest Path. If you tried to accomodate this into a new version of the Logos (which you could do but I think even this taint radically alters the goal the Dunyain want to achieve and shifts them into a similar but not identical path, parallel if you will.) It would still be impossible to do the calculations due to the uncertainty principle. I think I shall term this principle the Anasurimbor Uncertainty Principle :) For say two actions A and B that both contain possible moral quandries that tie into damnation. But you don't know all of the things that factor into the calculation of whether you become damned or not, ultimately I imagine that barring a few "givens" (and who knows if Sorcerors are really damned anyway) there is some element of randomness and whim/luck to the whole thing. So it would always be impossible to decide between A and B based on logic if you don't have enough data to compute the probabilities. Hmmm I have no idea if that makes any sense what so ever :) view post


posted 06 Apr 2006, 21:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Entropic_existence":2fooollq]I think what I meant by the Onta is that for those that perceive it, it is different from the physical world that everyone else sees, which to me implies that the Outside is different as well, as the Onta is the "true" fabric so to speak. I think with the amount of symbolism and the philsophical aspects of the books that Scott has introduced that is is more likely, in my opinion, for the Outside and the "world" to be quite different at least on most levels. But who knows :)[/quote:2fooollq] Well, given that all humans have an epistemological bias, and the bias when seeing [i:2fooollq]it all[/i:2fooollq] is different from your everyday bias, of course your view of the onta will be different. I'd be surprised if it wasn't. The Outside [i:2fooollq]must[/i:2fooollq] be different. In the simplest form it would be simply a negative of the world, where one thing gives rise to multiple meanings. The question is whether the priority principles hold true in the outside, as well. The only assessment we have so far is Möenghus, who'd say the Dûnyain's principles of before/after, and the Logos hold true in the outside. Khellus implies disagreement, but we can't really be sure. [quote:2fooollq]For me I think becoming a Self-Moving soul is more thab an enhanced version of Free Will, which is how I;ve intereprested your statements.[/quote:2fooollq] Yep, that's what I meant. Actually, strike "ehanced" and "free". These words are redundant. The Self-Moving Soul, I think, is simply about the creation of "will" (which to a Dûnyain is an illusion). [quote:2fooollq]In my opinion the Dunyain want to rise above all instinct, all prior conditioning... they want to be elevated above history, convention, and the ingrained norms of human behaviour that they see as chains. [/quote:2fooollq] Yes, because it's these things that make "will" an illusion, according to the Dûnyain. [quote:2fooollq]Obviously the laws of Physics can't be overcome, but virtually everything else can. [/quote:2fooollq] 1. I'm uncertain, whether using sorcery doesn't involve overcoming the laws of physics to a certain extent. 2. I'm uncertain, whether it's possible to overcome your bodily desires, or your history. 3. I don't think the Dûnyain want to get rid of history and bodily desires at all. They want to be totally aware of all that moves them and reverse the control. (The Epistemological Principle, under the Dûnyain-entry in the glossary.) [quote:2fooollq]The thing with the threat of Damnation is that it doesn't actually mesh with the logcail reasonings of the Logos, and often impedes the Shortest Path.[/quote:2fooollq] We do not really know that. Also, recall that the Dûnyain have a "probability trance", not a "certainty trance". Total determinism isn't necessarily a prerequisite to use the Logos. [quote:2fooollq]If you tried to accomodate this into a new version of the Logos (which you could do but I think even this taint radically alters the goal the Dunyain want to achieve and shifts them into a similar but not identical path, parallel if you will.) It would still be impossible to do the calculations due to the uncertainty principle. I think I shall term this principle the Anasurimbor Uncertainty Principle :) For say two actions A and B that both contain possible moral quandries that tie into damnation. But you don't know all of the things that factor into the calculation of whether you become damned or not, ultimately I imagine that barring a few "givens" (and who knows if Sorcerors are really damned anyway) there is some element of randomness and whim/luck to the whole thing. So it would always be impossible to decide between A and B based on logic if you don't have enough data to compute the probabilities.[/quote:2fooollq] As long as you know the possible outcomes, it's possible to work with "worst case sceneraios", even when the probability distributions are an unkown factors. But I agree that the Dûnyain are not gamblers. [size=75:2fooollq](Heh, I've been building a concept "Guild of Gamblers" for almost a decade now; when I read TDtCB, and about the Dûnyain I initially thought, "Shit, there it is; now I'm never going to write it." But, luckily, while they share a similar world view, they're reaction is a lot different. Imagine a Dûnyain, who studies the Darkness in order to embrace it consciously, instead of trying to overcome it. They're trained madmen. Had to get that out of my system, sorry...)[/size:2fooollq] [quote:2fooollq]Hmmm I have no idea if that makes any sense what so ever :)[/quote:2fooollq] Hey, I've been able to answer the post. It must have made sense. :) *** Also I'm beginning to feel guilty for sidetracking the No-God thread. So: I've just noticed that the No-God, if he indeed communicates with Khellus, or if Khellus "channels" him, must have access to the outside; unless there's an "inside" way to bridge time/space. ;) I, now, think a "God minus outside connection" doesn't really work. view post


