The atrocity of the Akallabêth

[Raynor]

Was he aware of the potential outcry from some readers about the "unjust" nature of Eru's act given what happened in Numenor?

At least from Christians, this reaction should, theoretically, not come. The Bible describes what happens to the two cities of Sodoma and Gomora, whose people were considered sinful. Howeve, can the sins of the inhabitants of those cities ever compare to what the numenoreans did to others (torture, slavery, sacrifice to Melkor) and to themselves (slaying each other in madness), while disregarding each and every sign to repent? Or what would persons like minded with Thomas Jefferson, who said that "from time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots". I believe that the corruption in Numenor was so great among the un-faithful, that they were beyond redemption; possibly, that corruption spiritually and phiscially affected even those who were too young. Concerning the biblical deluge, it is said: "and God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually". It may be that Numenor was rotten to the core; for good reason did Tolkien call Elendil a Noachian figure, he may have been among the few who escaped this dire marring by true faith, which he later brings to M-E.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Or what would persons like minded with Thomas Jefferson, who said that "from time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots".

Or with Joseph Stalin who said: "One death is a tragedy, one million is a statistic. "

I believe that the corruption in Numenor was so great among the un-faithful, that they were beyond redemption; possibly, that corruption spiritually and phiscially affected even those who were too young.

So even the children of Numenor were valid targets, & it was acceptable for Eru to kill them? And we, presumably, cannot 'judge' such an action because Eru is a 'mystery'? I take it he 'destroyed the village in order to save it'?

Concerning the biblical deluge, it is said: "and God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually". It may be that Numenor was rotten to the core; for good reason did Tolkien call Elendil a Noachian figure, he may have been among the few who escaped this dire marring by true faith, which he later brings to M-E.

I think it should also be pointed up that not all the Faithful survived the devastation of Numenor - which I suppose is a case of 'Kill them all - God will know his own.'

[Raynor]

I expect it from an author.

Then again, you are putting all authors into one pot, regardless of their opinions. This expectation is uncalled for, imo.

LotR is not a religious work.

Again, ignoring myths as a path to spirituality.

It is, first & foremost, as Tolkien stated in the Foreword to LotR, an 'entertainment'.

Could you give that specific quote??

The point is that Eru is both transcendent (in which aspect he cannot be judged) & immanent (in which aspect he can).

But Eru is nont immanent, he does not inhabit any part of creation, an idea stated repeatedly by Tolkien. So your argument is void in that direction.

I choose to believe that Tolkien was only referring to Eru - because if he really believed that it would only confirm to me that he was failing to seperate the primary & secondary worlds in his own mind

I don't see the logical connection between writting something about God in a fictional setting and inability to differentiate between one's fiction and (perceived) reality.

If God is a transcendent mystery then Tolkien would have inevitably had a limited perception of him, & one can question the extent to which he was correct, but that is a very different thing to considering them 'the same thing'.

How can we conceive two different transcendent realities?? What differentiates them, if at their core both are, well, transcendent?

Or with Joseph Stalin who said: "One death is a tragedy, one million is a statistic. "

The problem with this quote is that it says nothing of the standing of those who died.

I take it he 'destroyed the village in order to save it'?

That is what it seemed; part of Sauron's loss of power is that he spent a great part of it on corrupting Numenor. This is the only possible exit out of that hell; as Tolkien stated, there are certain encounters with evil that cannot be won by mere humans without supplication to God.

I think it should also be pointed up that not all the Faithful survived the devastation of Numenor

And you say that, because?

Originally Posted by Akallabeth

But whether or no it were that Amandil came indeed to Valinor and Manwe hearkened to his prayer, by grace of the Valar Elendil and his sons and their people were spared from the ruin of that day.

[Lalwendë]

Look, we're arguing as though Eru destroyed Numenor because of something done against his will, but that's wrong. Eru detsroyed Numenor because the Valar asked him to, not even that, that Valar pleaded with Eru just to do something.

The Valar had overstepped the mark by giving Men this island which was so temptingly close to the Undying Lands, by idolising Men too much. Then when Men came to act as they inevitably would, wanting to explore the seas and wanting to see what it was about the Undying Lands which gave the inhabitants unending life (to their minds, it was the place which did this, not the inherent nature of the peoples there - the Men of Numenor lacked understanding of immortals just as much as the Immortals lacked any comprehension of mortality) the Valar were powerless to act. They pleaded with Eru, the one who made these creatures, and Eru smote.

