Let's make groups of 4

[Kingsdaughter613]

3 hours ago, Personification said:

Sort of (by my understanding. Religion is obviously quite personal). I actually have always read it as some of the stuff (like the water and the void) always having been there, and the first line being more of a thesis or abstract, like "God created the universe, here's how." A Ramban callout is always nice, though, but mostly for reasons relating to a semi-inside joke for me. I also don't think that the "First day" thing is that big of a stretch. It is a pretty common interpretation, and all of the other "xth day" things are actually ordinals in the original Hebrew.

Still, it is true that many English Bibles are translated from Latin which was translated from Greek which was translated from a version of Hebrew that has been dead for millennia and is very different from modern Hebrew (which is technically a conlang). Plus, while I don't know if there are glaring issues with the translation in the post you quoted, I do disagree with the interpretation of the text (both that of the Torah and the Cosmere) presented in it.

On the other hand, your transliteration of Bereshit pains me (yes, I understand that it is the accepted Ashkenazi spelling and pronunciation). The word ends in ת, not ס or ש. And yes I am that pedantic about transliteration. When I found out how my middle name (a transliterated Hebrew word) was spelled, I actually got mad at my parents for their choice. (I got over it).

(welcome to pedantic-cast davar edition (no, not that one))

I transliterate according to the way I pronounce it, usually. And there’s no dagesh in the word Bereishis, so it actually isn’t a Taph. It’s a Saph, or a Taph without a dagesh. The pronunciation difference has to do with how you pronounce the letter.
 

The ‘first day’ thing is a personal peeve. It’s ‘one day’ because until the second day was created there was only one. There’s not even a CONCEPT of two, and by calling it ‘first ‘ you completely miss the point that the entire IDEA of a day was created - and it was created as a unique thing.

 

The Ramban is always fun. Especially THAT Ramban.

[Danoo]

Where have you got the commands from? Did I miss the 4 commands in dawnshard?

[Personification]

2 hours ago, Kingsdaughter613 said:

I transliterate according to the way I pronounce it, usually. And there’s no dagesh in the word Bereishis, so it actually isn’t a Taph. It’s a Saph, or a Taph without a dagesh. The pronunciation difference has to do with how you pronounce the letter.
 

The ‘first day’ thing is a personal peeve. It’s ‘one day’ because until the second day was created there was only one. There’s not even a CONCEPT of two, and by calling it ‘first ‘ you completely miss the point that the entire IDEA of a day was created - and it was created as a unique thing.

 

The Ramban is always fun. Especially THAT Ramban.

True, but in modern Israeli Hebrew there is no distinct Saph. I totally understand that you were pronouncing/spelling it correctly by a different dialect than the one I use, I was mostly being hyperbolic about my annoyance.

Honestly, the Ramban joke comes from a sketch by an Israeli comedy group where the Ramban goes into a restaurant to get some food, and everyone gets super excited when they hear his name because they think it's the Rambam, but then they all get mad and feel betrayed when he explains that he is a different person, even though he keeps trying to tell them that he is a famous rabbi and philosopher, too.

[Winter]

11 hours ago, beewall said:

 

Separated from virtues and context isn't really "righteous", but more the opposite, I'd say. 

Right, I'm not saying that Odium himself is righteous but within the context of Adonalsium, the concepts that odium encompasses would be.

[Winter]

1 hour ago, Danoo said:

Where have you got the commands from? Did I miss the 4 commands in dawnshard?

The change/transform command comes from dawnshard. The rest are speculation based on themes that the shards seem to fit

[Seloun]

My reading of this was slightly different from the OP. First:

Quote

"...And so, the Dawnshards. The four primal Commands that created all things.” He paused. “And then eventually, they were used to undo Adonalsium itself. . . .”

Sanderson, Brandon. Dawnshard: From the Stormlight Archive (p. 190). Dragonsteel Entertainment, LLC. Kindle Edition. 

Effectively, the Dawnshards were the tools that resulted in the Shards of Adonalsium by breaking it/him/whatever apart. The 4x4 makes me think, then, that the tools were used twice (first to break into 4, then to subdivide each into 4 apiece); this leads me to think that the Shard combinations might be Dawnshard x Dawnshard, rather than other distinct categories after the first Dawnshard break. Given the symmetry, I think this is probably a better place to start rather than trying to figure out what other secondary classification might exist.

