ashamen and Aes sedai

[lordofsoup]

now that saiden is clean male channelers will live for centuries.  Aes sedai retire into the kin and keep the 3 oaths.  doesnt this put them at a huge disadvantage, against their male counterparts.  we know the oaths shorten their lives, but will being released from the oath give them back the extra time that they would have lost?  no matter what egwene thinks, I cant see her making Aes Sedai keep the oaths.  it seems like an impediment, where all u get is make sure they doent lie, but you can make the arguement that a purposeful half truth is the same thing as a lie, distorting the truth

[Underscore]

They don't keep the oaths when they retire to the kin, they become kinswoman and the oaths are removed.

 

To be Aes Sedai means the oaths according to Egwene's "new" policy.

[mb]

The plan was actually for Aes Sedia to forsware the oaths before retiring.  That returns their live spans to what they would be.

 

Originally Egwene wanted for Aes Sedia to not be bound to the Oath Rod.  Her changed mind was from Arangar's treatment on her; likely by Compulsion.

I am not sure if Egwene would (or could) go back to her original opinion.  And I am not sure if her Hall would vote in favor if she did.

 

A purposeful half truth the same as a lie?  I think it would depend on the speaker's intention in speaking the half truth.  There being something that needs to be keep secret, that I think would not make it a lie.

 

[Underscore]

If you break the oath down, "Speak no word that is not true" it doesn't say anything about lying, you could say a word you believe to be true and then another and another, until you form a sentence that is untrue (since all words have no meaning individually and can be considered to be true).

 

But none of the Aes Sedai interpret it like that because in the series Aes Sedai have to rely on half truths, omission and misdirection to convey lies. Is there any reason why its not interpreted as such? 

[Bela]

If you break the oath down, "Speak no word that is not true" it doesn't say anything about lying, you could say a word you believe to be true and then another and another, until you form a sentence that is untrue (since all words have no meaning individually and can be considered to be true).

 

But none of the Aes Sedai interpret it like that because in the series Aes Sedai have to rely on half truths, omission and misdirection to convey lies. Is there any reason why its not interpreted as such? 

 

While that logically makes sense, do you have any idea how hard it would be to cut off your mind like that? I often block things out of my mind but what you speak of would require you to have no back thought at all. It wouldn't be suppressing the thought it would be not having the thought and how can you MAKE your mind not have a thought. Even when I am suppressing a pained emotion I still know it's there, I just will my mind not to think of it, block it off like Lews Therin. Except of course my pained thoughts are not raving madmen.  :D

[MikeRiley]

I can't think of a single male channeler who will accept the three oaths, and we don't even know if an oath rod still exists that will bind them anyway. I think the oaths will be done away with in the end, they were a product of the Breaking to promote trust of Aes Sedai and after the Last Battle when they all help save mankind I can't see that being much of a problem anymore.

[Mr Ares]

If you break the oath down, "Speak no word that is not true" it doesn't say anything about lying, you could say a word you believe to be true and then another and another, until you form a sentence that is untrue (since all words have no meaning individually and can be considered to be true).

How can they be considered true if they exist in isolation? Without context they are neither true nor false. And if the words you say are not true, then how could you say them?

[Thor]

Well it worked fine without any binding being used in the AOL and there wasn't any violence done by aes sedai that a normal person other than aiel wouldn't have committed.

 

And in present Randland, binding didn't stop the Black Ajah from being formed either, so it's not really that much use.

[Nightstrike]

If you break the oath down, "Speak no word that is not true" it doesn't say anything about lying, you could say a word you believe to be true and then another and another, until you form a sentence that is untrue (since all words have no meaning individually and can be considered to be true).

How can they be considered true if they exist in isolation? Without context they are neither true nor false. And if the words you say are not true, then how could you say them?

I think intention is the one factor that determines all their statements. If they intend to speak "true" words (or at least "not untrue") that will form an untrue sentence, then they can't form the words. RJ said that one person can form a sentence that is untrue if the other person knows that it is not true (sarcasm). But she can't tell a blind person that a green mug is blue (because the blind might believe her).

 

 

 

 

[Casco]

I have thinked about this a little to.

First of all, whats the reason Aes Sedai swear on the rod in the first place? They started to do this after AOL, after braking of the world. They wanted people to trust Aes Sedai again. The reason of braking of the world was the taint in Saidin.

Did it make people trust Aes Sedai at all? No, not at all. Infact, it did the oposite. Nobody trust a word Aes Sedai say. "The truth a Aes Sedai say, isnt the truth you think you hear" and so on.

 

So the "never say a untruth word" isnt working as intended, and need to be changed.

