[Yellow]

As an aside, perhaps it is simply that sorcery leaves a Mark only when the sorcerer uses language. I believe Gnostic and Anagogic schools both use dead languages for the Uterals - that's a pretty strong link to a lot of  dead and dawned souls really.

My take was that the Mark is a result of imperfection. When recalling the God through meaning and language, the wielder's recollection is imperfect and therefore can be distinguished from the work of the God.

The Psukhe, in the other hand, is the result of the wielder *feeling* as the God, and these emotions are the thing itself, not representations of the thing. Therefore not imperfect. Therefore no Mark.

[SuJuroit]

As an aside, perhaps it is simply that sorcery leaves a Mark only when the sorcerer uses language. I believe Gnostic and Anagogic schools both use dead languages for the Uterals - that's a pretty strong link to a lot of  dead and dawned souls really.

My take was that the Mark is a result of imperfection. When recalling the God through meaning and language, the wielder's recollection is imperfect and therefore can be distinguished from the work of the God.

The Psukhe, in the other hand, is the result of the wielder *feeling* as the God, and these emotions are the thing itself, not representations of the thing. Therefore not imperfect. Therefore no Mark.

I have a difficult time reconciling this with how chorae interact with the Psukhe (and the Cishaurim) though.  Chorae protect against the Psukhe and kill Cishaurim, so despite the lack of a Mark, the Psukhe (and those who wield it) are distinguished from the God's own creation against which chorae are inert.  A perfect recollection of the work of the God would be, well, perfect and presumably identical to the work of the God, and thus unaffected by chorae.  An imperfect recollection would, presumably, leave a Mark (heh).  Perhaps it's a case where the Psuke just leaves a tiny Mark that's imperceptible to men, in the way that a forgery made by a master could fool any but the most discerning eye (the chorae)?

[Cüréthañ]

My take was that the Mark is a result of imperfection. When recalling the God through meaning and language, the wielder's recollection is imperfect and therefore can be distinguished from the work of the God.

The Psukhe, in the other hand, is the result of the wielder *feeling* as the God, and these emotions are the thing itself, not representations of the thing. Therefore not imperfect. Therefore no Mark.

So how does that work when a Cish delivers Water, or walks in the sky, or sends dreams? 

Creation as is stands would be a perfect recollection, but the Psukhe destroys and alters creation itself no less than other forms of sorcery. Thus it is also countered by the contradictions of Chorae.

The difference seems rooted in the method of invocation, not the 'perfection' of the effect - other sorcerers use semantics to change reality whereas the Cish use passionate belief. For me, it is pretty clear that they are using different tools to the same effect.

[Yellow]

EDIT - this first bit is in reply to Curethan, but the bit about chorae is in reply to both.

I guess I don't understand your first point / question. I don't believe it matters what the Psukhe is used to *do*, whether that's to destroy things, or walk in the sky, or anything else. If it is done with perfect recollection, it is indistinguishable from as if the God has done it. But it's still sorcery, right? It's just that one method is imperfect. This is basically what Kellhus tells Akka, anyway.

The chorae question is interesting and I'm not sure. But I would say that I think chorae act to destroy links to the Outside, in which case they would definitely kill Psukhe - wielders. I don't believe they act to destroy things which are distinguishable from the God, specifically. The Aporos is the sorcery of contradictions, but I always took that to be referring to (in effect) the use of sorcery to destroy the act of sorcery. Not that chorae specifically destroy contradictions.

Would chorae kill gods? I note that Ajokli was wary of them when he manifested in the Golden room. He forced the skin spies' hands to the ground so they could not use them against him. Was he just trying to protect his host (i.e. Kellhus), or was he also protecting himself? He was as close to all powerful in that Topos as he could possibly be, but he still feared chorae. Would a fully-manifested Ajokli be susceptible to chorae? And if he had created his own Hell in which he is basically all-powerful, why would he allow himself - even through a host body - to be susceptible to anything, unless he was unable to do anything about it? I don't believe we have any evidence either way to answer this - correct me if I'm wrong. What would happen if a chorae found its way (somehow, don't ask me how) into the Outside?

The only thing against this idea that I can think of is that Mimara is not destroyed by chorae. But is she a god? I don't believe so. She's definitely holy, though, sure (EDIT - actually, I don't believe that's true. She's saved, but really it's the Eye that's holy). The JE has a strange interaction with chorae, which I can't remember the details of - it somehow was able to see the God through the chorae, as though the chorae was a direct link to the God. I need to go back and re-read that section in Cil-Aujas to see whether this completely negates my points above.

I guess I just have to admit I have no idea how chorae work

[Cüréthañ]

I'll try and clarify my position for you Yellow.

Well, sorcery alters Creation, yes? The God is responsible for reality, sorcery changes that reality according to the desire of the sorcerer, whether it's the Psukhe or not. There's plenty of ways to get damned without causing the Mark, why should the Psukhe be exempt?

Chorae destroy the Mark, and yet the Aporetics who made them defected to the Consult.

Aside from Kellhus' cryptic reference to the Psukhe using different leverage to produce sorcerous effects, I see no real reason to axiomatically conclude Cish aren't damned simply because they don't produce a Mark. And given that sorcery of all stripes is primarily used to murder and destroy at the whim of the user, I can't get behind the idea.

Chorae are used to banish Ciphrang in Shimeh, but that could be because the demon's avatars might be a product of Daimotic magic. On the other hand, I think Yatwer seemed pretty comfortable with Chorae even seemingly manifesting one from nowhere when the first WLW tries to kill Kellhus, but Mimara's tricks with them might be another matter.

