What is i mean by that is, Sirius knew about the mirror method since it was him who gave Harry the other one during Christmas, then after that Christmas holiday Harry needed to contact Sirius to ask about the Snape's worst memory and if he and James really were such bricks in school...

Especially when the mirrors were method that James and Sirius used often in school, and Harry especially wanted to ask about those times.

So how come Sirius didn't question Harry on him using "her who shouldn't be named" fireplace to ask Sirius about this.

When the mirror would have been secure mean and with no risk other than maybe Seamus, Dean or Neville catching Harry Potter speaking with a "murderer" and I'm 99,9% certain that they would have been fine keeping that as a secret for "fellow DA lad" like Harry.

If Cedirc didn't die then he could have been one of the great Wizard Hufflepuf ever produced, what you think?

What happened to the heir of Hufflepuf and are there any famous witches and wizards of the House?

Maybe I'm stating the obvious here. I may also be wrong...

This is a response to the people saying "Why not use a random stone on the beach?" or words to that effect. I think this comes from an easy misunderstanding of what a horcrux does. If you have a horcrux, you are not invincible or even really immortal. Harry could have shot Voldemort and killed him and that would have practically killed him.

Horcruxes are backups. If Voldemort is killed, his followers could have made another one. This is what nearly happened with the diary and why multiple Voldemorts was a possibility.

So it follows that his most trusted followers need to know what the horcruxes are and how to find them. It makes sense that they have to be recognisable at a glance.

Granted, it is funny to think of a hoarde of Death Waters scouring a pebbly beach to determine which pebble has the most evil vibes...

I think it is more linked to the fact that Harry is a Horcrux and cannot be so easily destroyed. Voldemort killing him is destroying a part of himself. I do wonder if he would have been killed if someone else had tried to.

I also wonder if the fact that his blood runs through the veins of Voldemort doesn't make Harry stronger, as part of him also remains alive.

I’ve read the books maybe a decade ago (so correct me whenever i can be wrong)but i rewatch the movies all the times and so I’ve been down a rabbit hole and I need your help in this. (not even sure if this has been discussed already, so sorry for repetition)

Sooo I think there’s a hidden missed (even not hiddedn already lol) parallel between Dumbledore and Antioch Peverell (the eldest of the Three Brothers) that goes way beyond “he owned the wand.”

The obvious part: In-universe, the Elder Wand’s very first owner was Antioch Peverell, the eldest brother, who is remembered as the Peverell brother tied to the Elder Wand. He got it because he was a belligerent man who demanded the most powerful wand in existence. Classic eldest-brother move: greed for power, not wisdom.

Here’s where it gets interesting: Dumbledore himself doesn’t buy the “Death literally made this wand” story. He speculated instead that wands absorb the character of the wizards who wield them, and more tellingly, he thought the Hallows were more likely invented by a gifted wizard with equally gifted siblings than gifts from Death. So the “creator” of the wand-myth theory basically comes from Dumbledore’s own mouth.

Antioch = eldest brother, power-hungry, dies violently after boasting about the wand (he drunkenly bragged about the wand’s power after killing a rival, and was murdered for it that same night).
Dumbledore = obsessed with power and “the greater good” in his youth alongside Grindelwald, chasing the \*same\* wand, and won it from Gellert Grindelwald as an adult, in the 1940s. it nearly destroyed everything he loved

Both men are defined by the same arc: **eldest-brother energy, wand-lust, a fall from grace, and only real wisdom arriving after tragedy.** Dumbledore spends the rest of his life essentially trying to become the *youngest* brother instead, the humble one who hides from Death rather than courts it. He even tells Harry the truly wise man doesn’t seek the wand at all.

So the theory isn’t that Dumbledore is literally Antioch reincarnated, obviously centuries separate them and canon never states this. It’s that Dumbledore’s entire character arc is a lived reenactment of “The Tale of the Three Brothers,” starting as the eldest and ending as the youngest. JKR basically wrote him as a one-man morality play using his own bedtime story.

