You must remember however; this particular quote in context interprets "what
Finrod believed to be true" (i.e. - his educated 'opinion'), and this was also at a time "prior to Finrodâs revelation" during his discussion with Andreth.... which happens here:
Also;
Yes, but the quote that I employed in argument was from
Tolkien's Commentary of the
Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth which is the author's
own perspective of the
concepts elucidated in
The Debate. Despite the fact that as the
waning process propogated further toward the
End of Arda and that
Elvish thought would have 'changed' on the matter, thus being modified; it does not mean that this contention (of Tolkien's nonetheless) has no bearing on the discussion whatsoever. In actuality, as Tolkien didn't explore the matter further I would contend that this was his
final perspective on the matter - it is more than likely he was leaving himself a
loophole to give him a little leway to crawl through if textual contradiction eventuated.
Always in some way
inclined to committing
evil? Yes. The smoking gun, or "
catalyst" responsible for the Fall of the
Noldor? I donât think so. All of the
Elves in
Aman were in bondage to a
hröa that was tainted, but only the Noldor who followed
Fëanor were so "inclined to committing evil", and actually went through with it. Even the Avari (i.e. Eöl) who had never set foot in Aman (whose
hröar never received the healing benefits of
the Blessed Realm), were appalled and disgusted by the evil deeds of the Noldor.
And (as I can see below) this is where the eternal concept of Free Will rears its majestic head as I knew it would... eventually.
Free Will is still free
without inherent
perversion to evil.
Eru, being omnibenevolent, is continuously described throughout all the works of Tolkien as being "
free". Eru is forever
Untainted by the evil of
Melkor and
Arda Marred as he is First and Foremost - transcendent - however, (H)e is the continuance and perpetuation of the fulfilment of Arda's Destiny (the
Oienkarmë Eruo) and thus
evil exists within his
Thought; and this is the point that
Celegorm alludes to below (to an extent). Evil is
extrinsic of Eru, however it has its "
uttermost source in [him]". Due to this
omnibenevolence and the existence of
Free Will it is only through the
extrinsic existence of evil and the inherent perversion to it and the acting upon
Choice that generates evil within Arda. This existence of evil (Melkor being
Proto-evil) is prpogated through
Arda Marred and I would therefore reason that both
Free Will (
Cilmë = Choosing) and
Evil were
catalysed by this
Tainting. The
tainting of the
fëa is caused by the
tainting of the hröa. Both
Aulë and
Ulmo are in concord with this belief:
The History of Middle-earth X: Morgoth's Ring - The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II): Laws A
'... [AulĂ«:] Therefore the greatness of the child must proceed from his will directly, and be intended for the good of the Eldar and of all of Arda.' ... [Ulmo:] '... For if the death of MĂriel was otherwise, and came from beyond Arda (as a new thing having no cause in the past) it would not bring grief or doubt. For Eru is Lord of All, and moveth all the devices of his creatures, even the malice of the Marrer, in his final purposes, but he doth not of his prime motion impose grief upon them. ... The coming of FĂ«anĂĄro must proceed certainly from the will of Eru; but I hold that the marring of his birth comes of the Shadow, and is a portent of evils to come. For the greatest are the most potent also for evil.
One can only assume what path FĂ«anor and the Noldor might have followed had their hröar been formed pure and untainted. Would Melkorâs lies and "influence" following his release have taken hold within the "mind" (fĂ«a) of FĂ«anor if his physical body had been "unalloyed" with the contaminated Melk - ore? Iâd certainly bet on it. I do not believe FĂ«anor rebelled; roused the Noldor; and instigated a Kinslaying because his hröar was tainted any more than I believe a random spree killer goes on a rampage because his mom smoked cigarettes and drank too many martinis while he was yet in the womb. Thatâs a weak excuse.
I have an enormous amount of respect for this position...
in the 'real world'.

However, in
The Legendarium apropos of the above quote this
acknowledgment of the separation of the
fëa and
hröa and
hröa-
consumption through
The Marring of Arda and the evil that is wrought by it can only lead to the supposition that it was indeed responsible for
The Fall of the Noldor. It appears however, that Tolkien as author has put a
restriction on the affinity to evil of the
EruhĂni to the
greatest of them - which, of course, is arguably the Noldor. This is why the quote above about
minor-Melkorism is considerably important and has a strong bearing on this debate. Due to
inherent potency the
realisation of Mastery of Arda is more readily achievable and this perversion to evil more inveigling because of it. Pride cometh before the Fall - it's as simple as that.
There is no doubt in my mind that FĂ«anor would have snapped regardless, due to the chain reaction of extreme "external" circumstances that pushed him over the edge (including the evil spirit Melkorâs "external" meddling [fĂ«a to fĂ«a] which initially kindled his pride).
Couldn't
disagree more. The
Tainting of the Hröa through
Arda Marred generated this intrinsic
perversion to evil which resided with the
fëa. This
inclination to evil must first be actually present (or existent) otherwise Fëanor would not have comprehended Melkor's seduction and not have appealed to this most significant of requirements for Fall - pride. It would have thus been beyond Fëanor's understanding - just as Melkor was beyond
Manwë's:
The History of Middle-earth X: Morgoth's Ring - The Later Quenta Silmarillion (I)
Wherefore in a while he was allowed to go freely about the land, and it seemed to Manwë that his evil had been cured. For he himself was free from evil and could not comprehend it ...
We also see that the
fëa itself (apart from the
hröar) is not immune to its own shortcomings:
Why would these "
fëa" be refused further incarnate life? Because even if they were provided with perfect, bright, shiny, new untainted
hröar; the "
fëar" themselves are lemons....
factory defects. Time for a recall

.
You cannot separate (entirely) the
fëa from the
hröa to make it more conducive to your argument. The
fission of the Two is what results in the
inclination to Evil and as the
fëa is also
extrinsic of Arda it is therefore
The Marring of Arda and
The Tainting of the Hröa that is responsible for the affinity of the
fëa to evil.
The History of Middle-earth X: Morgoth's Ring - The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II): Laws A
'... Yet they came into Arda Marred, and were destined to do so, and to endure the Marring, even though they came in the beginning from beyond EĂ€. ... For though by their prime nature, unmarred, they rightly dwell as spirit and body coherent, yet these are two things, not the same...'
As
fused and
coherent constituents of
being, to refute the
marring of the
hröa in the context of the
fëa is, in my opinion, to err in the understanding of the presence of evil within Arda and the way in which it acts upon the cognizant creatures of Arda. Even
Men are akin to the Eldar in this respect. This is however, why they are more readily a
dulterated and
perverted to Melkor as they lack the same level of
control.
I think our only real difference in thought is that I personally do not "directly" associate this 'waning of the Elvish hröar' with The Fall of the Noldor as you do; though I agree with much of what you say; including the fact that the 'waning' was of the Ordinance of Eru:
Come now, Illuin; you and I both know there is more to the
waning of the Elves than just the
hröa! However, I do agree with the
Ordinance of Eru, but perhaps within a different context.
I believe the Fall of the Noldor however was an exclusive, inimitable event that would have happened just as it did "apart from" whether or not the hröar was derived from the erma of Arda Marred. Of course, this is by no means an open and shut case on either side of the coin (yours or mine); and there is still so much room for discussion. As Tolkien states:
To be continued.......
Exclusive and inimitable perhaps in that a whole lot of situations combined to cause it, some of which were exclusive to the Noldor. ... The truly morally questionable acts, however, both the over-possessiveness and the willingness to kill for one's possessions by far are not exclusive to the Noldor, we still see
the One Ring fuelling them thousands of years later.
...
to be continued...