The atrocity of the Akallabêth

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Tar Telperien

What did Eru do? He merely responded to the request of the Valar to do something, because by laying down their guardianship of the world, they showed that they weren't going to do anything. To the extent that it is possible for one of his creations to do so, they "forced" Eru to make a move.

First, thank you for adding valuable information and perspective to this thread that, until you first posted to it, was lacking.

That death is a gift from Eru to Men is a critical fact that certainly alters the discussion in terms of "innocents being killed".

It is a little much to say that the Valar forced Eru to make a move. By laying down their guardianship they submitted to the authority of their Master. He acted as He had planned from the beginning, as the Ainulindalë shows: "Ilúvatar called together the Ainur and declared to them a mighty theme, unfolding to them things greater and more wonderful than he had yet revealed; and the glory of its beginning and the splendour of its end amazed the Ainur, so that they bowed before Ilúvatar and were silent." This indicates that Eru's will was at work throughout the whole Theme, which is to say that his will was at work throughout the entire history of Arda, including the events of the Akallabêth as well as the War of the Ring.

It must be remembered that Eru is the one who introduced the 2nd theme: the Valar that remained faithful (and their deeds for good in battling against Melkor), and the 3rd theme: the Children of Ilúvatar. "For the Children of Ilúvatar were conceived by him along; and they came with the third theme, and were not in the theme which Ilúvatar propounded at the beginning, and none of hte Ainur had part in their making. Therefore when they beheld them, the more did they love them, being things other than themselves, strange and free, wherein they saw the mind of Ilúvatar reflected anew, and learned yet a little more of his wisdom, which otherwise had been hidden even from the Ainur." So Elves and Men are free and not controlled by the Valar; they are only governed by them. Eru remains the power behind Elves and Men.

Originally Posted by Tar Telperien

{Eru} completely neglected {the Numenoreans}, because they had done the same.

Eru propounded the themes and the Ainur listened - thus, Eru was from the beginning the only active agent in Elves and Men; he gave their governance to the Valar, but not control of their lives. Every Child of Ilúvatar has a fëa (spirit in the form of fire/light), something the Valar have not the power to bestow: a fëa comes from Eru. Therefore, Eru's hand and will are present in the making of every Elf and Man. Bodies and mind and will may come through lineage, but a fëa is fire and light, and as such cannot pass through lineage; it can only be created in each Elf or Man by Eru.

Originally Posted by Tar Telperien

Now, a word about Eru: I really can't see him as a moral figure. He can't really be bound to morality himself.

Eru is not bound by morality, or it would be his master; rather, he is the creator of it, and as such, morality comes from him.

Originally Posted by Tar Telperien

Furthermore, he did not "punish" Melkor for being "immoral", he simply let him be and do as he wished, though he did warn Melkor of the consequences of his actions (namely, that his plans would not ultimately be successful).

As to Punishment: what, if Eru "did not 'punish' Melkor for being 'immoral', is being cast into the Void? Furthermore, "But Manwë was the brother of Melkor in the mind of Ilúvatar, and he was the chief instrument of the second theme that Ilúvatar had raised up against the discord of Melkor; and he called unto himself many spirits both greater and less, and they came down into the fields of Arda and aided Manwë, lest Meklor should hinder the fulfillment of their labour for ever, and Earth should wither ere it flowered. And Manwë said unto Melkor: 'This kingdom thou shalt not take for thine own, wrongfully, for many others have laboured here no less than thou.' And there was strife between Melkor and the other Valar; and for that time Melkor withdrew and departed to other regions and did there what he would; but he did not put the desire of the Kingdom of Arda from his heart."

Manwë, "dearest to Ilúvatar", names Melkor's deeds, drawn from his discordant theme in the Music, as wrongful; that is, full-wrong: a moral judgement.

Originally Posted by Tar Telperien

If Eru made the quintessential "moral" and "immoral" figures of Arda, namely Manwë and Melkor, but is neither beholden to them nor gives any of his creatures any moral code to follow (this is the way in which he perhaps differs most from any Primary World deity), then how are we to assume he is moral?

The moral code is at first presented in the form of Music: that which is presented as pleasing to Ilúvatar are: harmony, flawlessness, unity, beauty; that which is presented as not pleasing to Ilúvatar are: discord, despondency, disturbance, faltering, turbulent sound, wrath, dismay, violence, singing no more, confusion. Only a few of these adjectives, which Tolkien sprinkles through the account of the Music, has to do with music, per sé; the remainder have strong moral connotations and implications.

As to "how are we to assume {Eru} is moral", it is not an assumption we make; rather, it is a necessary logical conclusion. If Eru is creator of all things, and not moral, then morality cannot be part of his creation. If it is not part of his creation, then it can only have preceded him. If it preceded him, it necessarily has to have created him, for if he is not first, then something had to create him; and morality would therefore be superior to him; and this is of course an impossibility, since it is at odds with what Tolkien wrote. Therefore, Eru must be the creator of morality; and since this must be so, morality necessarily exists according to the nature of Eru.

