Talk:Mythology of Final Fantasy X

Untitled

Please read before editing:

• This article name is "Mythology of Final Fantasy X". This is not a typo, nor is it incorrect.
• Please read through these notes on capitalization before editing the current capitalization of nouns within the article.
• Any discussion on these matters should occur below.
• Be sure to read through the topics below, and if you want to ask a team of dedicated Final Fantasy editors for input, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy.
• Be sure to date any and all comments that you make in discussions, and please sign your comments using ~~~~.

NOTICE: Since this article was moved to Spira (Final Fantasy X) and the old spira article was moved to List of locations in Spira, the GA awards have been shifted appropriately.

Anima article

By the way, in case anyone's missed it, it's been suggested that we merge the Anima page in here instead of making a "FFX exclusive summons" section on the main FFX page. I think it would be better to merge it here because we already mention the Jungian reference, and the storyline related info (Seymour's mother and Final Aeon, located in Baaj Temple), and it doesn't make sense to put it over on the summon magic page since Anima's only made one appearance. Ryu Kaze 09:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Hm. I agree that the information belongs here more than anywhere else (and I don't believe that Anima deserves her own article), but I'm concerned that it would need to be trimmed substantially, otherwise it would... I dunno, overpower maybe?... the rest of the article, since it seems like it's more detailed than everything else here. Where were you thinking of placing the info, and were you planning to omit and/or trim any of the detail present in the current article, Ryu? – Seancdaug 09:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, I was actually thinking of just making it a redirect to this page, since we obviously don't care about Anima's Overdrive and acquirement methods here. And since we don't go into those details with other summons anywhere else, it's no big loss. As you said, Anima doesn't warrant her own article, and the story relevant info about her is here anyway. The most I can really see us needing to add is an image, but we don't even do that for Bahamut (Shiva's got a picture up, but that's for just for "Here's an example of an aeon" purposes). Ryu Kaze 10:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah. That sounds reasonable. Although, might I suggest that we replace the Shiva image with Anima? Anima has more of a novelty factor, if nothing else, since Shiva shows up pretty much everywhere in the series. – Seancdaug 13:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Great idea but... Anima is so darn ugly! We could use her fayth instead since we talk about her being Seymour's mother.. Renmiri 15:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Anima's fayth

I think we could use both her fayth's image and her aeon form. The aeon form because -- as Sean said -- the novelty factor is greatest there, and the fayth form because it supplies contrast... and because she was quite a looker. I'll make the edit!

<_< Okay, fine. Just the aeon if it must be so. *saves picture of her fayth form, though* What? >_> Ryu Kaze 18:10, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, Ren, you take great screenshots. Thanks for all that good work you do with them. And if there's no objections, I'll go ahead with merging Anima in. Ryu Kaze 18:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Why not both pictures ? We took the map off, our picture quota would still be well bellow most pages Renmiri 18:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I'll put both of them in then after all. If no one likes it, we can always change it. I personally think it's a good idea. Because of the contrast and not just the other reason. Ryu Kaze 18:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I got the images in after struggling with them for a while. I don't think they look right, though. I'm going to tinker in the sandbox and see if I can figure out how they work. Ryu Kaze 19:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I give up with the images. I was trying to stack them, but the only way I could do that was to do a force break, and that of course is to be avoided when possible, and it also left an ugly white space. I'm going to leave it as it is for now until one of you who knows more about it can take a look. It doesn't look that bad at the moment, but it doesn't look right. Ryu Kaze 19:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, Anima's merged, and I've copied its original form over to the FF Wiki, as is standard practice. Now if only I knew how to stack those images properly. *sighs* Ryu Kaze 19:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

The text says that Anima became Seymour's Final Aeon. Is that really technically correct? IMO, "Final Aeon" should only refer specifically to an aeon that is intended to fight and defeat Sin. If nobody disagrees, I am going to change it.PiccoloNamek 19:53, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

It's correct, PN. Seymour's mother had a terminal illness and was dying. Also, she and her son had been banished to Baaj by Jyscal in the first place because of the uproar it caused in the Guado nation that he had taken a regular human for a wife. That was his way of keeping peace.

