The Three of us

[Thor]

morridin must have some way of detecting fain too else he would have no method of control over fain. 

 

i see it as this: fain tries to sneak attack morridin, morridin lifts fain up with disgust with a weave of air, morridin uses the squeeing weave to start crushing fain, rand (who just got his other hand sliced off, nose flattened, ear deafened, eyes blinded, testes squished, lungs burned) then balefires morridin while morridin was distracted.

 

although i'm not sure if rand knows how to weave balefire without using at least one hand.  so let's let him keep one for practicality sake.

 

I dont think Moridin could control Fain in any way. The reason I would love to see such a fight is because each are from three sides if you will, and each possess a different form of power. I would love to see the True Power used in battle, but I also want to see Fain use his powers against channeling, both True Source and True Power. Each could prove interesting.

 

it's pretty obvious that morridin could control fain since fain was 'ishy's dog'.  the control is obviously less opr even gone now, but it is only logical that morridin should still be able to sense fain's presence. opposite evils cannot get near each other without them sensing, else they wouldn't be so opposite, don't you think.

[Luckers]

Supposing that body switch took place, would Fain find himself sensing Rand's body or his soul? I can see Moridin stuck in Rand's messed up body and getting murdered by Fain who runs off jumping for joy.

 

We don't really know for sure--we don't know enough about Fain's Rand-sense to know. I'd suggest the link would probably be broken altogether and that Fain would lose Rand--I'm basing this on that old theory that attempted to explain why Fain sometimes lost his sense of Rand--we know it happened other then when Rand was in the Portal Stone worlds, yet at a time when he was aware if he was channeling or not, so it wasn't the Power. Some suggested that it was the void--Rand's altered mindstate within the void--that made Fain lose his feel of Rand.

 

If that IS true--and its pretty weak--then i'd say swapping brains would probable change his mindstate enough to lose Fain for good, and that Moridin would be too different from Rand that he would not pick up the mindsense either.

 

 

[mb]

it's pretty obvious that morridin could control fain since fain was 'ishy's dog'.  the control is obviously less opr even gone now, but it is only logical that morridin should still be able to sense fain's presence. opposite evils cannot get near each other without them sensing, else they wouldn't be so opposite, don't you think.

 

Since Winter's Heart (if not before), Moridin wanted Fain dead.  From the passage (Moridin speaking)::

"Whether Isam succeeds in finding and killing that other vermin, Fain."

If Moridin could control Fain, there would be no point in sending an assassin after Fain; there would only need to be some order from Moridin to Fain that would cause Fain's death.

 

[Jyxxer]

Alot more. Here's the thread. http://forums.dragonmount.com/index.php/topic,31778.0.html

 

Thanks for that.  It never dawned on me that Moridin was channeling strictly the True Power because his link to Saidin was jacked up from that incident.  I guess I am also having a little trouble swallowing the body swap theory.  I think once Rand has defeated Moridin in some way, he will be able to channel normally again.

 

Throughout the book Nyneave gets better with healing, (meeting the Kin lady who could heal without touching the body). As does Flynn, who can heal in this new fashion, and also figures out how to heal stilling.  It's obvious that healing the opposite sex of being severed works best.  But I'm bettting Flynn and Nyneave will meet up and figure out some uber healing skills via linking.  If she can't heal death, she better be able to at least grow Rand's hand back.

 

I don't care how it plays out, Nyneave will have a huge part in helping Rand live after he dies.  If Nyneave doesn't heal him back to life, maybe he will just die and Mat will call him back with the Horn of Valere.  ;)  Either of these would be able to support all of your prophecies, yes?

 

I still don't think any one has come up with a good theory to support the beggar quotes.  Have we all agreed The Three of Us is LTT, Rand, and Moridin?

 

P.S.  The Forsaken lost most control of Fain when they traveled through Shadar Logoth in book one.  They lost all control once he got his hands on that dagger.

[Mr Ares]

I'm thinking... considering it's pretty likely that Moridin will be commander in chief (or very close to it) at Tarmon Gaidon, perhaps the fact that Rand can almost read his thoughts, could be a wonderful way of knowing what Moridin's going to do, before he does it? If Rand can keep his mind clear enough, and simply pass on Moridin's thoughts directly to Mat, for all the thinking to go on in Mat's head instead of Rand's...?

What if the link works both ways - then Moridin reads Rand's thought and passes information onto Demandred. After all, Demandred held field commands during the War, Ishy didn't. So who is more likely to be in charge on the battlefield at TG?