He did not do it as those remaining on Numenor were 'evil' themselves - indeed Miriel is perfectly innocent. And I seriously doubt that Tolkien, devoted family man would ever write about children being evil or wicked. The event is not 'just' nor is it 'justified' apart from it is something that the god of this world does. A god who as I have pointed out already is like the God of the Book of Job, a law only unto himself. Rather than punishing the people left on Numenor, he is in fact punishing the Valar who were foolish/proud enough to set up Numenor in the first place.

Nor was the event meant to echo the Noah myth in any way, it was meant to be Atlantean. The only part which echoes the Noah story is the escape of Elendil and the Faithful, which Tolkien calls "a kind of Noachian situation". The rest of it, this whole, huge, overbearing and memorable story, is drawn from something Atlantean. It comes from Tolkien's own mind, from his own recurring nightmares, something which he squarely points down to being common amongst those who live near the Sea and those in Western Europe. I know exactly what he means - I grew up with exactly the same kinds of tales of drowned lands and fears of the lands being drowned once more.

So while we're all scratching away at some kind of Biblical analogy, meaning or comprehension to all of this we are looking in precisely the wrong place. This really has very little to do with what Eru and the valar are really like, little to do with whether the babies drowned at Numenor were evil, and a whole lot to do with Atlantis.

Some quotes:

Originally Posted by Letter 154

The particular 'myth' which lies behind this tale, and the mood both of Men and Elves at this time, is the Downfall of Númenor: a special variety of the Atlantis tradition. That seems to me so fundamental to 'mythical history' -- whether is has any kind of basis in real history, pace Saurat and others, is not relevant -- that some version of it would have to come in

Originally Posted by Letter 163

for I have what some might call an Atlantis complex. Possibly inherited, though my parents died too young for me to know such things about them, and too young to transfer such things by words. Inherited from me (I suppose) by one only of my children, though I did not know that about my son until recently, and he did not know it about me. I mean the terrible recurrent dream (beginning with memory) of the Great Wave, towering up, and coming in ineluctably over the trees and green fields. (I bequeathed it to Faramir.) I don't think I have had it since I wrote the 'Downfall of Númenor' as the last of the legends of the First and Second Age.

Originally Posted by Letter 180

For when Faramir speaks of his private vision of the Great Wave, he speaks for me. That vision and dream has been ever with me -- and has been inherited (as I only discovered recently) by one of my children

Originally Posted by Letter 227

The legends of Númenórë are only in the background of The Lord of the Rings ... They are my own use for my own purposes of the Atlantis legend, but not based on special knowledge, but on a special personal concern with this tradition of the culture-bearing men of the Sea which so profoundly affected the imagination of peoples of Europe with westward-shores.

Originally Posted by Letter 257

What I might call my Atlantis-haunting. This legend or myth or dim memory of some ancient history has always troubled me. In sleep I had the dreadful dream of the ineluctable Wave, either coming out of the quiet sea, or coming in towering over the green inlands. It still occurs occasionally, though now exorcized by writing about it. It always ends by surrender, and I awake gasping out of deep water. I used to draw it or write bad poems about it. When C. S. Lewis and I tossed up, and he was to write on space-travel and I on time-travel, I began an abortive book of time-travel of which the end was to be the presence of my hero in the drowning of Atlantis. This was to be called Númenor, the Land in the West.

Originally Posted by Child

To put it bluntly, did Tolkien blow it by giving us tiny glimpses of deity or reflected deity in one part of the narrative and pulling back in others so that we are ultimately left with unaswered questions. If the author truly wanted to keep "religion" out of his created world, as he certainly stated at one point, then why start the whole thing off with Eru? Or did his Catholic beliefs compel him to do this and, yet at the same time, require him to make Eru no more than a "minor, irritable" character, because of the difficulties of writing in a pre-revelation world?

Really the most obvious answer is that anyone writing a mythical saga would not want to miss out the Coolest Bit Of All: the chance to write your very own creation myth. I'm not religious and I too would be champing at the bit to get some god/creator action going on. Tolkien didn't put Eru in because he was a Catholic but because he was a writer.

[davem]

Again, ignoring myths as a path to spirituality.

Tolkien's work is not a 'mythology'. A mythology is the work of a people over millenia. Whatever Tolkien produced it is not technically a 'mythology'.