Because of who her husband was, and the Guado's own records of the past, she knew of the Final Summoning and that Yunalesca could turn her into a fayth. Since she felt that the people (Guado and regular humans both) would never accept her son, and since she was dying anyway, rather than leave him to face the world alone, she decided that the best thing she could do for him was give him the power to beat Sin, even if it would cost him his life. He'd be remembered and revered for doing that, but he didn't want her to do it.

When he saw Yunalesca turn her into a fayth and saw what she became, he fled from Zanarkand in horror (he was only 10 years old at the time), and he didn't return to Zanarkand to claim Anima as his aeon until 3 years before the game started. He then moved her fayth to Baaj and destroyed the entrance to the temple.

Techincally, Seymour had the power to beat Sin at any time, but he wanted to become Sin instead of letting his mother become Sin. Ryu Kaze 20:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Was that in the Ultimania guide ? Add a reference if it was, this quote is cool! Renmiri 23:49, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it actually was in the Ultimania Omega. It's on the timeline page. I'll check the exact page number in a little while and put it up. Ryu Kaze 01:18, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

It's page 81. By the way, thanks for fixing the images. I was hopelessly lost. Ryu Kaze 02:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

• Six months ago, I would be more than happy to help with this discussion. Unfortunately, I've forgotten most of the backstory, lol...Deckiller 20:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

That pyreflies and life section

Ummm... okay, I'm going to take that back out. It's not only redundant concerning the formation of fiends, but some of the info is wrong and some of the other info is unfounded speculation. Ryu Kaze 18:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Agree, we want to keep this as succinct as possible. Deckiller 18:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't even recall having a "Pireflies and life" section. Good thing it is gone! Renmiri 18:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

BTW Ryu, weren't you going to do away with the cultural references and move it to magic ? Renmiri 18:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I took care of that. Are they still showing up on your browser? Ryu Kaze 18:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Not anymore! Renmiri 17:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge Unsent of Final Fantasy X

It's not like we don't already have enough FFX-related articles -- CHANLORD ^[T]/_[C] 01:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

There isn't anything in the article that isn't mentioned here, so I'm just going to redirect it. Also, this page was becoming extremely huge, so I archived most of it. (Yes, Including the edit history.) If I accidentally got rid of any important discussion, it shouldn't be a problem to just move it back.PiccoloNamek 01:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

My mistake, I left that behind here but I had already moved all the content to Wikibooks. Sorry! Renmiri 02:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

That makes like 10 pages that have been merged into this one, doesn't it? We really cleaned up when we hit upon this page. Best Wiki idea yet.

By the way, Chanlord, archiving most of the discussion was a good idea, but I'm going to throw up a link at the top to the Notes on Capitalization for editor reference. Ryu Kaze 14:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Added a cool little archive box at the top. Ryu Kaze 18:29, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Article move

Sataneal has unilaterally decided that "Mythology of Final Fantasy X" was inappropriate and moved the article to "Mythos of Final Fantasy X", without starting a discussion about it first. The difference between "Mythology" and "Mythos" is subtle. Webster has this to say about "Mythology"

2 : a body of myths : as a : the myths dealing with the gods, demigods, and legendary heroes of a particular people b : MYTHOS 2 <cold war mythology>.

And this to say about "Mythos"

2 : a pattern of beliefs expressing often symbolically the characteristic or prevalent attitudes in a group or culture.