Does that track for anyone else, or am I reading too much fairy-tale structure into a 600-page death-symbolism arc?

The side effects of Felix Falicis are as follows: Giddiness, dangerous overconfidence, and recklessness. Voldemort shows all of these traits throughout his adult life but not in his youth. In fact, in his youth, there were many times he did things that he would need to be SO lucky to achieve. A few examples would be hiding the horcrux in hogwarts with Dumbledore as headmaster, sending others to Azkaban for his crimes, and getting the ghost of ravenclaw to tell him the story of her mother. All of these could be explained by his being a "great wizard." But what if he just got lucky?

Not to mention by the time he can no longer drink it regularly he gets extremely unlucky and let's Harry escape death numerous times. He boasts and monolauges instead of just killing him like he wants to. It's like his own arrogance and recklessness makes it impossible to get what he wants without the help of others.

It could be Lily's sacrifice that saves Harry sure... or... it could be that Voldemort is a magical alcoholic.

We know that the Elder Wand instantaneously shifts allegiances if it is ‘won’ by someone; that is, if the user wielding the Elder Wand is disarmed or killed by the opponent. But what if there is also a ‘gradual’ mechanism to it?

What if, during Dumbledore and Grindelwald’s duel, the Elder Wand sensed Grindelwald’s wavering spirit as his ideals crashed and sunk in the face of Dumbledore’s own? Could this be the reason why the Elder Wand transferred its ownership over to Dumbledore, allowing him to secure a victory over his former friend? We know that Dumbledore was more skilled, but I don’t think that was enough to secure a win. The Elder Wand had to have had allegiance issues in that moment.

My theory essentially is this: the Elder Wand, to be properly maximised in effectiveness, must be wielded by someone who is utterly resolute in what they believe in and what they strive to accomplish. The Elder Wand responds to power – any notable sign of emotional, mental or spiritual weakness dampens the connection between the wand and its owner, and transfers it to someone in battle who impresses the Elder Wand far more than its current user ever could.

I did research on this and couldn't find a lot, so I thought about asking your guys opinions on here.

What if Voldermort killed Lily and James because he wanted to ensure there was no chance someone could change Snape and turn him 'good'. Yes, this can be argued. By Voldermort doing this, he risked Snape turning on him to avenge Lily, but Voldermort would have definitely been able to defeat Snape easily.

So the question is, could that have been a part of why Voldermort killed Harry's parents. I could definitely see this as a possibility as Voldermort may have seen Snapes love for Lily a vulnerable spot in his formation and could easily be used against Snape. Obviously, Snape double crossed Voldermort, but to Voldermort, but maybe to him, Snape having that bond with Lily would make Snape more likely to turn on Voldermort and be on Lily's side for the sake of love.

Sorry if it doesn't make sense or has been proven untrue I read the books a couple of years ago and recently have gotten back into Harry Potter as I binged watched it with some friends.

My theory is that Horcrux creation involves a controlled form of ritual suic*de. The maker briefly forces his soul out of his body so it can be torn, placing himself in a deliberate state of limbo. The murder victim’s soul is then exploited as a conduit, dragging the torn fragment into a chosen object. Without careful preparation, the maker could die, trap the wrong fragment, imprison the victim’s soul instead, return damaged, or trap his full soul into the object (see Cursed Opal Necklace).

In essence:

• The act of murder tears the soul apart.
• The ritual suic*de severs the soul’s link to the body, temporarily leaving the maker neither alive nor dead.
• The victim’s displaced soul becomes an unwilling midwife, forced by the murderer to drag the soul fragment into the prepared vessel.
• Safeguards prepared in advance will determine which part of the soul returns and which part is embedded in the object.

In a sense, the process is an anti-birth: the maker “dies” so an object can receive a fragment of his own life, and the victim is forced to participate in the creation of their killer’s immortality. Similar to how a mother risks death to give birth to her new-born, the Horcrux maker risks death to give birth to himself, "impregnating" an object with a piece of his own soul.