[Yellow]

Curethan, I may have edited my post quite a lot while you were posting, so apologies if it's changed since you posted this!

Anyway, to answer this point:

I'll try and clarify my position for you Yellow.

Well, sorcery alters Creation, yes? The God is responsible for reality, sorcery changes that reality according to the desire of the sorcerer, whether it's the Psukhe or not. There's plenty of ways to get damned without causing the Mark, why should the Psukhe be exempt?

Ok, so maybe we're working under different assumptions here. I don't believe that Psukhe-wielders are any less damned than anyone else. I don't think the Mark is necessarily a sign of damnation - only of imperfection. EDIT - sorry, we actually agree on this. Blerg, will stop editing now!

[Cüréthañ]

Oh haha, rightio then. No worries, I think we often gain clarity from looking at the way others express similar concepts as much as trying to understand the perspectives of those who disagree.

[Yellow]

One thing I will say, is that one of the reasons I love TSA is that these are all Valid Questions, and there is more to what's going on than what we "see" on the page. We may never (probably will never?) know the answers to these questions - just like in real life. Since the beginning, I've always felt that if sorcery were real, it would be just like this.

I think if another writer wrote these books, then chorae would just be magic stones that kill wizards. Full stop, nothing else to discuss. As I get older, I grow really weary of reading about those kinds of worlds. They're just so boring.

[Cüréthañ]

Yes indeed my freind.

[Cynical Cat]

Chorae are a product of Nonmen sorcery and it is based on language and meanings.  The Aporos was a school based on negation.  Chorae are the negation of sorcery and by extension, the negation of sorcerers.  Not of the Outside, for they were useless against the wight in the topos, but sorcery.  That they work on the Psukhe and kill Psukharim (albeit in a slightly different manner) combined with the fact that there have been Psukhe practitioners before Fane is clearly indicative the Psukhe is a form of nonlinguistic sorcery.  All indications are that the truth or falsehood on Fanim beliefs is not related to the effectiveness of the Psukhe.

As for Kellhus's predictions about the Psukhe, we have very good reason to believe them.  They are not only the product of Dunyain reasoning and observation, but the product of the teachings of Drusas Achaiman and the accumulated knowledge of the Mandate.  The person he was speaking to was the same Drusas Achaiman, Mandate Sorcerer of Rank, and he found Kellhus's explanation compelling. 

[Duskweaver]

This is all complicated somewhat by Mimara looking at a Chorae with the Judging Eye and seeing it as actually divine after all. So maybe "Tear of God" is not just an epithet coined by ignorant fools who don't recognise a sorcerous artefact when they see one. Did the exiled Aporetic Quya who allied with the Inchoroi accidentally create something thaumaturgical rather than sorcerous?

I don't think an explanation for how Chorae work that treats them as purely sorcerous items will be able to resolve all these issues.

[SmilerLoki]

This is all complicated somewhat by Mimara looking at a Chorae with the Judging Eye and seeing it as actually divine after all. So maybe "Tear of God" is not just an epithet coined by ignorant fools who don't recognise a sorcerous artefact when they see one. Did the exiled Aporetic Quya who allied with the Inchoroi accidentally create something thaumaturgical rather than sorcerous?

I don't think an explanation for how Chorae work that treats them as purely sorcerous items will be able to resolve all these issues.

Let's try, though. As they are explained from sorcerous perspective, Chorae display the inherent contradiction in meaning itself, which lies at the heart of human perception of, well, everything. Each other, self, the world, you name it. This paradox (which is outlined, for example, here in its most basic form) can be viewed as divine in the sense of it appearing so fundamental it encompasses every facet of being. This is compounded by the fact that Earwa is more susceptible to perception and interpretation integral to minds (or souls) than our world. Paradoxes of mind are paradoxes of reality in Earwa.

[Duskweaver]

Huh. Actually, I think you might be on to something there. The soulless cannot comprehend paradox (c.f. Soma-Spy), which already implies a link between paradox and the divine. Also fits in with the implication (from various stuff said by Kellhus and from the Survivor's PoV in TGO) that the God of Gods / the Absolute is somehow both Zero and One - i.e. a paradox. So to create a little sphere of self-sustaining omni-paradox is somehow to create a tiny fragment of the Godhead?

None of that actually explains why Chorae do what they do to sorcerers, though. Why does coming into contact with divine paradox turn Schoolmen into salt, or Cishaurim into "sodden rags" (I'm still not really sure what it does to Cish, other than that it's fatal)? And why don't they do the same to other ensoulled beings?

[SmilerLoki]

None of that actually explains why Chorae do what they do to sorcerers, though. Why does coming into contact with divine paradox turn Schoolmen into salt, or Cishaurim into "sodden rags" (I'm still not really sure what it does to Cish, other than that it's fatal)? And why don't they do the same to other ensoulled beings?

I think it's about onta, more specifically, about it's imperfection when changed through sorcery (as in, it becomes unstable and thus vulnerable), and sorcerers are always the starting point of their sorcery. Concerning the actual effect of Chorae, i.e. turning sorcerers to salt, I vaguely remember Bakker saying he's just channeling Bible. I'm gonna try to find that quote and edit it in.

[EDIT] So far I've failed to find the quote.

[Yellow]

Isn't it something to do with Soddom and Gamorah? Someone looked back at it (Lot? Lot's wife?) and was turned to a pillar of salt. So basically the wicked and/or those who give in to temptation are reduced to salt.

You may be able to tell that I don't speak Bible