Could you give that specific quote??

As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none....The Lord of the Rings has been read by many people since it finally appeared in print; and I should like to say something here with reference to the many opinions or guesses that I have received or have read concerning the motives and meaning of the tale. The prime motive was the desire of a tale-teller to try his hand at a really long story that would hold the attention of readers, amuse them, delight them, and at times maybeexcite them or deeply move them.

I don't see the logical connection between writting something about God in a fictional setting and inability to differentiate between one's fiction and (perceived) reality.

Which assumes that Tolkien was writing something about God in a fictional setting, of course. And even if he was the reader is not required to accept, let alone agree with, what the author says. And if the author gives us a work of fiction rather than a work of theology, one must assume he wanted it to be read as a story, not a work of theology.

The problem with this quote is that it says nothing of the standing of those who died.

So killing a million 'bad' people is OK?. Tolkien seemed to consider the fall of Numenor & the deaths involved to be a tragedy. You seem to be shrugging your shoulders & saying its OK.

That is what it seemed; part of Sauron's loss of power is that he spent a great part of it on corrupting Numenor. This is the only possible exit out of that hell; as Tolkien stated, there are certain encounters with evil that cannot be won by mere humans without supplication to God.

And yet Eru spared Sauron (& the Orcs & other servants of Sauron btw - whose attrocities far exceeded those of the Numenoreans). I don't see where 'Hell' comes into M-e - where it is never mentioned as a metaphysical reality.

And you say that, because?

The last leaders of the Faithful, Elendil and his sons, escaped from the Downfall with nine ships, bearing a seedling of Nimloth, and the Seven Seeing-stones (gifts of the Eldar to their House)

The idea that the whole of the faithful of Numenor could gather together in one place (& fit themselves into 9 ships) without being noticed is hardly credible.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by Lal

The Valar had overstepped the mark by giving Men this island which was so temptingly close to the Undying Lands, by idolising Men too much. Then when Men came to act as they inevitably would, wanting to explore the seas and wanting to see what it was about the Undying Lands which gave the inhabitants unending life (to their minds, it was the place which did this, not the inherent nature of the peoples there - the Men of Numenor lacked understanding of immortals just as much as the Immortals lacked any comprehension of mortality) the Valar were powerless to act. They pleaded with Eru, the one who made these creatures, and Eru smote.

But let us not forget Sauron's influence. Did that encourage what happened or speed it up? Personally, I am not sure... The whole of Numenor was not corrupted for there still were those who were faithful. Rather like the story of Sodom and Gomorrah from Genesis, it seems that the faithful are brought out before the destruction of the land and they go on living in Middle Earth.

[Raynor]

Look, we're arguing as though Eru destroyed Numenor because of something done against his will, but that's wrong. Eru detsroyed Numenor because the Valar asked him to, not even that, that Valar pleaded with Eru just to do something.

But the second requires the first; I doubt Eru would proceed to any action, esspecially one of destruction, if there weren't good reasons, no matter the status of those who make the supplication.

He did not do it as those remaining on Numenor were 'evil' themselves - indeed Miriel is perfectly innocent.

COndoning acts of evil does not amount to innocence. And Sauron didn't just tell lies, he used his demonic power to corrupt the very beings.

And I seriously doubt that Tolkien, devoted family man would ever write about children being evil or wicked.

Though childrens in Gondor do play as orcs in The New Shadow.

The event is not 'just' nor is it 'justified' apart from it is something that the god of this world does.

Rooting out evil is just and justified. This was not a random act; it ended thraldom to evil to both oppressors and oppressed.

he is in fact punishing the Valar who were foolish/proud enough to set up Numenor in the first place.

How?

Nor was the event meant to echo the Noah myth in any way, it was meant to be Atlantean. The only part which echoes the Noah story is the escape of Elendil and the Faithful, which Tolkien calls "a kind of Noachian situation".

Atlantis and the deluge are not mutually exclusive, esspecially given your quote from his letter #156; quite the contrary case can be made rather powerfully. And Tolkien calls Elendil a Noachian figure in Letter #131.

So while we're all scratching away at some kind of Biblical analogy, meaning or comprehension to all of this we are looking in precisely the wrong place.

This biblical analogy was reffered to by Tolkien specifically; plus what I said above. Also, the deluge is something imprinted in the subsconscious of all humanity, although you are probably right it is more at the surface in certain areas.