[Thor]

please show source of where it is explicitly said that ishy did not control armies.

 

it is more likely that ishy did command army, which eventually led to his duel with ltt.

[Jethro]

please show source of where it is explicitly said that ishy did not control armies.

 

it is more likely that ishy did command army, which eventually led to his duel with ltt.

 

Moridin can definitely not control Fain. Since Fain encountered Mordeth they merged an Fain has been more than any normal Darkfriend ever since. As we have seen several times he has alien powers that do not relate to channeling as far as we know. And It is obvious that Fain is a potential threat to Moridins plans; firstly, because as has already been mentioned Moridn has Isam after Fain, and secondly because we know that Fains powers are as dangerous to the Shadow as to the Light. For one thing Fain can tell a Darkfriend by sight, even tell if someone had even thought of becoming a Darkfriend. That small ability in itself could be very useful to Fain indeed.

[Majsju]

The word viable means--more or less--'can occur'.

 

I state the Bodyswap Theory as the only viable explanation for the prophecies for a reason--other answes exist that address individual prophecies, but none other than this that address all the requirements.

 

Take your joke, for example. Being turned by the 13+13 thing could explain why Alivia killing him would be helping him die--yet how does it supply for the prophecy that he is 'dead, yet lives'? That particular prophecy requires him to be both alive and dead at the same time--the wording is concurrent, it is not he 'dies and lives again' as with Mat. He is dead, yet he lives. Both, occuring at the same time.

 

Add to that that the issues of healing a dead person--re-animating their brain functions, reacreating the original electro-chemical state in their brains would require a skill far beyond Nynaeve's.

 

Balefire, eclipses, time travel, imposter Rand's... i've considered them all. None viably address all the requirements stated by prophecy. So yes, i do stand by the claim that this is the only explanation that fits... and i look for another, because despite your claim that I 'desperatly want this idea of [mine] to be true' i actually do not like the bodyswap theory. I have been quite clear all along about that, in threads i know you've read. I think it crass, and will be very glad to be proven wrong.

 

But the fact remains, it is to date the only theory stated that adequately addresses all the requirements set down by the prophecies surrounding Rand's death and life.

 

I think the major mistake you are doing here is that you believe you can figure out every last detail of AMOL. Nothing wrong with a little confidence, but come on...RJ is the kind of writer who wants to surprise the readers.

 

Mistake #2, thinking that "He who is dead yet lives" only can be interpreted one way (conveniently, a way that works with your theory). For all we know, it could just as well mean that the world believes Rand to be dead, while he lives happily ever after in seclusion. Or, it is a reference to LTT, whose presence inside Rand is growing. Or a number of other things.

 

Long ago, when I went to acting school, I picked up a phrase I have since used as a guide in all creative work I have ever done; Kill your darlings  ;)

 

Someone also voiced an interesting thought not too long since although I cant remember who. Someone mentioned they thought Fain would have a role in Tarmon Gaidon much like Gollum did in LotR, which I agree with. The interesting bit was that maybe Fain can sense Moridin as he can sense Rand as a result of the link between them. Imagine that. A three sided battle, Rand vs. Moridin vs. Fain. Could prove interesting, as long as we see Moridin beat a hell of a lot of crap out of Rand before Fain intervenes.

 

My favourite theory regarding Fain purpose, is that he will actually save Rand by taking out SH. Fain considers Rand to be his to kill, and would probably jump at anyone trying to "steal" the kill from him. Now, SH seems a bit much for any on Team Light to handle, as it can block channeling, channels itself, and is quite likely to be a formidable opponent in combat.

Enter: Fain, and his knife. The knife with the SL taint on it. Putting that in SHs back just might do the trick.

 

Of course, the problem with that is that it would make the fight between Fain and Slayer I am hoping for way less likely to happen :(

[Jethro]

Now, SH seems a bit much for any on Team Light to handle, as it can block channeling

 

I reckon Shaidar uses True Power shields. If Shaidar radiates an anti-channeling field, why can it still channel itself? We have seen that the True Power can accomplish at least some of the things the Power can but sometimes in different ways. Travelling, for example; instead of stepping through a gateway, a True Power user fades out of the current location and fades int othe new one IIRC. My thought is that the True Power equivalent of a shield doesn't create a barrier between the channeler and the Source, but that the target simply cannot feel the Source at all. Speculation, true, but I don't like the idea of the Great Lord being able to create anything that prevents channeling like a stedding does.