What do you think? Is there that much of a difference between the two gramatically to warrant the change? The second one sounds more correct to me, but the first isn't necessarily incorrect, and in some cases "Mythology" and "Mythos" can have the same meaning, depending on the context.PiccoloNamek 16:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to think that "mythology" is more appropriate here, since what the article deals with really is "a body of myths." Neither really seems perfect to me, however, but I can't come up with a better alternative. As a note to Satanael, should he read this: there were a great number of redirects to this article, all of which now need to be repaired. Please, in future, if you're not going to do that yourself, leave a note on the talk page or something. – Seancdaug 16:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I left a (polite) note on his userpage. I also noticed that he has a history of fighting with other users. I wouldn't go fixing redirects just yet. If the others (Renmiri, Ryu, et al) agree to move it back, we should just do it, then we won't have to fix any redirects.PiccoloNamek 16:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Er... heh. Too late <grin>. If we do move it back, I promise I'll take the responsibility of fixing the redirects once more. – Seancdaug 17:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

He does have a point though: Here at wikipedia the term Category:Mythology refers to the study of myths, not to the body of myths itself, (I think, there's so much debate in the mythology portal that it is hard to tell for sure) and all the other similar modern mythological works like Lord of the Rings are considerd Artificial mythology and are in the category of Category:Fictional universes. The key reason FFX is NOT a mythology per Wikipedia lingo is because game fans do not believe FFX is real, hence it is not a mythology although other than not having true believers it's almost the same. Perhaps we should move, not to Mythos of but to The Fictional Universe of... I don't like the idead of moving but if we do, now would be the time... Renmiri 17:04, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I say we move it back to "Mythology of...". And not just because I'm of the opinion that anyone who unilaterally decides something automatically voids their opinion. It makes as much sense to say "mythology," and considering that the information we're detailing here is that of Spira's mythology, it makes more sense. I think we should revert this as soon as possible. Ryu Kaze 17:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

He doesn't seem all that passionate about the subject -- like Kappa was with that whole Al Bhed language thing -- and just called it a spur of the moment decision, and he did apologize (which is something Kappa didn't do), so there seems little cause for hard feelings this time. Anyway, since he's not exactly shown up to explain his reasons any further, really, and none of us really think that it's a good idea to change the name to "Mythos of...", I think even more so it should go back to what it was before. Ryu Kaze 17:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, brief aside, Sean, what was that in the edit history about materia in regard to? I don't see where the change was made. Ryu Kaze 17:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

The phrase "spiritual energy" in the introductory paragraph was a piped link to materia. Here's the diff. – Seancdaug 18:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't even notice that until now. Since spirit energy and its various allocations (materia/spheres, magic spells, etc.) aren't confined to a single FF, I agree with removing that link. Ryu Kaze 19:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Renmiri, about what you said earlier concerning mythology, while that does seem to be the implication given on the category:mythology page, the main mythology page it links to says this:

The word mythology (from the Greek μυθολογία mythología, from μυθολογειν mythologein to relate myths, from μυθος mythos, meaning a narrative, and λογος logos, meaning speech or argument) literally means the (oral) retelling of myths – stories that a particular culture believes to be true and that use supernatural events or characters to explain the nature of the universe and humanity. In modern usage, "mythology" is either the body of myths from a particular culture or religion (as in Greek mythology, Egyptian mythology or Norse mythology) or the branch of knowledge dealing with the collection, study and interpretation of myths.

It seems that "mythology" can apply to both the bodies of myths and their study. "Mythos" itself refers to "a collection of myths, which may have similar elemental backgrounds or may be of an interrelated nature" (like the mythos of the Buffyverse, for instance), and "mythology" can refer to the "body of myths within a particular religion or culture."

Either word would suffice, but we don't have to make the switch. If we're going to, though, as Renmiri has said, now would be the time. Getting down to the bare bones of it all, I concede that "Mythology of Spira" or "Mythos of Final Fantasy X" would probably make the most sense. It's going to be a lot of redirecting, though, if we go about changing it again. I guess I pretty much am willing to settle for "Mythos" as it does make more sense linguistically. Ryu Kaze 23:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. It'll also mean changing the FFX navigation box again. Ryu Kaze 23:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