Tolkien's work is not a 'mythology'. A mythology is the work of a people over millenia. Whatever Tolkien produced it is not technically a 'mythology'.

Well, I didn't say mythology, but myths; aslo, if we are to understand mythology as a body of myths, then he did produce it. Further I don't think your qualifier "produced over millenia" is necessary, but that is beside the point anyway.

amuse them, delight them, and at times maybeexcite them or deeply move them.

Delightment, excitement and moving signifies, to me, much more than entertainment (a word he didn't use) but (the making, road to) eucatastrophe.

Which assumes that Tolkien was writing something about God in a fictional setting, of course. And even if he was the reader is not required to accept, let alone agree with, what the author says. And if the author gives us a work of fiction rather than a work of theology, one must assume he wanted it to be read as a story, not a work of theology.

Ok; what was Tolkien writing about when he made more or less specific, direct, refferences to Eru? And, if he was talking about a transcendent reality, I ask again how could that be different that what he conceived of God? How can two transcedent realities differ? Also, to presume that one's spirituality can't be reflected in a book, and increase its value, and be perceived as such, is, well, presumptuous.

So killing a million 'bad' people is OK?

We are not talking about everyday 'bad' people. I am not going to repeat in each and every post their sins and horrible deeds. By their corruption, they were brought to a human's lowest possible level. And if one does in the sanctity of one's house doesn't concern others, it was not the case with them. They were spreading their corruption towards all of Middle Earth, esspecially in the west; and considering Sauron's powerful grip on the east, this would just have brought all humankind to its knees, probably forever. It also became a threat to his other kindred, the elves, even in Aman; they had to retreat from their ages old homes, to the protection of the valar, but even Valinor was endangered with destruction. You cannot ignore a problem of this level. And I believe that Eru did what was the closest to their redemption, by ending their thraldom to evil. They ignored everything else. But they could not be ignored anymore.

And yet Eru spared Sauron

Because he stated in the letters that not even the crreator can destroy a fea.

the Orcs & other servants of Sauron btw - whose attrocities far exceeded those of the Numenoreans

I am curious, what more evil deeds did all of these do that "far exceeded" the numenorean actions?

I don't see where 'Hell' comes into M-e - where it is never mentioned as a metaphysical reality.

But it is very real to those who experienced Utumno or Angband, and probably Mordor too, later, as evil is manifest in this world.

The idea that the whole of the faithful of Numenor could gather together in one place (& fit themselves into 9 ships) without being noticed is hardly credible.

It would fit however with the legend of Lot and his family escaping from their town before they were destroyed; and it was made specifically clear that the valar intervened to get them safe to shore. I would also like to know if you have any evidence that there were more faithtfulls than those who made it to the ships.

[davem]

Well, I just spent about an hour anwsering your point & lost the post & I can't face doing it all over, so I'll be brief here.

[QUOTE=Raynor]
And Sauron didn't just tell lies, he used his demonic power to corrupt the very beings.

This is to imply that Sauron was wholly responsible for the Numenoreans corruption. Which makes Eru's action even more unacceptable. The Numenoreans come across as victims in this scenario. One cannot assume all the Numenoreans were evil - many quite possibly went along out of fear for themselves & their families.

One cannot read the account of the Akallabeth in the same way post Hiroshima. The destruction of Numenor would have traumatised generations, & created a fear of Eru - which Eru must have realised.

Though childrens in Gondor do play as orcs in The New Shadow.

Because they were innocent & didn't realise what they were doing - which was Tolkien's point.

Well, I didn't say mythology, but myths; aslo, if we are to understand mythology as a body of myths, then he did produce it. Further I don't think your qualifier "produced over millenia" is necessary, but that is beside the point anyway.

Its still not a myth. A myth is the 'story' behind an actual religion, & reflected the worldview of an entire culture. What Tolkien produced was a pseudo-mythology. But in the end it is a work of fiction.

Delightment, excitement and moving signifies, to me, much more than entertainment (a word he didn't use)

Maybe he had a thesaurus.

Ok; what was Tolkien writing about when he made more or less specific, direct, refferences to Eru? And, if he was talking about a transcendent reality, I ask again how could that be different that what he conceived of God? How can two transcedent realities differ? Also, to presume that one's spirituality can't be reflected in a book, and increase its value, and be perceived as such, is, well, presumptuous.

