• Welcome to The Tolkien Forum! Connect with fellow Tolkien enthusiasts and join a community that is over two decades old, and still going strong. We look forward to meeting you.  Register

Why Did Eru not destroy Morgoth?

Then Ilúvatar spoke, and he said: 'Mighty are the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor; but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Ilúvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.'
Because as Eru said, no matter what Melkor did it just was acting as an instrument of Eru and His plan.
 
Eru chose to make the Ainur as creatures that each imaged him. That meant each individual creature was imbued with free will, because without free will they’re just robots that don’t image Eru. That automatically implies that each creature can, and inevitably will, fall short of what Eru himself would chose. Sometimes those decisions are well-meaning but in error: ergo gratis the decision of the Valar to remove the Elves from Middle-earth and ensconce them in Valinor, “for their own good (and safety)” of course. But sometimes its just damnable pride and selfishness, e.g. Melkor Morgoth.

Long ago in college days (there were still mastodons roaming North America when I went to college), I played a great deal of Dungeons & Dragons. I don’t want to push this analogy too far, but from time to time, players decided they would do particularly evil things. I even had one guy play an assassin, and his character murdered another player’s character. Now, I threw this guy out of the game, because I think he spoiled it for everyone else; but that sense of looking at a subcreated world has never left me. Eru began Eä with the “big kids”, the Valar and Maiar, and they get to play all the way until the end. Then the “little kids” come along, Elves and Men, and they get to play part of the time. You have big kids picking on little kids, and some of them on each other. The nastiest ones picking on each other were thrown out (in Tolkien’s world) by the other big kids, namely Morgoth, Sauron, and the Balrogs, probably along with some other lesser Umaiar (fallen Maiar).

Is that a correct view of reality, or subreality? I have no idea, but it makes sense to me: Some players get to play the whole game, from beginning to end, and some of those players who do get to play the whole game are just rotten to the core because they choose to be. And they can deliberately choose to be rotten – evil, we call it – because they are endowed with free will, a key ingredient for imaging Eru.

But at the End of Arda (or Eä, as the case may be), it’s bad for Morgoth and his buddies. The game will be over, and it’ll be time to settle accounts.
 
Because as Eru said, no matter what Melkor did it just was acting as an instrument of Eru and His plan.
That does seem to contradict Melkor getting yeeted into the void, direct Eru intervention needed to keep Numenor at bay, Sauron getting defeated ultimately by a hobbit, or in general, (supposedly) the entire 4th age and then the paradise era after Dagor Dagorath. These events pretty much remove the concept of opposition from the picture. It's like Tolkien is trying to say that life is only good with drama, but also trying to say that a paradise state is when the only good happens. Seems contradictory.
 
I'm not entirely sure, but I think that there is this moment in the Silmarillion where - after the Valar are done singing - Eru shows them the entire history of the universe on super-speed, the good and the bad, and then asks them whether they think it is worth creating this. They say yes. So, Morgoth and all of his evil is agreed upon and planned.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top