Why can't Sithis be considered a God? : The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion

» Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:42 am

because of this: worship not the 1s and the 0s and or the order and or the means. i mean, basically, isn't SIthis the dream that the Godhead is dreaming?

» Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:56 pm

I hope I made sence. It′s pretty confusing for me too since this isn't the easiest of topics and if there is something wrong here please tell me so I can correct it on this and later posts.

THX!!

If every living thing stopped thinking about destruction in TES Dagon would still exist. Not knowing about or thinking about a concept doesn't stop it from existing. Dagon would remain existing regardless of what anyone thought of him. As far as Sithis goes I remember one book (or was it a forum member's comment?, hope not

) describing Sithis as Anuel's limits. Basically he is the actualized limitations of Anuiel. Anuiel contemplated and catalogued its limits and there was Sithis. If Anuiel is the soul or living aspect of Anu, Sithis is the non-living part of Anu.

» Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:34 pm

I don't like how Sithis is some "non-living" things, because it is something, therefore can't be nothing. Just read the Monomyth you guys. In fact, here's the two paragraphs on Sithis and Anuiel from the Monomyth,

All Tamrielic religions begin the same. Man or mer, things begin with the dualism of Anu and His Other. These twin forces go by many names: Anu-Padomay, Anuiel-Sithis, Ak-El, Satak-Akel, Is-Is Not. Anuiel is the Everlasting Ineffable Light, Sithis is the Corrupting Inexpressible Action. In the middle is the Gray Maybe ('Nirn' in the Ehlnofex).

In most cultures, Anuiel is honored for his part of the interplay that creates the world, but Sithis is held in highest esteem because he's the one that causes the reaction. Sithis is thus the Original Creator, an entity who intrinsically causes change without design. Even the hist acknowledge this being.

Anuiel is also perceived of as Order, opposed to the Sithis-Chaos. Perhaps it is easier for mortals to envision change than perfect stasis, for often Anuiel is relegated to the mythic background of Sithis' fancies. In Yokudan folk-tales, which are among the most vivid in the world, Satak is only referred to a handful of times, as "the Hum"; he is a force so prevalent as to be not really there at all.

No where is he described as "non-living", only an opposite.

» Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:16 pm

I don't like how Sithis is some "non-living" things, because it is something, therefore can't be nothing.

That's about as big an irrelevant thesis as you can get.

Whether or not its "something" has no relevance to the discussion of whether or not its living. A rock is something, that is its not nothing, but a rock is by no means living. Gravity is something, in that its not nothing, but it is not living. If I'm writing a treatise about rocks or gravity, it shouldn't be necessary for me to specify that they're non-living, that much should be assumed. As with Sithis, there is every reason to assume that it is a non-living, non-sentient force, even if that isn't directly stated.

» Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:23 am

I know, but just saying it's Anu's "non-living" side is incorrect as how I look at it, as it assumes that Anu is "living." Both are forces in my book.

» Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:46 pm

I know, but just saying it's Anu's "non-living" side is incorrect as how I look at it, as it assumes that Anu is "living." Both are forces in my book.

This reminds me of the story of gaia and ouranos did the greek consider them gods yeah they did their more than gods their primodial deities I know nirn is not earth but I think sithis and anu falll into this category

» Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:48 am

err, I'd rather say Anu and Padomay as Kaos.

Also, it's Anu and Padomay, and with Anuiel and Sithis being the soul of those two, respectively.