[Mr Ares]

please show source of where it is explicitly said that ishy did not control armies.

It's in the BWB. The section on Ishamael says he never held a field command.

 

it is more likely that ishy did command army

Why is it more likely?

[Thor]

bwb is..... fudge to put it nicely.  the whole part with perrin describing wolf dream makes me cringe at the ridiculous childishness of how it was presented.

 

so answer me this then.  ishy was according to you not commanding any army, yet he for some reason just walks into the middle of a battle before darkness and light and somehow either challenges ltt or perhaps ltt challenged him.

 

i seriously don't believe how ishamael can be in the middle of a shadow army and somehow not be the leader.

[MikeRiley]

Rand made an appearance at Tarwin's Gap and he had nothing to do with the armies. Ishmael could have found any number of ways to enter a battlefield to challenge Lews Therin. He didn't have to command the army itself.

[Luckers]

I think the major mistake you are doing here is that you believe you can figure out every last detail of AMOL. Nothing wrong with a little confidence, but come on...RJ is the kind of writer who wants to surprise the readers.

 

Thats a bit of a cop out don't you think? First you suggest i state my theory only because i love the idea of it--which i don't--now you argue that no one can know everything therefore I'm mistaken...? Really?

 

I agree with you though, RJ does like to surprise his readers--and i hope he does here. But the fact is that he is also the kind of writer that is consistent with what he has previously written. That you don't like the ides is fine--i don't either--but my comment remains apt--the only viable option offered based on the strictures placed within the text is the bodyswap.

 

Mistake #2, thinking that "He who is dead yet lives" only can be interpreted one way (conveniently, a way that works with your theory). For all we know, it could just as well mean that the world believes Rand to be dead, while he lives happily ever after in seclusion. Or, it is a reference to LTT, whose presence inside Rand is growing. Or a number of other things.

 

Firstly, the distinction you make here--that it is a mistake to think that can only be interpreted one way--is flawed. Based on the reality of the english language the concurrency of the word 'yet' sustains my argument. Now I agree people misuse the english language all the time, which allows for the breadth of interpretation--I'm actually normally a fan of that. But the fact is that this was uttered as foretelling, the words supplied by whatever force drives that--we know this as a fact, the words of the foretelling are significant and come with it.

 

As such to suggest I am making a mistake in looking at the specific semantics of the prophecy is flawed. We have a deffinate reason to look exactly at that specific wording. It was for this purpose that I wrote the bodyswap to begin with--so many theories exist fulfilling one, but being stopped by another. The only viable answer is the bodyswap--i used the word viable at all stages intentionally, it speaks to this specific semantic argument. Viable. Possible to occur--not likely, not best, not 'darling'. Possible.

 

I get that you don't like the theory. I also get that you can't argue against it on any of its specific interpretations--we don't have enough information to do that, and I acknowledge that. We likely won't till aMoL--and thus have to argue that alternate interpretations are viable in a desire to express your dislike for it. But that's attacking my method, not my points, and i've been quite clear about my method. I created the bodyswap by interprating each of the prophecies as they are literally stated to the effect of establishing a unifying theory that fulfils all of those prophecies. Since my theory is the only theory I've ever seen that does that I stand by the claim that it remains the only viable theory.

 

You've offered one liner alternatives--like everyone thinking Rand dead, which is precluded by the specific statements that Rand actually must die--but you offer no alternatives which speak to all prophecies. I did so, with specific reference to each prophecy that refers to, or even may refer to, Rand's death.

 

No one else has. Do you really stand against my comment about viability? If so, do so by providing your own viable theory.

 

Long ago, when I went to acting school, I picked up a phrase I have since used as a guide in all creative work I have ever done; Kill your darlings

 

By which you again imply that I am holding to this theory because i like it, something I've specifically decried--not only in this thread, but in every thread I've ever made about the Bodyswap. Honestly Maj, such arguments are beneath you.

 

My favourite theory regarding Fain purpose, is that he will actually save Rand by taking out SH. Fain considers Rand to be his to kill, and would probably jump at anyone trying to "steal" the kill from him. Now, SH seems a bit much for any on Team Light to handle, as it can block channeling, channels itself, and is quite likely to be a formidable opponent in combat.

Enter: Fain, and his knife. The knife with the SL taint on it. Putting that in SHs back just might do the trick.

