Harry, impossible to kill?

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 177734

> > > Jen: 
> > > <snip>  The AK killed the soul piece, almost killed Harry
> > > in the process, that caused the blood protection to kick 
> > > in, and the blood connection is why Voldemort went with 
> > > Harry to his near-death experience.  I understood that the 
> > > AK didn't rebound because it 'found' part of LV inside Harry
> > > to hit instead.

Mike:
I still think the AK rebounded, but not at full power. That's why
Voldemort got knocked out and experienced his own near-death. I think 
Steve postulated this version up-thread.

 
> > zanooda:
> > I don't know why I didn't think about the blood connection as a
> > reason for LV to be knocked out, it seems logical enough, thanks!

Mike:
I thought the blood connection was the reason Harry and LV didn't 
die. But I thought it was because it's *Lily's* blood. It didn't keep 
either from being 'touched' by the spell, but it did offer Harry and 
Voldemort the same ultimate protection, kept them both from dying. So 
Harry was only *partially* protected from the AK, which then rebounds 
*partially* onto Voldemort who is also *partially* protected because 
he also has Lily blood. Both have near-deaths but neither dies. 
That's my hypothesis, anyway. ;)

> > zanooda:
> > I mostly agree with your ideas, except for one thing. You say 
> > that AK hit the soul-bit instead of Harry, but I always thought 
> > that AK *had* to hit and kill Harry, otherwise the soul-bit won't 
> > be destroyed. 
> > 
> > To eliminate a soul-bit inside a Horcrux, you need to destroy the 
> > Horcrux (the container), that's what DD's book on H-xes states. 
> > Harry is the container, so he needs to die (be destroyed), then 
> > the soul-bit will be destroyed also. That's what I always 
> > believed, so your remark about the AK killing the soul-bit 
> > directly was unexpected for me.

Mike:
I understand your reasoning here, Mila <waves>. The problem I'm 
having is the whole 'Harry must die as the "container" of the soul 
piece' when Harry really didn't die - Dumbledore said he wasn't dead. 
I believe it was Harry's soul that visited the King's Cross way 
station as it was Voldemort's ravaged soul from his body that made 
the trip. But neither's body was dead. 

Dumbledore told Snape that Voldy's soul piece attached itself to the 
only living *soul* left in the room, Harry's *soul*, at GH. So when 
Harry's soul departs the living world for his near-death visit with 
Dumbledore, Voldemort's soul piece has nothing to hold onto in the 
living world. It's just as destroyed as when any other Horcrux 
container is destroyed. But not because it's container was destroyed, 
because it was never *containerized*, Harry wasn't a true Horcrux. 
This piece attached *itself* to Harry's soul which is no longer 
there. And these pieces cannot survive outside of a body.


> Jen: I'm trying to work this out in my mind.  So the AK killed the 
> soul piece and destroyed the container. 

Mike:
I say, sent Harry's soul to King's Cross.


> Jen: But because Harry's tethered to LV he can't really die,
> just as LV can't really die; 

Mike: Yes


> Jen: 'Neither can live while the other survives'?

Mike: Not really, and DD never acknowledges Harry's guess here, 
regarding the prophesy's wording.

> Jen:  OK, that does make sense to me if I'm understanding 
> your reasoning.  When I said the AK 'almost killed Harry in 
> the process,' now that sounds incorrect. 

Mike: No, I think you were right the first time. "Almost killed" was 
correct, IMO.

> Jen:  I was thinking he 
> couldn't have died because he didn't 'go on.' But that's the point, 
> Harry's not dead because he's tethered to LV, not because he wasn't 
> actually killed.  I think. :)  Tell me if I've muddled you're 
> explanation instead of understanding it!


Mike:
And tell me if I've further confused the situation! ;) Because I 
don't like the explanation of Lily's blood acting in the same way as 
a Horcrux would. And Dumbledore's 'splainin leaves a lot to be 
desired in this case.