Destroying soul bits

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 141947

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zgirnius" <zgirnius at y...> wrote:
>
> > KJ writes:
> > 
> > ... I am curious about  why a lot ... swear that Dumbledore would
> > not ask anyone to rip his soul, but there is no hesitation to 
> > destroy a soul. 

> zgirnius:
> In destroying a Horcrux and the soul bit inside, you're not really 
> destroying Voldemort's soul, just one piece of it. The 'at home' 
> soul continues to exist, ...
> 

bboyminn:

Sadly throughout this post, in my own elaborate way, I probably won't
say much more that 'I agree'. Hopefully, I can add enough to make this
post worth while.

To the issue of Dumbledore not wanting anyone to sacrifice damage to
their own soul to help him, I think people are ignoring that everyday
we send soldiers off to war to kill or be killed; to damage their
souls in way that will still profoundly affect them 50... 60... 70
years later. 

I frequently watch PBS or the History Channel productions about WWII
where they interview veterans, and as they recount the events of that
war, now over 60 years after the fact, they are still moved to tears
by what they saw and did. Even more than 6 decades doesn't erase the
pain of their experiences or the horrors of war. 

So, yes, Dumbledore understands war, he understands that many many
many people will be called upon to 'damage their souls' for a cause
greater than themselves. I think they should be honored and remembered
for that great sacrifice both in the wizard world and in the real world.


> > KJ:
> > ... If Volemort's body is killed, does that kill his "at home"
> > soul piece? Does one of the horcruxes support the life of the "at
> > home" piece, or does it replace the loss of the "at home piece"?
> > Does one horcrux get used up if Voldemort is killed? ...
 
> zgirnius:
> First, killing Voldemort... I would presume does not kill the soul. 
> While ... not ... explicitly stated ..., the soul in Christianity 
> ... is the thing that lives on after someone dies. It just goes 
> somewhere else (Heaven/Hell/Purgatory/etc...)
> 
> My understanding of how Horcruxes work is that they prevent the soul 
> of someone who is killed from doing whatever it is that the soul 
> would normally do ...
> 

bboyminn:

I think Zgirnius has the right idea. The 'soul piece' stored in the
Horcrux is separated from its body, in this case, Voldemort. So
destroying the Horcrux doesn't destroy the soul piece, it simply
releases it to go to where ever souls go. Without the soul piece's
connection to the body, it has nothing to hold it here on earth, so it
is simply released to go back to the heavenly ether from which it came. 

One could speculate that it goes back to the 'home soul' and rejoins
it in the sense that it takes up residence in the 'home' body. I don't
get this sense from the books, but it is possible.

The Horcrux, in a vague sense, is a new 'body' for the soul piece, it
is something that binds the soul piece to this earth; a vessel to
contain it, just as the human body is nothing more than a vessel to
contain a soul on earth. When that Horcrux body is destroyed, the soul
goes to where ever souls go, just as if its human body were destroy.

However, as long as one soul piece is earth bound, all 'embodied' soul
pieces remain earth bound and most importantly the 'home soul', that
is the magic the protects Voldemort from death. When the auxiliary
soul pieces have been freed from this earthly existance, Voldemort's
protection is gone and his 'home' soul piece becomes vulnerable; it
can be release from its own earthly existance. 

I'm still finding it next to impossible to imagine how Harry and
friends can possibly resolve the whole Horcrux mystery in such a short
time. The only logical solution I can come up with is that Snape will
discover the secrets of the Horcruxes and direct Harry to them. But,
of course, is one year enough time to get Harry to listen to Snape? 


> > KJ:
> > The Dementors are so disturbing to the WW because they 
> > suck out the soul. 
> 
> zgirnius:
> I think the Dementors are different from someone destroying a 
> Horcrux. They suck out and permanently destroy the 'at home' soul. 
> ... They leave the body alive, but when the body later  dies, 
> nothing is left of that person at all.
> 

bboyminn:

Here all I can say is a simple 'I agree'. The Dementor consumes the
soul, and it is lost from both heaven and earth. Yet, the body remains
behind, very much alive. In a metaphorical sense, a vehicle without a
driver.


> > KJ:
> > Also, I wonder about the status of Inferi. Are they cadavers 
> > with no soul, or is their soul trapped in a dead mobile 
> > body? 
> 
> zgirnius:
> Ooooh gruesome thought. No, from what I gather a Dark wizard first 
> kills someone, and then makes them an Inferius. So I think the soul 
> gets away at the moment of death. (I hope!)
> 

bboyminn:

Again, 'I agree'; although I'm not sure whether it is necesary for a
DE to actually kill the body it re-animates. I think, although, I
can't prove, that any avaiable dead body can be used.


> > KJ:
> > Then there are the Hogwarts ghosts, which would appear to be souls 
> > with no corporeal body. 
> 
> zgirnius:
> To paraphrase ... Professor Snape, DADA Master at Hogwarts:
> 'A ghost is an imprint of a departed soul'.
> 
> What does that mean? A ghost is not the soul itself, apparently. 
> ... So maybe when a wizard dies, their consciousness/memories/self 
> usually go with their soul to wherever. But in cases like Nick's, 
> instead, the soul 'departs' and the rest stays, attached to an 
> 'imprint'. 
> 

bboyminn:

While I agree that this is a reasonable explanation, I'm not sure I
buy it. The phrase 'departed soul' could simply be a euphemism for
someone who is dead. I'm not convinced it's meant to be take literally.

I would speculate that a ghost is a earthbound soul that refuses to
give up its attachment to its 'earthly vehicle'. Nick was afraid of
death, so rather than let his soul crossover to the realm of souls, he
clung tightly to the earthly essense that defined him in the only way
he could understand 'self-definition'. That bound his soul and his
earthly essense, but not his body, to the mortal realm.

I have always wondered if an earth bound soul (a ghost) can be
released and join the realm of souls. I've always felt very bad for
Moaning Myrtle and have fantasized Fan Fic in which Harry finds a way
to resolve the trama that binds Myrtle to the earth, thereby releasing
here soul to 'crossover' and 'rest in peace'. 

If I had a chance, that's definitely one question I would like JKR to
answer. 

> > KJ:
> > Then there are the Hogwarts paintings that seem like 
> > they are alive, ..., but we are told that they have no souls. 
> 
> zgirnius:
> Yes, and they all seem to be portraits of dead people. Presumably 
> their souls have gone on to wherever. 
> 

bboyminn:

Again, a simple 'I agree'. I've equated Portraits with actors playing
a role. They duplicate their subject nicely, but in the end, it is all
play acting and no substance, which means no soul.


> KJ: 
> > I don't think that he cast them off, I think  that he hid them or
> > gave them to trusted people to look after. I am hoping that he 
> > gives them all to Snape. Apparently, I have no personal investment
> > in the saving of  Volemort's soul. ;)
> > 

bboyminn:

Voldemort has already doomed his own soul. Like many criminals,
Voldemort at some point might be sorry (repent), but he will be sorry
he got caught and has to pay a price, not sorry he committed his acts.

One brief side note here; the Riddle Diary was unique in that it
wasn't simply a Horcrux, and was never intended to be used in the same
 manner as a normal Horcrux. A normal Horcrux is meant to be hidden
and safeguarded; protected at all cost. The Diary, on the other hand,
was Voldemort's back-up plan; Plan 'B'. At some point it was meant to
be found and used; used to bring Voldemort back from the dead, and
perhaps provide a vehicle in which his old 'Home Soul' could reside. 

So, the Diary was much more than a Horcrux, a combination of complex
spell geared to a specific task, and should not be judged or held to
the same standard as the other Horcruxes.

> KJ continues: 
> > I am hoping for some explanation for all of this. Maybe JKR in 
> > building her plot line thought it would be amusing to make the
> > villain harder to kill by making it necessary to kill six of him 
> > first, and forgot about all this other soul-oriented stuff. ...
> 
> zgirnius:
> I believe she thought Horcruxes and ghosts through somewhat 
> carefully. Some of this soul stuff will play a role in Book 7. She 
> has said in interviews that she was sorry to do it, but she had to 
> kill off Sirius. Just doing it to isolate Harry further is not 
> sufficient reason in my opinion. I think the fact that he is dead, 
> and not a ghost, will play some role in the resolution of Book 7.
>

bboyminn:

Now we are at the heart of the matter and the very very scary part. So
many plotlines to resolve, Sirius's story amoung them, and so very
little time to do it in. The Soul parts, Godric's Hollow, Harry's
eyes, the Prophecy, the Horcruxes, Sirius's role, the Dursleys,
Dumbledore's death, Snape, Draco, Neville, Dobby, Ginny, and many
more. I just don't see how it can all fit into one book of one year.

As I've said before, JKR will either create the most stunning and
spectacular masterpiece of a story, or it will be a complete dud, a
total let down. Now all we have to do is wait two or three agonising
years and we will have the answers to all ...then again, maybe not.

Not sure what it's worth, but there it is.

Steve/bboyminn