You suggest that Moridin and SH are one creature, fused together like Luc and Isam are, but actually also Ishy and SH 0.5. were already one creature. Your evidence is that the Trollocs named Ishy Ba'alzamon, and consequently he must have a physical link to a Myrddraal. The other evidence is that the Nae'blis is just half a step below the DO, and consequently the DO would fuse himself together with his Nae'blis. Finally, Carrdin was visited by SH 0.5. but after Ishy's death, Carridin was left alone for some reason, which is obviously that Ishy and SH 0.5. were one creature.
Irrespective if this evidence is in any way convincing, or if it couldn't be explained in more reasonable ways (namely that Moridin and SH are simply closely working together and not physically linked), you have to note that if we read Moridin's or SH's PoV neither indicates at all that both are one being (if we read Isam's/Luc's it's immediately made clear that they are fused together). In the same way, the authors always distinguish between SH and Moridin in their statements. Why do you think, they would fool us that way, just for a lame twist?
Irrespective if this evidence is in any way convincing, or if it couldn't be explained in more reasonable ways (namely that Moridin and SH are simply closely working together and not physically linked), you have to note that if we read Moridin's or SH's PoV neither indicates at all that both are one being (if we read Isam's/Luc's it's immediately made clear that they are fused together). In the same way, the authors always distinguish between SH and Moridin in their statements. Why do you think, they would fool us that way, just for a lame twist?
Moridin & Shadar Haran
- 22/07/2010 08:14:27 PM
1784 Views
No...
- 22/07/2010 08:22:52 PM
1167 Views
Re: No...
- 22/07/2010 09:31:35 PM
1064 Views
Don't let her talk you out of it so easily. Give us the reasons behind your theory!
- 23/07/2010 03:41:00 AM
1009 Views
Re: Don't let her talk you out of it so easily. Give us the reasons behind your theory!
- 27/07/2010 04:00:26 PM
867 Views
Re: No...(en garde, Etzellius Maximus!)
- 23/07/2010 08:38:26 AM
1084 Views
I haven't seen those answers either so I'm interested. I don't think they're the same
- 23/07/2010 08:49:11 AM
952 Views
Yup, I think they are one and the same.
- 23/07/2010 08:21:20 AM
1344 Views
This idea is hardly vindicable
- 23/07/2010 09:12:14 AM
1067 Views
Au contraire.
- 23/07/2010 11:23:09 AM
1180 Views
But why...
- 23/07/2010 11:32:25 AM
998 Views
Again. RJ fooled you.
- 23/07/2010 12:15:26 PM
1077 Views
I think it would have to work this way:
- 23/07/2010 03:10:59 PM
1020 Views
Your reasoning falls apart right at the start, even though there is some truth to the rest, I think.
- 23/07/2010 04:22:22 PM
1118 Views
Um not quite
- 25/07/2010 05:47:22 AM
970 Views
I think your evidence is pretty weak...
- 26/07/2010 10:14:01 AM
926 Views
Why don't you answer some of the issues I raised then, instead of keeping it vague..?
- 26/07/2010 11:58:02 AM
1046 Views
Re: Why don't you answer some of the issues I raised then, instead of keeping it vague..?
- 26/07/2010 12:18:51 PM
1027 Views
Re: Why don't you answer some of the issues I raised then, instead of keeping it vague..?
- 26/07/2010 12:43:53 PM
977 Views
Frankly, I don't see any similarity...
- 26/07/2010 01:57:56 PM
1015 Views
Re: Frankly, I don't see any similarity...
- 26/07/2010 04:09:52 PM
894 Views
The problem is...
- 26/07/2010 04:27:50 PM
859 Views
No problem at all, but your unwillingness to accept the possibilty after all these years.
- 27/07/2010 11:38:10 AM
966 Views
I already answered all this...
- 27/07/2010 11:46:36 AM
979 Views
Yeah. And as proven earlier your answers are flat-out wrong.
- 27/07/2010 01:17:36 PM
1085 Views
Thanks for those answers. Here's how wrong they actually are:
- 26/07/2010 01:54:44 PM
1019 Views
No problem
- 26/07/2010 02:30:45 PM
1053 Views
Why the half answer? Here's my full answer and the questions you missed..again..
- 26/07/2010 05:14:00 PM
1126 Views
Just to understand you correctly...
- 26/07/2010 05:33:46 PM
961 Views
Sure..I'll answer your questions again.. "quid pro quo"?
- 27/07/2010 12:43:21 PM
1037 Views
Well, kudos to you, if that idea turns out to be right
- 27/07/2010 01:27:05 PM
990 Views
I almost want the theory to be true, but one quick thing:
- 26/07/2010 03:53:04 PM
963 Views
Re: I almost want the theory to be true, but one quick thing:
- 26/07/2010 04:18:40 PM
852 Views
One should also remember...
- 26/07/2010 05:06:36 PM
885 Views
Eh?
- 26/07/2010 05:30:20 PM
906 Views
But that the killing stopped, doesn't mean at all that Moridin and SH are one creature. *NM*
- 26/07/2010 05:35:02 PM
955 Views
Give me a better reason? Why did RJ make the timing fit and hid it so far apart?
- 26/07/2010 05:36:28 PM
991 Views

*NM*
=
- Oh and has anyone given thought to Hopper = Bela?