posted 07 Apr 2006, 01:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

I probably should have said Laws od Nature versus Laws of Physics, but yes even then Sorcery does circumvent them somehow, or at least enable one to overcome them in some way (Like the floating "climbing into the sky" thing). Althought makes another interesting point... notice that Sorcerors don't fly, they don't levitate, they actually physically step/walk/climb into the sky. Which makes one think about how it is actually accomplished. The Dunyain actually do want to repudiate history, history is in their mind actually one of the primary shackles of humanity that they overcome. Actually I also think it is something that they have overcome (of course I don't necessarily think the Dunyain are right, merely that this is their viewpoint). As for bodily functions, yea obviously the need to eat isn't likely to to be overcome to a significant extent but they do have control over their bodily urges. I think for the most part we're merely disagree'ing on some semantic issues and only a few other "key" points. You also have a much better language to work with than my rough and dirty education in philosophy so most of the semantic disagreements I'm conceding to you :) I think we've hashed out a good framework between us heh. For me the No-God is so radically different I simply cannot rationalize anything to explain it right now. For me so far anyway, it actually stands outside of my reference frame. And I like that. view post


posted 07 Apr 2006, 09:04 by Dawnstorm, Candidate

[quote="Entropic_existence":2sqswvnk]I think for the most part we're merely disagree'ing on some semantic issues and only a few other "key" points. You also have a much better language to work with than my rough and dirty education in philosophy so most of the semantic disagreements I'm conceding to you :) I think we've hashed out a good framework between us heh.[/quote:2sqswvnk] Agree. I think it's mostly a matter of emphasis, where we differ. [quote:2sqswvnk]For me the No-God is so radically different I simply cannot rationalize anything to explain it right now. For me so far anyway, it actually stands outside of my reference frame. And I like that.[/quote:2sqswvnk] For me, the No-God isn'r so radically different. He's as inscrutable to me as any god/demon/metaphysicalism/etc. ;) view post


posted 07 Apr 2006, 13:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Dawnstorm":2307ivvy] For me, the No-God isn'r so radically different. He's as inscrutable to me as any god/demon/metaphysicalism/etc. ;)[/quote:2307ivvy] Good point :) view post


posted 08 Apr 2006, 21:04 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

?........... view post


posted 08 Apr 2006, 23:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="shortyboomboom":9i9fyi1z]1/ Has Kellhus become Mog Pharau? Is the No-God walking once more...? Is this Kellhus his new avatar...? This extremely big and powerful creature summoned by the Consult/Inchoroi was another avatar of the No-God? Is Kellhus the new name of the No-God? 2/ If the world is sealed does that mean that the Inchoroi will no longer be able to enter Ishwa? Is Mog Pharau's aim to protect Ishwa from the Inchoroi? Or protect himself from other powerful entities...?? Did the Inchoroi intend to summon Mog Pharau to save themselves? Was it Mog Pharau who summoned the Inchoroi to do his bidding? 3/ Kellhus is now going to exterminate men right? Somehow he will use TTT to do that...use religion as excuse for war....as opposed to the No-God's earlier attempts using instinct driven creatures w/o souls....Kellhus is going to bring about the apocalypse...how ironic....maybe Non-men, rebel men and Consult will ally themselves to fight the No-God.[/quote:9i9fyi1z] Um.... not to sound rude or anything but.... what? Kelhus isn't the No-God, that isn't to say that the possibility of him ultimately ending up to be a bad guy isn't a possibility but yea... they definitly aren't one and the same. All indications point to Kelhus opposing the Consult for his own reasons. Other than to be used as a weapon to exterminate as many souled entitites from the world as possible we don't know what other motivations the Inchoroi had for summoning the No-God, if there were any others. But given that he is either a tool, or even at the same time the leader of, the Consult we won't see them fighting against him any time soon. I'm really not sure what version of Prince of Nothing you were reading but I think you might have gotten confused a little bit. view post


