Search Beyond Hogwarts:

Reference Desk:
•	Beyond Hogwarts FAQ
•	Wizard to Muggle Currency Converter
•	Harry Potter Spelling Reference

Pages:  <<  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ...  >  >>

Reader Comments: (Page 5)

Well Zach, you should check out the reader comments on the main article of 'Dumbledore is not ', particularly where it mentions a bit about time-travel. All right, DD may not have a horcrux, but he's not . Atleast not for the moment.

Posted by Aditi Dani from Nagpur, India on October 5, 2006 08:44 AM

I don't think Dumbledore would have any interest in creating a horcrux. He knows that the final fight with Voldey is for Harry and Harry alone. More importantly, I seem to recall Dumbledore talking about how life with a split soul is no life at all. Even if his goal were to help Harry defeat Voldey, I don't Dumbledore would create a horcrux. (And if Dumbledore did create a horcrux, I think Dumbledore's portrait would tell Harry that it would be far better to release the bit of captive soul than to try to bring Dumbledore back.)

Posted by Bina Grossplat from Florida on October 6, 2006 11:26 AM

I dont think dumbledore has a horcrux. If he did, he would have had to have ed someone.

Posted by Chelsea from Orem, Utah on October 7, 2006 10:41 AM

Ah, but that's the whole point of the original article. Is there a difference between ing someone, and ing them? How does the difference effect your soul and its health or lack thereof?

Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on October 7, 2006 11:57 AM

Brett J,
I am a bit confused by your suggestion.
when you say 'splitting your soul from your body' is the act needed to create a horcrux, are you suggesting that Harry split his soul when he was only 1 years old?
GoF, pg. 653: "I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost..."
It was Harry after all who caused LV's downfall, meaning, Harry ripped him from his body.

Posted by Noa from Israel on October 8, 2006 04:17 AM

in one of the books she said that dumbledore did beat the dark magican greenwald, that means he ed at least one wizard, to make a hocrux you have to someone. that means there is a possiblility he's still alive. also the philosophers stone is destroyed but nicolas flamel saved a lot of the liquid out of the stone maybe he could repair dumbledore (some magic with the hocrux) i'm not sure but i hope he's still alive

Posted by shad0w_crash from holland on October 8, 2006 06:29 AM

I wish Dumbledore wasn't , but all the signs point to it. I know there's the possibility that he created a Horcrux and use it to rise again and live but if you look at the New Revelations section of this website you see that a young boy asked JKR if Dumbledore be "back in action" in book 7. JKR replies "the answer is in book seven but, you shouldn't expect Dumbledore to do a Gandalf." For those of you who don't know, Gandalf fell over a cliff and everyone thought he was (as in this situation) but he came back and was alive and healthy. As for the portraits in the headmaster's office, "a new portrait had joined the ranks of the other headmasters and headmistresses of Hogwarts." Notice the word OTHER. That means he is really along with the other former headmasters. I know there are other possibilities and the idea that nothing is really logical in the magical world, but, what if JKR is trying to make the magical world suddenly logical?

Posted by Heather from Oceanside, CA on October 8, 2006 5:55 PM

I dont think Dumbledore made a horcrux. He is the one that thought that, " is but the next great adventure." He was ready for it whenever it came kinda guy. i don't think he'll come back as a ghost, either. As much as i liked him - i think we all have to face the fact that he is gone and not coming back.

Posted by Sneha from West Chester, PA on October 8, 2006 7:10 PM

Maybe the ing needed to be done for Dumbledore to create a Horcrux for himself is to distroy the Sorcerer's Stone? By doing that he prevented life from Nicolas Flamel. Maybe for a pure soul like his, maybe that was enough?

Posted by Shay on October 9, 2006 06:18 AM

Dumbledore not come as a ghost for sure. I say this because Nearly Headless Nick said to harry he came back as a ghost because he was too scared to and i dont think Dumbledore was a coward!

Posted by Bojan Vecanski from Canada on October 9, 2006 11:28 AM

Firstly, Flamel AGREED to have the stone destroyed... DD did NOT force it away from him. Even if he had, that would not be enough for a Horcrux. In the HBP it is stated by Slughorn that in order to create a horcrux one needs to do the HORRIBLE act of MURDER. This means, on accident is not enough. Destroying someone out of simpathy, like from suffering, is probably not enough either! So please, let's not get confused here...

It is interesting how DD said putting a horcrux into an animal (in HBP talking about Nagini being a horcrux for LV). He said, putting a piece of your soul in a living animal is dangerous, because the creature can think for itself, and thus there's a chance of it . Fawkes would be the perfect horcrux, since he cant , so even if the creature wanted to destroy the horcrux, it couldn't...

But I have sorta come to a new revelation. DD and Slughorn both say that splitting the soul is worth than . This means, having only a piece of your soul is bad. DD says that life with a horcrux isn't a true life at all, etc, etc. Therefor, it really seems like he wouldn't have made one. I think we can speculate that DD could have ed someone (Gridlewald, or whoever that dark wizard was), but the part I doubt it whether DD would want a horcrux.

I do still think DD is alive, simply because he embos the phoenix, and a phoenix is reborn from fire, so read between the lines... I bet he comes back by some weird magic, that we probably couldn't exactly pinpoint with a guess, I can only speculate. To conclude, I do not think DD made a horcurx, but I think he could have been able to...

Posted by Brett J. from Boulder, CO on October 9, 2006 3:42 PM

I do not believe that DD considered making a horcrux. He was an experienced Alchemist...together with Nicolas Flamel. Voldemort considered stealing the sorcerer's stone to revive himself in book 1....he was an inch from or was it a mere vapor trying to survive?

I believe that when snape performed the Avada Kedavra curse on DD...he did not mean to cause DD's . I remember Moody in book 4 and bellatrix in book 5 saying that you can't perform an unforgivable curse if you don't really want to cause pain to others and really enjoy doing it. if you perform it badly...you only cause serious injury.

Perhaps snape did the curse just severe enough to knock DD nearly .

Fawkes can heal right? What if Dumbledore wasn't really but just barely alive to be revived by fawkes...so that DD can drink up the elixir of life by Nicolas Flamel?

FAwkes swallowed an avada kedavra curse in book 5 for dumbledore and turned to ashes...but he did bot come to rescue dumbledore in the tower with snape's avada kedevra curse. he was just there at the forbidden forrest when all the action happened and sang a phoenix healing song after dumbledore's announcement.

On Snape not performing the unbreakable vow...Narcisa as I understand was only worried about his son not performing voldemort's order well. She is worried that if the Dark Lord won't be pleased with Malfoy's work...the Dark Lord would her son.

Narcisa made snape promise to look after malfoy. not to dumbledore. And he did look after malfoy by doing the deed himself to save malfoy's neck. this way he had fulfilled the unbreakable vow.

Posted by Shiela from Laoag City, Philippines on October 17, 2006 07:35 AM

Pages:  <<  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ...  >  >>