• My main concern is that both Mythos and Mythology apply to what people believe it's real, and as far as I know <grin> no one thinks Aeons and pyreflies are real. But that's the Wikipedia Mytology portal lingo, other places do no do this distinction between fictional mythology and "real" mythology. To be honest I like it the way it was, but I fear it will eventually land us in hot water with the mythology guys. What do the old-timers at wiki say (Piccolo, Cuahl, Sean ?) Renmiri 04:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I liked the old one more, but I'm not going to sweat something that is ultimately a relatively minor difference. The content is still there, and that is what matters.PiccoloNamek 04:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I also preferred the old title. ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 04:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I preferred the old title too (and still do), but I can see this coming up again, as linguistics more quickly recognizes "mythology of..." as referring to a place, and "mythos of" as referring to a collection of myths that may be about a place or about the interrelated myths within a created work. Either title is technically fine, but some people get real anal about this. Personally, I'd like to keep the old name, and as I said before, we don't have to change it. I don't think Chris Carter would change the name of his X-Files Mythology DVD sets for the anal folks. Ryu Kaze 09:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. To summarize: I'm willing to accept "Mythos of..." if I have to, but I'd like to keep "Mythology of...." And I've actually thought of a way to settle this before it becomes a problem in the future: Remember the message that shows up when you edit Aerith's page?:

Please note:

This article name is "Aerith Gainsborough". This is not a typo, nor is it incorrect.

If you wish to discuss an Aerith -> Aeris revision, see the talk page. For now all such revisions will be reverted back to Aerith.

Why not put one of those in this page, and here on the talk page, we can put another such notice up there with the notes on capitalization link (again, like on the Aerith page)? I think this would be the best solution. Ryu Kaze 09:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

• Whatever you guys decide is fine by me. I vote for Mythology Renmiri 15:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

And, so, some 24 hours later, that's at least 2 votes for "Mythology" and 0 for "Mythos." I see Satanael still hasn't shown up. Ryu Kaze 04:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

• Bah! Moved back. No one liked Mythos. We will deal with any objections when / if they come Renmiri 03:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Now poor Sean has to fix all of those redirects again. Maybe we should help him? :)PiccoloNamek 03:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I's help gladly but I don't know which pages he changed... Renmiri 03:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

How about try to fix all the redirects listed on Special:Whatlinkshere/Mythos of Final Fantasy X? ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 04:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Well crap. That's a lot of stuff. I guess we ought to give him a hand.

Renmiri: I love you. Thanks for moving it back. I've been restraining myself every time I came near a computer today. By the way, if there's no objections, I'm going to add that note on "This is not a typo nor is it incorrect" thing in. Ryu Kaze 04:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I just fixed all the redirects. Heh heh heh… ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 04:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

You rock. I have nothing more to add on that.

But I do have to add that I've added some "please read before editing" notes to the article and this talk page. Ryu Kaze 04:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

• I noticed this discussion already ended and that consensus have already being obtained, so I don't plan to start another debate of to unilateraly change the final desition of the group. But I wanted to state that I believe both titles are somewhat inapropiate. I belive a more a propiate title will be something like: History of FFX or customs of FFX. Something like that. Also maybe Final Fantasy X-2 should be added to the title also. what do you guys think?Nnfolz 15:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Technically, "mythology" is appropriate by definition. It's, indeed, used either as "mythology" or "mythos" in reference to the collected spiritual, historical, and physical properties (magical and non-magical) in the worlds of all created works (Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The X-Files and The Lord of the Rings being examples). That said, you may have a point about the X-2 thing.

I'm honestly not so sure that it merits placement in the title, though, as any discussion of the world properties and history of X-2 is automatically a discussion of the world properties and history of X, of which X-2 is regarded as a side-story rather than the "next" Final Fantasy in the numbered series (the same way the individual titles in the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII are regarded as side-stories to Final Fantasy VII). I think "Mythology of Final Fantasy X" probably covers both X and X-2 the same way a title page like "List of Final Fantasy VII terms" covers FFVII and its side-stories. Ryu Kaze 16:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagrea, the article is not complete without mentioning Final Fantasy X-2. FFX-2 is a hated game, I can buy it, but now it looks like X-2 is not important enough. My own thought is to rename it Final Fantasy 2X, cause it is two Final Fantasy X-games out where. I will change it in two days if not hidered. 22,32 Swedish time, 15/3

Temple?