posted 09 Apr 2006, 03:04 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

yah i was more than a little confused after reading his statement. Hence the ?........... You explained it pretty good EE view post


posted 09 Apr 2006, 15:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Thanks WP view post


posted 15 Apr 2006, 23:04 by stormchaser, Candidate

OK, here's an idea about the No-God for you, and a subconscious one at that. I have mentioned elsewhere how I am working on a drawing of the No-God. Well, I have done several preliminary sketches and studies, and today I was looking at them and I noticed for the first time that in all of them I had rendered the NG's carapace (i.e. his outward form) as looking very much like an insect pupae. I did this quite unconsciously, but might not my subconscious be on to something? Could the entity we know as the No-God actually be some kind of larva, patiently gestating all this time inside his carapace to eventually emerge as... What, exactly? Who knows! But following this line of thought, might not the chorae embedded in the NG's carapace be there precisely to prevent the emergence of the imago? Maybe the Inchoroi purposely trapped the pupating no-deity in larval form - certainly those chorae are there for a reason. Not sure if any of this really makes sense, but thought I'd throw the idea out there. [i:1i84x5qq]Something[/i:1i84x5qq] must have made me draw the NG in this way, although, to be sure, the origin of most art is shrouded in mystery. view post


posted 15 Apr 2006, 23:04 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

I kinda like the idea that the chorae not only make him invulnerable to sorcery but also keeps him inside the carapace interesting idea. view post


posted 16 Apr 2006, 15:04 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Yea I always thought too that the Chorae may also be there as a sort of "binding agent" if you will to keep him contained. view post


posted 01 May 2006, 02:05 by DELETED, Subdidact

DELETED view post


posted 01 May 2006, 04:05 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Erekassos Knerceannis":1pycai0o]From what I gather, Tsurumah is both "agonic" (sort of a reverse sorcery if you will) and a sort of 'new sorcery.' I have always gotten the hint that perhaps the Mangaecca had used their Anagogic sorcery to somehow advance the Tekne, making it a sort of scientific sorcery. So perhaps the No-God is a product of sorcerous technology. The more I think about it, he is the ultimate "weapon" of the Inchoroi, much like the Sranc and Bashrag. I suppose you could call him the "God" of the weapon races. He was obviously created as the ultimate weapon of the Inchoroi. I think we may find some interesting points when Maithanet reveals Simas as a "skin-spy who can work sorcery; a skin spy with a [b:1pycai0o]soul[/b:1pycai0o]. So perhaps the Consult had perfected a system for creating a soul, and therefore bring about the No-God; a soul with no body, I suppose you could say. This would definitely seem to make him more god-like, a soul with no real bodily/physical form. Perhaps this lack of physcal form created his purpose, the closing of the Outside. If he could empty the World, he could effectively take physical form and not simply be a free-moving soul.[/quote:1pycai0o] A few things that need to be pointed out. 1)The Mengaeacca (Consult) where a Gnostic School of the Ancient North, not a Anagogic school 2)The idea of the No-God seems to predate the Consult and may have been something the Inchoroi were working on before. The other thing is that their work was consistently described as summoning the No-God as opposed to creating him, implying that (he/it) existed prior to the Apocalypse in some form. 3)The Skin-Spy with a soul was described as an aberation. As Scott has said before only Humans, The Inchoroi, and the Non-men are inherently souled but sometimes, through circumstance, creatures without souls can "Awaken". Something like this happened with that Skin-Spy who infiltrated the Mandate. Luckily the Consult never could duplicate it. view post


What exactly is a "god"? posted 01 May 2006, 13:05 by Mahajanga Mordecai, Auditor

I don't know if this has been said yet in this very long post but, when I think of Tsurumah, I think of Ciphrang. He is summoned from the Outside like the Ciphrang. His mere existence is anithetical to life (see Womb Plague) like Zioz was to the grass and general vegetation of the grounds on which he stood as he battled Achamian at the end of TTT. Akka mentioned that Zioz was no ordinary demon; that the Ciphrang's mark was like concentrated light. What am I getting at? I think Tsurumah is an Avatar or spirit so old and "aware" that it might as well be an Avatar, however Avatar's are basically low-level gods (Demi-God) which explains why he is considered a god by his followers. I guess we need to define what a "god" is. view post


