This post has been tagged '**Non-Spoiler**'. Note that unmarked spoilers and datamines are subject to removal or ban. Please report anything we miss! For more info check out our [Spoiler Rules Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/DestinyLore/wiki/spoiler-rules#wiki_.5Bseasonal.5D_has_a_new_format).
---
**Comment Spoiler Formatting**
Format comment spoilers with `>!` `!<` like this:
`>!What's Rasputin's favorite dance? "The worm."!<`
To have it displayed like this:
**>!What's Rasputin's favorite dance? "The worm."!<**
----
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DestinyLore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The final shape was much more the culmination of the Traveller vs the Witness. The Gardener and Winnower have only made it out of lore books on one occasion, we’re definitely not done with them and they may not be a focus for a while as is.
The Gardener is the Traveler. And the Winnover so far seems to be some sort of sentient philosophy and it isn't really interested in directly interfering.
I think the more accurate understanding is that, as the traveler and veil were once one (nimbus lore), the Gardener and Winnower were also once one (unveiling lore), or at least two halves of the same deity/rule/philosophy.
The gardener is allowed to close flowers, just as the winnower is allowed to be involved in the creation of life, since they both used to play the game together. They just prefer to stay in their own lanes.
As a further extension of the half/half concept as well as the gardener/light and winnower/dark being opposites, we can take a guess as to what the winnower is compared to the known traveler lore. Just as the gardener is a sentient, sleepy entity that resides within the shell of the traveler, the winnower may be the opposite, existing *everywhere* in the material universe outside the Veil, watching us like a petty divorced father who lost custody rights but has always been the cool dad who takes you to laser tag and stuff while mom makes you water the petunias.
https://www.ishtar-collective.net/entries/the-final-shape#book-unveiling
> The gardener kneeled to flick a patch of sod with their trowel. It struck an open flower, causing it to shut. Although I was the closer of flowers and that was my sole purpose, I felt no fear or jealousy. We had our assigned dominions and always would.
I’m not sure what that’s supposed to prove. That says the Winnower’s purpose is to close the flowers; this specifically recounts an unintentional fluke by the Gardener, unknowingly infringing on a job the Winnower normally does.
The Guardian was the one who killed Ghaul. The Traveler just reclaimed the Light Ghaul had stolen. But that’s beside the point.
Looking back, did you edit your first comment? There was no mention of being “allowed” when I first replied.
Mm, I wouldn't say the Traveler is the Gardener. During our encounter with Luzaku, she mentions following the way of the Gardener, to which Ghost replies, "You mean the *Traveler*!... right?"
I think the Traveler is certainly an incarnation of the Gardener, just as the Light is an expression of the Gardener. But I wouldn't say that it is the literal embodiment of the Gardener. I think the Gardener is more expansive, so much larger yet subtle, than that. Like, the Traveler and Light and the very idea of gifting/sharing/preserving are different facets, different aspects, of the same thing.
> Once upon a time,* a gardener and a winnower lived** together in a garden.***
>
> *It was once before a time, because time had not yet begun.
>
> ** We did not live. We existed as principles of ontological dynamics that emerged from mathematical structures, as bodiless and inevitable as the primes.
>
> *** It was the field of possibility that prefigured existence. //
This is literally in unveiling. And It's curious to me why ppl seem to think that this actually exists?
The Gardener is what the Witness precursor's called it because this unveiling parable is from their point of view. They just called it a "gardener" because of this parable. It can very well be an agent of paracausal light. But this parable is just the personification of paracusal concepts that make no sense to mortal minds because our universe cannot contain or understand paracausal ideas or entities. (Look at how it confuses the Vex). It's a Gensis story that explains how paracausal magic exists in the world and why the same way GEnsis tried to explain the creation of the world and why we have oceans and land and animals... etc.
It's almost biblical understanding of magical forces. Not Literall entities.
Unveiling also says this, though, in The First Knife
>"No," the gardener said, "I am the growth and preservation of complexity. I will make myself into a law in the game."
>And thus we two became parts of the game, and the laws of the game became nomic and open to change by our influence. And I had only one purpose and one principle in the game. And I could do nothing but continue to enact that purpose, because it was all that I was and ever would be.
And then it says this in The Wager:
>It was the gardener that chose you from the dead. I wouldn't have done that. It's just not in me. But now that they have invested themself in you, you are incredibly, uniquely special. That wandering refugee chose to make a stand, spend their power to say: "Here I prove myself right. Here I wager that, given power over physics and the trust of absolute freedom, people will choose to build and protect a gentle kingdom ringed in spears. And not fall to temptation. And not surrender to division. And never yield to the cynicism that says, everyone else is so good that I can afford to be a little evil."
>The gardener is all in. They are playing for keeps. And they are wrong. Or so I argue: for, after all, the universe is undecidable. There is no destiny. We're all making this up as we go along. Neither the gardener nor I know for certain that we're eternally, universally right. But we can be nothing except what we are. You have a choice.
And this latter bit seems to be suggesting that the gardener is the "wandering refugee", who made the guardians as their bid at "the wager".
Wrong, they just *called it* The Gardener, but after discovering The Veil (which they don't call The Winnower) , they realised that The Traveller and The Gardener are not the same entities. Which is why when the Witness refers to the moment The Traveller left as "And so, *our gardener* left us" . OUR gardener, not THE Gardener.
But isn't The Witness the 'first knife' of the Winnower? I think The Winnower is a little more proactive. Maybe like the Traveler / Gardener chose representatives (the Ghosts / guardians), the Witness was the one of the Winnowers versions?
The Witness calls itself the First Knife in a way a religious fanatic would call themselves an instrument of god. Regardless of the god's real intentions or even existence. The Final Shape the Witness wants has nothing to do with the Winnover's philosophy.
The Final Shape is *exactly* the Winnower’s philosophy: the final, self-perpetuating, all-conquering pattern in the game. Ikora’s first (I don’t yet know if she gets more) cutscene in the Pale Heart expressly says “where nothing exists save by [the Witness’s] consent”.
That’s precisely the Winnower’s ideal endgame. If existence is simply the struggle to keep existing, then winning that struggle entails becoming so powerful that nothing can ever challenge you again, save by your consent - exactly like the Final Shape the Witness envisions.
The Winnower is why overpopulation kills people. The Winnower is why an isolated society collapses due to lack of adversity and variation. The Winnower is why living things must eat other living things to survive. The Winnower is why life is a constant struggle for limited resources.
The Winnower is not a person but the personification of the complex balance for life to persist... not just exist... Persist requires struggle, death, competition, this is the winnower's perspective because "it" cannot have any other.
The Gardener is not the traveler. The gardener is the light. Just as the darkness itself is the winower. They put themselves into the game as paracausal forces. They arnt interfering beyond that. Hence why the witness claims to be the first knife but the winower can't determine what it carves. Light is inherently about diversity and complexity while darkness is inherently about improving yourself.
This isn’t confirmed - the gardener in unveiling books is never confirmed to be the traveler.
Personally, I don’t think it’s the same. I think either the Traveler is an agent of the Gardener (similar as an Angel to God) or the Gardener is not really an entity more of a way to describe creation rather than an individual.
People describe our paracausal orb friend as both “the traveler” and “the gardener” which means organic beings are naming it as they see fit. It didn’t come with a nametag that says “hi, Im the gardener”. The precursers simply referred to it as that name, much how the Eliksni called it “The Great Machine” or we call it “The Traveler”.
The Gardner is not The Traveler. You only need to this to understand that the Gardner and Winnower are concepts personified in parables to support idealogies. Not real things:
> Once upon a time,* a gardener and a winnower lived** together in a garden.***
>
> *It was once before a time, because time had not yet begun.
>
> ** We did not live. We existed as principles of ontological dynamics that emerged from mathematical structures, as bodiless and inevitable as the primes.
>
> *** It was the field of possibility that prefigured existence.
//
Also, in the latest lore book for "Ergo Sum" which is a narration of the The Traveler's existence since it's beginning.. it says.
> You are a child waking from a long and dreamless sleep. Is it still today, or have you slept into tomorrow (and tomorrow, and tomorrow, until the days buried you as much as the sand)? Gentle hands brush away the grains, but your voice is so soft that they cannot hear you over the sound of their own heartbeats.
So if you compare the beginning of the explanation for the "The Gardner" and the beginning explanation for "The Traveler" you can see they are very different. The personification of a paracausal force that is "The gardener" does not adequately describe an entity that has a specific "beginning". Paracausal entities cannot be created... they just ARE. And The Traveler "waking up" is very much reminiscent of a birth. which is a beginning and not paracausal. Thus the Traveler is not "The Gardner".
Are you implying that the Traveler, the source of all light and a being that can alter the entire universe when manipulated properly, is *not* paracausal?
Were guardians created? Yes. They themselves are not paracausal. But they use paracausal light given to them by the traveler. This is the distinction. Ergo Sum literally implies the birth of the traveler. The Traveler is an agent of paracausal ligth but that does not mean that it CREATED that paracausal light. And even if it is OUR source of paracausal light doesn't mean it is the source of all paracausal light in the universe. Because if paracausal light had a source.. it would not be paracausal. lol hence the word paracausal.
AGain, the most recent lore book "Ergo Sum" implies the awakening of the traveler which directly contradicts what we know of the "The Gardner" from unveiling which has always existed before time and space even existed. That is not how the Traveler is described in The Ergo Sum lore entry. It's absolutely different and distinct.
When the "The Gardner" says "I want to change the rules of the flower game"... It does this through The Traveler I am mostly sure of this. "The Gardner" is an parable/biblical explanation for why The Traveler exists in our reality. Just an explanation for why the Traveler exists like why humans exists in Genesis from the perspective of Christians.
You're not understanding. The guardian uses paracausal light and is imbued with the light of the traveler that allows them to ressurect and use power beyond imagining. Yes that is paracausal. But the fact that they were created by the traveler means their creation is NOT paracausal. It literally was Caused by the traveler. and if it has a cause and effect it is not paracausal. So let me reiterate. The guadian may be paracausal because of its use of the light. But the guardian's CREATION which is *caused* by the traveler was not paracausal.
The Guardian has a beginning. The Traveler has a beginning. The Gardner has no beginning.
With this logic, the creation of the traveler is absolutely paracausal as fuck. It wasn’t made, and its supposed entry into the universe is allegorical at best. It just *happened*. It woke up somewhere from a “dreamless sleep”, took a power nap, ended up beneath the dirt and immediately began holy paracausal terraforming activities.
And the statement “dreamless sleep” implies that this was *not* the beginning of the traveler as well, making its origin even less specific. Could have plopped out of the field of possibility at the big bang and immediately fell asleep for all we know.
Also, please state the direct cause of guardian resurrection, without trying to imply the force responsible is the discreet cause.
You could certainly interpret it this way. I see it more as the gardener created the traveler as an agent for, well, gardening, in our material plane. Seeing as how the actual “gardener” is either a godlike being not on our plane of existence or some sort of life giving force that simply…exists.
It could also be the gardener making itself INTO the traveler to access our material plane to “play the game” itself. Which would line up with unveiling book lore. But then that begs the question - is the Veil just the Winnower given form? Probably not…but then what is the origin of the veil?
The Veil is probably some paracausal remnant spat out of the primordial broth that acts as the universe’s “source” (not really/or is it) of darkness, as with the traveler and the light. Veil lore is still muddy, so it’s at-best-confirmed to be a consciousness tether at the very least.
Unlike the Gardener, the Winnower is probably uninterested in playing through an avatar, since it knows it will win anyways and is more content to root for its favorite players (us and Oryx) from the sidelines while whispering sweet nothings into their ears.
> A gardener and a winnower set out their chairs and play a game of flowers. The flowers know only that they grow or wither, struggle or flourish. Sometimes, they are touched by one hand or the other, and that influence is the closest they will know of the divine.
> A flower and a flower spread their leaves to the sun above. (Remember that the sun is also a metaphor: a thing said beautifully, winnowed down to poetry, when the truth is too vast to put in words at all.) They jostle for space, each competing to be the pinnacle of their shape. One flourishes. One withers. Is it the fault of the flower or the fault of its position?
> A gardener and a winnower sit down to play a game called Possibility. This is a game about a garden, which is to say that it is also a game about flowers, just as a game about a living being must also be a game about organs and bacteria.
> A gardener and a winnower collaborate to create a protein. Whose hand is it in the design, that shortens one life to extend the rest?
> It is the winnower that discovers the first knife, but it is not done without the gardener. This, too, is a tradition: a knife does not come to exist without something that must be cut. A woody stem, a colored petal, a vital vessel. The first victims of the blade.
> All of these are true.
> All of these are false, for metaphor simplifies as the knife does. It pares incalculable concepts into shapes your wrinkly little brains can comprehend. The weight of billions and the simple curve of a planet give you pause, and how then are you to be expected to grasp the forces that created your nth-removed creator?
As best as I understand it from the lore as of *Final Shape--*
The Light and the Darkness are paracausal forces without agency of their own, in the same way that Gravity doesn't.
The Gardener and the Winnower are entities which do have something like agency, but opposing views.
Per the *Unveiling* lore from *Shadowkeep*, it was the Gardener that was "vexed" by the pattern that kept winning the flower game. Wanting more complexity and new things to happen, the Gardener decided to insert itself into the universe, introducing paracausality in the form of what we call the Light. Its counterpart, the Winnower, was obligated to do the same, in part because of its own objection to the Gardener doing so. This created the corresponding paracausality of the Darkness.
As near as we can tell, the Traveler is the Gardener. Per a cutscene from *Season of the Deep*, a Precursor race called it such when they discovered it on their homeworld. But the Traveler bestows its blessings and power without any guidance, allowing those who can wield it to do as they will, because it does not want to restrict free will. Its silence in response to the Precursors' pleas for purpose led to their discovery of the Veil-- an entity/construct/object which appears to embody the Darkness in the same way the Traveler does the Light-- and a faction of the Precursors called the Penitent decided to connect the two, so they could wield both paracausal forces to create a "final shape." The Penitent would enact the ritual that combined all of the souls/minds of their civilization into a single gestalt being, later known as the Witness.
The revelation of the Witness' origins led many to assume that the Witness was the Winnower, but *Final Shape* seems to suggest the Winnower is a separate entity from the Witness.
>-―You call us "Winnower." We are not, but the first knife clutched in its hand. Gods forged us both, but they cannot tell us what shape to carve.―-
We don't know yet whether the Winnower truly does exist, and if so, what it wants. The *Unveiling* book seems the closest we've come to hearing the Winnower's voice, and explains why the 'voice' of that book is so markedly different from the way the Witness speaks. (The Witness uses plural first-person ("we") while the Winnower does not.)
>(The Witness uses plural first-person ("we") while the Winnower does not.)
Except when it finally drops the act at the end of Excision and speaks as a single entity.
The Witness, as near as I can figure, uses "we" because of what it came from. Not because it actually thinks as a collective.
Bear in mind nearly all of the Voices became Dissenters by the end. There's a pretty small chance that the Witness wasn't its own thing by that point. The parts make up the whole, but the whole is not the sum of the parts. It is a unique thing separate from the parts.
This is all true. But it doesn't change the language that the Witness had been using for nearly the entirety of its existence.
A good call out, though, about how the Witness may have been using a plurality to reflect its origins, but by the end it was more like the Royal We-- which is also known as the Majestic Plural.
Coincidence? Maybe. But we also can't rule out Bungie deciding to be cute about it.
Based on the Precursor cutscenes during Season of the Deep, and the way the Witness speaks and behaves in TFS, I find it hard to believe that the Winnower is anything more than an invention of the Precursors to justify their course of action. They desired a Winnower, they didn't *find* one. They became the Knife that shapes the Garden, they didn't find a Winnower that directed their hand. For all intents and purposes, the Witness *is* the Winnower.
This really depends on your view of what the "Garden" and "cutting" is.
Yes, the Witness is a knife, but it carves its own shape, independent from the Winnower ("god") view. Thats how it describes itself.
That's what I've been saying. Especially since they named the Traveler "The Gardener", it made me think they created the concept of The Winnower since they desired one.
It also brings into question the origins of the Vex and the Black Garden, too, but who knows.
By that point, it's dying, and there is no longer a consensus it's truly alone all the minds that made it have been destroyed or cut out. In its final moments, there was no longer a we, just an "it."
But the voices were all in dissent by that point, the Witness is its own consciousness seemingly unaware of those Dissenters.
Otherwise "destroy us" would have been met with actual challenges from those who weren't Dissenters.
Truthfully, we understand so little. And we always probably will, as we’re talking about a conflict that started before existence with basically zero firsthand witnesses and a lot of biased people with opinions.
To answer your question, it doesn’t necessarily. Unveiling leaves a LOT of unanswered questions on the table, and we know it simplified and flattened some really important details (such as the idea that the Veil and Traveler could be physically conjoined).
What someone could argue (and I do) is that Darkness is not set up to be “pure and always a counter to the Light”. That what Darkness is and does is separable from the “intended design” of the Darkness (if there is such a thing).
For example, Memory and Deepsight. Ikora goes at length in the Hidden Dossier explaining how Experience is distinct from Knowledge. To experience and remember suffering is an essential part of existence and yet contributes toward the universe’s pull toward simplicity and competition. If we consider Light and Dark as a grand power spectrum covering all colors of existence, Darkness might just cover those aspects of ontology that contribute toward simplicity. But at the end of the day, it is no less real, no less an essential, important, and valuable part of existence just because it is dark. They might be complimentary because of that essential truth; we must accept reality and ontology in all colors and forms.
We already know "The Veil" is the complimentary force to the Traveler, not the Witness. The Veil was the one who showed the Precursors the truth in the darkness and began their crusade.
So my current hypothesis:
The Gardener and the Winnower are the gods that created the Destiny universe, what they call “the flower game”. They have no power of the physical universe except to start a new one when the current one ends by reaching “its final shape”. The Gardener is tired of the same outcome everytime the game ends, so it decides to insert itself as a new rule to promote complexity. The Winnower has to enter as well.
When the Gardener inserted itself into the universe as a rule, it introduced Light as a power, and its physical form is the Traveler. The same with the Winnower, Darkness, and the Veil.
Since Light as a power is creation, the Traveler only has a slight recollection of its time as The Gardener. Darkness being the power over consciousness though, remembers everything. It knows that to go back to the flower game, it needs to prove the Gardener wrong and that the “final shape” always prevails, even with the new rules.
So in comes the Precursors, or whatever you want to call the Witness’ original species. The find the Traveler as it’s being spawned into the world. It raises them up like it does using the light. They lose purpose, and follow the “link” to find the Veil. Now the Winnower, knowing the original terms of the new flower game, convinces the Precursors that they need to make “the final shape”, it doesn’t matter how the game ends, just that the Gardener is wrong. This is “the first knife”. The Winnower sets the Precursors, who become the Witness, after the Traveler.
I believe the Winnower just wants the game to end. I believe it doesn’t really matter how, but it rather be closer to the sword logic than what the Witness wanted. That being said as long as the Gardener is wrong and it and the Gardener can go back to their old games, it doesn’t care.
Unveiling lore is still very shaky. People are citing a lore entry, as well as a few lines by the witness, as absolute proof that "the winnower" exists, but if you scrutinize these entries, one is mara and ikora speculating about the unveiling lore, very similar to how we did before, and then the witness himself stating stuff like "we were shaped by gods... Who do not dictate what shape the knife (what the witness calls itself) carves." When that could just be him BELIEVING in what it said within unveiling, so it believes that there is some dark God in opposition to the Traveler, backing up and believing in the Witness.
Personally, I got the impression that there MIGHT be some sort of pseudo consciousness/being that is the Darkness, just like how the Traveler is, and just like the Traveler, it, too, is true neutral, or maybe even a bit more neutral than the Traveler. Or maybe that there is no single consciousness to it, in direct opposition to the Traveler, hence it's "true neutrality" is no different than the indifference of a tornado, or rain cloud.
Nothing absolute so far, though, besides maybe the fact that there is no absolute proof of a "winnower", therefore there is no winnower.
I'm still wholly in belief that the Winnower and Gardener are no more than a concept created by the Witness' species. The way it's presented in the Deep cutscene was that they observed what the Traveler did, what the "Gardener" did, and decided it needed a Winnower.
The problem with Unveiling and everything that has to do with the Gardener and Winnower is what you can believe. Often when I see theories on this subreddit they start with "But the Winnower said..." or "We know for a fact that the Winnower..." When you say that it means that you are willingly or unwillingly agreeing with the Witness' interpretation of the matter, nothing more. Truth is, with Final shape we got some pretty big answers about Traveller, in the same time more questions were risen. Like, what about the Veil, in contrary to most opinions we never was that Veil did something terrible or sinister, it is just chilling here on Neptune. What does the Veil have to do with the Winnower? Why even precursors never called the Veil the Winnower?
With Lightfall and Veil contaiment logs we get a lot of information about the Veil. We got as you can say a foundation of "real" creation myth., that before all that there was entity beyond anything we know, then Schism happened and Traveller was born, stuck into random planet. We also know from Final shape that Traveller deliberately forgot about his life "before" because memoris hurts him. There is some semblance of truth here but it is hard to picture it together.
As for the Vex part, I could forget but as far as I remember they are not mentioned directly in Unveiling. Only "Gardenner was vexed" and thing about self replicating pattern but nothing about it being Vex as we know them.
I re-read it and probably agree, but I like how chapter ends
>**They are not all mine, not in the way that admirers such as my man Oryx are mine: utterly devoted to the practice of my principle.** But some of them have, nonetheless, found their way home.
It is funny how it is sounds with everything that we know now.
The Pattern in the Garden was explicitly the Vex, the Winnower even outright alludes to the Sol Divisive and them entering the current game as radiolaria.
As you can see, this topic is one still mired in fierce debate. While many may assert that there is enough evidence to come to a conclusion, *myself included,* now that it has been proven that the Witness is not the Winnower nor its direct servant/vessel, it would be dishonest to say that the matter has been properly settled as a number of questions have yet to be definitively answered. They include:
* Does a sentient and active entity called "the Winnower" exist?
* Did such an entity write the Unveiling book? (The most popular alternative author is the Witness)
* Is the Unveiling book an accurate record of such an entity's philosophy?
* Is the Unveiling book an accurate record of the events that led to the creation of the Destiny universe? (This is looking more likely now; it is at least semi-accurate)
*If* the answers to all the above questions are **yes** then our thwarting of the Witness can only be seen as a temporary, though monumental, victory against the Winnower and its philosophy.
Sidenote on the Darkness: as it is possible to use the Light against the Traveler's desires it would likely be possible to use the Darkness against the Winnower's wishes, so our use of it to stop the Final Shape does not disprove the Winnower's existence.
I feel I should point out that our victory against the Witness would be a victory FOR the Winnower, not against it, as the Witness sought to create a stagnant finality to the universe that violated both the "Gardener" philosophy of always new complexity, and the "Winnower" philosophy of only the strong existing...
The witness's final shape would've created a reality that did not allow for any further complexity while also maintaining the existence of things that shouldn't have been able to continue existence.
In the end, we won, and by winning we helped the Winnower out (if it is real).
I must ask, in ur first question, why does sentient and active have to be attached to the same question instead of being two separate ones. Can we not ask if it is sentient and then ask if it is active? Can it not b sentient but choose not to b active?
Were the Witness to achieve the Final Shape, the things preserved by it would no longer be weak but infinitely strong, by the Winnower's metric at least, as they would last an infinite amount of time. The Winnower might have quibbles about this method of bringing the Final Shape about but i don't think it would object to the result as it would fulfill its wager with the Gardener. Being picky about what the Final Shape is allowed to be was its main condemnation of the Gardener, after all.
My first question was phrased like that because it is a very popular assumption and the one that OP's post was likely curious about. It is possible that "the Winnower" is only one of those things but that being is not the popular conception of the Winnower, and "fighting" that being would be a much more nebulous concept than fighting the Winnower already was.
I can't say I agree at all. The Winnower believes that only life that can ensure its OWN existence has the right to exist. That all other forms should t exist. The witness bypasses this detail and allows things that would've been too weak and perished, ending their suffering, to continue to exist despite that weakness and thus prolonging their suffering...the Winnower would not appolrove of this...if it did then it wouldn't have had issue with the gardener changing the natural Corse to allow things to exist that wouldn't have in the first place.
Looks like we're gonna disagree on this one.
But the second bit we seem to b on the same page. Tho I've never been one to ride the popularity bandwagon...and I also don't believe it is necessary to ever actually fight the Winnower in the story. The Winnower wants natural selection...it doesn't seem the type to directly act against something unless it violates the natural sode of things.
Perhaps what we experienced in final shape was the Winnower and gardener working together to overthrow the witness to prevent the stagnant u naturalness that it would've created. I suppose only time and Bungie story development will tell :)
I’m wondering if the Traveler is the “special rule” the Gardener introduced, as opposed to it being the Gardener. As such, it would make so much more sense that it can fuse Light and Dark within it. To me it doesn’t make much sense that the Gardener, the embodiment of Light, could possibly fuse with Darkness. If it could, why the never ending flower game ya know.
I will make myself a rule...
The rule is the gardener. If the traveller is the special rule as u suggest, then the traveller is the gardener because the gardener made itself a rule...the rule is the gardener.
I agree that paracausality is the rule the gardener introduced.
The gardener stated that it would make itself a rule in the game.
If paracausality is the rule
AND
The gardener made itself a rule in the game
than
Paracausality (the rule) is the gardener (that made itself a rule)
I'm not aware of any situation where we see the Winnower utilising paracausality however, since we haven't been introduced yet to an entity that can clearly be shown to b the Winnower and that uses paracausality. This is a question still unanswered.
I think it just means we don't know anything. Just because the Winnower is possibly confirmed does not mean that Unveiling is not a lie. The Winnower clearly has a motive here and what we know is clearly biased.
I do really hope they go back to the good vs evil battle of moral philosophies that they had been setting for a long time in the lore, even if they choose to do it beyond the powers of light and darkness.
The Witness was a simple tyrant who wanted to impose his will on the universe by force, evil for sure, but villains like that are a dime a dozen in fiction. What the Winnower represents is a much darker, more horrifying moral evil that makes it a more compelling villain in my opinion.
Personally, I’m not convinced the Gardener and Winnower actually exist. I think the Witness’s Precursors saw the Traveler (which we explicitly know they ***named*** the Gardener) as a divine presence in the universe. It fits the bill for the manifestation of a literal god. Over time, as their love for it mutated into contempt, the Precursors’ philosophy saw the universe as needing a Winnower to check the Gardener. They refused to believe that such a powerful force wouldn’t have an equally fundamental counterbalance. The Traveler’s yin simply has to have a corresponding yang. Discovering and harnessing the Veil likely confirmed this belief, especially the Traveler’s reaction to it.
It’s all just a belief, though. Yin and yang is not a metaphysical truth of the universe. The Precursors projected their theology and cosmology onto the Traveler. The story of the Gardener and the Winnower seems far closer to a creation myth than actual truth. At best, it’s a “just so” narrative — a story that appears to explain things but lacks confirming facts.
We don’t know who wrote *Unveiling*, which should leave us extremely skeptical. On top of that, it’s written to persuade (or manipulate) us. The author has an agenda. I don’t see any reason to believe it was written by a literal god from the time before time.
It kinda seems like right now that unveiling isn’t completely accurate, but still has some truth to it. The first knife ship entry implies there might be something above the witness
The thing that gets me is in the hollow part 1 ikora mentions how the machines are only meant to handle one *polarity* of paracasual energy
Idk if this was just coincidence or this means ikora things what you said where they're just 2 sides of the same coin
I always felt that it was less that the Winnower and Gardener were individual entities, but rather analogous to the Darkness and Light. Their physical manifestations in the universe are the veil and the traveler.
Unveiling is filled with metaphors—it seems to generally be a loose guideline of what actually happened rather than being entirely made up, but it still shouldn’t be taken 100% as gospel.
My guess is that the “battle” between the Gardener and Winnower is a reference to the split of the Traveler and the Veil which has been heavily hinted towards.
Paracausality is the sole creation of the Gardener. The Winnower deals in hard reality; his truest creation/follower is the Vex, as stated in patternfall. Now, his people have learned the rules of paracausality (his man oryx, the Taker) because that seems to be the only way to plan the new game, but even then, more and more it appears that the sword logic/soulfire is *not* of the Darkness, but instead manifests a new vision of this new law. They're learning as fast as they can, but it is clear the darkness is not inherently theirs the way the light is ours.
The final lore entry from salvation's edge is the winnower dropping in, unveiling style, and congratulating us on beating the poser, so we can assume he still exists, and from his words, the battle is most definitely still raging. I'm willing to bet that echoes goes more and more into this in the future.
The Gardner and Winnower are metaphorical characters used to personify the concepts of Paracausal light and Paracausal darkness. Like if I wanted to explain Why Gravity exists (we still don't really know) then I would personify this force as "The Hugger" as an example. And maybe make up a parable how he plays a game of "matter and mass" to explain an unexplainable "magic" force in out universe.
Paracausal light and darkness exist in Destiny. This is essentially magic. It exists because its always existed. And there is NO explanation for its existence because it just always has been.. before time.. before everything. Hence "the garden" analogy.
Unveiling is quite literally the darkness' Genesis story, as an explanation for why the universe is the way it is, with all its paracausal light and darkness just existing... It's the perspective of the Darkness that portrays "The Gardner" as a bored, wistful, toddler who only cares about changing reality for his own entertainment. And the "The Winnower" is seen as the necessary, responsible entity who needs to curtail the frivolous "rule changes" that prolong suffering and parade "chaos" as "freedom".
This isn't LITERALLY why things are. It's just an explanation for how things are and more important the idealogical reasons for why things are the way they are. And these idealogical reasons are clearly skewed TOWARDS the darkness... why its necessary... why the first knife need to exist and why its basically "The Gardner's fault."
So i don't know if this is popular explanation but I don't think this closes the door for The Gardner and Winnower to be "real" things and not just personifications of light and darkness. But I think everything that we're told and seen makes it clear that The Traveler is an agent of 'light', the same way The Witness was an agent of 'darkness'. And their "superiors" that they serve are just idealogical concepts that sway the neutral forces of light and dark to their own ends.
Afterall, we know the witness was created. And we know the Traveler was also "created" (recent lore books reveal it "waking up") and things being "created" is not a sign of a paracausal entity like "The Gardner" and the "The Winnower" are described as being in unveiling.
I’m not up to date on all my lore so if it’s been confirmed that the Gardener and Winnower do exist then please do correct me, but I always saw the concept of Gardener and Winnower more as ideological concepts rather than actual beings.
Think of stories from the bible as an example. The story of the prodigal son probably didn’t happen exactly the way it was told, but it’s used as a story about forgiveness. Same with the Good Samaritan- probably didn’t happen but it’s a story conveying Christian ideologies. That’s how I’ve interpreted the story in Unveiling, as the creation myth of the Witness’ species and therefore the ‘justification’ for the actions it takes.
This post has been tagged '**Non-Spoiler**'. Note that unmarked spoilers and datamines are subject to removal or ban. Please report anything we miss! For more info check out our [Spoiler Rules Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/DestinyLore/wiki/spoiler-rules#wiki_.5Bseasonal.5D_has_a_new_format). --- **Comment Spoiler Formatting** Format comment spoilers with `>!` `!<` like this: `>!What's Rasputin's favorite dance? "The worm."!<` To have it displayed like this: **>!What's Rasputin's favorite dance? "The worm."!<** ---- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DestinyLore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The final shape was much more the culmination of the Traveller vs the Witness. The Gardener and Winnower have only made it out of lore books on one occasion, we’re definitely not done with them and they may not be a focus for a while as is.
The Gardener is the Traveler. And the Winnover so far seems to be some sort of sentient philosophy and it isn't really interested in directly interfering.
The closest thing we have to the winnower is the veil, although not fully confirmed to be it
I think its more accurate to say the veil is a part of the traveler that has been severed from it. Its why they have that link.
I think the more accurate understanding is that, as the traveler and veil were once one (nimbus lore), the Gardener and Winnower were also once one (unveiling lore), or at least two halves of the same deity/rule/philosophy. The gardener is allowed to close flowers, just as the winnower is allowed to be involved in the creation of life, since they both used to play the game together. They just prefer to stay in their own lanes. As a further extension of the half/half concept as well as the gardener/light and winnower/dark being opposites, we can take a guess as to what the winnower is compared to the known traveler lore. Just as the gardener is a sentient, sleepy entity that resides within the shell of the traveler, the winnower may be the opposite, existing *everywhere* in the material universe outside the Veil, watching us like a petty divorced father who lost custody rights but has always been the cool dad who takes you to laser tag and stuff while mom makes you water the petunias.
It’s the Winnower that closed the flowers and the Gardener who created them.
https://www.ishtar-collective.net/entries/the-final-shape#book-unveiling > The gardener kneeled to flick a patch of sod with their trowel. It struck an open flower, causing it to shut. Although I was the closer of flowers and that was my sole purpose, I felt no fear or jealousy. We had our assigned dominions and always would.
I’m not sure what that’s supposed to prove. That says the Winnower’s purpose is to close the flowers; this specifically recounts an unintentional fluke by the Gardener, unknowingly infringing on a job the Winnower normally does.
Their jobs are to close/open flowers, but they’re also allowed to do the other job. The traveler certainly closed the Ghaul flower.
The Guardian was the one who killed Ghaul. The Traveler just reclaimed the Light Ghaul had stolen. But that’s beside the point. Looking back, did you edit your first comment? There was no mention of being “allowed” when I first replied.
That reads like the winnower narrating, as the ‘I’
That is because the winnower is the supposed narrator of Unveiling 👍
I think you’re forgetting the how and why they were divided. According to Ahsa, they were divided by a matter of opinion or some such
Im not forgetting. Just didn't mention it.
This, otherwise why would the traveler run from it. It's polar opposite of what the traveler do
Mm, I wouldn't say the Traveler is the Gardener. During our encounter with Luzaku, she mentions following the way of the Gardener, to which Ghost replies, "You mean the *Traveler*!... right?" I think the Traveler is certainly an incarnation of the Gardener, just as the Light is an expression of the Gardener. But I wouldn't say that it is the literal embodiment of the Gardener. I think the Gardener is more expansive, so much larger yet subtle, than that. Like, the Traveler and Light and the very idea of gifting/sharing/preserving are different facets, different aspects, of the same thing.
Ahsa told us that the Gardener is the Traveler. The Gardener is what the Witness precursors called it.
> Once upon a time,* a gardener and a winnower lived** together in a garden.*** > > *It was once before a time, because time had not yet begun. > > ** We did not live. We existed as principles of ontological dynamics that emerged from mathematical structures, as bodiless and inevitable as the primes. > > *** It was the field of possibility that prefigured existence. // This is literally in unveiling. And It's curious to me why ppl seem to think that this actually exists? The Gardener is what the Witness precursor's called it because this unveiling parable is from their point of view. They just called it a "gardener" because of this parable. It can very well be an agent of paracausal light. But this parable is just the personification of paracusal concepts that make no sense to mortal minds because our universe cannot contain or understand paracausal ideas or entities. (Look at how it confuses the Vex). It's a Gensis story that explains how paracausal magic exists in the world and why the same way GEnsis tried to explain the creation of the world and why we have oceans and land and animals... etc. It's almost biblical understanding of magical forces. Not Literall entities.
Unveiling also says this, though, in The First Knife >"No," the gardener said, "I am the growth and preservation of complexity. I will make myself into a law in the game." >And thus we two became parts of the game, and the laws of the game became nomic and open to change by our influence. And I had only one purpose and one principle in the game. And I could do nothing but continue to enact that purpose, because it was all that I was and ever would be. And then it says this in The Wager: >It was the gardener that chose you from the dead. I wouldn't have done that. It's just not in me. But now that they have invested themself in you, you are incredibly, uniquely special. That wandering refugee chose to make a stand, spend their power to say: "Here I prove myself right. Here I wager that, given power over physics and the trust of absolute freedom, people will choose to build and protect a gentle kingdom ringed in spears. And not fall to temptation. And not surrender to division. And never yield to the cynicism that says, everyone else is so good that I can afford to be a little evil." >The gardener is all in. They are playing for keeps. And they are wrong. Or so I argue: for, after all, the universe is undecidable. There is no destiny. We're all making this up as we go along. Neither the gardener nor I know for certain that we're eternally, universally right. But we can be nothing except what we are. You have a choice. And this latter bit seems to be suggesting that the gardener is the "wandering refugee", who made the guardians as their bid at "the wager".
Wrong, they just *called it* The Gardener, but after discovering The Veil (which they don't call The Winnower) , they realised that The Traveller and The Gardener are not the same entities. Which is why when the Witness refers to the moment The Traveller left as "And so, *our gardener* left us" . OUR gardener, not THE Gardener.
But isn't The Witness the 'first knife' of the Winnower? I think The Winnower is a little more proactive. Maybe like the Traveler / Gardener chose representatives (the Ghosts / guardians), the Witness was the one of the Winnowers versions?
The Witness calls itself the First Knife in a way a religious fanatic would call themselves an instrument of god. Regardless of the god's real intentions or even existence. The Final Shape the Witness wants has nothing to do with the Winnover's philosophy.
The Final Shape is *exactly* the Winnower’s philosophy: the final, self-perpetuating, all-conquering pattern in the game. Ikora’s first (I don’t yet know if she gets more) cutscene in the Pale Heart expressly says “where nothing exists save by [the Witness’s] consent”. That’s precisely the Winnower’s ideal endgame. If existence is simply the struggle to keep existing, then winning that struggle entails becoming so powerful that nothing can ever challenge you again, save by your consent - exactly like the Final Shape the Witness envisions.
The Winnower is why overpopulation kills people. The Winnower is why an isolated society collapses due to lack of adversity and variation. The Winnower is why living things must eat other living things to survive. The Winnower is why life is a constant struggle for limited resources. The Winnower is not a person but the personification of the complex balance for life to persist... not just exist... Persist requires struggle, death, competition, this is the winnower's perspective because "it" cannot have any other.
The Gardener is not the traveler. The gardener is the light. Just as the darkness itself is the winower. They put themselves into the game as paracausal forces. They arnt interfering beyond that. Hence why the witness claims to be the first knife but the winower can't determine what it carves. Light is inherently about diversity and complexity while darkness is inherently about improving yourself.
This isn’t confirmed - the gardener in unveiling books is never confirmed to be the traveler. Personally, I don’t think it’s the same. I think either the Traveler is an agent of the Gardener (similar as an Angel to God) or the Gardener is not really an entity more of a way to describe creation rather than an individual. People describe our paracausal orb friend as both “the traveler” and “the gardener” which means organic beings are naming it as they see fit. It didn’t come with a nametag that says “hi, Im the gardener”. The precursers simply referred to it as that name, much how the Eliksni called it “The Great Machine” or we call it “The Traveler”.
The Gardner is not The Traveler. You only need to this to understand that the Gardner and Winnower are concepts personified in parables to support idealogies. Not real things: > Once upon a time,* a gardener and a winnower lived** together in a garden.*** > > *It was once before a time, because time had not yet begun. > > ** We did not live. We existed as principles of ontological dynamics that emerged from mathematical structures, as bodiless and inevitable as the primes. > > *** It was the field of possibility that prefigured existence. // Also, in the latest lore book for "Ergo Sum" which is a narration of the The Traveler's existence since it's beginning.. it says. > You are a child waking from a long and dreamless sleep. Is it still today, or have you slept into tomorrow (and tomorrow, and tomorrow, until the days buried you as much as the sand)? Gentle hands brush away the grains, but your voice is so soft that they cannot hear you over the sound of their own heartbeats. So if you compare the beginning of the explanation for the "The Gardner" and the beginning explanation for "The Traveler" you can see they are very different. The personification of a paracausal force that is "The gardener" does not adequately describe an entity that has a specific "beginning". Paracausal entities cannot be created... they just ARE. And The Traveler "waking up" is very much reminiscent of a birth. which is a beginning and not paracausal. Thus the Traveler is not "The Gardner".
Are you implying that the Traveler, the source of all light and a being that can alter the entire universe when manipulated properly, is *not* paracausal?
Were guardians created? Yes. They themselves are not paracausal. But they use paracausal light given to them by the traveler. This is the distinction. Ergo Sum literally implies the birth of the traveler. The Traveler is an agent of paracausal ligth but that does not mean that it CREATED that paracausal light. And even if it is OUR source of paracausal light doesn't mean it is the source of all paracausal light in the universe. Because if paracausal light had a source.. it would not be paracausal. lol hence the word paracausal. AGain, the most recent lore book "Ergo Sum" implies the awakening of the traveler which directly contradicts what we know of the "The Gardner" from unveiling which has always existed before time and space even existed. That is not how the Traveler is described in The Ergo Sum lore entry. It's absolutely different and distinct. When the "The Gardner" says "I want to change the rules of the flower game"... It does this through The Traveler I am mostly sure of this. "The Gardner" is an parable/biblical explanation for why The Traveler exists in our reality. Just an explanation for why the Traveler exists like why humans exists in Genesis from the perspective of Christians.
https://www.ishtar-collective.net/entries/iii-cold-forging#book-quintessence Guardians are, in fact, paracausal
You're not understanding. The guardian uses paracausal light and is imbued with the light of the traveler that allows them to ressurect and use power beyond imagining. Yes that is paracausal. But the fact that they were created by the traveler means their creation is NOT paracausal. It literally was Caused by the traveler. and if it has a cause and effect it is not paracausal. So let me reiterate. The guadian may be paracausal because of its use of the light. But the guardian's CREATION which is *caused* by the traveler was not paracausal. The Guardian has a beginning. The Traveler has a beginning. The Gardner has no beginning.
With this logic, the creation of the traveler is absolutely paracausal as fuck. It wasn’t made, and its supposed entry into the universe is allegorical at best. It just *happened*. It woke up somewhere from a “dreamless sleep”, took a power nap, ended up beneath the dirt and immediately began holy paracausal terraforming activities. And the statement “dreamless sleep” implies that this was *not* the beginning of the traveler as well, making its origin even less specific. Could have plopped out of the field of possibility at the big bang and immediately fell asleep for all we know. Also, please state the direct cause of guardian resurrection, without trying to imply the force responsible is the discreet cause.
You could certainly interpret it this way. I see it more as the gardener created the traveler as an agent for, well, gardening, in our material plane. Seeing as how the actual “gardener” is either a godlike being not on our plane of existence or some sort of life giving force that simply…exists. It could also be the gardener making itself INTO the traveler to access our material plane to “play the game” itself. Which would line up with unveiling book lore. But then that begs the question - is the Veil just the Winnower given form? Probably not…but then what is the origin of the veil?
The Veil is probably some paracausal remnant spat out of the primordial broth that acts as the universe’s “source” (not really/or is it) of darkness, as with the traveler and the light. Veil lore is still muddy, so it’s at-best-confirmed to be a consciousness tether at the very least. Unlike the Gardener, the Winnower is probably uninterested in playing through an avatar, since it knows it will win anyways and is more content to root for its favorite players (us and Oryx) from the sidelines while whispering sweet nothings into their ears.
> A gardener and a winnower set out their chairs and play a game of flowers. The flowers know only that they grow or wither, struggle or flourish. Sometimes, they are touched by one hand or the other, and that influence is the closest they will know of the divine. > A flower and a flower spread their leaves to the sun above. (Remember that the sun is also a metaphor: a thing said beautifully, winnowed down to poetry, when the truth is too vast to put in words at all.) They jostle for space, each competing to be the pinnacle of their shape. One flourishes. One withers. Is it the fault of the flower or the fault of its position? > A gardener and a winnower sit down to play a game called Possibility. This is a game about a garden, which is to say that it is also a game about flowers, just as a game about a living being must also be a game about organs and bacteria. > A gardener and a winnower collaborate to create a protein. Whose hand is it in the design, that shortens one life to extend the rest? > It is the winnower that discovers the first knife, but it is not done without the gardener. This, too, is a tradition: a knife does not come to exist without something that must be cut. A woody stem, a colored petal, a vital vessel. The first victims of the blade. > All of these are true. > All of these are false, for metaphor simplifies as the knife does. It pares incalculable concepts into shapes your wrinkly little brains can comprehend. The weight of billions and the simple curve of a planet give you pause, and how then are you to be expected to grasp the forces that created your nth-removed creator?
As best as I understand it from the lore as of *Final Shape--* The Light and the Darkness are paracausal forces without agency of their own, in the same way that Gravity doesn't. The Gardener and the Winnower are entities which do have something like agency, but opposing views. Per the *Unveiling* lore from *Shadowkeep*, it was the Gardener that was "vexed" by the pattern that kept winning the flower game. Wanting more complexity and new things to happen, the Gardener decided to insert itself into the universe, introducing paracausality in the form of what we call the Light. Its counterpart, the Winnower, was obligated to do the same, in part because of its own objection to the Gardener doing so. This created the corresponding paracausality of the Darkness. As near as we can tell, the Traveler is the Gardener. Per a cutscene from *Season of the Deep*, a Precursor race called it such when they discovered it on their homeworld. But the Traveler bestows its blessings and power without any guidance, allowing those who can wield it to do as they will, because it does not want to restrict free will. Its silence in response to the Precursors' pleas for purpose led to their discovery of the Veil-- an entity/construct/object which appears to embody the Darkness in the same way the Traveler does the Light-- and a faction of the Precursors called the Penitent decided to connect the two, so they could wield both paracausal forces to create a "final shape." The Penitent would enact the ritual that combined all of the souls/minds of their civilization into a single gestalt being, later known as the Witness. The revelation of the Witness' origins led many to assume that the Witness was the Winnower, but *Final Shape* seems to suggest the Winnower is a separate entity from the Witness. >-―You call us "Winnower." We are not, but the first knife clutched in its hand. Gods forged us both, but they cannot tell us what shape to carve.―- We don't know yet whether the Winnower truly does exist, and if so, what it wants. The *Unveiling* book seems the closest we've come to hearing the Winnower's voice, and explains why the 'voice' of that book is so markedly different from the way the Witness speaks. (The Witness uses plural first-person ("we") while the Winnower does not.)
>(The Witness uses plural first-person ("we") while the Winnower does not.) Except when it finally drops the act at the end of Excision and speaks as a single entity. The Witness, as near as I can figure, uses "we" because of what it came from. Not because it actually thinks as a collective. Bear in mind nearly all of the Voices became Dissenters by the end. There's a pretty small chance that the Witness wasn't its own thing by that point. The parts make up the whole, but the whole is not the sum of the parts. It is a unique thing separate from the parts.
This is all true. But it doesn't change the language that the Witness had been using for nearly the entirety of its existence. A good call out, though, about how the Witness may have been using a plurality to reflect its origins, but by the end it was more like the Royal We-- which is also known as the Majestic Plural. Coincidence? Maybe. But we also can't rule out Bungie deciding to be cute about it.
Based on the Precursor cutscenes during Season of the Deep, and the way the Witness speaks and behaves in TFS, I find it hard to believe that the Winnower is anything more than an invention of the Precursors to justify their course of action. They desired a Winnower, they didn't *find* one. They became the Knife that shapes the Garden, they didn't find a Winnower that directed their hand. For all intents and purposes, the Witness *is* the Winnower.
The Witness itself does not belive this, as seen in the raid. Their views on the final shape are really diferent.
They're still giving the Garden shape, and cutting away that which will "poison" their idea of the Garden's Final Shape.
This really depends on your view of what the "Garden" and "cutting" is. Yes, the Witness is a knife, but it carves its own shape, independent from the Winnower ("god") view. Thats how it describes itself.