The Dawnshard names beyond the one that we know for sure ('Change') identified in this thread seems pretty likely, at least for the 'Survive' and 'Unite' cases. That said, it might be interesting to see if those could somehow be related to other Capitalized Concepts - specifically, Connection (Unite?), Identity (Survive?) and... something else (examination of Coppermind suggests Fortune as a possibility). It's worth noting that there is WoB saying 'one of the Dawnshards aren't like the others', which might mean that one of them doesn't follow a specific pattern; this is potentially an annoying herring as it admits a lot of possible organizations if we can say it's not actually all organized. Then again, there could be a lot of ways one of the Dawnshards is different without it necessarily breaking organizational patterns, so to keep things more manageable it's probably reasonable to assume that they are structurally similar.

So, in this taxonomy, each Shard would correlate to a Dawnshard x Dawnshard pairing (the order would have to matter for there to be 16 distinct ones). Then:

- Cultivation: Change / Fortune (Cultivation is change, but guided; also, Honor noting Cultivation is better at looking into the future than he is)

- Honor: Connection / Identity

- Ambition: Change / Identity

- Autonomy: Identity / Identity

- Devotion: Connection / Change

- Dominion: Connection / Connection

- Endowment: Change / Change 

- Ruin: Change / Connection (Breaking down of complex structure) or possibly Fortune / Connection

- Preservation: Identify / Connection (Possibly Connection / Fortune? Ruin/Preservation should clearly be a connected but somehow inverted pair - yet it seems like Identity/Survive should be here too)

- Odium: Fortune / Fortune (Odium seems to be Fortune-major at least?)

All very open to interpretation/debate, especially since the Dawnshard categories aren't known well (problem with any Dawnshard speculation, of course). Main advantage of this hypothesis is that it doesn't require adding new categorization for the Shards beyond the Dawnshard grouping; instead, double up on what we know.

Edit: Odium feels like a 'special case', and we know one of the Dawnshards are different from the others. What if one of the Commands doesn't work or otherwise ends up negating itself when doubled up? Like a 'Reverse' or 'Undo'. Given the warnings about looking into the future, possibly somehow related to that.

Edited November 15, 2020 by Seloun

[Kingsdaughter613]

1 hour ago, Personification said:

True, but in modern Israeli Hebrew there is no distinct Saph. I totally understand that you were pronouncing/spelling it correctly by a different dialect than the one I use, I was mostly being hyperbolic about my annoyance.

Honestly, the Ramban joke comes from a sketch by an Israeli comedy group where the Ramban goes into a restaurant to get some food, and everyone gets super excited when they hear his name because they think it's the Rambam, but then they all get mad and feel betrayed when he explains that he is a different person, even though he keeps trying to tell them that he is a famous rabbi and philosopher, too.

I was technically transliterating according to the ancient Hebraic language it’s written in, if we want to be really technical, as Old Hebrew does have a Saph. Lol.
 

Ha! That sounds cute. More people probably learn the the Ramban than the Rambam in reality, due to the former writing an extensive Biblical commentary. Interestingly, the Ramban did play a role in introducing the Rambam to Europe.

[Darkness]

I like:

Change: Cultivation, Ruin, Endowment

Survive: Preservation, Autonomy, shard-that-just-wants-to-hide

Unite: Honor, Dominion,

Inspire: Odium, Ambition, Devotion

I could see Devotion mostly in Inspire, but also in Unite.

Similarly, Autonomy mostly goes in Survive, but could be Inspire.

And Endowment is mostly Change, but also Inspire.

 

At the end, I just gotta say, I’m disappointed Brandon didn’t use:

Renew - Endowment, Cultivation

Act - Ambition, Odium, Autonomy, Devotion

Forge - Honor, Dominion

Overcome - Ruin, Preservation

the acronym is just too good.

[Leuthie]

19 hours ago, Kingsdaughter613 said:

Wow. I did not realize the translations were this bad.

