26

It was posited in answers/comments to " If a living Horcrux was killed "normally", would they stop being one? " that somehow, Harry is being protected from harm in general (post-GoF) by the fact that - as per HP7 - Voldemort took Harry's blood and thus with his blood took inside him the protection that Lily's sacrifice bestowed on Harry.

However, I think that this protection (both Lily's original protection in Harry's blood, and the part of it that got transferred to Voldemort) is VERY VERY specific and is only against harm done directly by Voldemort. This means that Harry is still subject to non-Voldemort harm, for example he could have been easily killed by Basilisk fang's bite in HP2 or by FiendFyre started by Crabbe in HP7 in Room of Hidden Things.

Is there good in-Universe or JKR information to support or reject my theory that the protection is only against harm directly done by Voldemort?

marked as duplicate by Bellatrix harry-potter Nov 30 '18 at 20:56

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 1
    If no one has found it yet, I'll search when I get home (at work now), but I believe it's explicitly stated when Dumbledore is explaining things to Harry near the end of year 1, maybe 4. – Kevin Jan 6 '12 at 17:55
  • BTW, I'm open to an answer that shows that the protection properties differed between the original one and "after Voldermort use Harry's blood" one. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 6 '12 at 18:11
  • 1
    You mean one of the Dark Lord's most loyal followers could kill the boy for him?! – Bellatrix Jun 23 '17 at 0:15
15
+50

Okay, yeah, you're totally right, and I will go back and edit my posts accordingly :) Here's what Harry tells Dumbledore at the end of Goblet of Fire:

‘He said my blood would make him stronger than if he’d used someone else’s,’ Harry told Dumbledore. ‘He said the protection my – my mother left in me – he’d have it, too. And he was right – he could touch me without hurting himself, he touched my face.’

Goblet of Fire - Page 604 - British Edition

And then I recalled something from Order of the Phoenix. Voldemort possessed Harry and taunted Dumbledore to kill Harry right then and there if Dumbledore wanted to kill Voldemort too. If Harry had universal protection, Dumbledore would not have been able to kill Harry and I don't think Voldemort would have offered that as an option.

Kill me now, Dumbledore ...’

Blinded and dying, every part of him screaming for release, Harry felt the creature use him again ...

If death is nothing, Dumbledore, kill the boy ...’

Let the pain stop, thought Harry ... let him kill us ... end it, Dumbledore ... death is nothing compared to this ...

Order of the Phoenix - Page 720 - British Edition

So, yes sir, I completely concede on this one. I was wrong. :)

  • +1. Likely will get an accept but will wait a bit to let others weigh in. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 7 '12 at 14:36
  • Maybe Dumbledore did consider "killing" Harry in the Ministry and then didn't because a) it would look back - even if Harry survived, how would DUMBLEDORE explain that move to the people around b) he wasn't sure enough to risk it. – Yurippe May 16 '12 at 17:55
  • I doubt Dumbledore would've taken that path though. He doesn't seem like the kind of person to think the ends justify the means. – Dante May 17 '12 at 7:19
  • @Dante Well in his youth he definitely was the kind of person you mention. – Kalissar Jun 13 '13 at 9:33
  • 5
    "I don't think Voldemort would've offered that as an option": When did Voldemort know anything about the reciprocal protection afforded to Harry through his ignorant act at the end of GoF? He didn't know (at any point of time in his life) that Harry was protected from harm done by him, to suppose it was restricted, or he would not have tried to kill Harry himself multiple times. – N Unnikrishnan Jul 3 '14 at 20:00
1

It’s only the Dark Lord - Wormtail acting for him could harm Harry.

The protection that Lily’s sacrifice gave Harry is specifically against harm done to him directly by the Dark Lord. To take Harry’s blood for the potion to restore the Dark Lord to a body, Wormtail touches Harry and doesn’t seem in any pain from it, although he’s a Death Eater and his actions that were harming Harry are directly in service of the Dark Lord.

“Harry could hear shallow, fast breathing from the depths of the hood; he struggled, and the man hit him – hit him with a hand that had a finger missing. And Harry realised who was under the hood. It was Wormtail.”
- Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Chapter 32 (Flesh, Blood and Bone)

As Wormtail is taking the blood then, that happened before the Dark Lord rebuilt his body using Harry’s blood in the potion, making it so he could touch Harry - so the Dark Lord wouldn’t have been able to touch Harry at that point, but Wormtail was able to touch him.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.