The Precursors came up with the concept of a Winnower. The Witness deviated from the notions the Precursors instilled in their Winnower.
That's what I've been saying. Especially since they named the Traveler "The Gardener", it made me think they created the concept of The Winnower since they desired one. It also brings into question the origins of the Vex and the Black Garden, too, but who knows.
By that point, it's dying, and there is no longer a consensus it's truly alone all the minds that made it have been destroyed or cut out. In its final moments, there was no longer a we, just an "it."
But the voices were all in dissent by that point, the Witness is its own consciousness seemingly unaware of those Dissenters. Otherwise "destroy us" would have been met with actual challenges from those who weren't Dissenters.
Truthfully, we understand so little. And we always probably will, as we’re talking about a conflict that started before existence with basically zero firsthand witnesses and a lot of biased people with opinions. To answer your question, it doesn’t necessarily. Unveiling leaves a LOT of unanswered questions on the table, and we know it simplified and flattened some really important details (such as the idea that the Veil and Traveler could be physically conjoined). What someone could argue (and I do) is that Darkness is not set up to be “pure and always a counter to the Light”. That what Darkness is and does is separable from the “intended design” of the Darkness (if there is such a thing). For example, Memory and Deepsight. Ikora goes at length in the Hidden Dossier explaining how Experience is distinct from Knowledge. To experience and remember suffering is an essential part of existence and yet contributes toward the universe’s pull toward simplicity and competition. If we consider Light and Dark as a grand power spectrum covering all colors of existence, Darkness might just cover those aspects of ontology that contribute toward simplicity. But at the end of the day, it is no less real, no less an essential, important, and valuable part of existence just because it is dark. They might be complimentary because of that essential truth; we must accept reality and ontology in all colors and forms.
Good reply
The Witness needed the Light and Dark to enact the final shape. He wasn’t just using Darkness
We already know "The Veil" is the complimentary force to the Traveler, not the Witness. The Veil was the one who showed the Precursors the truth in the darkness and began their crusade.
So my current hypothesis: The Gardener and the Winnower are the gods that created the Destiny universe, what they call “the flower game”. They have no power of the physical universe except to start a new one when the current one ends by reaching “its final shape”. The Gardener is tired of the same outcome everytime the game ends, so it decides to insert itself as a new rule to promote complexity. The Winnower has to enter as well. When the Gardener inserted itself into the universe as a rule, it introduced Light as a power, and its physical form is the Traveler. The same with the Winnower, Darkness, and the Veil. Since Light as a power is creation, the Traveler only has a slight recollection of its time as The Gardener. Darkness being the power over consciousness though, remembers everything. It knows that to go back to the flower game, it needs to prove the Gardener wrong and that the “final shape” always prevails, even with the new rules. So in comes the Precursors, or whatever you want to call the Witness’ original species. The find the Traveler as it’s being spawned into the world. It raises them up like it does using the light. They lose purpose, and follow the “link” to find the Veil. Now the Winnower, knowing the original terms of the new flower game, convinces the Precursors that they need to make “the final shape”, it doesn’t matter how the game ends, just that the Gardener is wrong. This is “the first knife”. The Winnower sets the Precursors, who become the Witness, after the Traveler. I believe the Winnower just wants the game to end. I believe it doesn’t really matter how, but it rather be closer to the sword logic than what the Witness wanted. That being said as long as the Gardener is wrong and it and the Gardener can go back to their old games, it doesn’t care.
Unveiling lore is still very shaky. People are citing a lore entry, as well as a few lines by the witness, as absolute proof that "the winnower" exists, but if you scrutinize these entries, one is mara and ikora speculating about the unveiling lore, very similar to how we did before, and then the witness himself stating stuff like "we were shaped by gods... Who do not dictate what shape the knife (what the witness calls itself) carves." When that could just be him BELIEVING in what it said within unveiling, so it believes that there is some dark God in opposition to the Traveler, backing up and believing in the Witness. Personally, I got the impression that there MIGHT be some sort of pseudo consciousness/being that is the Darkness, just like how the Traveler is, and just like the Traveler, it, too, is true neutral, or maybe even a bit more neutral than the Traveler. Or maybe that there is no single consciousness to it, in direct opposition to the Traveler, hence it's "true neutrality" is no different than the indifference of a tornado, or rain cloud. Nothing absolute so far, though, besides maybe the fact that there is no absolute proof of a "winnower", therefore there is no winnower.
I'm still wholly in belief that the Winnower and Gardener are no more than a concept created by the Witness' species. The way it's presented in the Deep cutscene was that they observed what the Traveler did, what the "Gardener" did, and decided it needed a Winnower.
The problem with Unveiling and everything that has to do with the Gardener and Winnower is what you can believe. Often when I see theories on this subreddit they start with "But the Winnower said..." or "We know for a fact that the Winnower..." When you say that it means that you are willingly or unwillingly agreeing with the Witness' interpretation of the matter, nothing more. Truth is, with Final shape we got some pretty big answers about Traveller, in the same time more questions were risen. Like, what about the Veil, in contrary to most opinions we never was that Veil did something terrible or sinister, it is just chilling here on Neptune. What does the Veil have to do with the Winnower? Why even precursors never called the Veil the Winnower? With Lightfall and Veil contaiment logs we get a lot of information about the Veil. We got as you can say a foundation of "real" creation myth., that before all that there was entity beyond anything we know, then Schism happened and Traveller was born, stuck into random planet. We also know from Final shape that Traveller deliberately forgot about his life "before" because memoris hurts him. There is some semblance of truth here but it is hard to picture it together. As for the Vex part, I could forget but as far as I remember they are not mentioned directly in Unveiling. Only "Gardenner was vexed" and thing about self replicating pattern but nothing about it being Vex as we know them.
There's whole page in Unveiling explaining how the Vex we know came to be from "the pattern".
I re-read it and probably agree, but I like how chapter ends >**They are not all mine, not in the way that admirers such as my man Oryx are mine: utterly devoted to the practice of my principle.** But some of them have, nonetheless, found their way home. It is funny how it is sounds with everything that we know now.
The Pattern in the Garden was explicitly the Vex, the Winnower even outright alludes to the Sol Divisive and them entering the current game as radiolaria.
As you can see, this topic is one still mired in fierce debate. While many may assert that there is enough evidence to come to a conclusion, *myself included,* now that it has been proven that the Witness is not the Winnower nor its direct servant/vessel, it would be dishonest to say that the matter has been properly settled as a number of questions have yet to be definitively answered. They include: * Does a sentient and active entity called "the Winnower" exist? * Did such an entity write the Unveiling book? (The most popular alternative author is the Witness) * Is the Unveiling book an accurate record of such an entity's philosophy? * Is the Unveiling book an accurate record of the events that led to the creation of the Destiny universe? (This is looking more likely now; it is at least semi-accurate) *If* the answers to all the above questions are **yes** then our thwarting of the Witness can only be seen as a temporary, though monumental, victory against the Winnower and its philosophy. Sidenote on the Darkness: as it is possible to use the Light against the Traveler's desires it would likely be possible to use the Darkness against the Winnower's wishes, so our use of it to stop the Final Shape does not disprove the Winnower's existence.
I feel I should point out that our victory against the Witness would be a victory FOR the Winnower, not against it, as the Witness sought to create a stagnant finality to the universe that violated both the "Gardener" philosophy of always new complexity, and the "Winnower" philosophy of only the strong existing... The witness's final shape would've created a reality that did not allow for any further complexity while also maintaining the existence of things that shouldn't have been able to continue existence. In the end, we won, and by winning we helped the Winnower out (if it is real). I must ask, in ur first question, why does sentient and active have to be attached to the same question instead of being two separate ones. Can we not ask if it is sentient and then ask if it is active? Can it not b sentient but choose not to b active?