The anonymous user who keeps changing "church" to temple seems to be pretty inexperienced, because he added this to the article:

Many who play Final Fantasy X believe that the religious centers are churches when in fact the game ALWAYS says temples. This is because Yevon is a made up religion that is not christain. Yevon is the bad guy in the game while Jesus is the savior of mankind. It is hard to compare the two religions. HOWEVER square has stated that the Yevon religion is a mix between SHINTO, BUDDHISM, and CATHOLCISM. The game designers stated over and over again that mythology in Final Fantasy X is based of Asian influences. Reference can be seen here. http://www.gunblade.nu/yuna/shrine/related.html

For those who wish to argue wheather the Yevon religion is based on Temples or Churches they can see the debate here http://www.squareinsider.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11774

Of course, the individual centers of worship are called temples. Interestingly, I can't find any mention of "church" in the game's script. Another point is that nobody except the maesters knew who Yevon really was.PiccoloNamek 19:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw it...The (chip)munks of Yevon ? Was that Chip & Dale ? <grin> All kidding apart, the guys seems to be coming from a perceived criticism of his beliefs. Which he may be right on the money... Yevon DOES reassemble Yahweh the ancient biblical name given to God. What to do ? And if we cave in, what's next, will we be forced to rename the Aeon Shiva ? Renmiri 21:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

For my part, the highly organized and hierarchical structure of the religion makes me feel as though "church" applies well in reference to it, but I believe "the temples of Yevon," "the temples" etc. is what's used in the script. It's an odd choice of reference for an organized religious body, but I'm okay with changing it to that since it was used in the game. I reverted those first few edits since "church" is what was there from even before this page was made, and I wasn't okay with that title being changed without a discussion. Ryu Kaze 05:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Though I oppose the inclusion of that "bonus" info for obvious reasons. Ryu Kaze 05:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, as I said, "Church" may rub some of the real churchgoers here the wrong way. Temples seems acceptable to me and it may keep those easily offended religious fundies out of our hair Renmiri 14:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • On second thought, how about we use Ryu's definition ? hierarchical structure of Spira's religion seems the proper name and that will skirt the debates of Churches vs Temples Renmiri 14:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

There are still those who would argue that what we see in Spira with Yevon wasn't a religion, but was [insert any number of titles of reference here]. Since we went to great legnths to ensure that the capitalization remained consistent with the game, perhaps we should just go with "the temples." That's as specific as the script or the Ultimania Omega ever got. Ryu Kaze 16:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

So, I guess I move for us to change it to "Temples." PN? Ren? Ryu Kaze 00:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Temples is fine by me Renmiri 08:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm probably going to go ahead and change this tonight or tomorrow. It's not a big deal, really, and for such a low-key change, I think there's been enough time for input. Still, I'll give it a while longer. Ryu Kaze 05:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The individual centers of worship should be called temples. The religion as a whole should simply be called "Yevon" as it is in the game.PiccoloNamek 05:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, we can do that, but that would obviously be confusing if it was the only word we used. Also, like I said earlier, they refer to the religious body itself as "the temples of Yevon"/"the Yevon Temple" in both the the Ultimania Omega and the game. Here's some examples:

Auron

"The fayth are the ones that give power to the summoners." "Not the temples or the teachings." "If the temples try to stop us..."

"then we will defy Yevon if we must."

Shelinda

"Yes, the chaos in the temples is worse than I'd imagined." "It's horrible!" "And all the priests do is blame each other."

"I worry what will become of Yevon."

Maechen

"And who'd admit Yevon was an enemy of Bevelle?"

"You can bet the temples had a hand in covering that one up!"

"ベベルにエボン寺院成立。エボンやユウ ナレスカをまつり機械禁止を説くなど、世の風潮を採り入れた教えを掲げて民心をつかみ、精神面でスピラの覇権を掌握。"

(That Japanese part from the UOG says "The Yevon Temple is formed in Bevelle. They put forth the doctrine -- which is adopted throughout the world -- of paying homage to Yevon and Yunalseca while banning machina, and -- having gained public sentiment -- they take psychological control of Spira.")

