Avatar Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Avatar Wiki
Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for the article "Avatar".

  • This space is for discussing changes to the article. Discussion on changing an infobox image or profile quote takes place on the appropriate project page for each. General discussion about the subject belongs to the comments, forum, or blog posts.
  • Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
  • Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

This article is currently rated Featured and A-class on the Avatar Wiki grading system.

5th bending form[]

If the island creature was right, then bending came from his kind, because they were the first creatures with ties to the spirit world.

This is unknown, but the Lion Turtle spoke of an era 'before the Avatar'. That might mean that once the elements could be manipulated through bending, the Avatar was necessary to keep them in balance. The spirit world has many animals (dragons, monkeys, pandas ,swamp creatures etc plus the two Koi fish) so elemental bending could come from those creatures. User:PhantomS 17:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


But isn´t it possible that a one man made the elemental bending from animals, and became the first avatar and started the avatar cycle? -Sami

Using spiritbending to make airbenders?[]

Someone at the IMDB boards asked that, considering Aang was able to take away the Fire Lord's firebending, could Aang give someone the ability to airbend?

I thought about this too, but came into a conclusion that giving energy is a lot more difficult than taking it, if not outright impossible, and probably not worth all the risk.

^^Please sighn your name with four of these ~. Next I think that is a good point. I dont think that he can create it but maybe transfer his own bending, but he would lose airbending. Scott 18:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Mike and Bryan already said that bending is a talent-turned-skill, and that after a certain age, you can't become a bender, you'll never see a 50 year old suddenly starting to bend. I don't know how spiritbending would affect that, but I think that people would need to have the talent, which would be turned into skill via spiritbending. I also think that it's possible to give back the bending after taking it. The skill is there, it's just inaccessible. Omnibender 18:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

We can't call it like that anymore, nick.com says it's Energybending now. Omnibender 19:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

So an example would of an older person would be like Piandao who would be able to gain a bending ability if he were younger, or Sokka now. Scott 23:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't remember the interview word by word, but I think the age limit is 7 or 8 years, Sokka and Katara's ages during The Southern Raiders I think. Omnibender 23:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

So just turn the youngest Air Walkers into Air Nomads and the problem is solved, they have enough spirit for Aang to be ok with being airbenders and they are already living in an Air Temple =b Felinoel 01:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternatively, perhaps he couldn't actually give them the airbending ability, but he could use Spiritbending to detect those who have the potential of learning it? 84.250.246.11 06:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Please use four tildes (~) to leave your name at the end, and I definitely think those Air Walkers will become the new Air Nomads Felinoel 05:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Well I don't think there's anyone here who thinks that they won't become Air Nomads. Also I don't have a name. 84.250.246.11 06:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Odd, at a forum I go to people didn't even know who they were much less think that way, they even didn't believe they were called Air Walkers... or was the not believing part here...? It is kind of required to sign your posts, regardless of whether or not you have a name Felinoel 06:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, this way we have a link to your contributions page. I don't think the Air Walkers will become Air Nomads, you just don't turn into an Air Nomad, I believe you have to be born into them. By Air Walkers we are talking of the EK refugees from the NAT right? Omnibender 00:03, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
lol yea them, then fine, maybe they could energybend up some unborn Air Walkers still inside the mom? =b Felinoel 01:56, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Who knows? Maybe. I still choose to believe that bending results from genetics and spirituality mix, and that to be a bend an element, one parent must be from the corresponding nation, though that might be a subconscious Kataang mindset. Anyway, maybe all children are born with a possibility of bending, but since spirituality plays a part, that might up or down the odds of someone being a bender. Omnibender 02:23, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
I like to think all are born able to bend but spirituality plays a part and some are born with the possibility to be great at bending Felinoel 02:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
I think it's more of spirituality than genetics, because long ago, the first airbenders were able to learn the skill from the bisons, even when their parent's weren't airbenders. And since the Air Walker lifestyle is relatively close to Air Nomads, it's quite reasonable to think that they could learn airbending some time in the future. 84.250.246.11 06:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Right, also, if my memory is correct, then Aang is also a orphan. Air Nomads are monks and I think they are pretty much all orphans. Perhaps a baby, being just born, therefore recently 'coming out' of the Spirit World, they have the ability to learn any Bending art but as they grow older, said ability fades. It can reach the point of being neglible but I'd like to believe that it never truly disappears. Therefore the potential to learn a Bending art is always in everyone. Possibly the potential to bend ALL the elements. It's just that as one begins to learn to bend one element, they place upon themselves a great mental block, preventing them from Bending the other elements.--cv

Or maybe their descendants will. Zero - Talk 12:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

What is more likely is that Aang's descendants will multiply (maybe even with the Air Walkers) and slowly repopulate the Air Nomad community over the years. The Air Nomads always seemed like the smallest of the Four Nations to start with, so it will be no time before the numbers come back up. There might even be Airbenders born into other cultures (Fire, Water, Earth) by then. Setting them up by Energybending is a bit silly- that stuff predates elemental bending, and is used to bend someone's spirit (bending comes from spirituality) ,but not to make a non-bender a bender. User:PhantomS 15:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

For everything that has a positive there exists negative and vice versa. Its not silly. Zero - Talk 12:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

The Avatar world is one where logic is defied in more ways than one. Energybending is arguably something Aang won't do too often as his spirit is not unbendable (Ozai nearly corrupted him), plus he only did it as a last resort to avoid killing the fire Lord. He won't go around Energybending people to find out if they can airbend; it's far easier for him just to teach people how. There is no 'positive- negative' rule here ,as there is no known opposite for Spiritbending (speculation not welcome) unlike with the Four Elements.

I'm well aware of your postings here, so I won't turn this into a squealing arguement on your part.User:PhantomS 18:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

You are right about the dangers of spiritbending. You do have a point, I agree. But know that this is only speculation. Not fact. This whole section is merely speculation. It was never intended to be put in the article, unless it actually is what happens. Even I dont put all my hopes in this. Since its not fact and is speculation therefore I dont need to argue. Also I ask that you be a little more polite. By Positive and Negative I meant that maybe, just maybe, if Aang can take away bending through energybending then maybe he can give the gift as well. But then again this is only speculation (Its a talk page, the normal rules of writing only fact can be bent here). Who knows what will happen. I'm not saying that this is the only way, all I'm saying that It could be one of the ways. Aang's decendants are a valid lead as well. Zero - Talk 07:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the next airbenders could learn from Appa and Aang. The original airbenders learned from flying bison, and they obviously weren't born with it. So I see no reason why people couldn't learn to airbend from bison again. Plus, they have Aang to teach them the specific techniques, once they have the basic idea. 65.9.128.56 22:06, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

The Lion Turtle Energybended (is that a word?) into Aang, but that was because, as the Avatar, he already had the ability to Energybend, he just didn't know how, like the other Bending Arts. So, it's unlikely that he could just give a random person the ability to bend an element that isn't their natural element. So, someone who isn't an Air Nomad (the Air Walkers don't count), can't be given the knowledge to Airbend, if they don't have the natural ability. But who knows? KonohaSunaKiriKumoIwa (talkcontribs) 04:12, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

List Of Known Avatars[]

1. Unknown Firebender 2. Yangchen 4. Kuruk 5. Kyoshi 6. Ruko 7. Aang 8. Korra&nbsp BGizzles45 02:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC) 02:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)02:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)~~

??? Felinoel 03:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Trivia[]

I don't understand the trivia here, does anyone understand it? felinoel ~ (Talk) 16:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I do. During the show Aangs eyes and Tatoos have been known to either glow completely white or white with just a hint of blue. That what he's saying. Zero - Talk 06:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

And the lighting changing affecting the visable color spectrum is important because? felinoel ~ (Talk) 01:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

It just trivia. Its not that important though. And No. I did'nt put it there. So if you really want to you can remove it.Zero - Talk 05:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

My post is about how I don't see it as trivia and I feel it should be changed to something else, if you feel trivia is not important why don't you remove all the triva from every page then? felinoel ~ (Talk) 08:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I didnt say trivia is unimportant. What i meant was that If you find that this trivia has no place here then you may remove it. Seriously. Zero - Talk 08:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

And what I meant is that it is not trivia, it is something else entirely, it could be kept if given a different label felinoel ~ (Talk) 08:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Dude, and I know this is a year old but, trivia by DEFINITION means unimportant information.--cv

Energybending[]

wait where was it said that only avatars could energybend? can't every bender do it?

Nick.com, their Avatar site. Seriously, does anyone ever goes there before asking something here? Omnibender - Talk 15:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Not really felinoel ~ (Talk) 08:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yup. I agree with felinoel. (Wow. Did I really say that?) lol Zero - Talk 10:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

thanks.

Please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~) felinoel ~ (Talk) 19:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Avatar State[]

Should Avatar state have it's own article because there is a lot of information?--Lightning Shenron 21:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps, but it is directly related to the Avatar and to nothing else, so unless the page is ridiculously long, it isn't needed. The 888th Avatar (Talk) 21:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

When did the gaang learn it was called the avatar state? It was never called that until "The Avatar State" when Aang says "I can only do those things when I'm in the Avatar State" or something like that, but Roku didn't tell him is was called that until later in the episode. dudewaldo4 22:57, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

Avatar Life Span[]

In the episode where Roku shows Aang his death against the volcano on his home island, notice his wife is sleeping in bed next to him,before the eruption,withered and old like he is.

If the avatar has an unusual life span Roku would look the age of his early 40'ies, not an old man. Although the possibility remains that he would be able to live as an elderly man for over a century, it is still not plausible.