Originally Posted by Tar Telperien

Eru simply creates. Morality is a product of the fact that his creatures were designed in a certain way, and have limitations (namely, the ability to be hurt by others of his creatures). Morality rises from design and the practical facts of life in Arda, not by divine command.

If design is not divine command, what is it? In fact, it cannot be anything other than part of divine command; therefore, if morality is a product of design, then it must be a product of Eru's command. Your distinction is erroneous.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Child of the Seventh Age

Simply it is impossible to have an absolutely good act, even by Eru, in a world where evil is woven into the fabric of existence.

It would be more accurate to say that it is seemingly impossible. Evil is not woven into the fabric of existence, but of Arda. The Valar, not Eru, are bound by Arda. If Eru is good, as I have demonstrated from the text, and all that Eru does is morally upright because morality itself stems from the nature of Eru, then nothing that Eru does can be tainted by evil. Therefore, Eru's permission of evil (necessitated by the freedom designed into his creatures to do other than his will), and use of evil as a tool for his ultimate purpose, is necessarily a morally upright act. That the characters in the story cannot perceive this to be so, underscores the fact that they are not equal to Eru and cannot stand as his judge.

That death is a gift of Eru to Men, actually makes the goodness of Eru easier for Men of Middle Earth to perceive than is the case of their counterparts in the real world, for if death is good, then the death of all those who died in the sinking of Numenor, is not an evil deed at all. This is a separate matter from the mysterious afterlife fate of Men who did evil on Arda.

Originally Posted by Child

Eru is in a different position and could possibly have made such a choice with clear understanding of its consequences. This is essentially a no-win situation. Whatever Eru does, there will be evil consequences. He is trapped by his own creation and the latitude he has given to his children.

This is a rather dire picture of the situation as compared to the text: "it has been said that a {Music} greater still shall be made before Ilúvatar by the choirs of the Ainur and the Children of Ilúvatar after the end of days. Then the themes of Ilúvatar shall be played aright, and take Being in the moment of their utterance, for all shall then understand fully his intent in their part, and each shall know the comprehension of each, and Ilúvatar shall give to their thoughts the secret fire, being well pleased.: This seems far from no-win. The end consequences, once all is said and done, will not be evil, for all evil deeds will have been Eru's "instrument in the devising of things more wonderful" than anything his creatures could imagine.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Lal

The point though is that Eru is beyond good/evil, he is at once both of them, and he creates the circumstances in which both enter the world.

If this were true, then Eru has no basis by which to condemn Morgoth to the Void, except pure whim. This does violence to the inner consistency of reality Tolkien built into his cosmos/mythos, and therefore cannot be accurate.

Originally Posted by Legate

We all know the story of Ainulindalë, and what Eru said to Melkor. When Eru put the plans of the Great Music before {the} Valar, there was nothing of what Melkor later did. In the beginning, there was nothing evil: not even Sauron, as it was said here many times.

Precisely.

Originally Posted by Lal

Legate - bear in mind though that Eru created Melkor. When Eru tells him "no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me" he is telling Melkor that he may have free will, but he was put there by Eru and Eru made him what he is, whether for good or for bad. ... I suppose in one way you might almost feel sorry for Melkor as he simply cannot help what he is.

Such determinism is not reflected in the text. Melkor had choices and made wrong ones. Eru created him to have the greatest potential of all, and Melkor fell to pride and lust for dominion outside the will of Eru. On what account, then, would one feel sorry for Melkor?

[littlemanpoet]

Sorry for the multiple posting, but I felt my responses needed to be broken up by topic and original poster (more or less).

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Even though death is the Gift of Eru to Men, I think this moral standard should also hold for him, regardless of the quality of the afterlife and regardless of whether life for the children would inevitably become very bad.

If Eru became subject to this moral standard, then the moral standard would be greater than Eru, which is an impossibility, as if: "In the beginning was Moral Standard, and Moral Standard created Eru."

Originally Posted by Macalaure

But maybe, at the time, the Drowning was simply the best choice that was left to Eru? This is possible. In fact, it would perhaps solve our dilemma. However, I think it leads to another question: Is Eru omnipotent or not? If he is, then he must have had the possibility to punish the evil and/or remove Valinor while sparing the innocent Númenoreans (I confess I'm growing increasingly uncomfortable with this black-and-white painting of the society of Westernesse). Is there any textual support for either one of the positions?

The Ainulindalë does nothing if it does not indicate the omnipotence of Ilúvatar. The oft quoted phrase, "no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me", indicates this. However, "sparing" the innocent Numenoreans (if such a thing exists in the context of what Tolkien presents), is unnecessary, as death is a Gift.