Dumbledore and Death

[ceridwennight]

No: HPFGUIDX 137979

mcjuels wrote:
> After reading HBP twice and listening to the tapes, I keep going 
> back to three Dumbledore quotes from "The Lightning Struck Tower."
> 
> 1  "Well, I certainly did have a drink...and I came back...after a 
> fashion."  Could mean "I drank poison, I died, and I came 
> back...sort of."  
> 
> 2. "He cannot kill you if you are already dead."  Could mean "You 
> can't kill me because I am already dead."
> 
> 3. "No Draco, said Dumbledore quietly, "it is my mercy, and not
> yours, that matters now."  Could mean "I have sacrificed my life 
> and you won't have to kill me."
> 
> Here's what I wonder.  Could the potion in the cave be turning 
> Dumbledore into an Inferi?    


Ceridwen:
I've wondered the same, or similar.  I wondered if DD was now nearly 
dead from having drunk the liquid in the pensieve, and that so much 
time was elasping that he knew he was beyond help.  Yet it does seem, 
particularily the quote of not being able to be killed if one is 
already dead, that maybe he really was.

But that would mean that Harry was the killer.  I know he acted on 
Dumbledore's orders to continue feeding him the liquid no matter what 
he said after he began to ingest it.  Dumbledore pressed the point 
home that he mustmustmust obey him without question.  And he waited 
to receive confirmation before they began their quest.  And at one 
point, Harry revives Dumbledore while they are still in the cave 
(iirc, don't have the book nearby).  Could this have been 
Dumbledore's death?

If so, then Harry is the killer, not Snape.  So many directions to go 
from here!  First, how would this affect Harry if/when he finds out?  
Second, how would anyone find out that Dumbledore died from that 
liquid and not from the (false or real) AK?  The body is buried and 
sealed in its tomb.  Do they exhume in the WW?

Third, how does this settle the UV?  If Dumbledore dies by other 
means than Draco or Snape, will the fact of his death render the UV 
moot?  Or will it exact a toll on Snape for not having beat the other 
circumstances?  

Fourth, if this was not a 'Severus... please... (mindreading)kill me' or 'Severus... please... (mindreading) say it isn't so!', then what was the look passed between Dumbledore and Snape?  If things were not as they seemed, then a bit of Legilimency doesn't seem out of order.  If things were exactly as they seemed (to Harry), then a long look while Dumbledore tried to gather strength to continue the discussion might fit.

I do think that sending a message through Legilimency would be the 
same as taking messages, the transmission of a thought or thought-
picture.  So that last bit opens up all sorts of possibilities.  If 
no Legilimency took place, did Snape see something on Dumbledore, 
proof of becoming an Inferius or of having become one, that Harry, in 
his ignorance, doesn't see?  In fact, that no one else on the tower 
sees, either because they're dumb as posts or because Snape knows 
where they went and is looking for it?  If Legilimency took place, 
does Snape know that Harry actually killed DD?

A lot of people, here and elsewhere, have said that DD wouldn't ask 
Snape to kill him.  In normal circumstances, I would agree.  It would 
damage the soul.  But DD said, before HBP, that they are at war.  And 
the war theme continues.  In war, killing is expected.  Civilized 
rules are suspended.  And heroic sacrifices are the order of the 
day.  Since HP is a fictional series, then examples from other 
fiction would fit.

The soldier stuck out in the open, wounded, dying slowly, in pain, 
surrounded by the enemy with his buddies helpless, calling for them 
to kill him rather than try to rescue him as they are cut down one by 
one, comes to mind.  In fact, I think we did see the WW version of 
that scene on the tower.  Though Snape could fit as either a buddy 
coming regretfully to the only rescue possible, or as an enemy who 
merely wants to kill a particular prize.  Harry, the one 'buddy' 
we're all sure of, is 'paralyzed', by magic here, but due to his 
youth, by fear/loathing of the situation in a normal war story.

Or a soldier valliantly throwing himself on a landmine or grenade to 
save the rest of his platoon.  And so on.

*IF* DD is dying/dead and then reanimated for a short time by the 
spell, then Harry, by unquestioningly following orders, killed him.  
*IF* Legilimency was involved, could DD have wanted Snape to spare 
Harry from this knowledge?  Could he be willing to sacrifice an 
already-wounded (through his own previous choices) Snape for the not-
wounded Harry?  And is that part of the revulsion Snape feels when he 
casts the (possible) AK?

Ceridwen, who does keep coming back to this since there are hints 
which may or may not be clues.