harry potter theory?

I strongly believe that killing a dark wizard is different than just killing someone out of cold blood. I don't think it would do the same thing to your soul if you were killing for a good reason. Also, Dumbledore didn't necessarily kill Grindelwald (the dark wizard). As he has so rightly said in the past, there are other ways to destroy a wizard.

I agree with several of the users above: Dumbledore is too good to be associated with something like a horcrux. We know that he is strongly opposed to students even learning about the subject.

"It's a banned subject at Hogwarts, you know.... Dumbledore's particularly fierce about it...." -Slughorn, HBP page 499 US edition

Also, a quote from Dumbledore about immortality comes to mind. I don't have my book with me, but I believe that he was talking about Nicholas Flamel. He said that for them, (Nicholas and his wife, I mean,) dying would really be like going to bed after a particularly long, exhausting day. He said that he knew it was hard for Harry to understand, but "to the well organized mind, death is but the next great adventure" or something like that. Basically, I think that Dumbledore was too comfortable with the idea of death to want to do something as trivial as making a horcrux.

I want to point out Fawkes's reaction to Dumbledore's death. If he was a horcrux, why would he be mourning his master? And, as another point, why would he leave Hogwarts? It the book says that "[Harry] knew, without knowing how he knew it, that the phoenix had gone, had left Hogwarts for good, just as Dumbledore had left the school, had left the world... had left Harry." (HBP, page 632.) I believe that even though phoenixes (sp?) are immortal (they are reborn from fire when they die) they have the power to die for good when they choose. I think that that is why he left. Dumbeldore was gone, and the time was right for him to leave too. (This opinion only applies to the books, of course; I don't know enough about the phoenix in mythology to back this theory up.)

Okay, I'm getting off topic, but I only have one more thing to say: As for Harry seeing a phoenix flying away, I interpreted that as a personified metaphor for Dumbledore's soul... This does point towards the idea of him coming back, but I think that would be in some other form, and he is, as of the end of the book, dead.

I don't think that Dumbledore would stoop so low as to have a horcrux. BUT, He IS the most powerful wizard of the time. There has to be a good reason for Voldy to fear him so much. He has knowledge of very old magic that has only been hinted at.

In my opinion he is not dead. But also there has to be a reason for the scene on top of the tower. Oh yeah, by the way, where is Dumbledore's wand? The last we hear it was flying over the battlements. Isn't it indicated that wizards are buried with their wands.

Those who are interested there is a website for this subject with tons of info and clues.: dumbledoreisnotdead.com

Another thing, why has there been so much emphasis on Neville in the last few books? What if...?

That wizard's name was Grindelwald, or something like that. I'm not sure he has a horcrux, I don't think it's enough just to kill someone. There must be some spells, some dark magic things you have to do to really break your soul and make a horcrux. As Bellatrix said, you have to mean it, to want to cause pain, to enjoy it, so you have to enjoy killing another human being (And Voldemort so did). I do agree with the flames, and the thing that makes me believe that Dumbledore is not dead is the fact that Fawkes disappeared. Phoenix birds never die, and he was very usefull to the Order, so he should have stayed with McGonagall. Let's not forget that Dumbledore's Patronus is a Phoenix, either. I think Dumbledore and Snape had some plans, and they found a way to fake the killing curse, and Fawkes left to join his Master (Dumbledore, who is not really dead).

Remember the fight between Harry and Bellatrix in Book 5, the "Order of the Phoenix" one? Harry tried to use the Crucio curse on Bellatrix, but it didn't work. Bellatrix goes on to say 'You've never used an unforgivable curse have you? You have to MEAN it.' or something to that extent.

So when Snape uses the Avada Kedavra curse on Dumbledore, doesn't it stand to reason that he didn't actually MEAN it? So it just...well...knocked him unconsious. Of course we know that Snape is actually good....don't we?

Also, I forget which book this was in, but somewhere it says that the witches of old, when burned at the stake, used a simple spell so that they wouldn't be consumed by the fire. That would explain dumbledore's funeral.

I have to say - sounds like wishful thinking ! Dumbledore is/was my favorite character, but think of it from JK's point of view. Harry has to confront Voldemore ALONE - he can't do that if Dumbledore is there to save him all the time.

Who knows though?! Seems like you've thought this out - maybe you're right. I guess we'll all have to wait to see what happens in Book 7...

In harry potter actually everyone has theories and that i think of that's nicely a stable one.all of us know of snape enjoyed lily yet so did many different ppl he's not the only one.Even lupin admitted there wad merely something specific approximately her.yet to be ordinary its kinda weird and wonderful if u think of roughly wormtail and lily jointly *shudders* yet ur concept is stable and that i think of its precise weird and wonderful yet precise

POSSIBLE, BUT DOESN'T SEEM TOO LIKELY...JO GIVES US THE IMPRESSION THAT DD DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY ARE. I THINK THAT DUMBLEDORE IS ALIVE, BUT NOT B/C OF A HORCRUX (SEE MY OTHER ANSWERS). I THINK SNAPE USED A NONVERBAL SPELL ON DD, AND JUST SAID THE AVADA KEDAVRA BUT NOT MEANING IT. MORE BACK UP TO MY THEORY THAT DD IS EVIL...I REREAD SORCERER'S STONE, AND IT DOES SAY HE DEFEATED THE DARK WIZARD GRINDELWALD. *BUT* IT DOESN'T SAY WHY OR HOW. I THINK HE DEFEATED HIM AND OVERTOOK HIS POWERS. NOT SURE WHAT POWERS THOSE ARE FOR SURE, BUT DUMBLEDORE CAN SEE THROUGH INVISIBILITY CLOAKS, UNLIKE MANY OTHER PEOPLE, AND *SAW HARRY LOOKING IN THE MIRROR OF ERISED* IN SS. AND HE DOESN'T "NEED AN INVISIBILITY CLOAK TO BECOME INVISIBLE" (NOT SURE ON WHAT PG. # BUT IT'S IN THE ERISED CHAPTER IN THE SORCERER'S STONE.)

Horcux I believe would be too dark for Dumbledore's tastes. More than likely, he just didn't want jeopardize Snape's cover. I think maybe that whole scene was pre-arranged.

Huh, I suppose it is possible. Is it true that you don't need to kill someone for a Horcrux. Someone around you just needs to be dead. Correct me if I'm wrong.

i think that it would be too dark for dumbledor . when he told harry about them , he told him how dark and evil they are . how wrong it was that voldemort used them . so why would he . its to hipocritical for dumbledor