Re: What exactly is a "god"? posted 01 May 2006, 23:05 by anor277, Didact

[quote="Mahajanga Mordecai":2qye0rhd]I don't know if this has been said yet in this very long post but, when I think of Tsurumah, I think of Ciphrang. He is summoned from the Outside like the Ciphrang. His mere existence is anithetical to life (see Womb Plague) like Zioz was to the grass and general vegetation of the grounds on which he stood as he battled Achamian at the end of TTT. Akka mentioned that Zioz was no ordinary demon; that the Ciphrang's mark was like concentrated light. What am I getting at? I think Tsurumah is an Avatar or spirit so old and "aware" that it might as well be an Avatar, however Avatar's are basically low-level gods (Demi-God) which explains why he is considered a god by his followers. I guess we need to define what a "god" is.[/quote:2qye0rhd] You're undoubtedly right as to the need for definitions. Mind you the greater demons were referred to as "sulfurous godlings" and the lesser gods are arguably more powerful demons. The demons (and the gods?) share one signal difference with old Mog: the demons (and perhaps the gods?) were vulnerable to chorae (cf Iyokus conjuring in Shimeh perceived the chorae as absences). From the only description we have of Mog, he was not greatly troubled by chorae. Maybe the chorae act as binding agents as an ealrier poster suggested; but it seems as likely that Mog is of a different order to the demons. view post


posted 02 May 2006, 02:05 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

I still like to think that he is sensitive to the chorae which is one reason why he is encased in the carapace. view post


posted 02 May 2006, 07:05 by Curethan, Didact

[quote:nqzo0z00]Entropic_existence 3)The Skin-Spy with a soul was described as an aberation. As Scott has said before only Humans, The Inchoroi, and the Non-men are inherently souled but sometimes, through circumstance, creatures without souls can "Awaken". Something like this happened with that Skin-Spy who infiltrated the Mandate. Luckily the Consult never could duplicate it.[/quote:nqzo0z00] Interesting that the aberation just happened to have a soul powerful/old/aware (whatever the criteria actually are) enough to wield sorcery. view post


posted 02 May 2006, 13:05 by Mahajanga Mordecai, Auditor

[quote="Warrior-Poet":2i1stjow]I still like to think that he is sensitive to the chorae which is one reason why he is encased in the carapace.[/quote:2i1stjow] Indeed, that's what I assumed was to be understood when I first read it. Also as Anor pointed out, I don't think Mog is a demon per se, but a vary inherently malignent entity of that likeness; the anti-avatar perhaps? Whatever, I just wonder if what Kellhus said about Mog being angry at the Consult for failiing the first time is true... I doubt it. view post


posted 02 May 2006, 17:05 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Curethan":2ct2zrky][quote:2ct2zrky]Entropic_existence 3)The Skin-Spy with a soul was described as an aberation. As Scott has said before only Humans, The Inchoroi, and the Non-men are inherently souled but sometimes, through circumstance, creatures without souls can "Awaken". Something like this happened with that Skin-Spy who infiltrated the Mandate. Luckily the Consult never could duplicate it.[/quote:2ct2zrky] Interesting that the aberation just happened to have a soul powerful/old/aware (whatever the criteria actually are) enough to wield sorcery.[/quote:2ct2zrky] There is probably some link/reasoning. Maybe Scott will explore it more down the road, who knows. Nevetheless it was an abberation and not a planned design :) view post