 

Of course, the problem with that is that it would make the fight between Fain and Slayer I am hoping for way less likely to happen

 

I also like this theory--and dislike it for the same reason.

 

The Fain theory that made me grin the most, though, was the one about Rand killing the Dark One and Fain becoming the next turning's Dark One.

[Mr Ares]

bwb is..... fudge to put it nicely.

Some, not all. If that is the only evidence we have, you choose to ignore the only source. My evidence is better than your say so. RJ had some input into my evidence, for one thing.

[Jethro]

I get that you don't like the theory. I also get that you can't argue against it on any of its specific interpretations--we don't have enough information to do that, and I acknowledge that. We likely won't till aMoL--and thus have to argue that alternate interpretations are viable in a desire to express your dislike for it. But that's attacking my method, not my points, and i've been quite clear about my method. I created the bodyswap by interprating each of the prophecies as they are literally stated to the effect of establishing a unifying theory that fulfils all of those prophecies. Since my theory is the only theory I've ever seen that does that I stand by the claim that it remains the only viable theory

 

No offense Luckers, but I agree with Maj on this. Just because nobody has cross-referenced their ideas as much as you did doesn't make your idea the only viable one. For one thing, while it does seem that most of the things you quoted form the books may be connected, our interpretation of any foreshadowing doesnt set anything in stone. As has been said by many people, RJ keeps us on our toes. I doubt it is as easy as you think to simply slam a few clues together to come up with "the only viable theory." For one thing, the viewing Min had about Rand and another merging and one dying, to me it seems like the one would die as a result of the merging and not because Rand and Alivia tag teamed him after they swap. For another, I dont think Rand and Alivia killing Moridin-in-Rands-body would count as her "helping him die" because that to me sounds more like she will help him sacrifice himself. I myself find it more likely that Rand will take Moridins body and Moridin will die. But even though these are the most likely options that appeal to me, I am not by any means saying they are the only viable ones, just ones that ARE just as viable as any other regardless of the fact that they contradict with your own idea.

[Luckers]

No offense Luckers, but I agree with Maj on this. Just because nobody has cross-referenced their ideas as much as you did doesn't make your idea the only viable one.

 

With all due respect Jethro, it does. That's what viability is. The possibility of something to occur based on the variables known. I'm not here saying 'beleive my theory, its awesome'. I'm saying that due to many different conflicting prophecies, yes, that they have not cross-referenced those prophecies does speak to their viability as a theory.

 

I'm not trying to be arrogant here. Yes, the bodyswap was specifically created because of contradictions in prophecy to provide a theory that addressed all the issues and conditions, and yes I do stand by the idea that that makes it the only viable options--but I really dislike the idea of it myself. I'm not here putting others down. My comment wasn't that 'your ideas are stupid' or 'your ideas are impossible'.

 

It was that the bodyswap is the only explanation to viably meet all the conditions of prophecy that has been put down so far. And it is. But please, present another. I would really like an alternative, but i just can't think of it. The problem is in that cross-referencing.

 

For one thing, while it does seem that most of the things you quoted form the books may be connected, our interpretation of any foreshadowing doesnt set anything in stone. As has been said by many people, RJ keeps us on our toes. I doubt it is as easy as you think to simply slam a few clues together to come up with "the only viable theory." For one thing, the viewing Min had about Rand and another merging and one dying, to me it seems like the one would die as a result of the merging and not because Rand and Alivia tag teamed him after they swap. For another, I dont think Rand and Alivia killing Moridin-in-Rands-body would count as her "helping him die" because that to me sounds more like she will help him sacrifice himself. I myself find it more likely that Rand will take Moridins body and Moridin will die. But even though these are the most likely options that appeal to me, I am not by any means saying they are the only viable ones, just ones that ARE just as viable as any other regardless of the fact that they contradict with your own idea.

 

Ok, you seem to think I've got this clear idea on what i want to happen, and am refusing to listen to anything else because its my beloved pet theory. Not so. And I was quite clear about the parts where i was offering my own interpretations as opposed to suggesting explanations of strictures in prophecy.

 

For instance, I agree that Moridin might as easily die almost straight after the bodyswap. I suggested months later because of the idea of him being a beggar, as seen by Min around Rand. But nothing directly links that, and nothing in the theory requires it. Your option is just as viable within the context of the bodyswap.

