Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

End of CoS - Shadar Logoth


trakand_01
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think the Dark One resurrecting someone is slightly more complicated, and actually requires more than is apparent. RJ too said something to the effect that the DO does definitely have restrictions in that. The Forsaken who has died:

Balthamel killed in the eye by fungi, recycled as Aran'gar

Aginor killed in the eye by overdose, recycled as Osan'gar

Be'lal killed in the stone by balefire, almost certainly out (unless the balefire was very weak)

Ishamael killed in the stone by a fiery sword, recycled as Moridin

Lanfear killed by the finns in finnland, recycled as Cyndane

Rahvin killed by megabalefire, out

Asmodean killed by something in a hidden cupboard, out

Sammael killed by mashadar, out

 

I seem to recall RJ saying Sammael was dead meat and Be'lal toast, but I'm not certain about the last.

 

Well, here's something of a pet theory of mine, coming from Asmo discussions, even though it isn't really related. Anyway, we know Asmo couldn't be recycled because of both where and how he was killed, and I understand this to mean that the DO did not notice his death in time, or had no way of knowing. Well, he did die suddenly and surprisingly in a hidden place and seen only by the killer. We know, by Demandred, that the Dark One does not know all the Forsaken know but knows other things very well. What I think is that the Dark One can look into the world some ways, and what happens around Rand can perhaps easily be seen by him. There's numerous ways how this could be. My theory is that if Rand sees the Forsaken die, the Dark One knows he dies. For Lanfear, going through the doorway in that manner could well amount to certain death, which the DO could well know. I thought the DO sent the bubble of evil in CoS when Rand saw Padan Fain. I can't recall whether Shaidar Haran appeared after Moridin helped Rand. This would have begun in Rand's dreams in EotW There's plenty of indications, but it could be otherwise, too. Anyway, the point is that Rand did not see Sammael die in Shadar Logoth, or alternatively, he could have died too far away, across the open, from Rand for him to notice he was in mortal danger, though I think it was a surprise that Sammael did die of Mashadar. If the DO has to notice and snatch the soul in a time that balefire's few seconds can erase, he has to notice immediately, and he cannot be looking at the whole pattern at the same time-- again, he does not know everything.

 

There's a lot of speculation there, but that's what I think happened with Sammael, too. I should put this theory together properly, though I still need to reread some of the later books for signs of it. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not too sure on this, as i'm not too knowledgable on mashadar.
We don't have a lot of info, but saying that the anti-Shadow, something which arose in a city with the motto "the victory of the Light is all", can prevent Shai'tan (BBHN) from transmigrating souls is far from the most unreasonable.

 

I think the Dark One resurrecting someone is slightly more complicated, and actually requires more than is apparent. RJ too said something to the effect that the DO does definitely have restrictions in that.
He did say
There are a few other limits and constraints, but I won't go into them here, since I may want to use them in the books, and I would rather they come as a surprise if I do.

in Question of the Week, week 3 (after talking about getting time constraints on getting souls and needing to get their hands on suitable bodies).
I seem to recall RJ saying Sammael was dead meat and Be'lal toast, but I'm not certain about the last.
He said Sammaelwas toast, after saying it was Mashadar that got him, but I don't know of any similar comment about Be'lal.

 

Well, here's something of a pet theory of mine, coming from Asmo discussions, even though it isn't really related. Anyway, we know Asmo couldn't be recycled because of both where and how he was killed, and I understand this to mean that the DO did not notice his death in time, or had no way of knowing.
We know? No, we have a single much disputed quote from some guy on theoryland who may have misheard. Hardly knowing. However, I prefer your interpretation, Shai'tan(BBHN) couldn't see, to the usual one, it must have taken place in some magic place beyond His reach.
Well, he did die suddenly and surprisingly in a hidden place and seen only by the killer. We know, by Demandred, that the Dark One does not know all the Forsaken know but knows other things very well.
We know that somethings He knew and some things He was ignorant of surprised Demandred. It could be that He needs reports in order to know what is going on, and sometimes the Chosen don't tell Him things (so He doesn't know) and sometimes those who do know tell Him (so He does, but as other Chosen didn't know this may come as a surprise to them) Here's an example: Joe the Chosen dies. Aginor saw, but no-one else. Aginor reports that Joe is dead. When Shai'tan (BBHN) announces Joe's death it comes as a surprise to all but Aginor, because he was the only one who knew.
What I think is that the Dark One can look into the world some ways, and what happens around Rand can perhaps easily be seen by him. There's numerous ways how this could be. My theory is that if Rand sees the Forsaken die, the Dark One knows he dies. For Lanfear, going through the doorway in that manner could well amount to certain death, which the DO could well know. I thought the DO sent the bubble of evil in CoS when Rand saw Padan Fain.
Pretty, but unsupported. While all Bubbles of Evil seem to emanate from the Bore/Shai'tan (BBHN) I'm not sure that he actually sends them out at specific times for specific reasons, they're just a way of spreading chaos, and they drift towards ta'veren because ta'veren affect the Pattern - like malignant driftwood carried on the tide, but with monsters, so it's more fun.
I can't recall whether Shaidar Haran appeared after Moridin helped Rand.
I don't remember any mention of SH visiting SL (it would be in POD if it happened)