I definitely think we should go with "the temples." Ryu Kaze 14:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

In most of those quotes, "the temples" refer to actual physical places, and "Yevon" refers to the religious body as a whole. (Not the person.) But whatever.PiccoloNamek 18:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

You may be right on some of those cases (the first time Auron said "the temples" and when Shelinda said it), but the others were clearly a reference to the religious order, and the way the UOG's written treats "Yevon temple(s)" and "the temple(s)" as a proper noun. When it brings up the religious order, it identifies it as either "the Yevon temple(s)" or just "the temple(s)." Like here:

"約７００年前 エボンの僧官オメガ、寺院に反逆した罪で処刑される"

("Approximately 700 years ago

The Yevon priest Omega is executed by the temples for the crime of treason.")

Obviously that's not a reference to the physical locations, and is, instead, a reference to the religious order. While "Yevon" is the order's name, the assumption is probably that any religious order in power could be referred to as "the temples." In this case, "the temples of Yevon." It's kind of like the assumption that gave us "the Church of Yevon" in the first place. Being westerners, and familiar with Catholicism's history, it's natural to call a religious order like this "the church."

The game script and the UOG do definitely use "the temples" -- and the first kanji of both "the temple(s)" and "priest" are the same ones one would use when referring to a Buddhist temple or priest -- when speaking of this religious order. I think it's only appropriate that we do the same, especially after going to painful lengths to ensure we used the right capitalization. Ryu Kaze 19:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who has an opinion on this, please put it forth. While we can be sure "the temples of Yevon" is correct, if anybody has any conflicting feelings about recognizing it, I do think we should go over them. Ryu Kaze 04:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Hm... I think this is the sixth day or so that this has been a matter of discussion, so I'm going to go ahead and change it to "temples" in about 5 or 6 hours unless someone presents some conflicting take on it. Ryu Kaze 21:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

If you change it, I'll throw a big fit! ;-). But seriously, It seems okay to me, I suppose. I'm not going to stress over it.

Okay, good to hear. "Church" was always fine to me too. It never even occurred to me to change it until this anonymous editor changed it. But now that it has come up, it just seems like the best thing to do to continue remaining consistent with the official materials where possible. Since there's not really any disagreement, I'm going to go ahead and do it. Thanks for bringing it up on the talk page, by the way. Ryu Kaze 02:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I added a link to theocrary, seeing as the church of Yevon ran the whole world i figured that was appropriate.

Symbolism

It seems to me that this game is symbolic of Christianity. Just as Sin keeps breaking loose in this game, we continue to sin our entire lives. Every time Sin breaks loose, the people of Spira have to make a sacrifice, just like the Jews had to sacrifice an animal when they sinned. To lock Sin away forever, someone had to beat the system, just like when Jesus died and rose again. I'm sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I'm too lazy to read all of the above comments in detail.--70.114.235.205 22:13, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Remember, Sin's existance had nothing to do with actual sins, so symbolism begins falling short when the religion begins showing itself as built on lies. Ryu Kaze 14:09, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's when the religion starts to show itself to be fictitious that the Christian (and religious in general) symbolism really becomes fleshed out. :) Or at least, begins to demonstrate an actual, substantial thesis, which is one of the biggest distinctions between FFX and the past Final Fantasy games: the whole series makes heavy use of mythological references and even symbolism, but few have dared to put all those references and symbolism to use by allegorically endorsing or criticizing anything more specific than "evil stuff". FFX was a step forward (albeit perhaps a small one) in that respect. -Silence 15:09, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Good insight Silence. I love this kind of debate about the game. I wish there was aplace to debate this stuff here at wiki. For now, I guess this talk page is "it" Renmiri 19:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I plan to have an ongoing discussion of FF mythology and Canon (not restricted only to X) on a new forum I launch on the 26th. Look at my User page for details, if you are interested Renmiri 19:52, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Important fact about High Summoners

How you ever wondered how many High Summoners that have actually existed in Spira? It is five, or maybe six, HS. The source is taken directly from Final Fantasy X-2 when you visit Zanarkand at one point in the game.