I would assume that the Avatar stays elderly for a long period of time. After all, they're supposed to be wise... The 888th Avatar (Talk) 23:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thier "Genetic Aging" doesn't seem to slow. This is not Wheel of Time even if one of the episodes was named like one of WoT Books (Crossroads of Destiny: Crossroads of Twighlight). But their life spans seem to be long. So while outwardly they do age normally. That doesn't mean that they will die when they get wrinkles do they? Death occurs when all neurological pulses of the brain cease. Both the voluntary ones and the involuntary ones. Not before. Zero - Talk 06:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the Avatar has a life span that is inherently longer than that of a normal Avatar-World human. Guru Pathik is a hundred and fifty and he's not an Avatar, he's just maintained his spiritual and physical health. I think that, since the Avatar is meant to be a powerful spiritual leader/authority, they tend to do the same things Pathik does, and that extends their lifespan. But it's not something they're born with, or an extra Avatar-Power. I don't know if that's exactly what we're talking about here, (sorry if its not) but its related and seems worth pointing out. Puragus Talk 16:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I think that the power of the spirit might be a factor here. Zero - Talk 04:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. According to Yangchen, the Avatar is supposed to be a relatively normal human, albeit one with special abilities, and not an all-powerful spirit. It seems like a special lifespan would interfere with that. Roku looks like a normal 68-year-old to me (though he is in excellent shape), so why would we assume his life is supernaturally extended? Puragus Talk 14:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Because compared to the other known avatars, Roku didn't die of natural causes. And the other known Avatars were all supercentenarians. Zero - Talk 03:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, only one named Avatar is a known supercentenarian (and wouldn't she be a..."double-centenarian?"... or a "Bicentenarian?" Anybody know what to call someone two hundred years old?). We don't know the ages of two of them, Roku was 68 when he died (although, as you correctly pointed out, of unnatural causes) and Aang is twelve. Even if most of them do live beyond a hundred, why wouldn't it be due to Pathikesque spiritual training? <font,. color="blue">Puragus Talk 22:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

We know that Kyoshi lived for over 200 years. And I think Yangchen was 100 and Kuruk was 88 when they died (Judging by the dates in the succession box at the bottom of their pages). Zero - Talk 07:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the ages for Kuruk and Yangchen are accurate. To my knowledge there's nothing to support them, and they're not mentioned anywhere else, at least on this site. Both their Age-boxes say "Unknown" in their character templates, and History of the World of Avatar does not list the years they served, except when Kuruk died. If we can't find anything to support their ages, we should change their succession boxes. Puragus Talk 21:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

That's a discussion for their talk pages, isn't it? Although, seeing as they're both Avatars it could go here too. Zero - Talk 11:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I put it here because I only noticed it when you mentioned it here. Should we put it on one of their talk pages? Puragus Talk 16:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Avatar imbalance[]

I think because the air nomads are almost extinct there could be a possible imbalance. If aang chooses not to have children the avatar cycle will be broken. There may be people out there of air nomad descent and with aangs help may become airbenders but won't be affiliated with the air nomads


I think Aang will restore the air nomads. TheBlueBlur (talkcontribs) 23:48, April 7, 2010 (UTC)

Is this even relevant? We"ll never know the truth 76.88.96.40 22:46, April 9, 2010 (UTC)ROKU)&

Controlling the Avatar State[]

Since Guru Pathik tried to help Aang control the Avatar State by opening the Chakras, is it possible that if an avatar opened all seven chakras that they could control elements they had yet to learn while in the Avater State?KonohaSunaKiriKumoIwa (talkcontribs) 04:18, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Possibly, but I think that control over the avatar state just lets you go into it, not power over the rest of the elements. If so, then why would any avatar learn the elements before the avatar state? So, most likely, you might be able to do some level of bending that you don't know, but not to a full extent. Avatar Talk 05:10, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Avatar Kyoshi[]

Shouldn't you mention that a previous Avatar can channel themselves through their living successor because in "Avatar Day" Kyoshi brought herself in just as the mayor was about to give Aang's sentence,and a brown wind spout circled Aang's body and the world was covered in darkness. Also Aang had no knowledge of it after it happened.Kibo100 (talkcontribs) 23:14, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

First Avatar[]

In speculation, people are saying that the first avatar was an airbender, but that would be contradictory, the first element is water.Courage the Cowardly User (talkcontribs) 06:01, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

When listing the elements in the cycle, one has to start somewhere. Just because it starts with water, it doesn't mean it was the first element in the cycle. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:12, July 20, 2010 (UTC)
then why is the cycle always with water at the begining Courage the Cowardly User (talkcontribs) 05:12, July 23, 2010 (UTC)
Convention? Emphasis on the fact that the first book was the Water one? There can be any number of reasons. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 03:24, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
remember the cycle is water earth fire air, why would they make the cycle a different element if the first avatar wasnt water?Courage the Cowardly User (talkcontribs) 03:26, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
If you remember from The Southern Air Temple, Katara says that the cycle goes Air, Water, Earth, and Fire. VJavatar is awesome (talkcontribs) 03:30, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
if you remember from our own wiki, it goes water earth fire airCourage the Cowardly User (talkcontribs) 03:34, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
The show takes preference, and VJavatar is right. The cycle is Air, Water, Earth, then Fire. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 04:07, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
they clearly say in the first episode narration Water, Earth, Fire, AirCourage the Cowardly Dawn's Past - SoF 01:58, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
The cycle is circular, you can start it wherever. Just because Katara starts it one place doesn't mean it's incorrect to start it somewhere else. I could say Fire, Air, Water and Earth and still be correct. You're not going to know who the first Avatar is or where he came from for looking at a circular cycle! MightyBrit has left this comment! (Talk, Read CoD!) 02:19, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
thn why would they always start with water if the first avatar was not a waterbenderCourage the Cowardly Dawn's Past - SoF 02:25, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
Because the opening narration is by Katara, who is from the water tribe! Of course she says her own element first! MightyBrit has left this comment! (Talk, Read CoD!) 02:35, August
Then why does everyone else refer to water first?Courage the Cowardly Dawn's Past - SoF 17:06, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
Never saw anyone else saying water was the first. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 19:38, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
iroh?03:40, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
Who explained how he studied them to create lightning redirection, it's obvious he'd start with it. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:12, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
5, 2010 (UTC)
and what about earth kingdom characters and all the times people said that the avatar learns the elements in orser and they always start with waterCourage the Cowardly Dawn's Past - SoF 20:07, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
Don't remember them. Even if they exist, it's rather obvious that they're speaking it according to Aang's case. Aang is already an airbending master, so people will naturally say the cycle starting with what he has to learn. Very late in the series, Sokka also lists the elements starting with air, when he adds himself and Suki as "fan and sword". Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 22:49, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
just realized something, the benders needed to become balanced, so the avaar was made, doesn' this possily mean the first avatar belonged to no nation and sorted all of them into nations?02:48, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
You're speculating. While your theory is completely possible, you can't assume that's the truth because you have no evidence whatsoever to back up your claims. You're reaching into the realms of fanon. MightyBrit has left this comment! (Talk, Read CoD!) 03:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
WRONG WRONG WRONG! The first avatar was a Firebender. The cycle goes like this: Fire Air Water Earth. That's what they said in Avatar Extras The Avatar and the Firelord. Maubinlol

Considering the number of Avatars since the first one and the many centuries since, it might be entirely possible that the First Avatar (and maybe the few that followed) was actually an energy bender and that the more formalized cycle of the elements developed later. Sings-With-Spirits (wallcontribs) 13:35, October 2, 2012 (UTC)

As of Beginning's, the First Avatar (Wan) is confirmed to be a firebenderPyrusmole (wallcontribs) 00:29, January 14, 2014 (UTC)

Speculation[]

Now that we know that Aang has at least begun to repopulate the Air Nomads with the introduction to Tenzin, shouldn't we delete the info about repopulating the air nomads? It isn't really a place to speculate anymore.Courage the Cowardly UserSokka-sprite 16:01, August 17, 2010 (UTC)


All in favor or oppossed write your names here:

Delete[]

  1. Courage the Cowardly UserSokka-sprite 16:00, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Keep[]

Anyone?Courage the Cowardly User1KB 23:15, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

So...delete or keep?Avatar Courage1KB 03:54, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

Complete all in the same????[]

Ok, so I thought reincarnation meant the body being reincarnation, and thus it wouldn't really be reincarnation in Avatar since it's the spirit that goes from body to body (like two spirits, the Avatar spirit and the soul of the individual), but now I know reincarnation actually means when the spirit goes from body to body; reincarnation is about the spirit not about the body.
Wait,

  • So does that means all the Avatars are the same consciousness, and thus it's like Aang's own consciousness is thousands of years old, but he can't remember anything after every birth. And thus consciousness-wise, Aang really isn't like anyone else as it really was his consciousness that has been in all these Avatar.
  • Or is it where the Avatar spirit may go from body to body, but it's still a thousand different consciousnesses (for 1,000 past Avatars so far) and thus after Aang's death, that means any Waterbender born could be an Avatar, and Korra is just lucky, but Korra would still have the same consciousness even if she wasn't the Avatar.
  • In answer to your question, the avatar is a single spirit - each avatar is like the memories from that lifetime, yet somehow each avatar still has his/her own consciousness (doesn't make any sense to me either). Think of it like Tom Riddle's horcruxes from harry potter - they had indepent wills but were all the same being and were like a memory. Or think of it like this: if you were the avatar, your current self would be the current avatar, your one year old self would be like the first avatar, your 2 year old self the next avatar, your 3 year old self another avatar, ect ect you get the idea - same person, different selves. 24.192.131.225 01:45, September 23, 2012 (UTC) wiki contributer.


History[]

It is possible that we can have a history section for this page. Avatarr (wallcontribs) 13:51, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Memory[]

When the avatar dies, the part of the soul from that lifetime has a 'consciousness' and lives in the spirit world. So this raises some questions:

  1. Does a past avatar know what the current avatar is doing at all times? Why or why not?
  2. If yes, wouldn't that mean that the first avatar is the 'most complete' avatar? because he/she has memories from all lifetimes?
Let me know what you think; put your answers under each question.

Number of Avatars - Speculative[]

(Moved from Comments section on main page)

For reference, in the pic File:Statueglow.png I can count 63 pairs of glowing eyes; given the angle and accounting for the statues at ground level, it would be safe to assume that there are 3 or 4 times the number of statues seen in the image, so that would be somewhere between 189 and 232 avatars before Aang. I'm fairly confident that there are no higher tiers of statues than the ones seen... heck; it's possible that one of the ones seen in the pic is the First Avatar! (the right-most one in the top tier).

If we can determine a reasonably good approximation of average length of an avatar's "reign", we could actually speculate on a count of years BSC!

Interestingly enough, a count of the avatars seen in File:Avatars.png shows 58 (possibly 59) visible (or barely visible) avatars.

--Sings-With-Spirits (wallcontribs) 13:26, October 2, 2012 (UTC)

It would be anywhere between 60-120. Knowing that Wan was the first Avatar back 10,000 years ago, we know that being an Avatar is a job for life. The Avatar spirit only moves on when the current one dies. So if you calculate an average life span of 85-150 years you get Korra being the 67-118th Avatar. I say 85 to 150 because some Avatars live a very long time. Kyoshi was over 200 years old. While it is unknown if that is common, the average life span of humans today is around 85 years.