 

I should put this theory together properly, though I still need to reread some of the later books for signs of it. ;)
I think it all exists solely in your head, but I would be interested to see if you can find any evidence to support this theory. Really, I think requiring reports, as mentioned earlier, is far more likely than this theory, but whatever.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I remembered some of his sayings inaccurately. Anyway, I read the answer, we must assume that the DO can react very quickly, since a few seconds is enough to make recycling virtually impossible, while he does not need to be ready to snatch the soul at the moment of death.

We know? No, we have a single much disputed quote from some guy on theoryland who may have misheard. Hardly knowing.

Has there been new info on that one. As I understood, it was in answer to Tamyrlin's question, who was known to RJ, and confirmed as accurate by him. Tamyrlin, or was it Kathana, comments on this in the Asmo thread as I recall. In my mental notebook the quote has the mark 'confirmed'.

We know that somethings He knew and some things He was ignorant of surprised Demandred. It could be that He needs reports in order to know what is going on, and sometimes the Chosen don't tell Him things (so He doesn't know) and sometimes those who do know tell Him (so He does, but as other Chosen didn't know this may come as a surprise to them)

It could be so though I rather doubt it. It is doubtful the DO could make any kind of relevant plan if he was solely dependant on people or Myrddraal etc coming to Shayol Ghul to report. Yes, it is completely possible that eg Graendal had made her report before Demandred visited Shayol Ghul. Perhaps Graendal even gave Demandred his summons. Yet I don't think it is enough. What we do know from Demandred, to a reasonable certainty, is that the Dark One cannot see everything. Whether he can hear things is again different from seeing. And of course it is possible he can only see the Pattern as a Pattern, and not as the threads within see their surroundings, though I don't know if there's much difference in the end. What seems clear is that the DO can directly affect things near SG, though.

 

Pretty, but unsupported. While all Bubbles of Evil seem to emanate from the Bore/Shai'tan (BBHN) I'm not sure that he actually sends them out at specific times for specific reasons, they're just a way of spreading chaos, and they drift towards ta'veren because ta'veren affect the Pattern - like malignant driftwood carried on the tide, but with monsters, so it's more fun.

Yea, it's unsupported, its just part of another theory, which is not yet properly formulated. If it ever will be. You say what Moiraine thought of bubbles of evil in Tear, but this may not be true. You have an attack on the three ta'veren in the stone, an attack on Padan Fain, an attack on Salidar which may well have been meant to kill Moghedien, etc. Hardly conclusive, of course. This theory I last laid out here in the autumn: http://forums.dragonmount.com/index.php/topic,20388.msg538258.html#msg538258

 

I think it all exists solely in your head, but I would be interested to see if you can find any evidence to support this theory. Really, I think requiring reports, as mentioned earlier, is far more likely than this theory, but whatever.

Yea, the theories mainly exist in my head, except when I write them out so others can make use of them if they wish :). I wouldn't put them forward if I didn't for a reason or another think there'd be a good chance of them being true, or else I'd say so, but at least these actually three or four theories, I need to concentrate and reread the series before deciding on the details. There's indications, and I don't know of anything against them, but not conclusive evidence and I haven't looked for counterarguments yet. They form the web: the DO's info, Rand's dreams, Ishamael's status early on, the nature of the blight and bubbles of evil etc. Large enough that all of the books are involved, definitely significant in aMoL, so there's enough there to keep me occupied, but I like to put these out, because half a year ago the situation with them was almost the same. Some things have occured to me out of memory, but I still haven't gotten around to proper research, and it might not happen any time soon, so better I not hold them in the drawer. That said, I'm already into SR in my reread that started the said half-year ago. Well, enough rambling.