posted 30 May 2006, 13:05 by coobek, Candidate

I agree that Mog-Pharau is one of the most intriguing concepts, and there are many in this brilliant book. [b:1v5ktl8k]1.[/b:1v5ktl8k] First of all the name No-God might be misleading in the discussion. Similar to Nonmen, when Men to distinguish living, thinking beings, which are alien to them called them that – ‘Nonmen’. But of course Nonmen do not think of themselves as ‘Nonmen’ but Cuniuri same Incoroi certainly do not call the Nonmen ‘Nonmen’. So since the No-God has other names Tsurmah, Mog-Pharau it is only the magic of the name ‘No-God’ that makes us think he is some strange unimaginable opposite of God. He may exactly be to Gods what Nonmen are to Men, a God but of different ‘race’ eg. God of different world, working on a different basis but non the less sharing some traits with the Gods of Earwa. Same as Nonmen share a lot with Men but certainly are of different race. That’s why he maybe stops souls as he doesn’t really stop them but populates his own ‘world’ with them. Or he is looking for another type of souls – Inchoroi?. [b:1v5ktl8k]2.[/b:1v5ktl8k] Second option. For me to understand the nature of No-God we have to understand what is God in Earwa terms. From what I have understood Gods live in the ‘Outside’ and they are connected to the cycle of souls. There are three types of Hundred Gods: the ones that do not care for the followers, the ones that reward them with ‘perks’ or promise of the afterlife and ones which like their believers to fight against them. Except those there is a solitary God of the Inrithi and Fanim. What do they have in common. They all have believers. Two questions arise. Whether Gods existence/powers are driven by the amount of believers that they have or do they exist regardless of the believers. I think there was an abstract in the Glossary saying that the power of the God is connected to the numbers of believers. If this is the case the ONE-AND-ONLY GODLY BEING would have all souls believing in him and he will be interested in more and more of this souls to multiply. Having zero souls believing in such a GOD would mean his death. If No-God was simply a God he would be interested in taking the souls away from him and making them believe in No-God. But since he is not a God but rather a No-God so in other words complete opposite of God. His motive may be having no souls at all in the Earwa, having no one to believe in anything. My problem with this approach is the Solitary God. I may be confabulating but It seems that he existed before Tusk and without the followers and he created Earwa. At least that’s my impression after reading glossary once. If such is the case than I am lost - who is No-God? A builder of Inchoroi worlds or ‘The Prince of Nothing’? view post


posted 17 Jul 2006, 07:07 by coobek, Candidate

VERY interesting hypothesis, which sound pretty possible. view post


posted 20 Jul 2006, 13:07 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Very insightful, I like it. view post


posted 21 Jul 2006, 22:07 by Shryke, Candidate

[quote:ir5znx77] [quote:ir5znx77] Entropic_existence 3)The Skin-Spy with a soul was described as an aberation. As Scott has said before only Humans, The Inchoroi, and the Non-men are inherently souled but sometimes, through circumstance, creatures without souls can "Awaken". Something like this happened with that Skin-Spy who infiltrated the Mandate. Luckily the Consult never could duplicate it. [/quote:ir5znx77] Interesting that the aberation just happened to have a soul powerful/old/aware (whatever the criteria actually are) enough to wield sorcery.[/quote:ir5znx77] Just thought I'd point out that this is a HUGE misunderstanding floating around this board. Scott was NOT reffering to just random creatures "Awakening" when he made that remark. It's not like a deer running through the forest has a chance to suddenly, randomly gain a soul. What he was reffering to at the time was that Non-men and Men both had souls and that this was just something that happened to certain species. As they evolved and went about there buisness of living, some species eventually "Awakened" and gained souls. It was in reference to a SPECIES becoming souled, not to a random creature suddenly gaining one. I'll try and dig up the post so you can see for yourselves. Just thought I'd point that out since I see it quoted EVERYWHERE on this board. view post


posted 24 Jul 2006, 13:07 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Shryke":2gz538jv][quote:2gz538jv] [quote:2gz538jv] Entropic_existence 3)The Skin-Spy with a soul was described as an aberation. As Scott has said before only Humans, The Inchoroi, and the Non-men are inherently souled but sometimes, through circumstance, creatures without souls can "Awaken". Something like this happened with that Skin-Spy who infiltrated the Mandate. Luckily the Consult never could duplicate it. [/quote:2gz538jv] Interesting that the aberation just happened to have a soul powerful/old/aware (whatever the criteria actually are) enough to wield sorcery.[/quote:2gz538jv] Just thought I'd point out that this is a HUGE misunderstanding floating around this board. Scott was NOT reffering to just random creatures "Awakening" when he made that remark. It's not like a deer running through the forest has a chance to suddenly, randomly gain a soul. What he was reffering to at the time was that Non-men and Men both had souls and that this was just something that happened to certain species. As they evolved and went about there buisness of living, some species eventually "Awakened" and gained souls. It was in reference to a SPECIES becoming souled, not to a random creature suddenly gaining one. I'll try and dig up the post so you can see for yourselves. Just thought I'd point that out since I see it quoted EVERYWHERE on this board.[/quote:2gz538jv] You're looking for this thread: http://www.forum.three-seas.com/viewtop ... =soul#6993 And you are probably right; however, the Skin-Spy has been noted as an abberation. Hopefully this will be explored more in later books. view post


posted 05 Aug 2006, 13:08 by Callan S., Auditor

I wonder if the no god is simply absense. It's thought it powered by absense. While a human mind values one factor over another, but with the no god, well...imagine two objects leaning against each other. What happens when you pull one away? That's how the mind of the no god works - it's simply the result of absence of other things. It doesn't think, it is the result of non thought eating at thought. view post