The priests taught me all about the high summoners. There were... um, five that came here!

It makes sense. Remember at the end of the game in Luca, some of the people don't think they will se a calm during the rest of their life. Based on that, it must take over 100 years before a calm comes.

The only problem is that I don't know if Yunie is counted in this five HS...

There have been six:

• Yunalesca
• Gandof
• Ohalland
• Yocun
• Braska
• Yuna

And, yes, the people in X-2 call Yuna a high summoner. Ryu Kaze 14:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

• Hehehe... Jinx!!! How long was each Calm ?. I guess all FFX Canon filled minds wonder about that once in a while.. Renmiri 19:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

• Ryu Kaze, I changed back my reference, and kept yours. Two references are better than one. One other reason is that how good the source of a book is, it is always easier to read it as a direct quote from the game. But your source is quite good (I think), thats why I kept it. Sjalvastefan

Whatthe guys it was explictly stated each calm lasted ten years, it's said several times by Auron, Yuna, Seymour, and the al bhed. it's cannon for it to be a decade long. geeze

No, it's really not. It's explicitly stated only that it's been ten years since the last Calm. That's not how long they last. Simple logic could tell us this given when Lulu went on her pilgrimages and when Auron went to Dream Zanarkand, even if the Ultimanias for Final Fantasy X didn't tell us that Sin had returned within a year. Ryu Kaze 11:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Tidus' Mom

I just thought of something about Tidus' Mom. She was a dream, just like Tidus and Jecht, so how could she be at the Farplane? Oh, and sorry for my english, I'm not used to write this language.

What I can think of is what Rikku says, that the Farplane is only based on ones memories. Tidus remembers his Mom, so thats mayby why she shows up there. And Jecht was still alive, so thats why he doesn't show up.

But it still raises a question, how could she be at the Farplane in the first place, when she is only a dream? Then Yuna tells that the Mom mayby accepted death, they don't know that Tidus is a dream, they think he was from 1000 years before.

By the way, the one thing I wrote about Rikku. Can someone write that down in the article, that should be in the part of the Farplane. Sjalvastefan

Aye, we can add it there but I belive it is also on th Pyreflies section

Being a dream doesn't mean the people of Dream Zanarkand aren't real. Their lives are just maintained through summoning. By the way, the Al Bhed's theory on the Farplane wasn't entirely correct. Only the dead whose souls have gone to the Farplane will appear there. Ryu Kaze 13:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Hey, if you guys don't mind, I copied some of this discussion to debate it with the FFX canon fanatics at my Forum. Want to join in the debate ? No registration is needed to post on the thread, you can post as anonymous :-) Link here Renmiri 22:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Tidus was brought to the real world where he lived as flesh and blood and had a soul. Tidus was a dream but he was an entity first dream zanarkand was a world for the fayth to unknowingy continue, so Tidus's mom were real people just not in our sense. it's confusing to explain but realitivly easy for a geek who reads philosophy (ME) to understand.

Mythology of Final Fantasy X and the Spira article

==>centralised the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy#Mythology of Final Fantasy X and the Spira article -- CHANLORD ^[T]/_[C] 04:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

High Summoners

I want to inklude the names om the six High Summoners in this article (this is a important fact in the history of Spira), and the time they lived in, but I can't find a good spot to do it in. Can someone put them in the article in a good place? Sjalvastefan

Perhaps just a picture ? I have this one at Wikicities and I can upload it here

http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/images/2/27/TIMELINE.jpg Renmiri 19:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Article move

I'm going to go ahead with carrying out the previously discussed move to Spira (Final Fantasy X), and the move of that page's info to a "List of locations in Spira" page. There's going to be a lot of links to fix (see them here and here), so if anyone feels generous, please help me out with that. Ryu Kaze 12:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I've finished repairing all the links. We're good to go from here on out. Ryu Kaze 15:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)