[Triskele]

So the Mek encounter in the prologue came up at the other site, and someone quoted the "I have fought both for and against the No-God" line. 

I just posted this:

"So we know that this is Mek via author's non-canonical revelation, but we would have been able to safely assume he was Consult on the "for the No-God."

One of the more common theories about the No-God is that it's somehow Nau-Cayuti or was him.  Mek would have fought against Him when Nau-Cayuti was also fighting the wars that "authored this wilderness" but as part of the Ancient North's war against the Consult.  So he didn't mean that he, Mek, changed sides.  He was all Consult once he helped found it.  But he did fight against the No-God back when NG was NC.  So it may not be an author's mistake at all but rather a hint hidden in the prologue of the first book about who the No-God was.  And if you think of the possibility that the "for and against" bit was about someone else being on either side rather than Mek...it starts to be seen in a different light, neh?"

EDIT [Madness]: Changed thread title.

[Galbrod]

I totally agree with you Trisk, if we see the NG as a non-static entity with its own story-arc it would make perfect sense that other (key) characters could have fought both for and against him/her/it.

[Madness]

Yeah, Trisk... It's pretty clear that people at Westeros don't actually read posts. It's such a mess of a thread after having this whole forum to play in.

We just don't know enough. Did the No-God rise once before in the Cuno-Inchoroi wars? Does Mekeritrig mean the Inchoroi but the No-God or Black Heavens makes a better placeholder to refer to as (for reasons we can't yet understand)? Is he referring to something like freeing Seswatha from the Wall of the Dead at Dagliash, which happened during the apocalypse. Hell, do we even have it on any authority, at all, that Mekeritrig is still a part of the Consult contemporarily?

I totally agree with you Trisk, if we see the NG as a non-static entity with its own story-arc it would make perfect sense that other (key) characters could have fought both for and against him.

Big +1, Galbrod. The No-God's just an it, trying to make its way through a nebulous and hormonal time in is life .

[Aural]

Yeah, Trisk... It's pretty clear that people at Westeros don't actually read posts. It's such a mess of a thread after having this whole forum to play in.

Are you saying that people are supposed to read posts before they reply to them?  I wouldn't call it a mess though because those threads don't have a single topic unlike here, so everyone pretty much posts whatever they have to say. There is no need to stay on topic because there isn't one.

Yeah, Trisk... It's pretty clear that people at Westeros don't actually read posts. It's such a mess of a thread after having this whole forum to play in.

We just don't know enough. Did the No-God rise once before in the Cuno-Inchoroi wars? Does Mekeritrig mean the Inchoroi but the No-God or Black Heavens makes a better placeholder to refer to as (for reasons we can't yet understand)? Is he referring to something like freeing Seswatha from the Wall of the Dead at Dagliash, which happened during the apocalypse. Hell, do we even have it on any authority, at all, that Mekeritrig is still a part of the Consult contemporarily?

Yeah, it's possible that he's not even with the consult now. But if I may add one more question to your list, is it "Mekeritrig" or "Mekertrig"? or is Mekertrig the twin brother of Mekeritrig?

My book has both of those version.

Also, if this is an obvious mistake like some people claim over there... Wouldn't he just say so if someone asked him about it? I mean many authors admit they've given contradictory info between books, even when the series is not yet finished.

[Madness]

Are you saying that people are supposed to read posts before they reply to them?  I wouldn't call it a mess though because those threads don't have a single topic unlike here, so everyone pretty much posts whatever they have to say. There is no need to stay on topic because there isn't one.

Lol. I've found it beneficial to read posts before replying, yes .

For me, the issue becomes one where posters at Westeros (us SAers included), if they do recognize the state of affairs as you write, are in such a hurry to write their perspective, that everyone's posts quickly read ignorant and oblivious (essentially infinite variations of "nuh-uh, he said this, it says this," even when they agree with one another, or you know, are provided with the actual quotation).

Again, my main gripe is that thread will receive 15-20 replies a day (if not many more), whereas this whole forum receives under 10 posts, maybe...

What a waste of energy. It could all be directed here where the monument of our efforts will stand tall, on strong and rigorous foundations.

Yeah, it's possible that he's not even with the consult now. But if I may add one more question to your list, is it "Mekeritrig" or "Mekertrig"? or is Mekertrig the twin brother of Mekeritrig?

My book has both of those version.

I'm sure it is only supposed to be one of them and that they are the same person, the Nonman Cet'ingira, who is named Mekeritrig (Mantraitor), I believe during the First Apocalypse (I'd have to check the TTT Glossary).

Also, if this is an obvious mistake like some people claim over there... Wouldn't he just say so if someone asked him about it? I mean many authors admit they've given contradictory info between books, even when the series is not yet finished.

I remember Bakker explicitly saying that there are a number of continuity errors throughout TSA that he missed during editing. However, as for what is topical over at Westeros, I don't remember (off the top of my head) any direct reference to those supposed errors.

I often find it fairly indicative of something when there is so much opinion written yet so little evidence cited .

[Wilshire]

Triskele that's something I have not thought of before. Its definitely and interesting idea that makes sense given what we do and don't know.

I'm curious though: Would there be any reason for the Scylvendi would have been lead by Nau-Cayuti? Or, further still, reason for them to refer toany man as a God? Certainly they worrship war and have had many great leaders, but what would raise one to God-hood in Scylvendi culture?

[Cüréthañ]

I used to hold the impression that Mek helped Seswatha from the wall at Sauglish and had a period of 'double erraticism'.  Still can't think of any other way Ses could've escaped that.

But the NG is a manifestation of the Inchies' objective - a refutation of God.  It doesn't need to be manifested or conceived as an entity to fight for or against it imo.  I can easily accept that Mek was talking about the Cuno-Inchoroi wars in a manner that a halaroi would understand.  Kind of a case of meaning invested by shared hindsight, if that makes sense.

[Inraus Ghost]

Perhaps this has been broached (I'd actually be surprised if it has not) but I'm new user and not very keen on reading 17pages of stuff, much predating several books.

Several times in the series it is theorized that mortal souls are but bits of the God trying to understand it's self.

The NG obviously has a deific level of power, what with the stillbirths across the known world upon it's arrival to mundis. Perhaps not that it can direct very well but it sure makes a big distortion in reality to have such an effect. Also the constant whirlwind about it, both despite being in a box covered in chorea.
 Second it repeatedly asks "WHAT DO YOU SEE?"
 So my thought is that the NG is a soul, somehow perverted and made (semi)aware of its godhood. The sarcophagus being the containment for the soul and/or life support for the doubtless wracked and mutilated body of whomever it was crafted from.

[Madness]

Perhaps this has been broached (I'd actually be surprised if it has not) but I'm new user and not very keen on reading 17pages of stuff, much predating several books.

These posts, though they may refer to old theories, were generated within the past two years. The quoted portion is from the old rendition of this forum. All of these posts occurred after WLW.

Several times in the series it is theorized that mortal souls are but bits of the God trying to understand it's self.

The NG obviously has a deific level of power, what with the stillbirths across the known world upon it's arrival to mundis. Perhaps not that it can direct very well but it sure makes a big distortion in reality to have such an effect. Also the constant whirlwind about it, both despite being in a box covered in chorea.
 Second it repeatedly asks "WHAT DO YOU SEE?"
 So my thought is that the NG is a soul, somehow perverted and made (semi)aware of its godhood. The sarcophagus being the containment for the soul and/or life support for the doubtless wracked and mutilated body of whomever it was crafted from.

I'm not sure that the No-God directs that "power" or if it's deific (thaumaturgical as we've been calling it round these parts) as you've highlighted.

There was a great theory on the old Three-Seas that the No-God was the trapped World-Soul (that pool of souls from which all souls are drawn and all souls return) but it had its detractors like all other theories.

Certainly possible, Inraus Ghost.

[locke]

There's always the theory that the no god is in fact a singularity (hah!) literally a (soul) black hole contained by the sarcophogus, thus the distortion in the soul fabric of the earwa-soul-space-time

[Inraus Ghost]

These posts, though they may refer to old theories, were generated within the past two years. The quoted portion is from the old rendition of this forum. All of these posts occurred after WLW.


I'm not sure that the No-God directs that "power" or if it's deific (thaumaturgical as we've been calling it round these parts) as you've highlighted.

There was a great theory on the old Three-Seas that the No-God was the trapped World-Soul (that pool of souls from which all souls are drawn and all souls return) but it had its detractors like all other theories.

Certainly possible, Inraus Ghost.

 I did go back and read most of them last night, insomnia's a bitch. Noticed that they did reference things in TJE and WLW and felt kinda silly. 
Yeah the world soul theory sounds pretty much like what I'm thinking. And if all souls are bits of The God that would explain the scope of it's effects on reality.  The only direct influencing of reality by gods we know we have seen has been in WLW and I dare say the NG's effects greatly exceed that in scope.

[Wilshire]

So basically you're saying that each soul the NG 'obtains' he is raised by degrees to actually being The God?

That would suggest too then that The Hundred are each some % of The God based on how many souls they are munching on for eternity.

Which also means that The God can never awaken/exist until all souls are united into 1 host. We need some kind of no-holds-barred, winner take all,  battle royale amongst all the Gods, Ciphrang, and any other being  who has a soul... Or at least between all significant souled entities (basically the preceding list excluding ensouled entities like humans, or that 1 skin-spy, the inchoroi, nonmen?, etc). That way 1 being could be 99.99999% The God, which could then be called Mostly The God, and could just say close enough.

Side note:
http://www.howstuffworks.com/10-evil-spacecraft9.htm#page=9
I googled Inchoroi because it wasn't marked as incorrectly spelled, and this page showed up.... I was amused, so I figured I'd share. Inchoroi coming in at #2.

[Francis Buck]

I've stated this theory numerous times both and here and Weateros, but I think it's a very strong possibility that Kellhus will use the NG as a method to merge all of the souls in the universe in order to awaken the God, which is in fact one and the same with the Dunyain's concept reachng the Absolute.

Regardleas, I think it's pretty clear that every ensouled being (that includes ciphrang and the gods) are indeed fragmenrs of the World Soul, a.k.a God, the Absolute, Sum of all Thought, etc. We hear this from multiple sources and there's quite a bit of evidence to suppprt it.

[Wilshire]

I've stated this theory numerous times ...

We've been here for so long, discussing the same things with the same people. We either new new content or new people, and as it turns out new people are easier to come by

[Madness]

I don't know. We might be savoring new material sooner rather than later.

Though, new members would always be cooler - in my opinion.