 

Though i would include Alivia in killing Moridin there--because the prophecies are clear. Rand must die, and Alivia must help him die, yet he must also live again-indeed, continue living inspite of his death. Moridin dying seperate of the prophecies around Rand's death brings us back to the old problem, how can Rand die, yet be alive. Or even if you don't take that one literally, how can he die and live again? Alivia kills him, then someone balefires Alivia--wouldn't that undo whatever Rand did that required him to have Alivia help him die? Alivia kills him and Nynaeve heals death? How does she overcome the issue that stumps even the Dark One--capturing the soul and returning it to the body after death? Even if she overcomes all the physical issues of such a resusitation she has no power to exert over the soul.

 

This is what i was talking about with viability, and why i created the bodyswap to begin with. Yes, answers can be found to individual problems, but to all of them? This is where my cross-referencing comes in, it was not just 'slamming a few clues together' as you put it, I worked to create something that solved all the problems, a unifying theory that addressed all the issues, something throwing out single answers for each of these issues does not do.

 

Does that make any sense to you? I wasn't casting aspirations on your ideas, or aggrandizing my own, i was making a comment about the different methodologies used, and the resulting aptness of those theories to the entirety of the question of the prophecies surrounding the bodyswap.

 

This isn't really getting anywhere. I stand by my comment, I just hope you don't misunderstand why.

[Dmitri]

bwb is..... fudge to put it nicely.  the whole part with perrin describing wolf dream makes me cringe at the ridiculous childishness of how it was presented.

 

so answer me this then.  ishy was according to you not commanding any army, yet he for some reason just walks into the middle of a battle before darkness and light and somehow either challenges ltt or perhaps ltt challenged him.

 

i seriously don't believe how ishamael can be in the middle of a shadow army and somehow not be the leader.

 

You seem not to believe a bunch of things (those which aren't your ideas, mostly)...   :-\

[Jethro]

This isn't really getting anywhere. I stand by my comment, I just hope you don't misunderstand why

 

Theres nothing wrong with standing by an idea, as long as you dont believe it to be the only viable one. You could say that Miks Moridin=Shaidar theory is the only viable one because it covers in its own area all the little things that make us wonder just as much-if not a hell of a lot more-than the bodyswap covers, yet that doesnt at all make it the only viable idea. Just because you believe it to be the only viable theory doesnt make it so. You should know that.

[Luckers]

For clarity, I wasn't standing by my idea (the bodyswap) i was standing by my comment that it is the only viable one--so your response makes little sense.

 

The fact is the methodology comes into it. Your trying to compare my bodyswap to Miks Moridin=Shaidar is pointless--almost offensive--the claim was viability, that means the methodology of the argument. I was clear about linking which points specify which requirements, Miks was a haphazard use of random quotes. If you do have any problems with my specific points, address them directly. Question me about them. I'm fine with that.

 

Endgame remains that the bodyswap remains the only theory set down to date to adequately address all requirements in prophecy. Thats my claim--thats what i meant by viability, so if you don't like that word lets drop it, and replace it with the above sentence. Means the same thing, and its a fact--no other person has developed a theory that addresses all the prophecies.

 

So Jethro, provide your own adequately sourced theory, coz all I've claimed is that no one else has. And they havn't.

 

 

[Majsju]

Thats a bit of a cop out don't you think? First you suggest i state my theory only because i love the idea of it--which i don't--now you argue that no one can know everything therefore I'm mistaken...? Really?

 

I agree with you though, RJ does like to surprise his readers--and i hope he does here. But the fact is that he is also the kind of writer that is consistent with what he has previously written. That you don't like the ides is fine--i don't either--but my comment remains apt--the only viable option offered based on the strictures placed within the text is the bodyswap.

 

And there comes yet another mistake of yours, the assumption that what RJ has previosuly written is consistent with your little pet theory. It is not.

 

Firstly, the distinction you make here--that it is a mistake to think that can only be interpreted one way--is flawed. Based on the reality of the english language the concurrency of the word 'yet' sustains my argument. Now I agree people misuse the english language all the time, which allows for the breadth of interpretation--I'm actually normally a fan of that. But the fact is that this was uttered as foretelling, the words supplied by whatever force drives that--we know this as a fact, the words of the foretelling are significant and come with it.

 

I will not argue the "reality of the english language" with you, considering that I am schooled with BE, you are an aussie, and RJ has the language of an educated southern american.

But you should try looking up the word 'yet' in an Oxford dictionary, it has more than one meaning... 