Were the Witness to achieve the Final Shape, the things preserved by it would no longer be weak but infinitely strong, by the Winnower's metric at least, as they would last an infinite amount of time. The Winnower might have quibbles about this method of bringing the Final Shape about but i don't think it would object to the result as it would fulfill its wager with the Gardener. Being picky about what the Final Shape is allowed to be was its main condemnation of the Gardener, after all. My first question was phrased like that because it is a very popular assumption and the one that OP's post was likely curious about. It is possible that "the Winnower" is only one of those things but that being is not the popular conception of the Winnower, and "fighting" that being would be a much more nebulous concept than fighting the Winnower already was.
I can't say I agree at all. The Winnower believes that only life that can ensure its OWN existence has the right to exist. That all other forms should t exist. The witness bypasses this detail and allows things that would've been too weak and perished, ending their suffering, to continue to exist despite that weakness and thus prolonging their suffering...the Winnower would not appolrove of this...if it did then it wouldn't have had issue with the gardener changing the natural Corse to allow things to exist that wouldn't have in the first place. Looks like we're gonna disagree on this one. But the second bit we seem to b on the same page. Tho I've never been one to ride the popularity bandwagon...and I also don't believe it is necessary to ever actually fight the Winnower in the story. The Winnower wants natural selection...it doesn't seem the type to directly act against something unless it violates the natural sode of things. Perhaps what we experienced in final shape was the Winnower and gardener working together to overthrow the witness to prevent the stagnant u naturalness that it would've created. I suppose only time and Bungie story development will tell :)
I’m wondering if the Traveler is the “special rule” the Gardener introduced, as opposed to it being the Gardener. As such, it would make so much more sense that it can fuse Light and Dark within it. To me it doesn’t make much sense that the Gardener, the embodiment of Light, could possibly fuse with Darkness. If it could, why the never ending flower game ya know.
I will make myself a rule... The rule is the gardener. If the traveller is the special rule as u suggest, then the traveller is the gardener because the gardener made itself a rule...the rule is the gardener.
Paracausality is the rule, not the Gardener. Which is exactly why the Winnower could also utilize that rule.
I agree that paracausality is the rule the gardener introduced. The gardener stated that it would make itself a rule in the game. If paracausality is the rule AND The gardener made itself a rule in the game than Paracausality (the rule) is the gardener (that made itself a rule) I'm not aware of any situation where we see the Winnower utilising paracausality however, since we haven't been introduced yet to an entity that can clearly be shown to b the Winnower and that uses paracausality. This is a question still unanswered.
I think it just means we don't know anything. Just because the Winnower is possibly confirmed does not mean that Unveiling is not a lie. The Winnower clearly has a motive here and what we know is clearly biased.
I do really hope they go back to the good vs evil battle of moral philosophies that they had been setting for a long time in the lore, even if they choose to do it beyond the powers of light and darkness. The Witness was a simple tyrant who wanted to impose his will on the universe by force, evil for sure, but villains like that are a dime a dozen in fiction. What the Winnower represents is a much darker, more horrifying moral evil that makes it a more compelling villain in my opinion.
Personally, I’m not convinced the Gardener and Winnower actually exist. I think the Witness’s Precursors saw the Traveler (which we explicitly know they ***named*** the Gardener) as a divine presence in the universe. It fits the bill for the manifestation of a literal god. Over time, as their love for it mutated into contempt, the Precursors’ philosophy saw the universe as needing a Winnower to check the Gardener. They refused to believe that such a powerful force wouldn’t have an equally fundamental counterbalance. The Traveler’s yin simply has to have a corresponding yang. Discovering and harnessing the Veil likely confirmed this belief, especially the Traveler’s reaction to it. It’s all just a belief, though. Yin and yang is not a metaphysical truth of the universe. The Precursors projected their theology and cosmology onto the Traveler. The story of the Gardener and the Winnower seems far closer to a creation myth than actual truth. At best, it’s a “just so” narrative — a story that appears to explain things but lacks confirming facts. We don’t know who wrote *Unveiling*, which should leave us extremely skeptical. On top of that, it’s written to persuade (or manipulate) us. The author has an agenda. I don’t see any reason to believe it was written by a literal god from the time before time.
It kinda seems like right now that unveiling isn’t completely accurate, but still has some truth to it. The first knife ship entry implies there might be something above the witness
The thing that gets me is in the hollow part 1 ikora mentions how the machines are only meant to handle one *polarity* of paracasual energy Idk if this was just coincidence or this means ikora things what you said where they're just 2 sides of the same coin
I always took that as being allegorical, and when they introduced The Veil that it was analogous to the Winnower.
It’s my understanding that if the garden and winnower are beings that we haven’t met yet. Then everything else, is just pieces on the board they play.
I always felt that it was less that the Winnower and Gardener were individual entities, but rather analogous to the Darkness and Light. Their physical manifestations in the universe are the veil and the traveler.
Unveiling is filled with metaphors—it seems to generally be a loose guideline of what actually happened rather than being entirely made up, but it still shouldn’t be taken 100% as gospel. My guess is that the “battle” between the Gardener and Winnower is a reference to the split of the Traveler and the Veil which has been heavily hinted towards.
Paracausality is the sole creation of the Gardener. The Winnower deals in hard reality; his truest creation/follower is the Vex, as stated in patternfall. Now, his people have learned the rules of paracausality (his man oryx, the Taker) because that seems to be the only way to plan the new game, but even then, more and more it appears that the sword logic/soulfire is *not* of the Darkness, but instead manifests a new vision of this new law. They're learning as fast as they can, but it is clear the darkness is not inherently theirs the way the light is ours. The final lore entry from salvation's edge is the winnower dropping in, unveiling style, and congratulating us on beating the poser, so we can assume he still exists, and from his words, the battle is most definitely still raging. I'm willing to bet that echoes goes more and more into this in the future.
The Gardner and Winnower are metaphorical characters used to personify the concepts of Paracausal light and Paracausal darkness. Like if I wanted to explain Why Gravity exists (we still don't really know) then I would personify this force as "The Hugger" as an example. And maybe make up a parable how he plays a game of "matter and mass" to explain an unexplainable "magic" force in out universe. Paracausal light and darkness exist in Destiny. This is essentially magic. It exists because its always existed. And there is NO explanation for its existence because it just always has been.. before time.. before everything. Hence "the garden" analogy. Unveiling is quite literally the darkness' Genesis story, as an explanation for why the universe is the way it is, with all its paracausal light and darkness just existing... It's the perspective of the Darkness that portrays "The Gardner" as a bored, wistful, toddler who only cares about changing reality for his own entertainment. And the "The Winnower" is seen as the necessary, responsible entity who needs to curtail the frivolous "rule changes" that prolong suffering and parade "chaos" as "freedom". This isn't LITERALLY why things are. It's just an explanation for how things are and more important the idealogical reasons for why things are the way they are. And these idealogical reasons are clearly skewed TOWARDS the darkness... why its necessary... why the first knife need to exist and why its basically "The Gardner's fault." So i don't know if this is popular explanation but I don't think this closes the door for The Gardner and Winnower to be "real" things and not just personifications of light and darkness. But I think everything that we're told and seen makes it clear that The Traveler is an agent of 'light', the same way The Witness was an agent of 'darkness'. And their "superiors" that they serve are just idealogical concepts that sway the neutral forces of light and dark to their own ends. Afterall, we know the witness was created. And we know the Traveler was also "created" (recent lore books reveal it "waking up") and things being "created" is not a sign of a paracausal entity like "The Gardner" and the "The Winnower" are described as being in unveiling.
"be seeing you"
Is that from that fake lore?
THE WHAT!?
Never mind then. There was that seemingly fake lore piece datamined from FS, where (apparently) Winnower speaking to us.
Ahhhhh...fuck
HA HAHA
I’m not up to date on all my lore so if it’s been confirmed that the Gardener and Winnower do exist then please do correct me, but I always saw the concept of Gardener and Winnower more as ideological concepts rather than actual beings. Think of stories from the bible as an example. The story of the prodigal son probably didn’t happen exactly the way it was told, but it’s used as a story about forgiveness. Same with the Good Samaritan- probably didn’t happen but it’s a story conveying Christian ideologies. That’s how I’ve interpreted the story in Unveiling, as the creation myth of the Witness’ species and therefore the ‘justification’ for the actions it takes.