 

But I'll stress again that they are yet sketches, so I don't bother with details, the most important thing is they should be logically sound and have some support at least in the books, enough to look into them deeper. I expect that if someone else wants to look into them deeper, I do not need to be too specific in what I think. Also, I'm after new info here, so nothing the Randlanders know is going to help much, I'm looking for what actually has happened not what they think of it. This is also the sort of thing RJ would have rafoed, so no help there either.

 

Oh, the Shaidar Haran thing I just misremembered, when I wrote that I wondered about the reasons the DO introduced SH, but in COS he was already at least. Perhaps because Moridin will sooner or later die of the True Power. Anyway, that comment can be replaced by Rand reading Fel's note  :) (You know there's problems in the Shadow finding out about dangerous thinking).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, does Mashadar prevent resurrection?

 

It's my understanding that in order for the DO to resurrect someone, he has to have access to the soul for a short window after death.  Mashadar consumes the soul, so it is not available for the DO to grab even if he is aware of the death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, it's unsupported, its just part of another theory, which is not yet properly formulated. If it ever will be. You say what Moiraine thought of bubbles of evil in Tear, but this may not be true. You have an attack on the three ta'veren in the stone, an attack on Padan Fain, an attack on Salidar which may well have been meant to kill Moghedien, etc. Hardly conclusive, of course. This theory I last laid out here in the autumn: http://forums.dragonmount.com/index.php/topic,20388.msg538258.html#msg538258

 

I seem to recalion in one or more of the books of mention of strange events all accross the contenent, which whoever it was that heard about it attributed to bubbles, but I may be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, we know Asmo couldn't be recycled because of both where and how he was killed

 

I think that the fact that Asmo couldn't be recycled had less to do with where and how he was killed than with the fact that the Dark One WOULDN'T recycle him. "Who betrays me shall die the final death", and I'm pretty sure he was referring to Asmodean.

 

Then again, Lanfear spoke blasphemy against the Dark One, and she was recycled as Cyndane...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, does Mashadar prevent resurrection?
It's my understanding that in order for the DO to resurrect someone, he has to have access to the soul for a short window after death.  Mashadar consumes the soul, so it is not available for the DO to grab even if he is aware of the death.
It's my understanding that Mashadar consuming souls was a theory rather than a stated fact. Prove me wrong, by all means.

 

Anyway, we know Asmo couldn't be recycled because of both where and how he was killed
I think that the fact that Asmo couldn't be recycled had less to do with where and how he was killed than with the fact that the Dark One WOULDN'T recycle him. "Who betrays me shall die the final death", and I'm pretty sure he was referring to Asmodean.

 

Then again, Lanfear spoke blasphemy against the Dark One, and she was recycled as Cyndane...

How dare you try to get around this oh so important, and oh so backed up quote, which is not even in the slightest bit suspect....Oh, and Lanfear saying something against Shai'tan (BBHN) is a bit different from Asmo working against him (Moggy is different again, she was clearly compelled, thanks to the A'dam, while by all accounts Asmo was acting of his own volition (we know he wasn't, but...))so with his shortage of "tools" being willing to live with mindtrapped lesser traitors like Cyndane and Moggy is acceptable, for now. But there was apparently nothing lesser about Asmo's treason, so even if he could have been brought back he wouldn't have been.

 

We know? No, we have a single much disputed quote from some guy on theoryland who may have misheard. Hardly knowing.

Has there been new info on that one? As I understood, it was in answer to Tamyrlin's question, who was known to RJ, and confirmed as accurate by him. Tamyrlin, or was it Kathana, comments on this in the Asmo thread as I recall. In my mental notebook the quote has the mark 'confirmed'.

In my mental notebook, a question of Tamyrlin's which was asked not by Tam but by his friend Winespring Brother, with Tamyrlin not even present, and which he can confirm the accuracy of only by being a friend of the asker rather than through hearing it in person comes under "slightly suspect, especially when it doesn't mesh with what we know". But, whatever.

