Mimara's abilities and status as a prophet

  • 19 Replies
  • 3591 Views

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2807
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #15 on: June 14, 2018, 11:53:41 am »
@H, but from the quote from my previous post about Koringhus thinking, "Why does she weep? The Eye knows no sorrow.". Koringhus is thinking this and Mimara responds, "But I do."

That tells me that through the Eye she hears/sees, whatever you want to say, whatever Koringhus thinks. Those were his thoughts, and she answers him. I'd say thats more proof that she sees and hears everything through the Eye, whomever its Gaze is aimed at.

ETA; to add to your thoughts H, ive reread that chapter and those scenes in particular at least 10 times in the past few weeks. I think its clear she knows all that the Eye sees. I also am not sure that ita Mimara that is rendering redemption, after all, it says the Eye approves. And, that's not the dialogue I take away, that Koringhus sees what the Eye reflects back to him, not at all. I can see that is the case for Mimara, she sees and hears what the shows/reflects to her. But, all of that is clearly of Koringhus's narrative and him thinking on the stones, saving the boy, emulating the Sranc, etc, etc.

Right, I didn't phrase it well, but Mimara knows some amount of what the Eye "sees."  It could be all, it could only be some.  She can finihsed Koringhus' sentences there because the whole idea of Zero, the Eye, the Cubit, is that the interval between them, between their souls collapses.  So, in that way, Mimara's soul and Koringhus' soul are One, so it is no wonder she "knows" what he is thinking.  "Zero made One" is how Koringhus summarizes it.

It is only after Mimara forgives, only after the revelations that the Zero Principle inspires in Koringhus, that the Eye approves.  So, I don't think the Eye's approval is contingent on either, so much as it is contingent on both of those things.  Mimara's forgiveness allows Koringhus a chance at redemption.   The Eye's perspective gives Koringhus the path toward the "holy."  It is his renunciation of the Logos and so the "sacrificium intellectus" and then his Leap that finalizes his redemption.  (In a sort of Søren Kierkegaard-ian fashion.)

I think that Bakker is making some kind of mashed up presentation of some ideas regarding The Cubit, Mimara and The Eye in regards to "archetypal" themes of the Bible.  I am, however, not well read enough to fully disentangle all thing.  However, I think the the parallels between Mimara and Christ are real, even if not deeply meaningful to the narrative, only to the thematic structure of the series.  Just to lob them out: Zero as Feminine, a nod, I think to the separation between Logos and Sophia; Christ as the successor of Adam (the first man), so does Koringhus liken Mimara to the "first mothers" (I think Bakker is going for a direct nod here); the atemporal "pleromatic" nature of the Incarnation, i.e. Mimara's possession of the Eye before she was pregnant (and later Kel's "birth" as the No-God, not to mention the motif of the "hostile bothers" in Kel and Sammi) and so the historical precedent of the Eye having been possessed by others before.  I think there are more, but need to dig further, but something about Gödel's incompleteness theorem, as it relates to the infinite perspective of The Cubit and thus the "need" for the reduced mortal perspective of Mimara to render judgement.

I need to do a lot more reading, but I am coming to think that Bakker has not only read and worked off the Bible, but must, at least in some fashion, have read or come across some Gnostic interpretations of it as well.  I'd love to be able to give you all a good, rational interpretation of the connections, but one, I am not sure there is one, and two, I am certainly not qualified to actually offer it.  Going to keep digging though, even though I don't think it gives us any real narrative insight, but I think it's interesting both intellectually and thematically.
I am a warrior of ages, Anasurimbor. . . ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury. -Cet'ingira

The Spaces Between

  • *
  • Emwama
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
« Reply #16 on: July 23, 2020, 12:09:53 pm »

There are lots of threads about the JE and Mimara. This post links onto a discussion about one so figured its as good as any to put in my two cents.

Since the eye is related to being pregnant and giving birth to stillborns it seems odd that she recounts having it all her life. There's a bit in the TJE where Akka wonders about Mimara not being aborted by her mother's whores shell.