 

As such to suggest I am making a mistake in looking at the specific semantics of the prophecy is flawed. We have a deffinate reason to look exactly at that specific wording. It was for this purpose that I wrote the bodyswap to begin with--so many theories exist fulfilling one, but being stopped by another. The only viable answer is the bodyswap--i used the word viable at all stages intentionally, it speaks to this specific semantic argument. Viable. Possible to occur--not likely, not best, not 'darling'. Possible.

 

I know very well what 'viable' means, at least in the Queens English. I am however questioning your interpretation of the word. No dictionary I have ever seen has the word meaning "the way I think things fit together to result in this".

 

I get that you don't like the theory. I also get that you can't argue against it on any of its specific interpretations--we don't have enough information to do that, and I acknowledge that. We likely won't till aMoL--and thus have to argue that alternate interpretations are viable in a desire to express your dislike for it. But that's attacking my method, not my points, and i've been quite clear about my method. I created the bodyswap by interprating each of the prophecies as they are literally stated to the effect of establishing a unifying theory that fulfils all of those prophecies. Since my theory is the only theory I've ever seen that does that I stand by the claim that it remains the only viable theory.

 

I am attacking your method hjere, because you are not presenting your argeuments. Which are even easier to rip apart than your methods.

 

You've offered one liner alternatives--like everyone thinking Rand dead, which is precluded by the specific statements that Rand actually must die--but you offer no alternatives which speak to all prophecies. I did so, with specific reference to each prophecy that refers to, or even may refer to, Rand's death.

 

I can not see how the Finns "prophecy" fits with your pet theory, so maybe, just maybe it refers to something completely different...

 

No one else has. Do you really stand against my comment about viability? If so, do so by providing your own viable theory.

 

You know, I am not compelled to come up woith my own little theory for everything. I expect to be surprised, otherwise I would not have become so interested in WOT in the first place.

 

By which you again imply that I am holding to this theory because i like it, something I've specifically decried--not only in this thread, but in every thread I've ever made about the Bodyswap. Honestly Maj, such arguments are beneath you.

 

No, I do not imply that you actually like it. I do however imply that you want to stick to the theory because you came up with it. Quite a difference, but with the same result.

 

 

 

[Charlz Fel]

The body-swap theory is the only viable theory in which a certain set of prophecies are all explained by the same event.  However, do we know that all of these prophecies do, in fact, refer to the same event?  If Rand is not the one who dies in the "merging" vision, then this vision need not be related to the "To live, you must die" Aelfinn statement.  They could refer to the same event, if the body swap theory holds, but they don't necessarily.

 

I should probably add that I am skeptical of Rand's wisdom in trusting Alivia based on Min's statement that "she will help you die."  Rand assumes, arrogantly, that he knows what is going on here.  However, we know that Alivia's only stated motive is to kill sul'dam.  I find this motive somewhat suspect in itself, since it is so alien to the attitudes of all other long-term damane we have seen.  More importantly, Rand is planning to make alliance with the Seanchan, and has shown that he is afraid to let Alivia near the Seanchan in any case.  Why would she cooperate with him?

[Jethro]

Because he is showing her, without realising, what it is like to be a person and not a pet. Rand knows whats going on to a point because of the way Min worded her viewing; Alivia won't kill Rand, she will help him die. Since Rand is certain that he must sacrifice himself and now he knows Alivia will "help him die" I think he believes she will help him die in a way that somehow allows something to be done to bring him back. I cant see it being Rand-in-Moridins-body and Alivia tagteaming Moridin-in-Rands-body, because that wouldnt be helping Rand die even if you count his body I dont think. Rands soul is what makes him Rand, not his body.

[Luckers]

And there comes yet another mistake of yours, the assumption that what RJ has previosuly written is consistent with your little pet theory. It is not.

 

You have problems with the content of the theory, address it in the theory. I'm more than willing to discuss the content. Coz what you are talking about it not an 'assumption'. I provided reasoning for why i think what i think.

 

I will not argue the "reality of the english language" with you, considering that I am schooled with BE, you are an aussie, and RJ has the language of an educated southern american.

But you should try looking up the word 'yet' in an Oxford dictionary, it has more than one meaning... 

 

You realise you argued what you said you wouldn't argue? And in less than three lines, that's impressive.

 

Does anyone actually need me to respond? Is anyone confused about whether I was saying what Maj is trying to make out that I was saying?

 

If not, shall we move on?

 

I know very well what 'viable' means, at least in the Queens English. I am however questioning your interpretation of the word. No dictionary I have ever seen has the word meaning "the way I think things fit together to result in this".