Point is, there have only been around 100 or so Avatars so I edited the weakness section that previously stated "millions of benders" to dozens.

Side note, If the actual date of the original Avatar Wan is true, than Roku was wrong. In book one episode 16 "The Deserter" Roku convinces Jeong Jeong to teach Aang firebending by saying, "I have mastered the elements 1,000 times in 1,000 lifetimes" But that is impossable. If Wan was the first Avatar 10,000 years ago, and there are 1,000 Avatars than that would put the average life-span of an Avatar at 10 years. This is most likely due to an oversight as they had probably not ironed out the origin of the Avatar when that episode aired. Griffmstr835 (wallcontribs) 22:02, September 29, 2013 (UTC)

Or, it was just a figure of speech, meant to show that he mastered the elements many, many times. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 22:06, September 29, 2013 (UTC)

It is stated that Kyoshi was the longest-lived avatar, and though we have seen some avatars who are fairly long-lived, it would be reasonable to assume that some simply have not lived that long; we do know that training is not required to pass on the avatar spirit, so some could've simply died at an early age during, or even before, training was completed. We also don't know the political climate the early avatars lived in, it is possible that many died fairly young, in their 30's, 40's or 50's, which would drop the average age significantly. If we assume (for sake of argument), 200 avatars in 10,000 years, then the average age of death of an avatar would be 50, which might seem low, but could include dozens of centenarians, but also dozens of teenagers. I also agree with Omnibender that the "thousands" in "a thousand lifetimes" was just a bit of idiomatic hyperbole (wow... my 6th grade teacher must be proud of my use of that sentence!). --Sings-With-Spirits (wallcontribs) 00:12, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Split Avatar State?[]

I think the Avatar State is a notable enough subject to warrant its own article, especially considering how many articles link to it directly. - Sikon (wallcontribs) 09:30, November 5, 2013 (UTC)

There is no need for that since the two are, to quite Raava, "bonded forever". The Avatar cannot exist without the Avatar and visa versa. They need each other and since Raava and Wan's merger, they are basically the same. As such, if we were to split the pages, those pages would nearly be copy/pastes of each other. However, since this is a community run wiki, you are welcome to propose your idea in the Avatar Wiki:War Room to get site-consensus on the matter. Lady Lostris / 9?cb=20210808202057 SOAP 13:21, November 5, 2013 (UTC)

Dark Avatar state[]

shouldn't the dark avatar state stuff be put on the dark avatar page???Deathmailrock (wallcontribs) 09:53, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Problem with one point of trivia[]

  • Aang is the youngest biologically and the oldest chronologically known fully realized Avatar


I've read here that apparently Kyoshi was 230 when she died, and I'd assume she'd been fully realized long before her death. So, how can Aang then be the oldest chronologically if he's only 166? He's still a bit under Kyoshi in that regard, yes? Tommy-Vercetti (wallcontribs) 22:23, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Because chronologically speaking, he only became a fully realized Avatar at the age of 112, whereas all the other known Avatars became fully realized much sooner. The age in that trivia is in regards to when he mastered all the elements, not just his overall age. Lady Lostris / 9?cb=20210808202057 SOAP 22:30, November 30, 2014 (UTC)
I've reworded the sentence to clarify that since it think it was a little unclear before what it was referring to. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 22:33, November 30, 2014 (UTC)
Yes, rewording that is good. I get now what it was trying to say; I was on a completely different wavelength before. Tommy-Vercetti (wallcontribs) 23:47, November 30, 2014 (UTC)
Glad we could help. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 23:51, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Avatar Separate Entities Edits[]

On page 294 (ebook) of The Shadow of Kyoshi, the narrator says, "Yangchen read her thoughts, a feat made easier by the fact they were the same person."

Earlier in the book, after Yun escapes the Spirit World, it is noted that "Kyoshi is Kuruk".

The section on past lives shouldn't say that the Avatars are generally assumed to be separate entities, when they clearly are not, and it is literally, explicitly stated as such multiple times in canon media.

They are connected to each other as you are connected to your childhood self. It's a Buddhist theory: you don't really have a soul, so to speak, but a continuum of energy that flows and changes as time goes on, as a candle flame does. This is also what Nyahitha was referring to with his candle metaphor: a candle is never the same flame, as the gas rises due to convection and becomes smoke, vaporizing more fuel to become new flame: beyond the change that comes with reincarnation, the personal change someone - in this case Kyoshi - goes through as they grow and gain experience in life.

It would be fine to leave up the part about the candle flame metaphor, but the part stating the avatar is generally assumed to be separate entities should be edited out, as it is inaccurate.

Pertaining to the fact that the avatar must reach their past lives in reverse order, a couple things:

We've seen this isn't always strictly true, since korra was able to connect with wan despite not going through the many lives between kuruk and wan

This doesn't imply they are separate people. As yangchen said in one of the comics, the Avatars are connected like a chain, meaning only that if the connection to one is lost then so too is the connection to the ones before. Roku said to aang, "I am a part of you". This is necessarily true of all incarnations then: the past one is a part of the next one, meaning they are sort of like russian nesting dolls. As far as whether they are all separate spiritual entities, the idea of having to reach one before the next doesn't by itself imply anything, nor feed any assumptions, and we don't include assumed information anyway.Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) November 30, 2020 (UTC)

They are considered separate persons, that's also stated in the same book (I can't reference like you are due to only having the hard copy, which I don't have with me, cause since you read it, you also know that's true).
It is all basically saying the same. They are one and they are many. They are each other reincarnation thus obviously connected, but they're also different. The flame metaphor Nyahitha used is to be interpreted in the canon lore of the Avatar not in the Buddhist way since that doesn't exist in the Avatar World. Lady Lostris / 9?cb=20210808202057 SOAP November 30, 2020 (UTC)
That is not correct. What I believe you're referring to is a quote by Nayahitha when talking to Kyoshi, "The one is many, and the many are one." This, again, is part of Buddhist philosophy, which while buddhism might not exist in the avatar world, the creators of that world have stated it and its philosophy had great influence on the show, which cannot be ignored. Even in the context of the show, "The one spirit has many incarnations, and the many incarnations are one person." It's acknowledging the complexities of a person's spirit, and the different, many facets of someone's personality, or in the case of the avatar, the many personalities they've had over many reincarnation cycles. The spiritual energy of one person reincarnates becoming the next person, but they are still of the same spiritual energy. "You and the flame change with every moment, with every generation." This buddhist idea of energy taking on a new form is discussed in more detail in the "The Guru" episode of the original series. Nyahitha's full quote taken with context sheds some light on the situation: the avatar has many incarnations, but is the same energy/"soul" reincarnated over and over.
Nowhere in the "Shadow of Kyoshi" book - or in any canon media - is there a statement that the different incarnations of the avatar are separate, distinct spirits. There are, however, several statements - such as the one I quoted above, "...a feat made easier by the fact that they were the same person..." that states they are different versions of the same spiritual entity, connected like a chain, as yangchen said in one of the comics.
Taken at the bare minimum, it has been explicitly stated that Yangchen and Kyoshi are the same person. As you acknowledged, they are reincarnations of each other, which, by definition, means they are the same "person", which, again, has been explicitly, literally spelled out.
In the context of the specific edit, at a bare minimum, we should remove the sentence, "It is generally assumed that the avatars are different people": one, we don't include assumptions as fact on this wiki, and two, that is not a general assumption per everything I've already written. It could start by saying, "The fire sage nyahitha tried explaining the avatar's nature to kyoshi by likening the avatar to a candle flame..."
The part about kuruk roaming the spirit world also needs removed, as that is inaccurate as well, and the bit about the avatar existing separately from the avatar spirit (raava) is redundant. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) November 30, 2020 (UTC)
That entry doesn't state them to be separate people, it says that they're separate individuals in reference to them being their own person with their own personality and quirks and whatever. The only time it truly references them being actually separate is when talking about Kuruk's spirit continuing his search for Koh in the Spirit World. Since it's sourced in-universe, I don't see why that needs to be removed based on your interpretation of an out-of-universe concept. Lady Lostris / 9?cb=20210808202057 SOAP November 30, 2020 (UTC)
To say that they have their own personalities and whatnot is obvious, and should not be stated. Any viewer can see that Aang and Korra, for instance, have different personalities, even though Aang became Korra. That's the very concept of reincarnation. To say or imply anything further about the avatars being separate would be incorrect, since it has been stated otherwise. ("...made easier by the fact that they were the same person.") It is also inappropriate to use the phrase, "generally assumed" when writing an encyclopedic resource. The term "separate individuals" is also inappropriate, and would better substituted by "unique personalities", with a necessary fix of the accompanying verb diction/tense as well.
The bit about Kuruk is the result of misinterpretation. My interpretation of an out of universe concept (I assume you're referring to what I said about Buddhism's influence on the show), is unrelated here. Kuruk was not, and is not, roaming the spirit world looking for koh. 1. He knows where Koh is. He found him, and tried to kill him once. He wouldn't still be looking for him. 2. It's been established that past avatars aren't roaming the spirit world. For one thing, they only exist as part of the current avatar, for another, if they did exist in the spirit world independently, then several plot points of both series no longer work. Korra would be able to simply wander the spirit world until she finds her past lives again, and other characters would have been able to independently interact with the past avatars as well. They would also be able to return to the physical world.
In any case, that point is not relevant to a section explaining the concept of the avatar's past lives, thus it should be removed.
The last bit is about the avatar existing independently from raava, which again is an obvious point to a viewer of the show, and should not be stated. This too is not relevant in a section about the Avatar's past lives.
Current:
"As the Avatar reincarnates, it is generally assumed that the various Avatars are different individuals yet also part of a continuum.[30] The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many."[26] In addition, the Avatars as individuals can exist separate from the Avatar Spirit, which reincarnates, as Kuruk's spirit continued to roam the Spirit World despite dying and being reincarnated,[31] while Korra existed separated from Raava for a short time.[4]"
Revision for clarity, brevity (the article is quite long without the unnecessary paragraph already), and removing unnecessary/obvious information:
"The Bhanti Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain the Avatar's nature to Avatar Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle flame: 'It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many.' "
This entry should also be moved from the "past lives" section to the section above about the Avatar cycle, where it fits better. The past lives section pertains to the avatar connecting with their memories from past lives to gain wisdom and knowledge, and different ways this has been shown to work. The entry in question would better belong in another section. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) December 1, 2020 (UTC)

I had not noticed this discussion and the changes to the Avatar page until now. I was the one who added the discussed part of the "past lives" section in the first place, and I would like to say that I strongly disagree with Intelligence4's arguments.