Quote
For the first time, it seemed, he noticed how much lighter her skin was than his or her mother's. For the first time he wondered about her real father, about the twist of caprice that had seen her born, rather than aborted by Esmenet's whore-shell.

This makes Mim a bit of an inversion of the JE and its criteria. Where pregnant women get the JE and have stillbirths, Mim is an intended abortion that possesses the JE. Or at least that was my impression when i read the above statement and tried to resolve the paradox of Mim possessing the JE all her life.
"A terror, so profound, so abiding–and, yes, pure–that all other fears guttered into nothingness for lack of air. A terror that was a gift… such was the peace and certainty that followed upon it."

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2807
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #17 on: July 23, 2020, 03:24:42 pm »
This makes Mim a bit of an inversion of the JE and its criteria. Where pregnant women get the JE and have stillbirths, Mim is an intended abortion that possesses the JE. Or at least that was my impression when i read the above statement and tried to resolve the paradox of Mim possessing the JE all her life.

Well, in my current Hegelian paradigm, I tend to think of this mainly in terms of the sort of "reconciliation" the seems to run all through TAE.  Namely the notion of how the Eternal (the unchanging in Hegelian terms) could or would intersect with the temporal (the individual).

I don't know that there is a resolution to that paradox though, really.  The fact seemingly just is, more so, something self-consciousness has to sublate (overcome) and possibly that is part of the Dasein spirit (in essence, what it means to have a soul).  Or maybe that is the whole thing really.
I am a warrior of ages, Anasurimbor. . . ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury. -Cet'ingira

SmilerLoki

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
    • View Profile
« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2020, 01:28:58 pm »
This makes Mim a bit of an inversion of the JE and its criteria. Where pregnant women get the JE and have stillbirths, Mim is an intended abortion that possesses the JE. Or at least that was my impression when i read the above statement and tried to resolve the paradox of Mim possessing the JE all her life.

Well, in my current Hegelian paradigm, I tend to think of this mainly in terms of the sort of "reconciliation" the seems to run all through TAE.  Namely the notion of how the Eternal (the unchanging in Hegelian terms) could or would intersect with the temporal (the individual).

I don't know that there is a resolution to that paradox though, really.  The fact seemingly just is, more so, something self-consciousness has to sublate (overcome) and possibly that is part of the Dasein spirit (in essence, what it means to have a soul).  Or maybe that is the whole thing really.
Putting it in more straightforward (albeit simplified), plot-related terms, the Judging Eye is an atemporal phenomenon. If it exists at one point in time, it exists always. Since Mimara will have it in the future, she does have it for all her life.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2020, 01:30:50 pm by SmilerLoki »

The Spaces Between

  • *
  • Emwama
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
« Reply #19 on: July 24, 2020, 11:53:40 pm »
Well, in my current Hegelian paradigm, I tend to think of this mainly in terms of the sort of "reconciliation" the seems to run all through TAE.  Namely the notion of how the Eternal (the unchanging in Hegelian terms) could or would intersect with the temporal (the individual).

I don't know that there is a resolution to that paradox though, really.  The fact seemingly just is, more so, something self-consciousness has to sublate (overcome) and possibly that is part of the Dasein spirit (in essence, what it means to have a soul).  Or maybe that is the whole thing really.

To quote Titirga, you swim deep and i can only watch from the shallows lol

Putting it in more straightforward (albeit simplified), plot-related terms, the Judging Eye is an atemporal phenomenon. If it exists at one point in time, it exists always. Since Mimara will have it in the future, she does have it for all her life.


Yes that does seem the prevailing theory. Similar to kel being the no-god always, or the ark being invisible to the gods in the present because one day they win.

"A terror, so profound, so abiding–and, yes, pure–that all other fears guttered into nothingness for lack of air. A terror that was a gift… such was the peace and certainty that followed upon it."