Its a story. If Tolkien had wanted to 'do a Lewis' & write Christian apologetics, or 'reveal the ways of God to man' he would have done so. In any case, by writing a story he invites the reader to take it as a story, & not a sermon.

Because he stated in the letters that not even the crreator can destroy a fea.
I am curious, what more evil deeds did all of these do that "far exceeded" the numenorean actions?

He could have simply done with Sauron what was done with Melkor & removed him to the void - except that he needed Sauron for LotR, so he had to invent a reason for keeping him around in the world - a pretty unconvincing one if you ask me.

But it is very real to those who experienced Utumno or Angband, and probably Mordor too, later, as evil is manifest in this world.

I stated Hell did not exist in M-e as a metaphysical reality.

It would fit however with the legend of Lot and his family escaping from their town before they were destroyed; and it was made specifically clear that the valar intervened to get them safe to shore. I would also like to know if you have any evidence that there were more faithtfulls than those who made it to the ships.

It states the Valar intervened to get the safely to the shores of M-e after the devastation, not that they intervened to get them to the harbours of Numenor. Being that the devastation happened without warning one can only logically assume that those of the faithful who escaped were the lucky ones. And given that many 'evil' Numenoreans in the cities on M-e were not wiped out one can only assume that many faithful Numenoreans died & many unfaithful ones didn't. In which case, one has to ask, why didn't Eru wipe out all the 'sinful' Numenoreans. As far as I'm aware the ships only carried those of the House of Elros (ie of the Royal Blood), so unless we posit that only the aristocrats remained faithful we have a problem. One must question whether, given that only nine ships escaped, the totality of the faithful were so small in number (even given Sauron's depredations).

[Raynor]

This is to imply that Sauron was wholly responsible for the Numenoreans corruption.

That is to ignore all the previous actions of the numenoreans; they already resorted to oppressing, they stopped following the old ways, respecting the valar and their status, or the offerings to Eru. Three great numenorean lords became ringwraiths. They punished those who welcomed the elven ships. All these happened before Sauron came to Numenor.

Given the adulation of their ancestry, their knowledge of who Sauron truly was would have been second only to the elves, yet they still suffered him in their country, suffered him near their king, suffered his evil teachings - which, to those who were still good, the faithful, they were abominations. Their observance of true faith was a shield to Sauron. The others, welcomed him. Not to resist Sauron and his doings (through observance of rules - let us remember that in the Atrabeth Eru said : "Call on me and I shall hear, for I am watching over you") means assenting. There can't be a middle way for a moral person. Numenoreans weren't victims, they were accessories, if not perpetrators of Sauron's corruption in Numenor. One cannot expect salvation from God if one welcomes (while one still can welcome) evil.

Because they were innocent & didn't realise what they were doing - which was Tolkien's point.

His _stated_ point for the story was Man's satiety with good - hence his propensity towards evil. May I ask if you read it?

Its still not a myth. A myth is the 'story' behind an actual religion, & reflected the worldview of an entire culture.

Then again, even if we accept this as the general definition (I particulary don't, and I would like to see an official definition), we must take into account what myth was for Tolkien in particular. He saw myth-making as a modern day too activity, with a significant spiritual potential. And that is the relevant aspect of Tolkien's myths in regards to the relation between Eru and God.

Maybe he had a thesaurus.

That's a cryptic statement to me, as a non native English speaker, and I suppose it was meant to be sarcastic. Perhaps you could be kind enough to state your argument in more detail.

Its a story. If Tolkien had wanted to 'do a Lewis' & write Christian apologetics, or 'reveal the ways of God to man' he would have done so. In any case, by writing a story he invites the reader to take it as a story, & not a sermon.

This would ignore one of his main concerns: writting about fundamental subjects in essence, not in form - his struggle with allegory.

He could have simply done with Sauron what was done with Melkor & removed him to the void - except that he needed Sauron for LotR, so he had to invent a reason for keeping him around in the world - a pretty unconvincing one if you ask me.

Sauron was a problem that Men had to deal with; it was mainly the numenoreans who dealt with him, either at the end of the second or the third age - with direct help from high elves and istari. Later, Men would face other incarnations of evil, but none of mythological status - but they also won't have mythological aide by their side (such as istari, or, arguably, elves). The level of struggle decreases in time, but it is balanced - esspecially if true allegiance to Eru is observed.

I stated Hell did not exist in M-e as a metaphysical reality.