We know that somethings He knew and some things He was ignorant of surprised Demandred. It could be that He needs reports in order to know what is going on, and sometimes the Chosen don't tell Him things (so He doesn't know) and sometimes those who do know tell Him (so He does, but as other Chosen didn't know this may come as a surprise to them)
It could be so though I rather doubt it. It is doubtful the DO could make any kind of relevant plan if he was solely dependant on people or Myrddraal etc coming to Shayol Ghul to report. Yes, it is completely possible that eg Graendal had made her report before Demandred visited Shayol Ghul. Perhaps Graendal even gave Demandred his summons. Yet I don't think it is enough. What we do know from Demandred, to a reasonable certainty, is that the Dark One cannot see everything. Whether he can hear things is again different from seeing. And of course it is possible he can only see the Pattern as a Pattern, and not as the threads within see their surroundings, though I don't know if there's much difference in the end. What seems clear is that the DO can directly affect things near SG, though.
It could be that Shai'tan (BBHN) has some sort of perception of the Pattern, but it hardly seems necessary to me. Maybe he only sees the big picture, or is limited to places where the pattern has achieved a neccessary thinness. Why any of that should be related to Rand though, is something you need to explain. And relying on reports could certainly be enough, especially if He wishes to leaves precise tactical details to His followers and concentrate more on strategy. Broad edicts like "spread chaos", and some more precise details of what to do is not beyond Him if all He has to go on are reports.

 

Pretty, but unsupported. While all Bubbles of Evil seem to emanate from the Bore/Shai'tan (BBHN) I'm not sure that he actually sends them out at specific times for specific reasons, they're just a way of spreading chaos, and they drift towards ta'veren because ta'veren affect the Pattern - like malignant driftwood carried on the tide, but with monsters, so it's more fun.
Yea, it's unsupported, its just part of another theory, which is not yet properly formulated. If it ever will be. You say what Moiraine thought of bubbles of evil in Tear, but this may not be true. You have an attack on the three ta'veren in the stone, an attack on Padan Fain, an attack on Salidar which may well have been meant to kill Moghedien, etc. Hardly conclusive, of course. This theory I last laid out here in the autumn: http://forums.dragonmount.com/index.php/topic,20388.msg538258.html#msg538258
Of course! A 3 Bubbles attack the ta'veren, which couldn't possibly be because ta'veren affect the Pattern and so they were naturally drawn. They attack Fain....who just so happened to be near a ta'veren when the attack came. And an attack on Salidar, which was supposed to kill Moghedien because this is the perfect weapon for assassinations. No. Bubbles of Evil are good weapons for spreading chaos and causing destruction. They are not good weapons for targeting specific harm to specific people. Go with a Grey Man. My theory at least has the advantages of being supported in the book, and making sense. Yay Me.

I think it all exists solely in your head, but I would be interested to see if you can find any evidence to support this theory. Really, I think requiring reports, as mentioned earlier, is far more likely than this theory, but whatever.
Yea, the theories mainly exist in my head, except when I write them out so others can make use of them if they wish :). I wouldn't put them forward if I didn't for a reason or another think there'd be a good chance of them being true, or else I'd say so, but at least these actually three or four theories, I need to concentrate and reread the series before deciding on the details. There's indications, and I don't know of anything against them, but not conclusive evidence and I haven't looked for counterarguments yet. They form the web: the DO's info, Rand's dreams, Ishamael's status early on, the nature of the blight and bubbles of evil etc. Large enough that all of the books are involved, definitely significant in aMoL, so there's enough there to keep me occupied, but I like to put these out, because half a year ago the situation with them was almost the same. Some things have occured to me out of memory, but I still haven't gotten around to proper research, and it might not happen any time soon, so better I not hold them in the drawer. That said, I'm already into SR in my reread that started the said half-year ago. Well, enough rambling.
I suggest you flesh out your theory in a bit more detail next time. This appears to be more a collection of interesting but unsupported bits of speculation, with nothing to tie them together.

