Restricted Killing?

[Alz]

This was spawned from Vestral's comments in another thread about trophy kills ...

The question is this - Did Voldemort have to restrict his killings/victims to only those he wished to use as Horcruxes after he sealed his first one?
We know that the victims Voldemort has personally been suspected of killing isnt that huge - could it be that once you set off on the path of creating Horcruxes that any kill you make subsequent will lead to a ripped soul portion that must be sealed as a Horcrux?

[The Frozen North]

If that is the case then the logical conclusion would be that in creating a horcrux one is limiting one's ability to commit murder in the future as ultimately it would lead to self destruction (once the soul is removed from a being it surely ceases to be a being of any use - see the what has been said about the effects of the Dementor's Kiss, and there must surely come a point that the soul portion is so small it ceases to be considered or even act as a soul). This further supports the theory that Voldermort really needs his followers and that they are not just there for his ego!!! With this in mind I refer you all to a previous thread discussing Voldermort's downfall being the love that DEs feel for their families leading to them abandoning him.

[Alz]

No I agree - for someone who needs no-one around him - a loaner as sych, why would he have them ...
I think he realised that each time he killed he ripped his soul and that it needed to be sealed - he couldnt just kill and kill and then pick a special death.
I like the idea of restricted killing as it helps show why he wasnt the huge, mass murderer we all assume he was - it is the people that served him and killed on his behalf that gave him the reputation.
I like to think there is limitations in Horcruxes and the likes - because if Voldemort ever works out that a Horcrux is destroyed or Harry is on his case - he could go off on another huge killing spree and make Harry's task impossible.

[DumbledoreLives]

Very interesting and mind boggling to think about too.
I think because of Voldy's arrogance and ego, he creates his horcruxes with significant kills. I think he can just kill others at random and not give it a second thought unless it were for making horcruces. I think he would be as picky with the murder as he was with the object that would become the horcrux.

Your question is quite provocative. Because, if he is ripping his soul and creating a horcrux at the same time, wouldn't he need the object with him? If this is the case, wouldn't that make him vulnerable until he had time to protect and hide it? Slughorn tells the young Tom Riddle that to create a horcrux, one would have to commit a murder and perform a spell. If only he gave more details, like what the spell actually is, how much time is allowed to pass between kill and spell, can a single horcrux be split into further horcruces?

Assuming six horcruces were created, whose murders are attached to them? We know from GoF that Voldy killed the (3) Riddles and in HBP we learn he killed Hepzibah Smith and that horcruces probably resulted from these murders. He also killed the Potters, but was mostly destroyed in the process. Cedric, Frank Bryce and Bertha Jorkins were killed with Voldy's wand, but not by himself. Does that count? Who might the other victims be? Hmm. ;)

[Alz]

OK, I think with the Riddles we can explain that one away ...
You could say he split his soul three times and used up three parts - but what if he only uttered what he needed to when he killed Dad - the real target of the attack?

I think that when he kills - he uses a modified version of AK - this has been speculated in other threads and I like it - as such he could set about half the process and then finish it with sealing the soul in the item afterwards.
But to get back OT - excuse me for that - I think that once he set about making the first Horcrux he needed to kill - then seal - kill - then seal ...
I dont think he could have killed, killed, killed, killed and then picked just one to seal the fragment - because as said above I like the idea that Voldemort was restricted after he set this process in order ... I like to think that he was forced into making a call if to kill someone himself or send a servent ... just makes it more fun!

[Lovegood54]

i dotn like this theory because it makes the horcrux creation spell sound more like an enchantment. (i define enchantments to be spells that last forever, like Gubraithian Fire, the branch of fire dumbledore gave hagrid to give to the gurg of giants) i feel the horcrux creation spell is more a dark charm. something that has to be done directly after (or with in a set period of time after) the murder, prepared before hand, or is a modified form of the killing curse (like the killing curse with the intention of creating a horcrux)

[Padma Patil]

I think that Voldemort killed the Riddles and Morfin before he knew how to make horcruxes. Because in HBP Dumbledore shows Harry the memory of when Morfin and Harry meet before the memory of Riddle asking Slughorn about horcruxes and how they are made. When Riddle asked about horcruxes, I think he already knew what they were, I think he just wanted to know how to create one. Because he then askes Slughorn his opinion on a person making seven horcruxes as though he wanted a second opinion before doing it.

But getting back on topic. I do think that he killed specific people for horcruxes, but I don't think he couldn't control when the horcruxes were made. Slughorn says in the memory that it is an incantation. I'm assuming that one says this incantation after killing a specific person.

[Alz]

Well the death rate at the hands of Voldemort - when he became Voldemort - would exceed the 6 killings needed to create his horcruxes - we know some of his casualties lead to horcrux creation - but he killed a lot more ... so how would you explain that given his premise of a 7 part soul and a lot of blood on his hands?

[secret seeker]

I dont know if Voldemort did the ACTUAL killings, but just thought responsible for them. Can someone please clarify this for me ... er ... just thought ... didn't Remus Lupin say Voldemort murdered a Goblin family in Nottingham? ... and what about Emmiline Vance? ... Fudge believed Voldemort may have killed her himself, AND we know for a fact he murdered Frank Bryce personally.
I think Voldemort had his 6 Horcruxes, but didn't restrict his killings, and repeatedly " ripped " his soul. Dumb**s!.

[Glumbumble]

I know that this argument has been discussed on other threads, however, I think that the process goes something like this. A murder is committed, the soul tears into two, for those who wish to make a Horcrux a soul fragment is encased in an object, for those who do not wish to make a Horcrux the two torn fragments rejoin with minimal damage. This would explain why other deatheaters, aurors etc. do not display similar degenerative conditions to Voldemort.
If you think about it Wormtail has murdered at least 13 people 12 muggles and Cedric without showing the same effects.
I think it is the act of encasing the soul fragment and preventing it reuniting that ensures immortality, because the soul can only be destroyed when all of its constituent parts are destroyed.
This is why Dumbledore has said that the Horcruxes need to be destroyed before the final soul fragment, that remains inside of Voldemort can be destroyed.
This does pose a problem however. When a horcrux is destroyed why does it not either survive in spirit form in search of a body, as the Voldergeist did before Voldermort's rebirth or reunite with the soul fragment remaining in the body. It could be a matter of distance in respect of the reuniting I suppose but the possibility of destroying a Horcrux only to release a further potential Voldemort clone is quite worrying!

[Vestral]

That is where we differ... I don't believe that the soul can rejoin after it has been ripped in two. Murder is a terrible thing... wizard or muggle... it is a universal truth that transcends cultural differences. I believe that Wormtail's soul is shredded into pieces as well... he simply has not sealed any of the fragments into a Horcrux. I think the reason Voldemort appears less and less "human" is because with every Horcrux he creates, a piece of his "human-ness"... his soul... is removed from his being. The part that I am speculating about is sort of a "use it or lose it" theory with the torn soul pieces. I don't think that Voldemort could commit... say four murders... and then a few years later make four Horcruxes out of the torn bits of soul. I'd bet that the incantation must be immediate, if not a part of the murder... like a modified Avada Kedavra that kills and creates a Horcrux in one step. My assertion in this thread was to speculate that Voldemort could not kill without limit if he wants to create strong, viable Horcruxes. If his soul was shredded into hundreds, or even dozens of pieces, how strong would one of these bits of soul be to create a Horcrux that could restore him to life should his body be destroyed ? That's why he asked Horace the question about seven Horcruxes... that's also why I think the Eye of Horus in Egyptian mythology is so important to this idea... Horace=Horus. I'll have to check my notes again for the research I did on the Eye of Horus, but I seem to remember there being a limit to the number of times it could be split... seven times.
1 splits to 1/2... splits to 1/4... splits to 1/8... 1/16... 1/32... 1/64... and finally 1/128. It is a fascinating story, and I believe a bit of it is in the Trophy Kills? thread.

[Hoggy Warty Hogwarts]

That is where we differ... I don't believe that the soul can rejoin after it has been ripped in two. Murder is a terrible thing... wizard or muggle... it is a universal truth that transcends cultural differences. I believe that Wormtail's soul is shredded into pieces as well... he simply has not sealed any of the fragments into a Horcrux. I think the reason Voldemort appears less and less "human" is because with every Horcrux he creates, a piece of his "human-ness"... his soul... is removed from his being. The part that I am speculating about is sort of a "use it or lose it" theory with the torn soul pieces. I don't think that Voldemort could commit... say four murders... and then a few years later make four Horcruxes out of the torn bits of soul. I'd bet that the incantation must be immediate, if not a part of the murder... like a modified Avada Kedavra that kills and creates a Horcrux in one step. My assertion in this thread was to speculate that Voldemort could not kill without limit if he wants to create strong, viable Horcruxes. If his soul was shredded into hundreds, or even dozens of pieces, how strong would one of these bits of soul be to create a Horcrux that could restore him to life should his body be destroyed ? That's why he asked Horace the question about seven Horcruxes... that's also why I think the Eye of Horus in Egyptian mythology is so important to this idea... Horace=Horus. I'll have to check my notes again for the research I did on the Eye of Horus, but I seem to remember there being a limit to the number of times it could be split... seven times.
1 splits to 1/2... splits to 1/4... splits to 1/8... 1/16... 1/32... 1/64... and finally 1/128. It is a fascinating story, and I believe a bit of it is in the Trophy Kills? thread.





Yes and like Hagrid says i dont think there is enough human left in him, so with that i will say in making more horcruxes even if he wanted to.

[Glumbumble]

Vestral, firstly, and slightly off topic, you say “Murder is a terrible thing... wizard or muggle... it is a universal truth that transcends cultural differences.” I do not think that this is the case in the muggle world today. Many countries, including your own, retain the death penalty, which is only state authorised murder. The words murder, killing, death penalty, civilian casualties involve the same outcome the only difference is our concepts or right, wrong and authority. What is right and wrong and who is a legitimate authority differ from individual to individual and from state to state. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. I believe that murder is a terrible thing, whether committed by an individual, group, organisation or State.

Anyway, you say
I think the reason Voldemort appears less and less "human" is because with every Horcrux he creates, a piece of his "human-ness"... his soul... is removed from his being.

Surely this is the point that I am making. That when a Horcrux is made "a piece of his "human-ness"... his soul... is removed from his being." It is encasing the fragment that causes the soul to remain torn apart. This is different from when he kills.

My assertion in this thread was to speculate that Voldemort could not kill without limit if he wants to create strong, viable Horcruxes. If his soul was shredded into hundreds, or even dozens of pieces, how strong would one of these bits of soul be to create a Horcrux that could restore him to life should his body be destroyed ?

"They are corpses," said Dumbledore calmly. "Dead bodies that have been bewitched to do a Dark wizard's bidding. Inferi have not been seen for a long time, however, not since Voldemort was last powerful... He killed enough people to make an army of them, of course."

Dumbledore asserts that Voldemort intended the death of Harry to make his final Horcrux. He must have believed this possible despite Voldemort having killed "enough people to make an army of them."

I do not think that a Horcrux has to be strong to be viable. Horcruxes work because the soul can only be destroyed in its entirety and while one or some fragments remain in the mortal world, encased and separate, the remaining soul fragment cannot be destroyed.

When Voldemort was reborn he did not use a soul fragment from a Horcrux. The remaining fragment, his geist so to speak, was united with a new body. It has not reduced the number of viable Horcruxes.

When Riddle asked Slughorn about Horcruxes he was told,

"Well, you split your soul, you see," said Slughorn, "and hide part of it in an object outside the body. Then, even if one's body is attacked or destroyed, one cannot die, for part of the soul remains earthbound and undamaged. But of course, existence in such a form ...... few would want it, Tom, very few. Death would be preferable."

When Tom says,

"What I don't understand, though — just out of curiosity — I mean, would one Horcrux be much use? Can you only split your soul once? Wouldn't it be better, make you stronger, to have your soul in more pieces, I mean, for instance, isn't seven the most powerfully magical number, wouldn't seven — ?"

I don’t think he is using the word “stronger” in the sense of having greater power but in the sense of making it more difficult to destroy. This is because all of the Horcruxes would need to be destroyed before the geist can be killed.

Retuning to my opening paragraph. Are there good and bad murders? Some aurors killed many death eaters. Are their souls torn to ribbons?

I'll say this for Moody, though, he never killed if he could help it. Always brought people in alive where possible. He was tough, but he never descended to the level of the Death Eaters. Crouch, though . . . he's a different matter ...

[Vestral]

Glumbumble - my intention was not to start a debate on the death penalty. The problem with the world today is the apparent inability of people to make distinctions between a malicious act of murder and any other form of killing or death. You may not see it, but a small child being raped and murdered by a man who is then convicted and executed of his crime are two very different sorts of death. Both result in death... the former, tragic... the later, justified.
Only recently have "modern" countries abolished the death penalty... I think because we can no longer tell the difference between these two kinds of death.
I still contend that Voldemort's "murders" were malicious, deliberate, and specific to his purpose of creating Horcruxes. If and when Harry kills Voldemort, it will not be a murder because it lacks the malicious aspect of murder. Harry's soul won't split with the act. Sadly, I know some people can't and won't understand this.

[Glumbumble]

Vestral, what you said was that "Murder is a terrible thing... wizard or muggle... it is a universal truth that transcends cultural differences." and I have pointed out that that is not the case. Different cultures have very different ideas as to what constitutes murder. In some countries stoning women to death is for adultery is legal, in others disagreeing with the government can be punished by death whilst in others giving up your religion demands the ultimate penalty. "Honour" killings, where a father may kill a child who has brought dishonour upon a family is legal

You say that “Only recently have "modern" countries abolished the death penalty”

Among democratic countries around the world, most European (all of the European Union), Latin American, many Pacific Area states (including Australia, New Zealand and Timor Leste) and Canada have abolished capital punishment, while the United States, Guatemala, and most of the Caribbean as well as some democracies in Asia and Africa retain it.

It is not just “modern” states that have abolished the death penalty and it is not just older states that have retained it.

It is my understanding of the Wizard world that there is no death penalty

I believe that in the US you have a finding of justifiable homicide that means "killing without evil or criminal intent, for which there can be no blame, such as self-defence to protect oneself or to protect another, or the shooting by a law enforcement officer in fulfilling his/her duties." I shall assume that that is the type of situation you regard as not murder. I assume, also, that it is a court of law that determines whether a killing falls into that category or any other.

I wonder how an individual's soul can determine whether a killing falls into that category. After all most of us feel justified in the actions we take, we may individually perceive threats that are very real to us at the time but either with the benefit of hindsight or from a third party "objective" view do not exist. How does the soul know when and when not to tear apart?

You say that "If and when Harry kills Voldemort, it will not be a murder because it lacks the malicious aspect of murder." That is demonstrably not the case.

If Voldemort had never murdered your father, would he have imparted in you a furious desire for revenge?

"Got to?" said Dumbledore. "Of course you've got to! But not because of the prophecy! Because you, yourself, will never rest until you've tried! We both know it! Imagine, please, just for a moment, that you had never heard that prophecy! How would you feel about Voldemort now? Think!"
Harry watched Dumbledore striding up and down in front of him, and thought. He thought of his mother, his father, and Sirius. He thought of Cedric Diggory. He thought of all the terrible deeds he knew Lord Voldemort had done. A flame seemed to leap inside his chest, searing his throat.
"I'd want him finished," said Harry quietly. "And I'd want to do it."

Often the mean nature of the act itself implies malice, without the party saying "I did it because I was mad at him, and I hated him," which would be express malice. Malice is an element in first degree murder.

Now do you really think that that argument would result in a justifiable homicide verdict in a court of law? It certainly wouldn’t in the UK. After all Harry is not a law enforcement officer and his motive clearly is vengeance.

Getting back to Voldemort. When he murdered Mr. Bryce was it out of malice? I don't think so. When he ordered Wormtail to murder Cedric was that out of malice? I don't think so. When he murdered James and Lily was that out of malice? I don't think so. They were obstacles to him achieving his goal. He shows both in relation to his “enemies” and his “friends” that he places no value on either their lives or their suffering.

How can the individuals’ soul determine when it should tear?

I know from discussion with those who have killed in real life, in a military context, that they do feel that their souls have been ripped apart and that over a period of time, with support confirmation that they were acting correctly they have come to terms with their actions, their torn soul has come together, with some residual damage, but it has come together.

When Slughorn tells Tom about Horcruxes he says “Killing rips the soul apart.”

Not some killing rips the soul apart, not malicious killing rips the soul apart but "Killing rips the soul apart."

Voldemort did not confine his killings to just making Horcruxes. I do not think that the murders of his father or grandparents were used to make horcruxes, the murders of those who now form an army of inferi were not used to make Horcruxes. I do not think that the murders of Lily and James were used, deliberately, to make Horcruxes. There was nothing in Harry's dream to suggest that the murder of Frank Bryce was used to make a Horcrux. There was no suggestion that the murder of Bertha Jorkins was used to make a Horcrux.

[serophis]

Well said, Glumbumble.

I think that the mindset of the person at the time of the killing determines how the soul reacts. This is because, in my opinion, the soul is not ripped by the act of killing: rather, it is when someone is filled with so much emotion, so much malice, that they take it upon themselves to extinguish the life of another human. Therefore, if the victim were to survive, the killer's soul would be torn, although perhaps not quite as drastically, as the guilt of living with the murder must follow one throughout the rest of that person's life, further damaging the soul.

For Voldemort, however, who does not seem to feel further remorse for his actions, I feel that he has killed so often that he knows how it feels to tear his own soul; thus, he can likely do so at will with a particular murder.

That lack of oneness is permanent, and those shards do not cease to exist; but they have separated themselves from the consciousness (in other words, as someone continues to murder person after person, they become less and less human and more of a monster as a result of their decisions). As the soul becomes less human, it no longer clings to those values that it once held dear: Conscience, love, passion, remorse, etc. As those values lose their importance, the soul no longer becomes conscious of them. As the person is no longer as connected with their soul, their body will often allow them to remove part of it and place it inside something else.

Therefore, let's say that Harry accidentally hit an old lady on his broom. He feels remorse for this, but that action makes him more human instead of less. As the death of the hypothetical old lady was unintentional, Harry's soul would be hurt, but would become stronger and more human as he sympathizes with the old lady, her family, etc.

Look at all of Tom Riddle's initial killings. His grandparents, for example...he killed them out of sheer hatred because they were a mere portion of his bloodline. He hated them because they were human and not wizard, and in his hatred he ended their lives. Notice how quickly he is to make someone else take the blame. He doesn't have remorse or guilt; that part of him has been surpressed long ago, and thus, that part of his soul is lost forever.

Remember that Hagrid told Harry that Voldemort didn't have enough human in him to die...he was right in the fact that Voldemort's soul was not fully inside his body, but look for a moment at how Hagrid meant it. Voldemort had gone so far since Hagrid knew him as a boy...and now, forty-nine years later (remember, the second book was the 50th anniversary of when the Chamber opened and Hagrid was suspended, so Harry's first year would have been year 49, or the year 1991). In 1942 when the Chamber opened, Hagrid believed that Tom was disturbed and unfair, but not evil. But in that time, Hagrid saw a transformation of a smart boy into a soulless murderer.

I think that whether Voldemort made a horcrux immediately or not, his soul would be parted. But even the smallest fragment of his soul would be imprinted with his memories, his wizard DNA, if you will, just like a single drop of blood contains the map of how our entire body is made up. Had Voldemort killed a million people, and torn his soul from the supression of guilt an conscience of a million deaths, he could still take seven small sections of the million deaths and make seven Horcruxes. Each horcrux would anchor his vaporial presence to this world, regardless of how small. Remember, Slughorn said that the death would be better than the life obtained through a single Horcrux...and Voldemort had seven, not to mention the hundreds of people he killed...but his soul was not exactly put into his horcruxes...more like a separate anchor to his subconscious to hold his soul to this world.

By the way, this is why my wife doesn't let me talk too much...I get too confusing and confuse myself in the process :)

[Vestral]

Again, I think you missed my point, and you seemed to have left off a very important part of what Slughorn said to young Tom Riddle about Horcruxes. He said "By an act of evil - the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart." Killing someone in self defense is not an act of evil, and yet it is killing. The word "murder" is used intentionally here and we must learn to differentiate it from the word "kill." But we are splitting hairs here.


Very sad.... we clearly see things very differently, and out of respect for Blaise and his intent for this website, I won't debate you on this point. Your rebuttal simply reinforced my point.

[serophis]

Yeah, the death penalty debate has too much going for it on either side for us to bring it up and risk going completely off-topic...I myself from a moral standpoint agree with it but from a religious standpoint must disagree with it (*goes to debate silently amongst himself*)

But I do think that Glumbumble has one valid point that must be addressed: He brings up the fact that murder means different things based on laws and traditions of various culture. In the same way, is it possible that murder may mean different things to different wizards? For example, Voldemort, who has possibly seen so much death that he is used to it...would murdering someone just because they didn't get out of his way (Lily Potter, for example?) In other words, Voldemort had become so powerful and developed such a god-complex, if you will, that he felt himself the most powerful wizard alive, and perhaps felt a sense of entitlement. For Voldemort, who had followers and enemies who all feared to even say his name, would Voldemort see the death of Lily Potter as murder, or see it more similar to crushing a bug or snapping a tree branch that was in his way?

Perhaps for Voldemort to tear his soul to the point that he can separate it from his body, it must be an intentional, premediated death that of someone who he considers a threat. Frank Bryce was a threat as he could have possibly exposed Voldemort's existence to the muggle Police (such information may be easily attainable by the MoM). Harry Potter was an obvious threat. Lilly Potter, however was a mere annoyance. So maybe many of his murders, to Voldemort at least, were not really murder, but rather a slightly messy means to an end.

[Glumbumble]

Vestral.
Of course I respect your wish not to debate the issues around definitions of killing and murder. I would, however, remind you that before the deviation into the morality of killing the debate was around whether it was encasing soul fragments or straight killings that caused Voldemort to have such a damaged soul. I think that that is a significant part of the storyline.
I do not think it sad that we clearly see things very differently. Who would want a world where we all saw things the same way?
I do, however, think that this site was set up to discuss the issuses aroung the Harry Potter series and it is my view that Harry's desire for revenge is essential to the story line. JKR has said that Voldemort and Harry could shake hands and walk away. It is not the prophecy that is making them fight to the death. Voldemort cannot do that for fear that there is someone with the power to kill him and he wants immortality. Harry cannot walk away because he wants revenge for Voldemort killing his parents, Sirius and Cedric. If Harry kills Voldemort it will not be because of some high moral purpose. It will be for revenge in the same way that Lupin and Sirius wanted to kill Wormtail for revenge.
The imposter Moody said
"Avada Kedavra's a curse that needs a powerful bit of magic behind it - you could all get your wands out now and point them at me and say the words, and I doubt I'd get so much as a nosebleed. But that doesn't matter. I'm not here to teach you how to do it."
Bellatrix says
`Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?' she yelled. She had abandoned her baby voice now. `You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain - to enjoy it - righteous anger won't hurt me for long - I'll show you how it is done, shall I? I'll give you a lesson -'
If Harry kills Voldemort it will be the murders of Lily and James that will give him that desire for revenge, that hatred that will enable him to kill. I suspect that it will not in fact come to that. JKR picks her word carefully. Vanquish does not mean kill, murder or whatever term you want to use. It means to overcome.

[serophis]

I see what you mean, Glumbumble...JKR on her website said that she and Trelawney chose the words for the prophecy very carefully. I just assumed that only meant about "Neither can live while the other..." part, but perhaps she also meant the section, "The one with the power to vanquish the dark lord..." (Now I'm at home and my HP books are at work so you'll have to forgive any inaccuracies in the text).

In this case, perhaps Harry could stand there and refuse to fight Voldemort...you remember how Voldemort wanted Harry to duel him? Very odd he didn't just want to kill him outright and end it all. I mean, come on, this boy almost killed him fourteen years before! If it were me, I'd do everything in my power to see him gone!

Voldemort has given Harry way too many chances to live to be simply convenient...Didn't he even ask Harry to join up with him in the PS/SS (I've only seen the movie recently and it's been a couple years since the book so I may be wrong here)? Almost seems as if he wants Harry to avoid using a certain type of attack, a certain strategy, because Voldemort knows that the strategy may work. For example, what if Harry walked up to Voldemort and this happened:

Harry strode through the graveyard, his head swimming, his heart pulsing. Nearly fifty feet away stood the Dark Lord, his wand raised.

"It's over, Riddle!" Harry yelled, a fierceness in his voice that not even he expected. "Your horcruxes have been destroyed, and you have no more servants to fall back on. Now it's just you and me!"

"You think you stand a chance against me, Potter?" Voldemort laughed. "Let's see what you've got then. Come on, I'll even give you the first shot at me!"

"No."

"What? What do you mean 'no'?"

"Like I said, it's over. I'm tired of fighting. I'm tired of being a pawn to this prophecy." Harry held out his wand, and then dropped it on the ground in front of the Dark Lord. "My mother stood up to you in the greatest way possible: by refusing to fight. And now that's what I'm going to do. You can do as you will, Voldemort, but I don't want any more part of your game."

"No!" Voldemort yelled, his wand raised. "You can't just walk away! Attack me! Fear me! Hate me! Crucio!"

Harry winced as the spell connected, expecting the mind-numbing pain of the Unforgiveable Curse. But no pain came, for him at least. As he watched, Voldemort was doubled over in pain.

"What magic is this? What are you trying to do to me?" Voldemort snarled. "Alright then, this ends now! Avada Kedavra!"


And then I think you can guess what happens next.

Might be a fun ending...means we won't get the huge wizard duel that we always wanted and expected, but come on, we got that between Voldemort and DD in book 5, anyway. And it would come full-circle with the whole love thing, and the fact that "fear in a name only increases fear in the thing itself;" perhaps if someone stands up to Voldemort just like any other school bully and tells him they no longer fear him, and that they are simply going to walk away, Voldemort may be powerless (similar like a Dementor, perhaps he feeds on the fear of others).

If it turns out that Harry does kill Lord Voldemort, however, I agree that it will be mostly for revenge. I think that this is something that JKR has been building us up to for the last six books...Harry's anger has to be so great that he is willing to kill. And I think that even though he did what was right and necessary by destroying the Dark Lord, I believe that his soul will be at least damaged by the guilt and emotion of taking a life.

[Glumbumble]

The wording of the prophecy is interesting.
"and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives!"
Voldemort has survived for the whole of Harry's life for the last two years reunited with his body.
For the purpose of the series I assume that the final confrontation will take place in DH but there is no time limit in the prophecy.

[serophis]

It's definitely an equation that must be balanced out (sounding too much like the Matrix here). The fact that only one of them can live means that the two must inevitably clash until one destroys the other, or they both somehow get destroyed.

The fact that both of them live does not invalidate the prophecy, however; rather, it supports it. Although there is a span of time that elapses while both are alive at the same time, the two cannot coexist peacefully, and their conflict will inevitably destroy one or both.

[Alz]

I think the argument of this thread pretty much confirms the answer - it isnt the killings that are restricted - just the amount of horcrux creating spells.
I think Voldemort could kill 1000 people but as long as he only cast the spell to create horcruxes 6 times - he would be in his quota for 7 part soul.
He way have done 'special' murders at the time he sealed the horcruxes but the fact he killed Lily and James the fateful night goes to show he could kill as many as he wanted, it wouldnt lead automatically to a horcrux being made.

[Piper]

The timeline on this bothers me. I don't see how it can be that the Horcrux has to made at the time of the murder, because, he didn't ask Slughorn about the Horcruxes, and what spell is used until the fall of 1943.

He had already killed his father and Grandparents before this, because he was wearing the ring in the Slughorn memory. He killed them in July of 43. After he made the ring into a Horcrux, he took it back and hit it in the old Gaunt house ruins.

Dumbledore says that he believed that later in the fall Voldermort used the recent deaths to create Horcruxes, I assume of the Diary and the Ring. That would be 3 deaths, and only two items.

He didn't have the locket and the Hufflepuff cup at this time. Dumbledore believed that he used only significant deaths to make Horcruxes, and had made 5 up until the time that he killed Harrys Parents, and was planning to use Harry's death to make the 6th Horcrux. According to Dumbledore's calculations.

So who would have been the significant deaths? Because if the Grandparents and Father's deaths were used, he surely did not make the Horcruxes at the time of the deaths. But later, when they were still "recent deaths".

Dumbledore was betting that the Locket and Hufflepuffs cup became Horcruxes 3 and 4. Which would mean that one grandparents death was not used until a few years later. ? And he used Hepzibah Smith's death for one of those?

He is betting that the old Muggle Frank Bryce's death was used to make Nagini the Snape Horcrux 6. Or is it Bertha Jonkin's?
And only guessing that a Ravenclaw or Griffindor item was found and made into a Horcrux prior to the murder of Lily and James.

I can see now why so many think that Harry is a Horcrux. From the death of Lily, or James. Either way though, from the time line, Voldermort's killing seems to have gotten ahead of his Horcrux making.

And I think when he murders someone, it just leaves the soul torn inside of him, so if he murdered someone now, while only having 1/7 of a piece of soul, that 1/7 would be just torn in half, (I stink at fractions) unless he did another spell and found another object to make into a 7th Horcrux, but I think he only ever wanted a 7 piece soul.