There was only ONE act of creation: the very first word Bereishis (Nachmanides). After God creates the Beginning, every other act is separation. The building blocks of everything were created with the word Bereishis, and the rest was separating out those blocks and putting things into the forms as we know them.

Only the first word was Creation from nothing. And these translations are pretty bad. I already knew about the misinterpretation of Bereishis Barah Elokim. And how Yom Echad ever became the First Day is beyond me. It’s ONE day. But the others I was no aware of.

Suggestion: before quoting the Bible check the original source? Translations of a translation of a translation tend to be fairly unreliable.

I didn't really do my due diligence in making sure I had the best first article Hebrew translation available. Didn't think this discussion required such a thing. I also forgot to add my source, which was www.vatican.va. I assumed the Vatican would be a good resource to get text for the Bible I was using as a support for theorizing what a fiction author would write next about a fictional world. In the future, I'll make sure all of my sources are primary sources and first translations (if required).

In any case, your comment actually makes mine look a bit better. I was worrying that the Change Dawnshard would be too useful compared to the other three. If Creation was handled mostly through Separation and Combination, then the balance of power between the Commands looks a little better.

[cheezyguy6]

Ok so immediately after finishing dawnshard, I went on to reddit and did some reading, and threw my preliminary ideas on paper. They're attached below.

I like the ideas discussed here a lot better, however I want to make sure we're sure about the other dawnshards being Survive, Unite, and Care/Inspire. I think it'd be good to consider some other options before jumping into those four choices. 

I also think that Preservation fits well into change, as kind of an Anti-change. I can see him fitting into that dawnshard as a category, not as a force.

I'll make another table with the ideas posted here momentarily.

[Kingsdaughter613]

43 minutes ago, Leuthie said:

I didn't really do my due diligence in making sure I had the best first article Hebrew translation available. Didn't think this discussion required such a thing. I also forgot to add my source, which was www.vatican.va. I assumed the Vatican would be a good resource to get text for the Bible I was using as a support for theorizing what a fiction author would write next about a fictional world. In the future, I'll make sure all of my sources are primary sources and first translations (if required).

In any case, your comment actually makes mine look a bit better. I was worrying that the Change Dawnshard would be too useful compared to the other three. If Creation was handled mostly through Separation and Combination, then the balance of power between the Commands looks a little better.

The Jewish opinion of any Vatican translation tends to be pretty low. Most Christian bibles are triple translations; they start with the Septuagint, translated into Latin, translated into English. Kind of amazing that any part of it is accurate, lol! In general, English does not have the right nuance as old Hebrew words tend not to have perfect translations.
 

I usually use the Artscroll Rashi and Ramban translations. Rashi and Ramban were biblical commentators, and they had slightly differing interpretations of the words. (Hence two different translations.) A third source would be the Ibn Ezra, who had his own opinions. I don’t think they’ve translated that one though. Ramban tends to cite the other two though, so that helps. 
 

The only perfect translation is Onkelus, as far as Judaism is concerned, but he wrote in Aramaic so I doubt that helps! 

 

You really can’t understand Genesis without commentary. Or even with commentary. Just try to conceive of an evening... without the concept of day. Because that’s day one. Evening was created first. “And it was evening and it was morning; One day.” Can you imagine a night without the concept of day?

And that’s why trying to figure out Creation is a great way to go mad. Commentaries help though. Also great ways to discover things you never knew. Bet your local minister never explained exactly how Adam figured out he needed a female of his own species... The Bible has some really weird stuff hidden in it.

[cheezyguy6]

20 hours ago, Winter said:

I've got an order I like so far but am having trouble with the 4th and endowment

The Command of Ideal

Honor, Odium (as righteous anger as said in one of the letters), Ambition, wisdom/prudence (existence implied in WoB)

The Command of Transformation

Ruin, Preservation (as in knowing when to not transform), cultivation

The Command of Will

Dominion, Devotion, Autonomy

The Command of Creation????

Endowment

Just found this. Much better terminology for my chart up above. I was thinking maybe power instead of creation?

Edited November 15, 2020 by cheezyguy6

[Leuthie]

9 minutes ago, Kingsdaughter613 said:

The Jewish opinion of any Vatican translation tends to be pretty low. Most Christian bibles are triple translations; they start with the Septuagint, translated into Latin, translated into English. Kind of amazing that any part of it is accurate, lol! In general, English does not have the right nuance as old Hebrew words tend not to have perfect translations.
 

I usually use the Artscroll Rashi and Ramban translations. Rashi and Ramban were biblical commentators, and they had slightly differing interpretations of the words. (Hence two different translations.) A third source would be the Ibn Ezra, who had his own opinions. I don’t think they’ve translated that one though. Ramban tends to cite the other two though, so that helps. 
 

The only perfect translation is Onkelus, as far as Judaism is concerned, but he wrote in Aramaic so I doubt that helps! 

 

You really can’t understand Genesis without commentary. Or even with commentary. Just try to conceive of an evening... without the concept of day. Because that’s day one. Evening was created first. “And it was evening and it was morning; One day.” Can you imagine a night without the concept of day?

And that’s why trying to figure out Creation is a great way to go mad. Commentaries help though. Also great ways to discover things you never knew. Bet your local minister never explained exactly how Adam figured out he needed a female of his own species... The Bible has some really weird stuff hidden in it.

Fun topic for you, I'm sure. The issue I have is I'm simply using it to pull 4 commands to create the universe. I don't need a full and accurate translation, nor a millennium or two of research and debate. So for the purposes of this really important fictional universe theorizing, a Vatican translation does just fine. Thanks for the background, though.

Edited November 15, 2020 by Leuthie

[cheezyguy6]

This is another possible classification put forth early on in the thread. It uses internal/external, positive/negative classification just like alomancy. 

As has been said, we don't know enough about Endowment, Devotion, Dominion, or Autonomy to accurately place them.

[cheezyguy6]

My issue with the idea of Dalinar and Kelsier holding the Dawnshards of Unity and Survival are that they are obviously not immortal (at least Kelsier isn't for sure). The dawnshard held by Hoid made him immortal, so wouldn't Unity and Survival do the same for them?

I think it's likely that Hoid held the survival Dawnshard, because acording to Brandon, his Dawnshard is what made it so he can't hurt another person, or even eat meat. That sounds like he would be unable to do anything that would impact another creature's survival. 

Final thought, is it possible that the one Dawnshard that Brandon said is "different from the rest" was Change? Because up until a week ago, no one held it, and it was disconnected. Maybe the other 3 are being held by someone, and Change was different because it wasn't?

[Kingsdaughter613]

29 minutes ago, cheezyguy6 said:

This is another possible classification put forth early on in the thread. It uses internal/external, positive/negative classification just like alomancy. 

As has been said, we don't know enough about Endowment, Devotion, Dominion, or Autonomy to accurately place them.

I was the one who theorized about pushing/pulling and internal/external. Devotion was in the Unite one, which was argued. “Just wants to survive” was actually theorized to go there too, if it was actually something like Wisdom.

That theory held that your green category was something like drive; Inspire works well. Of Ingenuity is a Shard, it likely goes there.
 

Odium was argued to either go there, or in Survive. It depends on if Odium is more passion or more void.

Endowment is more positive, actually. I had it internal originally, but the arguments for it being external were very compelling.

[cheezyguy6]

8 minutes ago, Kingsdaughter613 said:

I was the one who theorized about pushing/pulling and internal/external. Devotion was in the Unite one, which was argued. “Just wants to survive” was actually theorized to go there too, if it was actually something like Wisdom.

That theory held that your green category was something like drive; Inspire works well. Of Ingenuity is a Shard, it likely goes there.
 

Odium was argued to either go there, or in Survive. It depends on if Odium is more passion or more void.

Endowment is more positive, actually. I had it internal originally, but the arguments for it being external were very compelling.

There's been a lot of things thrown around. I think for now we should see about confirming whether Unity and Survival are other Dawnshards before we get ourselves too far down other rabbit holes. That brings me back to my earlier question: 

 

30 minutes ago, cheezyguy6 said:

My issue with the idea of Dalinar and Kelsier holding the Dawnshards of Unity and Survival are that they are obviously not immortal (at least Kelsier isn't for sure). The dawnshard held by Hoid made him immortal, so wouldn't Unity and Survival do the same for them?

Also, Gavilar was getting the call to "unite them" before he died, so if Unite is actually a Dawnshard, did Gavilar have it first?

[Personification]

31 minutes ago, cheezyguy6 said:

My issue with the idea of Dalinar and Kelsier holding the Dawnshards of Unity and Survival are that they are obviously not immortal (at least Kelsier isn't for sure). The dawnshard held by Hoid made him immortal, so wouldn't Unity and Survival do the same for them?

I think it's likely that Hoid held the survival Dawnshard, because acording to Brandon, his Dawnshard is what made it so he can't hurt another person, or even eat meat. That sounds like he would be unable to do anything that would impact another creature's survival. 

Final thought, is it possible that the one Dawnshard that Brandon said is "different from the rest" was Change? Because up until a week ago, no one held it, and it was disconnected. Maybe the other 3 are being held by someone, and Change was different because it wasn't?

I don't think either are holding them, I think both were experiencing the influence of Dawnshards in a minor way due to a combination of Connection to related Shards and agreement with the Commands.

[Kingsdaughter613]

25 minutes ago, cheezyguy6 said:

There's been a lot of things thrown around. I think for now we should see about confirming whether Unity and Survival are other Dawnshards before we get ourselves too far down other rabbit holes. That brings me back to my earlier question: 

 

Also, Gavilar was getting the call to "unite them" before he died, so if Unite is actually a Dawnshard, did Gavilar have it first?

It was more that you mentioned my theory, so I figured I’d clarify it. 

[Eternal Khol]

Brandon said it was relevant that Ruin/Ati mentioned passion to Vin(In HoA)

He also said that there are and aren’t Shards who would talk about Passion(when it’s italicized) in the same way as Odium and Ruin

from that connection alone and what we know now, after reading Dawnshard, i feel like Ruin and Odium(though very different) should be in the same category.

[Kingsdaughter613]

1 hour ago, Eternal Khol said:

Brandon said it was relevant that Ruin/Ati mentioned passion to Vin(In HoA)

He also said that there are and aren’t Shards who would talk about Passion(when it’s italicized) in the same way as Odium and Ruin

from that connection alone and what we know now, after reading Dawnshard, i feel like Ruin and Odium(though very different) should be in the same category.

Ruin is Entropy though, and it’s hard to argue that’s anything but change. Odium seems to be almost the opposite; when people give up their pain they lose their ability to change.

Further, you gain the ability to pick up Ruin by accepting the need for end and understanding that the inevitable end does not have to be a sorrow. It’s the Death card; it’s change.

Odium is the refusal to move on, the unwillingness to forgive, the refusal to give in. When love is gone, and faith is gone and hope is gone, hatred can keep you alive. It will leave you hollow, and empty, and a shell of what you were, but it will keep you ALIVE if only to spite your enemies.

Ruin is standing by your infant girl’s bedside and knowing she may never awaken. Never smile, never laugh. And readying yourself to make the hardest choice a parent can make: to allow her to live senseless but for pain, or give her a peaceful, quiet end. When you understand that endings can be necessary; can be good, however painful - that’s Ruin.

(She woke up, btw. despite reading brain dead for three days. Still not well, but slowly getting there. She’ll be four on Thanksgiving.)

Odium is my great-grandmother looking around at her dozens of descendants and saying, with a satisfied smile, “Hitler didn’t win.” Well, some forms of vengeance are more productive than others. My children are my revenge. My community is my revenge. The voices of children speaking our sages words - that’s Odium. Not just hatred toward our oppressors, but it is definitely a form of revenge, along with everything else. 

I think a lot of chronically ill people could pick up Ruin. I think a lot of survivors of oppression could pick up Odium. I could probably pick up either, but I could also take Cultivation because I’m a mom, and I think most parents could pick up that one.

I think I’m putting Odium back in Survive. Although it can also drive you to accomplish...

[Darkness]

1 hour ago, Kingsdaughter613 said:

Ruin is Entropy though, and it’s hard to argue that’s anything but change. Odium seems to be almost the opposite; when people give up their pain they lose their ability to change.

Further, you gain the ability to pick up Ruin by accepting the need for end and understanding that the inevitable end does not have to be a sorrow. It’s the Death card; it’s change.

Odium is the refusal to move on, the unwillingness to forgive, the refusal to give in. When love is gone, and faith is gone and hope is gone, hatred can keep you alive. It will leave you hollow, and empty, and a shell of what you were, but it will keep you ALIVE if only to spite your enemies.

Ruin is standing by your infant girl’s bedside and knowing she may never awaken. Never smile, never laugh. And readying yourself to make the hardest choice a parent can make: to allow her to live senseless but for pain, or give her a peaceful, quiet end. When you understand that endings can be necessary; can be good, however painful - that’s Ruin.

(She woke up, btw. despite reading brain dead for three days. Still not well, but slowly getting there. She’ll be four on Thanksgiving.)

Odium is my great-grandmother looking around at her dozens of descendants and saying, with a satisfied smile, “Hitler didn’t win.” Well, some forms of vengeance are more productive than others. My children are my revenge. My community is my revenge. The voices of children speaking our sages words - that’s Odium. Not just hatred toward our oppressors, but it is definitely a form of revenge, along with everything else. 

I think a lot of chronically ill people could pick up Ruin. I think a lot of survivors of oppression could pick up Odium. I could probably pick up either, but I could also take Cultivation because I’m a mom, and I think most parents could pick up that one.

I think I’m putting Odium back in Survive. Although it can also drive you to accomplish...

I mostly put Odium in the Inspire category because I was waffling between calling it Inspire or Incite. Odium is Inspiring hatred or ‘passion’ in people. Inspire to me just means a kind of inward amplification or germination and gestation of emotions, ideas, and paradigms. Most of the Shards will cross over between Proto-Intents (tm) in some way, so it’s going to be impossible to say anything for sure until we get all of the Shardic Intents... and maybe it’ll be ambiguous even then.

[Kingsdaughter613]

2 hours ago, Darkness said:

I mostly put Odium in the Inspire category because I was waffling between calling it Inspire or Incite. Odium is Inspiring hatred or ‘passion’ in people. Inspire to me just means a kind of inward amplification or germination and gestation of emotions, ideas, and paradigms. Most of the Shards will cross over between Proto-Intents (tm) in some way, so it’s going to be impossible to say anything for sure until we get all of the Shardic Intents... and maybe it’ll be ambiguous even then.

Likely. I call the Inspire group ‘Drive’ which means the same thing here. I keep going back and forth on which Odium is, and ended up deciding: more Void = Survive; more Passion = Drive/Inspire. This is also where I put the theorized Ingenuity shard, if it turns out to exist.

Devotion I put with Honor and Dominion as part of Unity/Bonds. Honor - bonds of morality, code and society; Dominion - bonds between master, land and subject; Devotion - bonds between people, places and beliefs. Devotion was originally called Love, I think, and love is usually viewed as a bond. This is also where I put the theorized Wisdom shard; bonds of scholarship, learning, and teaching.

The one I’m least certain of is Endowment. We keep putting it in Change, but I’m not sure that’s really where it goes.

The only two we can really be sure of are Cultivation and Ruin with Change.

[+Child of Hodor]

12 hours ago, cheezyguy6 said:

This is another possible classification put forth early on in the thread. It uses internal/external, positive/negative classification just like alomancy. 

As has been said, we don't know enough about Endowment, Devotion, Dominion, or Autonomy to accurately place them.

I like Inspire a lot as a category. It fits with a creator god they are inspired to create and they would want to inspire their creations. 

I think Ingenuity is the missing Change shard. https://wob.coppermind.net/events/123/#e3299  https://wob.coppermind.net/events/352/#e10288   

"the quality of being clever, original, and inventive."  The creation/invention of something new part of the lifecycle. It's a change because it changes the Cosmere by adding something new. 

 

[Yvainnie]

On 15. 11. 2020 at 11:47 PM, cheezyguy6 said:

This is another possible classification put forth early on in the thread. It uses internal/external, positive/negative classification just like alomancy. 

As has been said, we don't know enough about Endowment, Devotion, Dominion, or Autonomy to accurately place them.

Could it be instead of "inspire feel" DESIRE?