But I'll stress again that they are yet sketches, so I don't bother with details, the most important thing is they should be logically sound and have some support at least in the books, enough to look into them deeper. I expect that if someone else wants to look into them deeper, I do not need to be too specific in what I think. Also, I'm after new info here, so nothing the Randlanders know is going to help much, I'm looking for what actually has happened not what they think of it. This is also the sort of thing RJ would have rafoed, so no help there either.
Essentially, you're just too cool for facts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my mental notebook, a question of Tamyrlin's which was asked not by Tam but by his friend Winespring Brother, with Tamyrlin not even present, and which he can confirm the accuracy of only by being a friend of the asker rather than through hearing it in person comes under "slightly suspect, especially when it doesn't mesh with what we know". But, whatever.

Well, I'll keep in mind it is still under suspicion. Anyway, it isn't like it's something from the books.

It could be that Shai'tan (BBHN) has some sort of perception of the Pattern, but it hardly seems necessary to me. Maybe he only sees the big picture, or is limited to places where the pattern has achieved a neccessary thinness. Why any of that should be related to Rand though, is something you need to explain. And relying on reports could certainly be enough, especially if He wishes to leaves precise tactical details to His followers and concentrate more on strategy. Broad edicts like "spread chaos", and some more precise details of what to do is not beyond Him if all He has to go on are reports.

One indication is the effects from mentioning the name Shai'tan. Another, that strategy is worthless if one does not know the terrain. But really, I'm not out to present a theory here, there's things which lead me to believe Rand has a role, but as I said, I haven't done the research properly. You don't need to buy it, I just give it for free for any who are interested.

Of course! A 3 Bubbles attack the ta'veren, which couldn't possibly be because ta'veren affect the Pattern and so they were naturally drawn. They attack Fain....who just so happened to be near a ta'veren when the attack came. And an attack on Salidar, which was supposed to kill Moghedien because this is the perfect weapon for assassinations. No. Bubbles of Evil are good weapons for spreading chaos and causing destruction. They are not good weapons for targeting specific harm to specific people. Go with a Grey Man. My theory at least has the advantages of being supported in the book, and making sense. Yay Me.

Look, it is usually assumed everywhere that Moiraine was correct there. It is not like your theory, which is almost an indirect quote from the books, is unknown to me. I'm suggesting an alternative is what I'm doing, since I'm just a nasty person that way. However, Moiraine can be wrong sometimes :) .

I suggest you flesh out your theory in a bit more detail next time. This appears to be more a collection of interesting but unsupported bits of speculation, with nothing to tie them together.

If you wish to express it so, I thought I said as much. Oh, they're tied together in that one thing leads to another, the answer to one question affects the other problems, but it is just you that insist I've given out the theory in full. Nope. I gave the essential parts, but if you want to know more, work it out by either proving or refuting. I said I don't have the means to do either yet, and thus I don't bother to try. Perhaps I can put more effort in the reread, but I do it for enjoyment; often it can happen you don't notice what you don't expect to see, as I expect to have been the case, I'll notice things when I read through them next time, assuming they are there to be noticed of course.

Essentially, you're just too cool for facts.

If you consider it so. Essentially, I'm interested in new facts, is what I think. I do pretty much know what is said plainly in the books, so I'm just more interested in what's hidden these days. Also, especially in a fantasy book, one shouldn't take 'known truths' too far, if you never look you'll never know what's out there.

 

Yea, reading your tone in general in answering, my point of view is perhaps clarified, if I say that I'm fully aware that I don't know the answer to this problem, and I don't know if I ever will, but I seek the answer because I want to, and it does not bother me if I never find out. Such it is often in life, in life there are many truths. So I don't feel a need to appear to be right, in order to state an opinion. You do not need to believe it, in fact I prefer you think it for yourself rather than believe, but even that is up to you; there's many things one can do to occupy one's free time. Like a mathematician might react, I just think I may have found problems that may have answers that can be found and are related to each other in some manner..  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One indication is the effects from mentioning the name Shai'tan. Another, that strategy is worthless if one does not know the terrain. But really, I'm not out to present a theory here, there's things which lead me to believe Rand has a role, but as I said, I haven't done the research properly. You don't need to buy it, I just give it for free for any who are interested.
Now that point about naming Shai'tan (BBHN) is a good one (at last). Yes, I think He can "see" the Pattern in some sense, although I still don't see why it should relate specifically to Rand, and nor do I believe that He sees in the sense that we mortals would understand the term. You see things to make you believe Rand has a role....what things? Share. Also, strategy does not require detailed knowledge of terrain, or rather it requires knowledge of some things rather than others. To give an example, if there was an important railway hub, strategy would be saying "deny those railways to the enemy." You need not specify how to go about doing that, unless you are a tactician, in which case you need knowledge that a strategist wouldn't. Shai'tan (BBHN) can rely on reports for the knowledge He needs to formulate strategy.

Of course! A 3 Bubbles attack the ta'veren, which couldn't possibly be because ta'veren affect the Pattern and so they were naturally drawn. They attack Fain....who just so happened to be near a ta'veren when the attack came. And an attack on Salidar, which was supposed to kill Moghedien because this is the perfect weapon for assassinations. No. Bubbles of Evil are good weapons for spreading chaos and causing destruction. They are not good weapons for targeting specific harm to specific people. Go with a Grey Man. My theory at least has the advantages of being supported in the book, and making sense. Yay Me.
Look, it is usually assumed everywhere that Moiraine was correct there. It is not like your theory, which is almost an indirect quote from the books, is unknown to me. I'm suggesting an alternative is what I'm doing, since I'm just a nasty person that way. However, Moiraine can be wrong sometimes :) .
Moiraine can be wrong! Blasphemy!!! Yeah, of course she can. Is there any evidence she is? Do you have a theory that explains anything left unexplained? Is there anything left unexplained? Is there any reason, other than a desire to throw Occam's Razor out the window, for this line of specualtion, no matter how interesting it is?

I suggest you flesh out your theory in a bit more detail next time. This appears to be more a collection of interesting but unsupported bits of speculation, with nothing to tie them together.
If you wish to express it so, I thought I said as much. Oh, they're tied together in that one thing leads to another, the answer to one question affects the other problems, but it is just you that insist I've given out the theory in full. Nope. I gave the essential parts, but if you want to know more, work it out by either proving or refuting. I said I don't have the means to do either yet, and thus I don't bother to try. Perhaps I can put more effort in the reread, but I do it for enjoyment; often it can happen you don't notice what you don't expect to see, as I expect to have been the case, I'll notice things when I read through them next time, assuming they are there to be noticed of course.
You would hardly be the first person to notice things that aren't there. And yes, you did say that you couldn't be bothered to put your speculation together into a theory. I am suggesting that you do so, because I am interested in reading it, and refuting it if possible. As it is, your collection of strung together bits of wholly unsupported speculation is just that. Wait until you have a theory before you post its constituent parts next time.

 

Essentially, you're just too cool for facts.

If you consider it so. Essentially, I'm interested in new facts, is what I think. I do pretty much know what is said plainly in the books, so I'm just more interested in what's hidden these days. Also, especially in a fantasy book, one shouldn't take 'known truths' too far, if you never look you'll never know what's out there.

"New facts". Of course, speculation that is unsupported and unhelpful. Why disregard what is stated plainly in the books without due cause?

 

Yea, reading your tone in general in answering, my point of view is perhaps clarified, if I say that I'm fully aware that I don't know the answer to this problem, and I don't know if I ever will, but I seek the answer because I want to, and it does not bother me if I never find out. Such it is often in life, in life there are many truths. So I don't feel a need to appear to be right, in order to state an opinion. You do not need to believe it, in fact I prefer you think it for yourself rather than believe, but even that is up to you; there's many things one can do to occupy one's free time. Like a mathematician might react, I just think I may have found problems that may have answers that can be found and are related to each other in some manner..  ;)
You have found problems that didn't exist before you invented them, and don't exist now. Very useful, and only to be expected from the mortal that brought us the "Graendal needed to Travel to kill Asmo" theory (I know that is an ad hominem, but is there any problem you can see that your speculation solves, or is this the same case as that theory, you solving a problem that only you see?). What problems are there that your speculation serves to answer? I can't see any, although I do see an awful lot of you justifying your methodology. Now, you can specualte away to your hearts content, and you may find something that does solve a minor problem from the books, or does suggest a possible and potentially interesting plot point for AMOL, but don't expect people to say how useful and wonderful and logical and so on you are being when all you are doing is inventing new problems to be overcome.