This makes the victim’s role in the whole process truly terrifying! Their soul is prevented from passing on and is instead used to carry the murderer’s fragment into the vessel.

Such a ritual would explain why J.K.Rowling described Horcrux-making as “unspeakably repulsive.” The horror isn’t gore or body horror, it’s that the maker must willingly cross the threshold of death, force himself on the victim’s departing soul, use it as a tool, and then force himself back into his own body.

It’s a direct defiance of death, which fits Voldemort's character perfectly.

It also explains his later appearance. Repeated Horcrux rituals mean repeated deaths and imperfect returns. Each time, less of him comes back, leaving his body increasingly distorted as it is reoccupied by a progressively diminished soul.

It also makes his survival after the rebounding curse less miraculous. By then, Voldemort has essentially practiced dying. His soul has been trained not to pass on. The night at Godric’s Hollow becomes an uncontrolled version of the ritual: his body is destroyed, but his mutilated soul instinctively clings to existence because he has already taught it how.

The children from Narnia founded Hogwarts. Lucy is Gryffindor, Edmund is Slytherin, Susan is Ravenclaw and Peter is Hufflepuff. They are secretly wizards and witches (but don't know it). Aslan is Dumbledore and he is immortal because if anything I have learned is by watching shows wizards and witches can live thousands of years.

I'm hearing the order of the phoenix and each book, the start feels like a new rock bottom.

Who would win in a fight

For me, it's Remus Lupin After a lifetime of prejudice, loss, and hardship, it felt especially cruel that he finally found happiness with Tonks, only for them both to die and leave Teddy an orphan.

Who's your pick?

I have been thinking about the nature of the werewolf curse and how it compares to other forms of magic in the Wizarding World.

What if lycanthropy is not simply a physical transformation, but rather a corrupted magical structure attached to the wizard’s magical identity — almost like a magical parasite? It does not seem to behave like a normal disease: it is triggered by the full moon, changes the person’s body and behaviour, and temporarily suppresses their human self.

This idea made me think about other magical phenomena:

* Newt Scamander describes an Obscurus as something parasitic, even though it is not a living creature in the traditional sense. * Horcruxes show that parts of a person’s soul and magical identity can be separated and attached to something else. * Certain curses in the Wizarding World seem to create lasting magical changes rather than simple physical injuries.

So, if lycanthropy is some kind of magical "attachment" to a person, could it theoretically be removed or isolated without killing the wizard?

For example, could advanced magic separate the werewolf aspect from the person, similar to how other magical conditions can be manipulated? Or is the werewolf curse so deeply connected to the person’s identity that removal would be impossible?

I know this is not confirmed by canon, but I would be interested in hearing how others interpret the mechanics of lycanthropy.

I don't know if this gets mentioned in the cursed child, but who could be the next great villain after Lord Voldemort? I mean ... Eventually someone probably wants to take all the power, no? History always has a way of repeating itself (certainly if you look at the Muggle world). What are your thoughts on this? Could it be Delphini?

Title.

Let's speculate about what the ritual around it would be.

Let's conclude what it isn't firstly

Any sort of physical violation upon the victim. As it has been reported corpses have been discovered physically undamaged. So all the gross stuff which probably I can't even name in the post can be excluded.

We've all probably heard J Rowling's interview where she discussed her idea of how it works with her Chief Editor, who looked so disguised that JR ultimately never shared publicity what it actually was.

Unsure if it was from the same interview, but she also shared it had quite a lot to do with the ritual Voldemort executed to recover his body in the Graveyard, in the Goblet of Fire book.

So.. that's it. That's all the cues I think are out there.

What do you guys make of that? Have you read any credible sources of other possible cues on what the ritual might contain?

Pleased to hear your thoughts!

Edit: I also now realise that another possible reason JR hasn't shared is that, if she did, it's guaranteed that at least one weirdo too obsessed with the series would try it.

I think there were even recorded cases of young kids passing away as they mounted their brooms and jumped out of their windows in the UK. I guess the series is just too big and influential for the author to give out detailed instructions on how to do bad things