posted 19 Aug 2006, 06:08 by Harrol, Moderator

This post is for this topic and also for a topic in the WP section. The No-God must have some awareness and conscience. I base this off of TTT page 250 where Kellhus and Aurang are talking and Kellhus tells him that Mog is dissappointed by his failure at Mengedda and that he is coming for him. This infers some sort of awareness and even to me a level of malevolence. view post


posted 20 Aug 2006, 22:08 by vercint, Peralogue

But isn't Kellhus lying to Aurang in order to unbalance him? The only time Kellhus hears the No-God is on the circumfix in Caraskand, and then it is only the same questions as in Akka's dreams. I don't think the No-God ever says anything else in any of the three books. Clearly, the No-God possesses awareness, but his questions seem to imply that he lacks even the most basic understanding of himself. view post


posted 20 Aug 2006, 22:08 by Harrol, Moderator

True enough he may not be completely aware of himself but he is a destroyer and a ravager. The question to me is are these inate side effects of his being or are they intentionally done by him? If the answer is that he intentionally destroies and brings death then I say he is malevolent whether he completely understands himself or not. view post


posted 20 Aug 2006, 23:08 by vercint, Peralogue

I agree that the question turns on whether the No-God controls his own destructive effect or not. From what we see of him so far I think he doesn't, but PoN doesn't give a definite answer. Probably because the question is important for later series. I think the most significant information about the No-God so far are the questions, which imply he lacks self-awareness amd hence the ability to be intentionally evil, and the description in TWP p16 of the Carapace as a "nimil sarcophagus sheathed in choric script." This suggests that his nature is similar to that of Chorae, which we know are paradoxes which undo sorcery. My guess is the No-God is a contradiction intended to undo [i:5j8vrceb]life[/i:5j8vrceb] (that would explain the dead-born children). view post


posted 21 Aug 2006, 12:08 by Harrol, Moderator

That's a good point i had forgotten about that description of the No-God in TWP. view post


posted 28 Aug 2006, 15:08 by brandon, Candidate

I like to think of the no-god as anti-matter in relation to matter. he is a negative. hence like stated, being a negative of the outside or of a soul, births a born still because his presence forces a negative i.e. the lack of a soul. As such, it is a tool which the inchorai can further their own designs with, but isn't so much a positive, existent being. view post


posted 28 Aug 2006, 16:08 by Harrol, Moderator

If he is a tool then why do the Inchorai worship him? Even their constructs such as the Wracu worship him. view post


posted 28 Aug 2006, 22:08 by anor277, Didact

My post above, whoops! view post


posted 29 Aug 2006, 03:08 by Harrol, Moderator

I do not remember where it is at in the books but we are told that the Inchorai summoned the No-God rather than creating him. view post


posted 30 Aug 2006, 05:08 by anor277, Didact

[quote="Harrol":2hbfjkpe]I do not remember where it is at in the books but we are told that the Inchorai summoned the No-God rather than creating him.[/quote:2hbfjkpe] And they summoned him complete with a chorae casing, or did fit they fit the device to him later? They also apparently summoned him with a built in mechanism for commanding worship from biotechnological artefacts, the Sranc, the Wracu etc. I don't wish to argue the point really, the truth is we don't know and your guess is certainly as good as mine. I hope Scott's conception of the No-God, whatever he turns out to be, lives up to our expectations. view post


posted 30 Aug 2006, 18:08 by Harrol, Moderator

I am not trying to argue i am trying to get as many of the pieces together as I can and hopefully figure something out about him. So far I find the concept of the No-God to be fascinating and unique. view post


posted 31 Aug 2006, 13:08 by Murrin, Peralogue

I think that the Chorae carapace might have been what they used to trap the No-God - to hold it in the world, as it were. I expect it is not something that is meant to be in the world: It was certainly bewildered and ignorant, when they finally brought it out onto the battlefield; I doubt it can understand what the Consult have done to it. That suggests that it exists in the Outside only, until they bring it through and trap it. Considering the Consult's purpose in existence--to cut the world off from Outside, to cut it off from the God, in order to eliminate the possibility of damnation--and the effects of the No-God's presence in the world--no new life can enter the world while the No-God is present--there are some very interesting implications. If no new life can enter the world, what does that mean? Does the No-God's presence work as a resistance to the entry of life, or is it an elimination of life's [i:2tui4dzz]source[/i:2tui4dzz]? view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown.