Killing tears the soul apart redux.

[Caius Marcius]

No: HPFGUIDX 139481

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy Rizzo" <ms-tamany at r...> 
wrote:
> On 4 Sep 2005 at 1:21, houyhnhnm102 wrote:
> 
> > It has been argued by you and others that Dumbledore could not 
have
> > told Snape to sacrifice him if it was the only way to save Harry,
> > Draco, and Hogwarts, because Dumbledore would not order Snape to 
do
> > something that would tear his soul. "Killing tears the soul". I've
> > read that over and over on this board.
> > 
> > Not cold-blooded murder for gain or immortality (Voldemort) or
> > hot-blooded killing for revenge (Sirius and Lupin). Any killing 
for
> > any reason, regardless of motive or circumstances. A blanket 
statement.
> > 
> > I'm asking for evidence that this claim has been made anywhere in 
the
> > books or interviews. You have not provided it. You can't, because 
it
> > doesn't exist. 
> 
> Okay, page number and edition and all that.  American hard cover 
edition, chapter 23, 
> 'Horcruxes', page 498, fifth line from the top of the page.  
Slughorn is discussing horcruxes 
> with young Tom, in the true pensieve memory.
> 
> "But how do you do it?"
> "By an act of evil -- the supreme act of evil.  By committing 
murder.  Killing rips the soul apart."
> 
> Right there in black and white, very much canonical.  *Killing* 
rips the soul apart.  The act of 
> taking another's life tears your soul apart.  Slughorn doesn't say 
anything about tearing your 
> soul in half, though, nor does he mention extenuating circumstances 
to the killing. 

He first says "murder", and it may be interpreted that he is defining 
as "killing" only those acts which fall under the definition 
of "murder." The Sixth Biblical Commandment which is often 
erroneously translated as "Thou shalt not kill" should actually be 
rendered as "Thou shalt not murder" - the Hebrew verb "tirsah" which 
is used in the Mosaic commandment is not one of the common verbs 
associated with killing an enemy on the field of battle, killing a 
sacrificial animal, or executing a convicted malefactor (all three of 
these deeds meet with Scriptural approval when properly conducted) - 
rather, it is associated with the cold-blooded execution of a 
personal enemy, or killing for personal gain (as opposed to killing 
to protect the community).

To give a hypothetical example: a sniper who shot innocent 
unsuspecting bystanders to avenge some percieved personal slight 
would surely be guilty of murder, and would be (in the Potterverse) 
tearing his soul as well - the police officer who shot and killed the 
sniper, however, did so to protect his fellow citizens, and so 
performed a brave and selfless action, one which would not rend his 
soul (even though both the police officer and the sniper took a human 
life).

So Harry can "kill" Voldemort, because that is at bottom a selfless 
act; Voldemort can only "murder" becuase his goals are fundamentally 
selfish.

  - CMC