 

Now, a suggestion. If you wish to respond, try writing out what you perceive to be the problems that your bits of speculation solve. If you can convince us that there is a problem left unsolved in the books, then we will look to your answer, and try to disprove or improve as desired. Like the Bubbles of Evil. Why is Moiraine's answer insufficient? As far as I can see, it is, and you have done nothing to convince me that there is any reason to believe otherwise. Oh, and everyone knows that the day will be saved by Giant Pink Rabbits. It is up to you to prove or refute that, while I go off on my search for new facts, such as Mat's hidden sexuality and the real reason Perrin grew a beard. Farewell, and adieu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that point about naming Shai'tan (BBHN) is a good one (at last). Yes, I think He can "see" the Pattern in some sense, although I still don't see why it should relate specifically to Rand, and nor do I believe that He sees in the sense that we mortals would understand the term. You see things to make you believe Rand has a role....what things? Share. Also, strategy does not require detailed knowledge of terrain, or rather it requires knowledge of some things rather than others. To give an example, if there was an important railway hub, strategy would be saying "deny those railways to the enemy." You need not specify how to go about doing that, unless you are a tactician, in which case you need knowledge that a strategist wouldn't. Shai'tan (BBHN) can rely on reports for the knowledge He needs to formulate strategy.

Look, I'm sure you can think yourself, so do so. Read strategy by Sun Tzu.

Moiraine can be wrong! Blasphemy!!! Yeah, of course she can. Is there any evidence she is? Do you have a theory that explains anything left unexplained? Is there anything left unexplained? Is there any reason, other than a desire to throw Occam's Razor out the window, for this line of specualtion, no matter how interesting it is?

Think.

You would hardly be the first person to notice things that aren't there. And yes, you did say that you couldn't be bothered to put your speculation together into a theory. I am suggesting that you do so, because I am interested in reading it, and refuting it if possible. As it is, your collection of strung together bits of wholly unsupported speculation is just that. Wait until you have a theory before you post its constituent parts next time.

You can lead the horse to water...

"New facts". Of course, speculation that is unsupported and unhelpful. Why disregard what is stated plainly in the books without due cause?

Ok, I see I'm waisting my time, answering to you. I exist not for your pleasure. Please add something to the table and I might stay.

 

Mr Ares, is this about Asmo that you insist to fail to understand me. I've said all that needs on Asmo, for the past two years, there is a thread in this very discussion group if you seek enlightenment. Luckers did bring up a very nice explanation on inversion and reversion, but otherwise nothing has changed. The change on what I've written in the Structured discussion thread is so small I don't feel like updating because of that. You just came too late to that table to debate it with me.

 

Oh, and please rid yourself of that attitude.

Farewell, and adieu.

thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GF, no this is not about Asmo. This is about you inventing stuff to solve problems that don't exist. If I had wished to debate Asmo with you, I would have done so in the relevant thread. You complain about my attitude, and frankly yours is none too helpful. You tell me to read a book which I read more than 80 years ago, rather than bother giving me something useful, like answers to my questions, and you say I am unwilling to think because I can't be bothered to work out your theories for you. I asked you questions, you reply by asking me to think. Alright. I think you don't have answers to my questions. Why is Shai'tan's (BBHN) "sight" connected to Rand? I know, Rand is the DR, so Shai'tan (BBHN) would keep an eye on him if He could, but does that mean He can, or does? Drawing His gaze results in bad things happening, so what evidence is there that His gaze is perpetually drawn to Rand? Why is Moiraine's answer insufficient? It isn't, you just don't like it and seek to overcomplicate. Now, the Giant Pink Rabbits are going to get involved, you would know this if you were capable of thinking, but I'm not going to be any help on how or why you would know this because I am entirely satisfied making unhelpful little comments and speculating wildly in my search for new facts, which are obviously beyond you. Now, do you want to try again? What problems are there that you speculation helps solve? I have thought, and I can't think of any. Helpful. You say that if Rand sees a Chosen die, Shai'tan (BBHN) sees it. Why? Is Shai'tan (BBHN) seeing through Rand's eyes? That is the implication. OK. Why? Evidence. Lanfear dies outside of Rand's gaze (she is held for a time), so how does this fit into your not-quite-a-theory? I want YOU to think, because it is your speculation, and I want YOU to defend it, and if you didn't want to defend it then why post? Did you just want people to say how wonderful you are? (I have thought about it, and I'm not sure you would like my answer.) I'm hardly being unreasonable asking you to defend what you have posted. Don't give me pseudo-answers like "think", or complain and pull the poor little me act, or say you don't exist for my amusement, or some such crap. I asked a question. Why didn't you answer? *thinks* Because you don't have one. Oh, and don't worry, you are not wasting your time answering me, you're not answering at all.