Scape from the Spirit World makes it very clear that Kuruk is still rying to save Ummi AFTER his death: When meeting Aang in the spirit world, he says "Thank you, Aang. My search is not over yet. I will keep hunting Koh until Ummi and I are reunited." The point about Korra is important in this regard, as this too confirms that individual Avatars are not equal to the Avatar spirit. In fact, we still do not know where people end up after death - unless they become spirits. The whole issue about how reincarnation and the afterlife work in the Avatar world remains unclear.

As it happens, I also have read a bit on Buddhist thinking, and your interpretation of the Bhanti sayings is not the only correct one. Reincarnation, and even the existence of a spirit / soul, are not necessarily serial or linear. Some Buddhist schools of thought believe that each person has multiple souls, representing different aspects of a personality and/or body parts, or that the soul is split into many elements, or that there is a distinction between material parts of an individual (which are illusions or tied to the world) and parts which transmit the material plane of existence. Accordingly, there have been cases where one person reincarnated as multiple people. Then there is the issue of time which some Buddhists regard as existing, while others see it as illusion as well - accordingly, if time is meaningless, reincarnation might go backwards as well - with someone reincarnating in the past. And then we get to heavens and gods which some Buddhist believe in - raising even more possibilities.

It is very much possible that Kuruk continued to roam the Spirit World, either due to time-shenanigans or part of his soul splitting off and so on. The fact that Korra was not destroyed when separated from Raava, plus Korra being able to absorb Vaatu - making the Avatar spirit essentially a two-in-one spirit - reinforces the idea that this might very well be the case. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) December 1, 2020 (UTC)

Just because you disagree with them does not mean they do not rein true. There has never been any mention of any sort of time travel in the canon of avatar, and it's very well established that the avatar reincarnates in a time-linear fashion.
Yangchen's quote: all the avatars are connected to each other like a chain.
Roku's quote to aang: our *shared* past.
Katara, at the very beginning of the series: When the avatar dies, he's reincarnated into the next nation in the cycle.
Etc.
All verbage surrounding the avatar's reincarnation makes it very clear and unambiguous that the process is linear (and cyclical), and one becomes the next, as a continuum, to use the wording from the kyoshi novels that's at hand here.
The canon makes it very clear how the avatar's reincarnation works, even if we don't know what happens to regular people when they die. (Does everyone reincarnate? etc.) The Escape from the Spirit World content was a one-off that, while technically canon, was part of a game format at production and release. Furthermore, the story it encompasses is Aang reconnecting with his past lives after being killed, in order to heal the avatar spirit. It would be far less of a stretch of canon to say that kuruk's wording is simply a product of the condition the avatar spirit is in, rather than assign some out-of-universe hypothetical buddhism theory and time traveling. (we have seen how a damaged avatar spirit effects the connection with the past lives, time traveling does not exist in avatar, and hypothetical buddhism theory has been shown to be non-applicable to avatar.) The game, as all canon content, further still doesn't ever show a past avatar physically existing separately from the current avatar. A past avatar has never not been an apparition derived from the current avatar, even in the EftSW game.
Still further, what you wrote is that "kuruk's spirit continued to roam the spirit world", but even this is not true. As I said, kuruk was only shown in the presence of aang, and faded away after the encounter. in fact, he disappeared off-screen and aang looked away from where he moved to, as though he was no longer there. There are other things wrong with what kuruk told aang: he told aang he'd not thought of settling down until he met the love of his life - ummi - but we know he had serious feeling for another woman - his firebending teacher. on the whole, the EftSW game should not be taken too seriously.
The amount of directly quotable canon story plot/dialogue must outweigh a single shakily (mis)interpreted quote from a one-off game-derived short story format. Kuruk cannot be still in the spirit world per established canon rules, as upon death, he was reincarnated into kyoshi. (for yet another direct quote explicitly confirming as such, from the kyoshi novels: "kyoshi *was* kuruk".) You may also refer to my points above for why it is generally not possible for the past avatars to exist independently in the spirit world.
Moving on, I have never disputed the fact that the Avatar is distinct from the Avatar Spirit. As Raava's page correctly indicates, the "Avatar Spirit" is Raava herself. This is well documented on our wiki, and does not need to be restated. As seen in Beginnings, Raava permanently bound herself to Wan, resulting in two spirits bound together ("We will be together for all your lifetimes"). Wan was shown to reincarnate as the second avatar, and this cycle continued - linearly - for 10k years. Wan became the second avatar, then the third, and so on, until his "spirit" became korra. (Iroh to korra: "when you were avatar wan..."). This "two-in-one" as you call it (raava+her avatar) does not in any way support the possibility that some avatar was able to split off as a distinct spirit, as raava and wan - the avatar spirit to be and the avatar to be - were initially separate until they were bound together by the spirit portal's energy.
In terms of the actual verbage on the avatar wiki entry, I kept almost all of what you wrote except the bit about kuruk, and the bit about the avatar spirit. As i've explained in great detail, with more than sufficient quotes to demonstrate, the avatar spirit bit is unnecessary/obvious and stated elsewhere, and the thing about kuruk is not correct. What you wrote better fits in the above section, which is where I moved it. Your contribution was not diluted by this.
Just to be extra clear, I'll quickly break it down line by line:
As the Avatar reincarnates, it is generally assumed that the various Avatars are different individuals yet also part of a continuum. The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many." In addition, the Avatars as individuals can exist separate from the Avatar Spirit, which reincarnates, as Kuruk's spirit continued to roam the Spirit World despite dying and being reincarnated, while Korra existed separated from Raava for a short time.
  1. This does not belong as the first paragraph of the past lives section. The paragraph after that is the introduction to that section, and should not be proceeded.
  2. "it is generally assumed" is not appropriate diction to use with an encyclopedic resource. Nothing should be "assumed", and stating it as a generalization is inappropriate.
  3. Nyahitha's quote was retained, which makes up the bulk of this section, and moved to the preceding section about the nature of the avatar cycle.
  4. The avatar existing as separate from the avatar spirit has been stated elsewhere, and does not belong in the past lives section. it should not be restated as part of this quote.
  5. "kuruk's spirit continued to roam the spirit world" - this is false per above ad nauseam, and is the only part of the quote that was entirely removed from the article. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) December 27, 2020 (UTC)
I disagree. The sources are quite clear that we do not know how the life-to-death issues work in the Avatar world, as the Avatar reincarnates, while reincarnation is not confirmed for any other human (Iroh sought his son's spirit, suggesting that he believed that Lu Ten was NOT reincarnated). To clarify the relation of the past lifes to each other and the cycle as a whole makes sense as intro to the section.
Regardless on how you feel about it, the Kuruk part is NOT false. It is based on Kuruk's own words in Escape from the Spirit World. It also aligns with Kuruk's presentation in the Kyoshi novels - he notes that the spirits still keep their distance from him, yet they do not do so for any other later Avatar, meaning that most spirits keep distinguishing Kuruk from other Avatars after his death(!). The Korra-Raava split reaffirms that the Avatar's individual lifes can exist without the Avatar spirit.
Kuruk also never intended to settle down per the Kyoshi novels, btw. While he loved Hei-Ran, and wanted a relationship, it is never stated that he wanted to stop travelling the world and found a family. "Escape" remains canon, and we have to at least think about its content.
My raising of the different ideas on reincarnation in regards to Buddhist teachings was just an attempt to showcase that it is very much possible for Kuruk to keep existing as some kind of shadow entity at the same time as his successors, especially if we remember that time works differently in the Spirit World. I did not postulate that Kuruk split off completely; my point is that Kuruk could do other stuff in the Spirit World while being reincarnated as his successor.
As a matter of fact, reincarnation usually means that there is - at least in some way - a break between the individuals: If one has died and reincarnates, one cannot (as far as I know in regards to Buddhist and Hindu thinking) talk to your past selves, as they are you. One can, however, split off parts of one's self to achieve enlightenment.
My point is that the fact that past Avatars can talk to present ones and even influence them already means that the Avatar cycle does not work like the "regular" reincarnation. Where do the past Avatars even reside? If each Avatar is completely one, in a (one might say "simple") linear succession as you said, the destruction of Raava should not have severed Korra's connection to the past - after all, she is still Wan, Aang, Kyoshi, etc. Obviously Raava is the important connection, the reincarnation works with her help. As you said, she told Wan that they are bound together. However, that's the thing. They are "bound", as in, two beings. If the connection to the past works through Raava, it does not - naturally - work through Wan. As said, other mortals may or may not reincarnate. Meaning, their spirits seem to end up somewhere. The question is, if an Avatar dies, and their connection flows through Raava, might the "original" system still work? Or, to approach it differently, could an Avatar do what Iroh and the Painted Lady did? Mind you, they died and then became spirits. Could an Avatar, theoretically, become a spirit, while the reincarnation still continued through Raava? No idea, but we have no clarification that it is entirely impossible.
The main purpose of the intro to the past lives section is to showcase that we still do not fully understand how the Avatar cycle works. The idea of a simple linear succession is at least challenged by some events and sources. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) December 27, 2020 (UTC)
I have changed the wording a bit in regards to Kuruk, to make it a bit more open to interpretation: "After his death, Kuruk informed his successor Aang that he was still trying to save his wife in the Spirit World". This way, it is closer to the source. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) December 27, 2020 (UTC)
EftSW remains canon, but has a particular detail that is contradicted by literally every other canon quote pertaining to the matter. I'm not going to repeat myself like a broken record, as I've already shown ad nauseam why that particular bit about kuruk has no place on the avatar page. Kuruk - nor any other past avatar - could be doing stuff in the spirit world separately from the current avatar.
"As a matter of fact, reincarnation usually means that there is - at least in some way - a break between the individuals: If one has died and reincarnates, one cannot (as far as I know in regards to Buddhist and Hindu thinking) talk to your past selves, as they are you. One can, however, split off parts of one's self to achieve enlightenment."
Roku literally said to Aang: "Aang, you are me." Among other quotes to that effect. it remains true that the avatars indeed are their reincarnations. I definitely agree that the concept of talking with your past self is unique to avatar, and different from traditional reincarnation concepts. This does not invalidate the plethora of quotes explaining the phenomenon though. Clearly raava has something to do with this, and the status quo for the avatar page included enough detail to explain this without including speculation. regardless of raava's role in the process, the many incarnations of the avatar are a single "individual"/spirit reincarnated many times over.
The point of the past lives section - which i originally wrote - is not to show that we don't know how it works. that is not the goal of an encyclopedic resource. it is to show what we do know about it, without speculation. you've added a paragraph that does not follow encyclopedic guidelines, includes speculation, and is better placed elsewhere.
In terms of what you actually wrote with your last edit, you simply undid my edit, including my grammatical edits. I'm more than willing to come to a compromise on wording, but that discussion needs to happen here before changing the page. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) December 27, 2020 (UTC)

Note that I added the section, and you removed it later on after it stayed for some time. Lady Lostris also initially disagree with you in regards to removing it.

In essence, we disagree both on the interpretation of the scenes - as I think that several inter-Avatar interactions and the Korra-Raava split cast strong doubts on the simple and purely linear reincarnation (Btw, Roku said you are me to Aang, yet they disagreed and Aang was even able to sever his connection which is also not how reincarnation-interaction should work). In consequence, there is a lot but not total agreement by the sources on how the cycle works in its entirety. Your assumption that "Kuruk - nor any other past avatar - could be doing stuff in the spirit world separately from the current avatar" is your assumption, no more. In fact, several Avatars did possess their successors and then did things the present Avatar might find problematic. The entire possession stuff is its own can of worms, as that one stems from other belief systems and carries its own implications.

In my opinion, the section needs the introduction to showcase that there might be twists to the cycle that have been hinted at. An enyclopedia usually includes such alternate views as well if they have at least some support - to take but one example, there are several theories on human evolution. The out-of-Africa theory has the strongest support, but enyclopedias like Wikipedia also talk about other models - which makes sense, as for example recent findings suggest that the "pure" out-of-Africa model was too simple and that other theories had some merit. IMO, this is a similar case. Most evidence points at one direction, but there is stuff we should not just ignore. If it were just the Kuruk quote, ok, but the Raava-Korra split also suggests that the system is more complex.

In addition: almost all sources for the cycle, aside from Raava, are in essence limited viewpoints. If a guru tells an Avatar how the system works, his or her understanding is based on experience, histories, and studies - all of which might be flawed. This situation is naturally helpful for the creators as well if they intend to retcon stuff.

I would also like to note that the section is the best place, IMO, to discussion the interactions and relations between the Avatars, including the possibilities of splits and disruptions in the connections. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) December 27, 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps the best idea would be to seek the others' opinion? Personally, I would accept the removal of the intro to the section if other editors also regard it as incorrect or useless. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) December 28, 2020 (UTC)
Dying flame said:
" ...split cast strong doubts on the simple and purely linear reincarnation..."
The entire point of the show is that one avatar reincarnates as the next. From one nation in the cycle to the next. They don't hang around while another avatar is born, they are reborn into the next nation in the cycle as soon as they die. We have seen this very linear process visually depicted twice, and discussed often. I don't think the avatar(wan/korra)/avatar spirit(raava) "split" has anything to do with this. It was shown from the beginning that raava was separate from wan. I don't see how that could possibly indicate that wan or any of the other incarnations are separate from each other. We also have a direct, explicit quote - from the narrator, not a character - that "[the past avatars] are the same [people]. Along with dozens of other quotes directly stating they are the same person.
...yet they disagreed and Aang was even able to sever his connection which is also not how reincarnation-interaction should work
Also
several Avatars did possess their successors and then did things the present Avatar might find problematic.
That's... actually exactly how reincarnation works. As I explained farther up, of course the avatars have different personalities. While they're part of the same continuum of the same "spirit" (originally Wan), they have unique experiences and unique personalities. Aang and Korra, to reuse my example above, contrast sharply ("I can't believe your sweet tempered father was reincarnated into that girl!") but Aang became Korra per the process of reincarnation. As for the inter-avatar interactions complicating things, we have seen a scene that explains that a little: Korra talking to her current self. The first "past avatar" that korra summoned when she was recovering from amnesia was not aang or any other, it was her own current self. This - along with, as I've said - literally every quote about the matter - helps to cement the fact that while inter-avatar interactions exist, they are still very much talking to their past self, not a separate distinct spirit.
Your assumption that Kuruk - nor any other past avatar - could be doing stuff in the spirit world separately from the current avatar is your assumption, no more.
Was that a typo? I'm very much saying kuruk can not be doing stuff in the spirit world. See: all my reasoning above in all my replies as to why the past avatars are not in the spirit world. It is not merely an assumption, it is backed up with everything i've stated ad nauseam. One thing I haven't mentioned is that we also know "where" the past avatars are: Bryke has stated that korra losing her connection to her past lives was like wiping your hard drive, and roku said "I am a part of you." Add these to the pile of evidence that we know the past avatars don't exist outside of the current avatar.
Let's get down to the meat and potatoes:
the section needs the introduction to showcase that there might be twists to the 'cycle' that have been hinted at.
This is why I moved it to the 'cycle' section. I didn't remove your paragraph, I just reworked it and placed it where it fits better. The quote you used is a good one, but would better belong in the "avatar cycle" section where I moved it.
As far as my "past avatars" section having an introduction, I'd already written that ages ago. The point of that section of the page is to discuss and show the phenomenon of the avatar having past lives and being able to recall them, and the various ways that happens and what it can be used for. Thus my efficient introduction encompasses that: "Due to the nature of the reincarnation cycle, the avatar can recall memories of past lives."
At the absolute bare minimum, your paragraph would need to be moved to the end of the past lives section or just before the last paragraph.
An enyclopedia usually includes such alternate views as well if they have at least some support...
The "kuruk existing separately in the spirit world" idea is more akin to Creationism than the "out-of-africa" theory. A mountain of evidence exists against it. A reputable encyclopedic resource would not posit that as a credible, evidence-based explanation for the origin of humans, nor should the avatar article state the disproven misunderstanding that any of the past avatars are hanging out in the spirit world on their own.
Your addition:
As the Avatar reincarnates, it is generally assumed that the various Avatars are different individuals yet also part of a continuum. The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many." In addition, the Avatars as individuals can exist separate from the Avatar Spirit, which reincarnates, as Kuruk's spirit continued to roam the Spirit World despite dying and being reincarnated, while Korra existed separated from Raava for a short time.
Edits for clarity, brevity, accuracy, verb tense, and relevancy to the "past avatar" section:
The different incarnations of the avatar have had unique personalities yet they are also part of a continuum. The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many."
As i'm getting tired of restating, the "...can exist separate from the avatar spirit" is obvious (see:wan/korra and raava) and is an insult to our readers, and the fragment about kuruk is not correct. Neither would belong in the past lives section regardless. There are other wording issues that I'm not going to drag out unless necessary since this post is long enough as is haha.
If anyone else wants to chime in please feel free. I'm open to suggestions on placement. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) December 29, 2020 (UTC)
My interpretation, is that all humans in the Avatar world reincarnate. I back this up by Raava's choice of words when talking to Wan at the end of Beginnings Part 2, when she says "We will be together for all of your lifetimes". This tells ME, that Raava isn't the source of Wan's reincarnation, but rather she's just tagging along. This further makes sense when we consider that the Avatar state is Raava "taking the drivers seat" so to speak, so when an Avatar is killed in the Avatar state, Raava dies as well since she was in control. So my theory on that is that, if an Avatar were to die in the Avatar State, the human would reincarnate like normal, but since Raava has been killed as well, she doesn't tag along like normal since she would have to be reborn over time inside of Vaatu.
Tying this into the discussion presently, clearly there's a difference between all other humans, and the Avatar. If everybody reincarnates (which is evident as I've said above), regular people have no way of contacting their past lives. So that tells me that Raava is the only reason that they can contact their past lives. The mutual connection that the current Avatar shares with the past Avatars is Raava. So that connection is what can link up the past spirit with the current spirit. That connection having been broken of course when Raava was killed by Unalaq.
So TLDR, no I don't consider all Avatars to be the same person. I just think they have that mutual connection through Raava and she facilitates any communication between the current Avatar and the past spirits. Zacatero • (Wall) • 15  20  15 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Intelligence4, I feel like that it is not an "insult to our readers" to try to highlight issues that clearly cause confusion and discussions, otherwise we would not have this talk in the first place.
And as I said above, your "rework" essentially does remove core aspects of what the paragraph is trying to showcase, as you yourself have repeatedly stated that you regard my view of things as extremely false.
As to your responses, I generally find that you just present your viewpoint as the only viable one. For example, your statement "That's... actually exactly how reincarnation works." is literally false, as in real-world religions reincarnation does not work that way. When someone dies and is reborn, they become that person, and cannot talk to the past self, as that past self is now themselves. The present-day person can remember stuff, and traits might carry over, but the old personality is not preserved as a whole. It is not something with which you could have a conversation. As far as I know, Buddhism and Hinduism also do not regard possession of a current human by their past self as possible. As a result, my point was that the Avatar reincarnation does not work like real-world reincarnation concepts, meaning that we cannot simply assume a linear succession - at least not in the way usually understood (mind you, I do not dispute a succession of Avatars per se).
I also do not claim that "any of the past avatars are hanging out in the spirit world on their own". I argued that past Avatars still have some kind of persence, despite the existence of their successor(s), that allows them to do things which would not be possible in regular reincarnation. Ergo, if we have cases like that of Kuruk where he claims to still try saving his wife, while the spirits also continue to regard him differently than other Avatars, these might hint at the past Avatars interacting with the world in ways which have not yet been fully explored.
As Zacatero says, the determining factor is the Avatar cycle is Raava who is essential to the entire thing - and how she keeps the past Avatars around (is she just a way for communication to another plain? Does she allow one to access an inner memory of the past selves? Or does she store them in herself?) remains not fully explained despite your claims otherwise.
With regards to Zacatero's comment, one point that, for example, remains unexplained is what happens when someone dies and is revived (on that note, i still remember the fan-theory about Amon being an Avatar-spin off created by Azula killed Aang ^^). In fact, Aang's near-death and other cases hints at the Spirit World actually having some role in the presence of past Avatars - contrary to your argument: Aang's - spirit? - was obviously still around after getting struck by lightning, and in fact seems to have ended up in the Spirit World (hence "Escape from the Spirit World"). Furthermore, it has been repeatedly shown that current Avatars are better able to connect to past Avatars by entering the Spirit World or being close to death: Aang connected to Roku and Yangchen through the Spirit World, in the latter case even circumventing Roku through this method after disrupting his connection. Kyoshi almost drowned herself (at a spiritually significant place) to get a connection with Kuruk. Why would a near-death experience or entering the Spirit World bring you closer to your past selves if these just exist within yourself?
I just feel like that the situation remains much more unclear than Intelligence4 thinks it is. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) December 29, 2020 (UTC)

Oh it's 100% unclear. My entire thing I wrote above is merely my theory, based on what we see and what we're told. My theory doesn't go against anything in the canon and could possibly be true, but its not confirmed in any way, shape, or form. Zacatero • (Wall) • 15  20  15 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, of course. That's my point. We don't know, and thus we should include what is presented in the sources. In my opinion, the paragraph that I had introduced into the section was just stating that there have been instances where an individual Avatar and Avatar spirit seemingly did not overlap. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) December 29, 2020 (UTC)
Zacatero wrote: "So TLDR, no I don't consider all Avatars to be the same person."
This has been explicitly stated by the narrator to be false. Have you read the Kyoshi novels? I cited in one of my earlier replies in this thread a quote an exact page number, but it says, "...a feat made easier by the fact that [Kyoshi and Yangchen are] the same person." Verbatim. and not said by a character with a limited viewpoint, or anything else ambiguous. explicit confirmation that the avatars are all different instances of the same person. (which fits well with everything you wrote before the tldr, actually.)
Dyingflame wrote: "one point that, for example, remains unexplained is what happens when someone dies and is revived (on that note, i still remember the fan-theory about Amon being an Avatar-spin off created by Azula killed Aang ^^). In fact, Aang's near-death and other cases hints at the Spirit World actually having some role in the presence of past Avatars - contrary to your argument: Aang's - spirit? - was obviously still around after getting struck by lightning, and in fact seems to have ended up in the Spirit World"
We can't include anything about fan fiction in the Avatar article.
And aang ended up in the spirit world after being revived by katara's spirit water. he did not just end up there after death. but yes, it appears it is easier to contact your past lives in the spirit world.
Dyingflame wrote: "I generally find that you just present your viewpoint as the only viable one."
I'm presenting quotes from canon content. This isn't about my viewpoint or yours or anyone else's, as this wiki is for documenting, not speculation.
Dyingflame wrote: "I also do not claim that "any of the past avatars are hanging out in the spirit world on their own"."
Perhaps not directly, but by the transitive property, if kuruk was still in the spirit world hunting for his wife, then necessarily it would be true that the past avatars are hanging out in the spirit world on their own. what rules apply to one avatar must apply to all incarnations. they're either all there, or none of them are, and it's been clearly shown in canon that the past avatars are not roaming around with persistence outside of the current avatar for others to interact with. regardless of the original intent of EftSW, which i still believe was not to show that past avatars continue on their own in the spirit world, at best, it has since been retconned by the plethora of explicit evidence against it.
Dying flame wrote: "Why would a near-death experience or entering the Spirit World bring you closer to your past selves if these just exist within yourself?"
This would be part of the raava (avatar spirit) shenanigans. We saw when raava was attacked/destroyed, korra was in great pain and also experienced physical effects, along with losing her past lives for good. Clearly, the ability to access those parts of your past comes from raava. we've seen that spirits can change a human, and how raava/vaatu are able to change them in different ways than normal spirits. perhaps these apparitions of the past avatars are simply raava effecting the avatar in some spirity way to show them their past. i completely agree, the specifics of this remain unclear. that's exactly why the Avatar article needs to only include what's been shown/documented in canon, without speculation or assumption. with that said, we know that they only exist within the past avatar/raava per my quote above about losing the past avatars being akin to deleting data off your hard drive.
Dyingflame wrote: "In my opinion, the paragraph that I had introduced into the section was just stating that there have been instances where an individual Avatar and Avatar spirit seemingly did not overlap."
Your paragraph speculated much more than that, and nowhere have I or anyone else stated that the avatar does overlap with the avatar spirit - in fact quite the opposite. the avatar and the avatar spirit have always been distinct yet bonded together. two separate souls. wan/aang/korra/etc is the avatar, and raava is the avatar spirit. in an outline for the beginnings episode MDD posted, they said that "raava is an ancient name for [the] avatar spirit]."
Dying flame wrote: "And as I said above, your "rework" essentially does remove core aspects of what the paragraph is trying to showcase, as you yourself have repeatedly stated that you regard my view of things as extremely false."
The statements in the paragraph you added are indeed very false.
I take great issue with the following wording:
Use of the phrase, "generally assumed to be different individuals". - the avatars have been stated to all be the same person, thus they are not separate individuals. raava is not bound to a new human. it's the same human soul every time. the words "generally assumed" are not appropriate for this site.
Inclusion of the phrase, "the avatars as individuals can exist as separate from the avatar spirit" -they can't NOT exist separate from the avatar spirit. raava is not korra. raava is not wan, nor aang, etc. They were ORIGINALLY physically separated. This is akin to stating that you can exist separately from me. it just doesn't make sense, and is irrelevant to a section on the past lives.
Usage of the parenthetical, "which reincarnates". -the avatar spirit doesn't reincarnate, the avatar does. what drives that remains unknown, but we do know that raava remains the same while her avatar reincarnates through the 4 nations.
Usage of the phrase, "as kuruk's spirit continued to roam the spirit world despite dying and being reincarnated" -we've been through this. the past avatars are not roaming the spirit world, which would have to be true if this phrase was true, yet neither are. this is perhaps the worst falsehood in the contested paragraph.
Usage of the fragment, "while korra existed separated from raava for a short time". -see three carriage returns above. wan was originally separated from raava for a much longer time. there's no point or relevancy to stating what's obvious.
If these inaccuracies and poor sentence structure can be addressed, then the contested paragraph could have a place in another section of the avatar article, or in any of the other places i suggested. As is, however, the longer the article contains the paragraph in its current form, the longer it languishes. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) December 30, 2020 (UTC)
To reply to your quoting of my initial statement, just because a character says something doesn't make it true, and also it doesn't mean that we treat it like the word of god. That line reads to me like its more figurative than literal. Obviously they're not the same exact being, one died and the next was reborn, etc. That's all I was saying in my line, that they're reincarnated like everybody else, but the fact that this specific line of reincarnation can communicate with their past lives is because of Raava, not because of the reincarnation. Zacatero • (Wall) • 15  20  15 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay, this is going nowhere and has completely become "tl; dr".
Let's break it down to try to come to a consensus somewhere, cause this back and forth of slamming each other with walls of text isn't going anywhere.
The paragraph that is being contested is:
As the Avatar reincarnates, it is generally assumed that the various Avatars are different individuals yet also part of a continuum. The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many." In addition, the Avatars as individuals can exist separate from the Avatar Spirit, which reincarnates, as Kuruk's spirit continued to roam the Spirit World despite dying and being reincarnated, while Korra existed separated from Raava for a short time.
Especially the sentence " it is generally assumed that the various Avatars are different individuals yet also part of a continuum" and the reference to Kuruk continuing to roam the SW after his death.
@Intelligence4: since you're the one contesting this, can you summarize briefly you objection to it and suggest an alternative? Lady Lostris / 9?cb=20210808202057 SOAP December 30, 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, yes:

I take great issue with the following wording(s?):

  1. Use of the phrase, "generally assumed to be different individuals". - the avatars have explicitly been stated to all be the same person, thus they are not separate individuals, making this phrase untrue. raava is not bound to a new human. it's the same human soul/spirit every time. the words "generally assumed" are not appropriate for this site, particularly this topic.
  2. Inclusion of the phrase, "the avatars as individuals can exist as separate from the avatar spirit" -they can't not exist separate from the avatar spirit. raava is not korra. raava is not wan, nor aang, etc. They were originally physically separated. This is akin to stating that you can exist separately from me. it just doesn't make sense, and either way is irrelevant to a section on the avatar's past lives. perhaps something about raava's independence would better be suited for her article.
  3. Placement of the parenthetical, "which reincarnates". -the "avatar spirit" doesn't reincarnate, the avatar does. what drives that process remains unproven, but we do know that raava remains the same, bonded to her avatar reincarnating through the 4 nations.
  4. Usage of the phrase, "as kuruk's spirit continued to roam the spirit world despite dying and being reincarnated" -we've been through this. the past avatars are not roaming the spirit world, which would have to be true if this phrase was true, yet neither are. this is perhaps the worst falsehood in the contested paragraph. At the absolute bare minimum, this needs to be removed.
  5. Usage of the fragment, "while korra existed separated from raava for a short time". -see three carriage returns above. wan was originally separated from raava for a much longer time. there's no point or relevancy to stating what's obvious. the tense is also wrong; it would be "separate" not "separated", as an adverb.

If these inaccuracies are removed and poor sentence structure addressed, then the contested paragraph could have a place in another section of the avatar article, or in any of the other places I suggested, such as last/second to last paragraph in the 'past lives' section. As is, however, the longer the article contains the paragraph in its current form and placement, the longer it languishes in falsehood. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 1, 2021 (UTC)

I think you're misinterpreting what that passage means by "the same person". What you think is explicitly stated, is merely your own interpretation of that passage. You're taking it literally, and not figuratively.
If we take what we know about Raava, as I said it's been made clear that she doesn't control the fact that Wan reincarnates, which means either Raava is extremely lucky to have merged with somebody who gets reborn, or (the more likely scenario) every human reincarnates. Reincarnation doesn't mean you are the exact same person as your predecessor, just your spirit is.
Technically speaking, even if we were to agree that the passage is meant to be taken literally, it wouldn't matter. Based on the Wiki's rules of continuity, the information we get from the TV shows take precedence over the information from the books, which means that the line in question would ultimately be written off as a goof since we know they are different people. Zacatero • (Wall) • 15  20  15 January 1, 2021 (UTC)
@zacetero: I think you're misinterpreting the meaning of the word person in this context. If your spirit/soul is the same, then you are the same "person", which is what the kyoshi novels said ("...read her thoughts, a feat made easier by the fact that they were the same person").
I think you're more referring to the personality of a person: their character traits, their likes and dislikes, attitudes and opinions, etc. What makes you who you are. Reincarnation wipes all that away, and you become someone else, but your past is still your past, and you - your spirit/soul/atman, your most quintessential energy - is still the same. As i went into farther above, of course the different avatars have different personalities. korra doesn't have the same personality as aang, but aang became korra. one becomes the next. your other statements tell me we agree on that, but are just using different terminology. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 1, 2021 (UTC)
Yes but as we've seen it's not so cut and dried. At the beginning, Aang could only talk to Roku during the solstice or whatever, and Korra couldn't talk to any of her past lives until much later on.
From the two Avatars we've seen extensively, Aang and Korra, they don't have the memories and experiences of their past lives just as they do their experience from last week. They can call upon those past lives in spirit but based on the evidence, I don't think saying "they were the same person" makes much sense. Zacatero • (Wall) • 15  20  15 January 1, 2021 (UTC)
Some people are just more in tune to their spiritual sides, so that makes total sense. Korra was more talented with the "physical side of bending", (korra episode 1) while aang, partly due to his air nomad upbringing, was more talented with the spiritual side of things.
Well of course they don't. Last week was part of their current lifetime, and doesn't require any spiritual talent to access, whereas their past lives was before they were reincarnated and essentially became a new "person". Regardless of what makes the most sense, the canon has directly stated the avatar's past lives to be the same person, meaning that they are not "separate individuals".
Anyway, we're veering off course again. I still thing the paragraph in question is not appropriate as it is in the place it is in. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 1, 2021 (UTC)

I stand by my viewpoint that Intelligence4's view of the reincarnation remains an interpretation; as Zacatero and I have repeatedly stated, the situation is much less clear cut and possibly allows different explainations of the Avatar cycle and the relations between the Avatars - "generally assumed to be different individuals" sums up our current information.What exactly reincarnates remains unclear - we know that spirits can reincarnate as well (see Lady Tienhai and Ol Iron), so it is possible that the Avatar Spirit itself reincarnates. Perhaps it would be best to reword this sentence, but we should not just ignore the issue. Overall, I think that the intro statement should showcase the complexity of the Avatar's relation to their past lives, and allow the readers to draw their own conclusion.

In regards to the Kuruk line, I propose this "After his death, Kuruk informed his successor Aang that he was still trying to save his wife in the Spirit World,..." to keep it more open and closer to the source. I don't think that we should remove it completely, however, as Escape is clearly considered canon as per several sources published since then taking up elements of its story. The fact that Kuruk's claim is seemingly a contradiction to other sources (although I think that it can be integrated into the cycle's logic) is the very thing that makes it noteworthy.

To note that "while korra existed separated from raava for a short time" is also important, as it showcases that the Avatar spirit and an Avatar can still be split without resulting in the destruction of the latter. While you might regard it as obvious that is your viewpoint, learly not shared by everyone (again: every time you claim that something is an "insult to the reader" or "obvious", you ignore that we currently have a discussion about the very thing, meaning that it is clearly not agreed upon). DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) January 1, 2021 (UTC)

Again, my view of reincarnation is not relevant, and nor is yours. What is relevant is the plethora of quotes I've provided that prove my point. "Generally assumed to be different individuals" makes a statement that is directly contradictory to the very explicit evidence we've seen in the series and accompanying media, and uses inappropriate language for this wiki. You're filibustering and dragging this out since Lostris rolled the page back to the previous status quo that included your edit.
To entertain your bit about the avatar spirit reincarnating: yes, raava goes along with her avatar as they reincarnate, but as we saw when she was separated from korra, she was in the exact form she was in before she bonded to korra when korra was wan. If a spirit is exactly the same, it's pretty difficult to say said spirit was reincarnated. Regardless, irrelevant to a section about the avatar's past lives.
A subsection of an article hardly needs much of its own introduction. The sentence I wrote, "Due to the nature of the reincarnation cycle, the avatar can recall memories of past lives" quickly introduces the reader to the section without any speculation or falsehood. It does not speculate on what that nature is, nor interpret it for the user. The section then proceeds to show various instances of this, again, without speculation or interpretation. Anything further is inappropriate.
On your proposed edit for the kuruk line, that would be much better than what you had the first time, but again, it has no place where it currently is. It is irrelevant to the avatar article entirely. Furthermore, regardless of whether or not it was canon, if it did mean to indicate that kuruk was acting independently, that has been very effectively retconned in the years since it's debut.
Noting that korra existed from raava for a period of time is again not relevant to the avatar article. your logic is again flawed: once the avatar spirit was destroyed, the avatar was destroyed, as the reincarnation cycle was broken. korra could still control all the elements, but she was no longer raava's avatar. yes, korra was still alive after raava was killed, if that's what you meant by not destroyed, but raava was alive much before wan was even born. they're two separate entities. i don't see why we need to include a statement that they're able to be separate. If this dubious fact were to be included, it would be better placed on raava's article. even if it were to remain on the avatar page, it would belong under another section besides the past lives section. Raava is decidedly not a past life of the avatar. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 3, 2021 (UTC)
Okay first of all, don't ever accuse DFT or myself or anybody else for wanting nothing but greatness for the quality of the wiki. Trust me, we all want what's best. What is best is what is currently up for discussion.
Can you sum up in the shortest possible way, what currently is said on the wiki and what you think it should be? I think brevity has been lost in this discussion. Zacatero • (Wall) • 15  20  15 January 3, 2021 (UTC)
I did not. I said he was filibustering. No need for you to be confrontational.
Yes, brevity has certainly been lost. That is why I broke it down into 5 simple points after Lostris replied a few replies ago. I said:
I take great issue with the following wording(s?):
  1. Use of the phrase, "generally assumed to be different individuals". - the avatars have explicitly been stated to all be the same person, thus they are not separate individuals, making this phrase untrue. raava is not bound to a new human. it's the same human soul/spirit every time. the words "generally assumed" are not appropriate for this site, particularly this topic.
  2. Inclusion of the phrase, "the avatars as individuals can exist as separate from the avatar spirit" -they can't not exist separate from the avatar spirit. raava is not korra. raava is not wan, nor aang, etc. They were originally physically separated. This is akin to stating that you can exist separately from me. it just doesn't make sense, and either way is irrelevant to a section on the avatar's past lives. perhaps something about raava's independence would better be suited for her article.
  3. Placement of the parenthetical, "which reincarnates". -the "avatar spirit" doesn't reincarnate, the avatar does. what drives that process remains unproven, but we do know that raava remains the same, bonded to her avatar reincarnating through the 4 nations.
  4. Usage of the phrase, "as kuruk's spirit continued to roam the spirit world despite dying and being reincarnated" -we've been through this. the past avatars are not roaming the spirit world, which would have to be true if this phrase was true, yet neither are. this is perhaps the worst falsehood in the contested paragraph. At the absolute bare minimum, this needs to be removed.
  5. Usage of the fragment, "while korra existed separated from raava for a short time". -see three carriage returns above. wan was originally separated from raava for a much longer time. there's no point or relevancy to stating what's obvious. the tense is also wrong; it would be "separate" not "separated", as an adverb.
If these inaccuracies are removed and poor sentence structure addressed, then the contested paragraph could have a place in another section of the avatar article, or in any of the other places I suggested, such as last/second to last paragraph in the 'past lives' section. As is, however, the longer the article contains the paragraph in its current form and placement, the longer it languishes in falsehood. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 3, 2021 (UTC)
Accusing me of filibustering isn't any nicer... I could counter that by now three people have disagreed with your point of view, yet you largely refuse to budge on your position and basically portray your opponents' positions as useless or inaccuracies. That does not make the discussion any easier. Despite your claims to the contrary, your position (namely on the nature of the Avatar spirit) is also an interpretation of the sources. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) January 4, 2021 (UTC)

I continue to persure changing the paragraph because, as I neatly laid out in 5 bullet points, it contains factual inaccuracies that are not derived from interpretation or opinion, but quotable facts from canon content. It also contains wording and sentence structure problems that need addressed, also part of the 5 points. You aren't budging either, and that's also not helping. This issue was previously resolved, with the contested paragraph still included in the same article, just in a different location with my 5 points addressed neatly.

DFT said:
...your position (namely on the nature of the Avatar spirit) is also an interpretation of the sources."

My position on the nature of the avatar spirit is largely irrelevant, as is anyone else's, since this is a section about the avatar's past lives. that is distinct from the avatar spirit. See 2, 3, and 5 above. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 5, 2021 (UTC)

I have already agreed that certain points, like Kuruk's sentence, can / should be changed, but as I have outlined several times, your arguments are based on the view that there is one universal truth in regards to the Avatar cycle which is - simply put - false. You have basically claimed that three other people who disagree with you are all wrong, and that you are the only one who is neutral and purely based on the sources. Sorry, but no, you are not.
I and Zacatero have also presented arguments against your five bullet points which you just dismissed. Anyway, this is seemingly not going anywhere.
Perhaps we should organize some kind of vote to solve the dispute? DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) January 5, 2021 (UTC)
I have yet to see any proposed wording change to the paragraph - besides the one I submitted that was previously accepted. As I've said before, I'm mostly opposed to the placement of the section rather than the content, other than the kuruk bit and the "separate individuals" bit. It just doesn't belong in the past lives section, since it's not about the avatar's past lives. I think we could largely just transplant what you wrote to raava's article, or to another section, and call it good. your point about the avatar not being destroyed once separated from the avatar spirit - aka raava - is interesting, but unrelated to the past lives section. it should go under another section, probably the avatar state section, since that's mostly what the avatar state is.
I'm not arguing that there is "one universal truth" in regards to the avatar cycle. What I'm saying is there is a large body of very explicitly stated canon content that makes several points made in your paragraph incorrect - namely the thing about kuruk, as we've been over.
I don't think any sort of vote on the talk page or anywhere else would be productive. Many users here tend to favor more/unnecessarily verbose content, regardless of the quality of the writing, and would just drag this out longer.
I'll throw you a bone here, and make a fairly significant concession: let's take the problem paragraph:
"As the Avatar reincarnates, it is generally assumed that the various Avatars are different individuals yet also part of a continuum. The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many." In addition, the Avatars as individuals can exist separate from the Avatar Spirit, which reincarnates, as Kuruk's spirit continued to roam the Spirit World despite dying and being reincarnated, while Korra existed separated from Raava for a short time."
...and merge it with the last paragraph, where it would even still be in the past lives section:
"The different incarnations of the Avatar have unique personalities, yet are also part of the same continuum. The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many." Due to this nature, if an event causes the connection with one past life to be lost, the connection to all the preceding Avatars is also jeopardized. A direct connection can temporarily be restored by participating in certain traditions such as Yangchen's Festival, which can act as a conduit for communication. After Dark Avatar Unalaq extracted Raava out of Korra - demonstrating the Avatar can exist separately from the Avatar Spirit - and attacked the Light Spirit, her connection to the past Avatars weakened with every blow, each hit doing more damage than the last and eventually severed her connection to Wan. Even after Korra managed to restore Raava's light to the world and fuse with her again, the connection to any of her past lives remained lost.
This basically leaves all your points in place - except the kuruk thing, which you've already agreed needs changed - and satisfies most of the issues in my 5 points. I think this is a pretty decent compromise for both sides to take. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 6, 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the concession. However, as I have said repeatedly, putting this info elsewhere defeats its actual purpose as helpful introduction to the section. However, to avoid further disputes, I am willing to leave out the separation entirely.
How about this one:
"As the Avatar reincarnates, it is generally assumed that the various Avatars are unique individuals yet also part of a continuum. The Fire Sage Nyahitha tried to explain this to Kyoshi by likening the Avatar to a candle's flame: "It is one flame, and it is many. It changes with every moment. No fire is ever the same fire. No Avatar is ever the same person. You and the flame change with every moment, every generation. You are one flame, and you are many."
IMO, this one helps readers to understand the relation of the different Avatars, while being faithful to the sources as well as open to different interpretations. Would this one be acceptable? DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) January 6, 2021 (UTC)

Not particularly. A subsection does not need and should not have its own introduction. Moreover, the particular phrasing still uses the unacceptable "generally assumed", and the incorrect "individuals".

"Are unique individuals" would imply that each time raava separates from the human and finds a new one. We know this to be incorrect.
"generally assumed" is improper and inappropriate for an encyclopedic resource. You never want to "assume" anything.

In the interest of wrapping this up, I'll accept your paragraph if these two changes are added.

So it would look something like, "As the avatar reincarnates, each reincarnation has their own personality but is part of the same spiritual continuum. the fire sage..." Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 10, 2021 (UTC)

That sounds as if all Avatars are one which is not true in the case of reincarnation. If people reincarnate, they become new people. It is not just their personality - their bodies as well. To make a comparison, a clone of an individual is also a unique individual, despite sharing much of the biological content. In the same way, each Avatar is an individual even if they are "the" Avatar, as they overlap in regards to their spirits, but differ in basically all else DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) January 10, 2021 (UTC)
"Are unique individuals" would imply that each time raava separates from the human and finds a new one. We know this to be incorrect.
Actually we know this to be 100% correct. Go rewatch the ending scene of Beginnings Part 2 when Wan dies. Raava literally leaves his body. Zacatero • (Wall) • 15  20  15 January 10, 2021 (UTC)
We're defining what a person is differently, I think, and that's causing a roadblock here. If you have the same spirit, you're the same "person", even if everything else is different. We know this to be the case with Avatar. Reincarnation yes, turns you into a new "person", but you're still you, still the same continuum, even if everything about you is different. If reincarnation was truly a different person, then the spirit would cease to exist, or move on to another plane (think Heaven/Hell) with no continuation. Since who we are is defined by our experiences in life, having different experiences in a new body in each lifetime essentially makes a new "person", but it's still the same spirit. Have you read a short story called "The Egg"? It's really interesting, and I think kinda relevant.
We know this to be the case in avatar because it has been explicitly stated by the narrator. "A feat made easier by the fact that they are the same person." Just look at my userpage ffs. Over and over again by different characters and even the narrator, they've hammered home the point that one Avatar becomes the next, and that Raava is bound to the same spirit since the beginnning: Wan's, who eventually became korra.
Raava didn't leave Wan behind and say, "great working with you man, let's hope the next person is as good as you were". That's what wan thought was going to happen, it seemed like, because he lamented about how there wasn't enough time. Then Raava corrected him: "Don't worry. We will remain together for all your lifetimes, and we will never give up." Then their combined spirits left to be reincarnated.
"To make a comparison, a clone of an individual is also a unique individual, despite sharing much of the biological content."
I don't think you've studied much biology. Reincarnation and cloning are very different concepts. Identical twins are clones of each other, although not created artificially. A clone of a person would indeed be a completely separate person, with zero continuity. Reincarnation is the continuation of someone's spirit in a new body. Memory/personality wipe, etc, but still the same soul. Cloning is a terrible analogy for reincarnation either way, due to one being very rooted in reality and science, and the other in metaphysics and religion.
We're risking losing brevity here again. Can you make another suggestion for the first sentence?
Another note on the nature of reincarnation in avatar being stated by an objective narrator:
The "Avatar Extras" specials had a note that read: Recap: Avatar Roku is Avatar Aang. Actually, Aang is all Avatars. Confusing, huh?"
It has been directly and explictly aknowledged that while it is confusing, what with the avatar talking to their past lives stuff, they are still indeed the same individual/soul reincarnated over and over again. There is little to no ambiguity or room for interpretation in that or the sentence in the kyoshi novel.
This is why I feel that first sentence should be left out, as it includes a subjective interpretation of content, instead of simply directly presenting the content: that due to the nature of the reincarnation cycle, the avatar can recall memories of past lives. that's it. no explanation or interpretation, just state the facts as is.
Regardless, as I said, I'll accept your edit on the condition that the inappropriate phrase "generally assumed" is not used, and we do not interpret the nature of reincarnation. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 11, 2021 (UTC)
Just as a note, I have studied psychology at an university (which included the way personalities can emerge on a biological level) and have taken several courses on religion, so I would appreciate if you do not talk about my statements in such a condescending way (i.e. "I don't think you've studied much biology"). It is simply false to say that there is "zero continuity" between clones or in the case relatives in general, but I do not want to open a new can of worms or write another wall of text to explain my comparison in more detail (just a hint: it has to do with the genes and epigenetics).
And, again, your claim that there is "little to no ambiguity" in regards to the existing sources remains your point of view. Please stop repeating it, it is not helping. However, I agree that your view of personality, the soul, and individuals seems indeed to be fundamentally different than mine or Zacatero's. For example, you seem to equate individual with soul which I would disagree with, especially in the case of the world of Avatar.
I do not think that we are heading toward a solution. The fact that we have already discussed this sooo much for so long suggests that the word "assumed" is actually the perfect way to describe the issue in this case. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) January 11, 2021 (UTC)

Don't take it personally man, this is just some dumb anonymous internet fan site. It's not condescending, just an observation. As far as clones/twins, they can and do exist simultaneously, so there can't be any spiritual continuity. They're two different, if physically related beings, with two separate distinct souls existing separately and simultaneously. Epigenetics are specifically not part of the gene sequence, but things that act in tandem with it, (like DNA methylation, which basically determines if a certain sequence will be transcribed to RNA or not) so that wouldn't have anything to do with determining if two being are clones, as clones just have the same genetic sequence, not necessarily anything else. That's why monozygotic twins still have some differences, despite the fact that they are genetically exact clones of each other. I digress...

Regardless of interpretation, two things remain true: neither of our interpretations have a valid place in an encyclopedic resource, and canon has many times directly, explicitly, and verbatim stated the avatars to be the same, despite the different interpretations that can come out of that. The very word "assumption" indicates an interpretation is being made, which is not appropriate. We can only state the facts given to us by the canon, or logical proofs derived from such, and allow the reader to come up with their own interpretation.

I have made many concessions and come up with various different options we could use on the page, but you're very stuck on a particular wording. We would certainly come to a solution faster if you helped a little instead of arguing against any rewording of the opening sentence.

Just for curiosity's sake, and maybe to hopefully find some common ground, do you dispute the fact that Aang became Korra through the process of reincarnation?

Anyway, I'm interested in ending this as soon as possible. Would you at least agree to:

"As the Avatar is a reincarnating being that has lived many lives, the various Avatars have been seen to be unique individuals with different personalities, yet also part of the same spiritual continuum. The Fire Sage..."

This gets rid of the assumption and just leaves an observation, and you get to keep your pedantic "unique individual" phrasing. I'm more than willing to call that sentence good enough and call it a day here. Intelligence4 (wallcontribs) January 14, 2021 (UTC)

@Intelligence - I have stayed out of this discussion, but I feel it is necessary to intervene here as your most recent response is becoming unnecessarily disrespectful. Everyone here is working towards coming to an agreement, so statements like
"We would certainly come to a solution faster if you helped a little instead of arguing against any rewording of the opening sentence."
"... and you get to keep your pedantic "unique individual" phrasing."
are entirely unhelpful. By my reading, you are the one in the minority here, and thus it is for you to argue why it should be changed. If the others feel the wording is fine, they are within their rights not to agree to any change, and in such a situation consensus and status quo would prevail.
To the others, I suggest that if you agree with Intelligence's suggested rewording in their last reply then it be changed to that and we consider the discussion closed. If you do not, then status quo will prevail. This discussion has gone on long enough that is is clear if no agreement can be reached now, it will not in the future. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • January 14, 2021 (UTC)
The now-changed article is acceptable. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) 18:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Statues image[]

As mentioned in the (at the time of comment) fourth to last trivia point, in The Legend of Korra—The Art of the Animated Series, Book Two: Spirits, page 36, there's an image showing the statues of the last 3 Avatar cycles and change. Should we have that image uploaded? With the Yangchen book approaching, even with the prologue, we already got a bit more information on a previous Avatar. Having that image in the trivia section could be useful for a reference point. Didn't we use to have that image already? Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:09, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree that it would be useful, and I also think that it was uploaded at some point, but it is not in the Air temple sanctuaries images category. Perhaps it got deleted? DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) 09:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
My guess is that if we did ever have it, it did feature in the trivia category at some point, but was for removed for some reason, and then deleted over not being used anywhere else. I've checked a few random past revisions of the article going back a couple of years, and at least since May 2020, I haven't seen it. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
As I could not find it in any of the Avatar image categories either, the old one is definitely gone. I uploaded a new version. DyingFlameTsui (wallcontribs) 23:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Advertisement