 

Yes, because I've claimed that. Next?

 

I am attacking your method hjere, because you are not presenting your argeuments. Which are even easier to rip apart than your methods.

 

I did present them, remember? I provided a link and everything.

 

Maj, you've attacked me on the issue of my claim that my theory is the only one that adequately addresses all the requirements. Prove it. Find me another one. Or, if you think mine doesn't succeed in that, address the specifics. Because honestly mate, your not ripping anything apart here.

 

This is beneath you dude. I have always had a strong respect for you--I've no problem with you not agreeing with my theory--but the anger with which you attack me for sustaining it concerns me.

 

I've made my claims--both in the content of the theory, and about why it is the only one to do what it does.

 

I can not see how the Finns "prophecy" fits with your pet theory, so maybe, just maybe it refers to something completely different...

 

Maybe it does. I've never required all the prophecies fit my interpretation, I've simply stated that my interpretation is the only one that fits all the requirements of prophecy. There is still a massive amount of room for variance, or things to go many ways. That being said, I maintain my stance on the core issues--and i feel I've been clear at all stages with where im offering my feelings on what will happen, and where i think something is required to happen by prophecy. If I've not been clear at any stage by all means raise the point specifically, and I will see if I can clarify myself.

 

But, in the context of what you were commenting on--you offered the idea that everyone might think Rand is dead as a viable alternative option. In this, the Finns prophecy is clear. Rand must actually die. That does not relate specifically to pointing out what will occurr in my theory, other than Rand must die, but it does disprove yours.

 

Or rather your flippant comment. I have too much respect for you to believe you actually intended to suggest such a thing--indeed, i've seen your comments about Rand's death against this point.

 

You know, I am not compelled to come up woith my own little theory for everything. I expect to be surprised, otherwise I would not have become so interested in WOT in the first place.

 

Of course you arn't. And you have every right to desire that--but lacking that attempt how can you contest my claim that mine is the only viable theory existing? And I agree that that it doesn't have any challangers doesn't make it correct--I'm rather hoping to be surprised too--but it does make your comments a baseless, because it does mean it is the only currently viable theory. Thats what viability is.

 

No, I do not imply that you actually like it. I do however imply that you want to stick to the theory because you came up with it. Quite a difference, but with the same result.

 

I believe i also stated how keen i am to see an alternative. Many times. No, Maj, this is exactly the same as your first comment--you are trying to imply that I am refusing to see alternatives because I'm so caught up in this theory, and you are wrong.

 

Offer me an alternative, I'm keen. But your not doing that, you state that you don't have to do that--and yet you still want to disparage me for saying that mine is the only one.

 

Pick, Maj. Either offer an alternative, or stop this. I'm not saying accept my theory, but your attempts to disparage me are getting pretty over the top.

 

The body-swap theory is the only viable theory in which a certain set of prophecies are all explained by the same event.  However, do we know that all of these prophecies do, in fact, refer to the same event?  If Rand is not the one who dies in the "merging" vision, then this vision need not be related to the "To live, you must die" Aelfinn statement.  They could refer to the same event, if the body swap theory holds, but they don't necessarily.

 

I agree, there is still a great deal of variance. The merging vision may have nothing to do with Rand's death at all. Same goes for any of a number of the visions.

 

However there are some, at their core, which refer to the same singular event. Rand's death. These prophecies are specific in what they speak of--the death of Rand. In stating my theory i feel i was clear in dilineating where i thought the requirements of prophecies established something, and where i was using prophecy to suggest something.That Rand needed to actually die in some form, as opposed to faking his death, is something prophecy established. That Rand be dead and alive at the same time, is something prophecy established. That Rand's death come about as the result of a direct effort on behalf of him and Alivia is something prophecy established. That Moridin in Rand's body goes on to be the beggar is something I've suggested.

 

If we are going to discuss the specifics of the theory may i suggest we move to that thread?

 

Because he is showing her, without realising, what it is like to be a person and not a pet. Rand knows whats going on to a point because of the way Min worded her viewing; Alivia won't kill Rand, she will help him die. Since Rand is certain that he must sacrifice himself and now he knows Alivia will "help him die" I think he believes she will help him die in a way that somehow allows something to be done to bring him back. I cant see it being Rand-in-Moridins-body and Alivia tagteaming Moridin-in-Rands-body, because that wouldnt be helping Rand die even if you count his body I dont think. Rands soul is what makes him Rand, not his body.