Metaphysical as in what? Non-material, "spiritual"? We also have the second world, of the spirits, in which wraiths and apparently elves access. I am sure Sauron too has power there too, as elves have too. It is said in the Silmarillion that Sauron was threatened by Luthien by something that can only be described as a non-material hell ("'There everlastingly thy naked self shall endure the torment of his scorn, pierced by his eyes, unless thou yield to me the mastery of thy tower"). Anyway, I am looking forward to your clarification.

It states the Valar intervened to get the safely to the shores of M-e after the devastation, not that they intervened to get them to the harbours of Numenor.

The original statement was: "by grace of the Valar Elendil and his sons and their people were spared from the ruin of that day". The particularisation of your interpretation, that they were helped only in the voyage, but not in escaping, doesn't stem from this, esspecially immediately since after the "grace of the valar" statement it is said how Elendil escaped the soldiers. Also, it was Amandil's design, shared to the faithfuls, that they should prepare to escape.

[Elmo]

It would fit however with the legend of Lot and his family escaping from their town before they were destroyed; and it was made specifically clear that the valar intervened to get them safe to shore. I would also like to know if you have any evidence that there were more faithtfulls than those who made it to the ships.

Three words - Miriel, Miriel and Miriel!

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

That is to ignore all the previous actions of the numenoreans; they already resorted to oppressing, they stopped following the old ways, respecting the valar and their status, or the offerings to Eru. Three great numenorean lords became ringwraiths. They punished those who welcomed the elven ships. All these happened before Sauron came to Numenor.

I know - you were the one who put all the blame on Sauron by saying:

he used his demonic power to corrupt the very beings.

Either Sauron corrupted them - as you stated there, or they were already 'corrupted' & that is why they succumbed to him. You seem to be seeking to win the argument by adopting both positions.

There can't be a middle way for a moral person. Numenoreans weren't victims, they were accessories, if not perpetrators of Sauron's corruption in Numenor. One cannot expect salvation from God if one welcomes (while one still can welcome) evil.

This has always been the problem with human beings - they will be human beings (often intentionally, & with malice aforethought). They will be complex, confused, frightened for themselves & those they love, do what they think is right & get it wrong. Sometimes they will even be nasty, unpleasant & cruel. Thank goodness in Arda there was a God who was prepared to slay them all (even those vicious little children, who were probably the worst of the lot. Pretending to be Orcs - they should have been skinned alive & fed to the wargs in order to save their immortal fea).

BTW, I wonder, en passant, if anyone agrees with you that its acceptable for Eru to slaughter 'wicked' children.

His _stated_ point for the story was Man's satiety with good - hence his propensity towards evil. May I ask if you read it?

I have, actually. TBH it came across to me like the rantings of an old codger about 'the youth of today..' & I'm glad he thought better of continuing with it.

That's a cryptic statement to me, as a non native English speaker, and I suppose it was meant to be sarcastic. Perhaps you could be kind enough to state your argument in more detail.

It was a bit sarcastic. But then you were being a bit pedantic. I think we should both forgive each other & move on.

This would ignore one of his main concerns: writting about fundamental subjects in essence, not in form - his struggle with allegory.

Whatever. He wrote a story. I read it as a story. I don't remember him anywhere stating he was trying to reveal the truth about God.

Sauron was a problem that Men had to deal with;

Why 'had to'?

Metaphysical as in what? Non-material, "spiritual"?

Yes - that's what 'metaphysical' means, & that's why I used it in that way.

We also have the second world, of the spirits, in which wraiths and apparently elves access. I am sure Sauron too has power there too, as elves have too. It is said in the Silmarillion that Sauron was threatened by Luthien by something that can only be described as a non-material hell ("'There everlastingly thy naked self shall endure the torment of his scorn, pierced by his eyes, unless thou yield to me the mastery of thy tower"). Anyway, I am looking forward to your clarification.

EDIT - I was rushing ahead (& seriously distracted by a headcold, so I misunderstood Raynor's point. Re-reading it I see I got the wrong end of the stick.

I'll attempt another answer.

This is clearly a reference to what will happen if Sauron's fea (his 'naked self') escapes & returns to Morgoth. It doesn't posit the existence of a metaphysical realm/state of eternal damnation.

On to the Miriel issue. Certainly Foster in his Complete Guide to Middle-earth (praised for its accuracy by no less an authority than Christopher Tolkien himself) states that Tar-Miriel was one of the faithful.