 

Now, I eagerly await your reply. Think, Is this about Asmo? I'm not going to debate that, Go read this book, You have a bad attitude, etc. are examples of replies I don't want. What I would appreciate is something along the lines of the following:

 

Moiraine's theory about Bubbles of Evil does not account for X. Here is how I account for X.

 

Existing theories about ressurecting Chosen are insufficient because *insert reasons* Here is how I account for them.

 

If you don't want to reply to my entirely reasonable questions in an entirely reasonable way, then kindly do not bother replying at all. I asked questions because I wanted you to give me an answer. You haven't bothered to do that yet. I'm sure it is not beyond you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll look into those things later. I will remind you, though, about the subject of this thread. This is way off topic. I thought a short explanation of a possible answer to the recyclings relevant, but did not intend to start defending theories. If you don't like them, why not just let them go? I did say they are not properly worked out, and implied they may have flaws by calling them pet theories. Also, I have repeatedly said I don't have the answers you want. I may after a reread of all the books, but that would take time even if I devoted myself to it, and unfortunately I don't have such a time. This kind of a thread does bring good memories of old debates here. So, don't expect conclusive arguments, when I have already said they are not. Quite frankly, I'm not certain how much effort I'm willing to put into this, when you've shown all the indications that you're going to shoot down ideas without even considering them, and everyone who's been involved in debates here knows that anything can be argued ad nauseum if there is no willingness to cooperate. I don't miss the debates, really, the discussions are nice though, when ideas are exchanged.

 

So, I'll see if I can pull together some relevant things, I may have some notes somewhere, too. But I'm not going to start debating or defending anything, or repeating myself. Once said should be enough...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q: Is Sammael dead dead, or 'he will never return dead'?

A: Sammael? [pronounce something like Sammy-el] Sammael is dead. He's dead. He could be reborn. In another life. Eithout knowing anything of Sammael. He's not going to be reincarnated, he's not going to show up again.

 

 

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/stargate/8513/creator-forsaken.htm

 

Straight from the Dragon's mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You tell me to read a book which I read more than 80 years ago,

 

Jesus Christ, how old are you? :p

You misspelled his name.

Apparently, that brings things far worse then calling the Dark One by His true name.

 

You shall be in my prairs, professorskar  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, Asmo's link to the DO has been severed. This could as easily explain why the DO did not see when he was slain.

 

By the same token the sheer concentration of evil represented by Shadar Logoth could have obscured the link on Samael to the decree that the DO could not see his death much as blaring mucis drowns out a talking person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, Asmo's link to the DO has been severed. This could as easily explain why the DO did not see when he was slain.

 

By the same token the sheer concentration of evil represented by Shadar Logoth could have obscured the link on Samael to the decree that the DO could not see his death much as blaring mucis drowns out a talking person.

 

Asmodean I agree with. However, Sammael's lack of resurrection probably has more to do with his soul sitting comfortably in Mashadar's belly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Guest Dreadlord

forgot about that, its been a while since i read that far. just started book 5 (first 4 have gone missing!!!! noooooooooo!!!!) but saying that padan fain has merged with it to a point has he not? it would be good if padan fain gained some of sammaels powers but again i know it aint happenin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Padan Fain is half-merged with Mordeth, not with Shadar Logoth or Mashadar ... and Mashadar doesn't get powers from the people it eats ... and Fain doesn't get powers from Mashadar.

 

Many people think that Fain has Mashadar-like powers because of the killer fog that appeared around Toram Riatin's tent while he was there in ACoS ch 36.  But that killer fog was not Mashadar, it was a "bubble of evil", which killed and scattered most of Toram Riatin's army, including the "White Lions", commanded by Daved Hanlon (see Glossary of TPoD under "Daved Hanlon")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...