 

Well, as i raised in the theory, its been shown clearly that personality is linked to body, even if held in the soul. Rand's soul does not make him Rand, any more that it makes him Lews Therin--both are contained, and yet specific to the body in which they lived. Their death is linked to their body, their incarnation. We've seen this hold true amongst the Forsaken, the Wolves and the Heroes--death, such that it is, is a bodily function. The soul goes on, even in cases where that soul retains the same facet personality, and still refers to their death.

 

Ergo, Alivia and Rand killing Rand's body could be termed as helping him die.

 

 

[Jethro]

I acknowledge it as a possibility but I personally dont think it will happen that way since I think Mins viewing of two merging and one dying means Moridin will die as a result of the event. The idea does sound good though, if Moridin ended up burnt out and in Rands half-crippled body, but I personally think Mins viewing outrules the possibility.

[Majsju]

You have problems with the content of the theory, address it in the theory. I'm more than willing to discuss the content. Coz what you are talking about it not an 'assumption'. I provided reasoning for why i think what i think.

 

Problem is, your reasoning is based on assumptions made to fit your conclusion. To view the reasoning in the proper light, it is thus important to look at where both the conclusion and the reasoning are coming from.

In this case, you want to understand where the story is going, and take it upon yourself to draw a red line between bits of information and dcelare it to be the most viable one.

 

You realise you argued what you said you wouldn't argue? And in less than three lines, that's impressive.

 

I would not calling it arguing, since I was simply explaining why going on about language would be futile.

 

I did present them, remember? I provided a link and everything.

 

Maj, you've attacked me on the issue of my claim that my theory is the only one that adequately addresses all the requirements. Prove it. Find me another one. Or, if you think mine doesn't succeed in that, address the specifics. Because honestly mate, your not ripping anything apart here.

 

This is beneath you dude. I have always had a strong respect for you--I've no problem with you not agreeing with my theory--but the anger with which you attack me for sustaining it concerns me.

 

I've made my claims--both in the content of the theory, and about why it is the only one to do what it does.

 

I adressed your way of looking at your interpretation of the prophecies as the correct one, something that by itself removes the "most viable" from your theory.

Should I perhaps go on, say with how there is absolutely zero support in the books for souls being able to move around by themselves? Whenever we have seen a soul about to leave or enter a body, it has been a direct result of someones actions.

Or perhaps looking at it storywise. All the efforst RJ spent on making Rands body suffer would be made completely irrelevant, by a simple little act of magic. "Lost a hand? No problem, just take a new body." Great, with a few sentences, the entoire journey Rand has been through would be diminished to something that could fit in a book by Eddings.

 

But, in the context of what you were commenting on--you offered the idea that everyone might think Rand is dead as a viable alternative option. In this, the Finns prophecy is clear. Rand must actually die. That does not relate specifically to pointing out what will occurr in my theory, other than Rand must die, but it does disprove yours.

 

Or rather your flippant comment. I have too much respect for you to believe you actually intended to suggest such a thing--indeed, i've seen your comments about Rand's death against this point.

 

You are quite correct, the intention was not to actually suggest such a thing, only to illustrate how there are numerous possibilities.

But look at other possibilities. Nynaeve healing death is still there, and unlike any souls floating around as they wish, it can be said t have been somewhat foreshadowed, by the comments on how Nynaeve will not give up until she has healed someone three days dead, and what was shown when she healed stilling; she does not have the limitations of other Aes Sedai by thinking she knows what can and what can not be done.

Or Rand being ripped out of T'A'R, where he should go if he dies. That is not only foreshadowed as a possibility, we have seen it happen.

 

Or any of a number of twists RJ might have had up his sleeves. 

 

I believe i also stated how keen i am to see an alternative. Many times. No, Maj, this is exactly the same as your first comment--you are trying to imply that I am refusing to see alternatives because I'm so caught up in this theory, and you are wrong.

 

Offer me an alternative, I'm keen. But your not doing that, you state that you don't have to do that--and yet you still want to disparage me for saying that mine is the only one.

 

Pick, Maj. Either offer an alternative, or stop this. I'm not saying accept my theory, but your attempts to disparage me are getting pretty over the top.

 

There is no need to come up with an anternative theory to say that your theory is wrong. Just as I do not need to come up with a theory about exactly what SH is, and how it was made, in order to show that a certain SH=Moridin theory being wrong.