"Never use the true power as a weapon, and never make weapon with it for men to use" dont work. Aes Sedai use the true power as weapon all the time. Not directly, but still. For example, if Aes Sedai capture a man with air, and he do get killed by it, you can say that the true power was used as a weapon. There is still weapons made of Aes Sedai before the braking of the world, the swordmaster swords, the ter´angrals and so on.

 

But should they swear at the rod in the first place? The reason for that is gone (the taint in Saidin, insane male channelers) and people know that there is ways around the oaths.

Asha´men will have the same strenghts, use the clean Saidin and still wont be forced to swear the oaths (i think there is a male version of the rod somewhere) so why let Aes Sedai still do this?

 

It isnt the rod that makes the Aes Sedai a true Aes Sedai, it have only been that for the last 3000 years becouse of the taint in Saidar (inderectly).

Imo, there is no reason for Aes Sedai to swear or use the rod at all anymore, or maby there is. its still usefull to get darkfriends with.

Why was the nine rods created in the first place? (if the oath rod is one of them) i think it was tho be used on criminals.

It would be interesting to know what the other 7 rods do (2 of them works the simular way, that we know).

 

Egwene will make Aes Sedai look pretty stupid if she still demand the use of the rod to make new Aes Sedai.

[Mr Ares]

"Never use the true power as a weapon, and never make weapon with it for men to use" dont work. Aes Sedai use the true power as weapon all the time. Not directly, but still. For example, if Aes Sedai capture a man with air, and he do get killed by it, you can say that the true power was used as a weapon. There is still weapons made of Aes Sedai before the braking of the world, the swordmaster swords, the ter´angrals and so on.

Aside from the fact you're thinking of the One Power, not the True Power, you're reasoning is flawed. For example, make no weapon for one man to kill another. How is this flawed? Weapons already exist? So what? They swore not to make any more. While everyone knows not to trust what AS say, because they twist the truth, I don't recall anyone warning that the AS make weapons. That Oath works fine. It is unnecessary, but just as eeryone is convinced that AS don't lie but do distort the truth, no-one is convinced that AS make weapons. The same with using the Power as a weapon. They can't do it. The example you give, capture a man with Air and he dies because of it. How? Do they hold him in place and he gets killed with a sword? The sword is the weapon. They can't use the Power as a weapon. Geofram Bornhald thought differently, when confronted by damane, but aside from him? Give one occasion when AS use the Power as a weapon in the series.

 

Why was the nine rods created in the first place? (if the oath rod is one of them)

The Oath Rod is not one of the Nine Rods of Dominion. They were regional governors.

[John]

If you break the oath down, "Speak no word that is not true" it doesn't say anything about lying, you could say a word you believe to be true and then another and another, until you form a sentence that is untrue (since all words have no meaning individually and can be considered to be true).

Alternatively, you can write down whatever lie you want. This also isn't thought of by the Aes Sedai.

 

I can't think of a single male channeler who will accept the three oaths

Having just read the prequel to the Crown of Swords, I think this is what Elaida's prophecy refers to. The exact quote is "Rand al'Thor will face the Amyrlin Seat and know her anger." Obviously this refers to Egwene, however I've often wondered what would anger her so much? IMO its the uniting of the Black Tower with the White Tower and Egwene wanting the Asha'man to swear the three oaths. In that prophecy we also hear mention of a small number of Aes Sedai being exiled from the White Tower. I think its the Red Sisters who refuse to give up their hunt for men who can channel.

 

And in present Randland, binding didn't stop the Black Ajah from being formed either, so it's not really that much use.

I think the White Tower's hunt for the Black Ajah has revealed that the Black Ajah have the 3 Oaths removed from them in a ceremony.

[Mr Ares]

And in present Randland, binding didn't stop the Black Ajah from being formed either, so it's not really that much use.

I think the White Tower's hunt for the Black Ajah has revealed that the Black Ajah have the 3 Oaths removed from them in a ceremony.

And then they swear three new ones. But given that a secret organisation of Darkfriend channelers has existed under the collective nose of the AS for a couple of millennia with them not only not noticing, but denying such a thing was even possible, all while the AS were under the Three Oaths, and while their reputation for honesty was taking a kicking at every turn, shows that they really are not much use, aside from showing them up to be a load of violent, weapon making liars who need to be restrained because they can't otherwise stop themselves.

[Idril]

To me this question is very complicated. However, Asha´man and AS can hardly be compared, at least not at the present state. They are too different.

 

The concept behind Asha´man is that they are weapons. You always have to keep that in mind. I know that at the time of KOD this is not really completely true since Asha´man also perform a wide range of tasks apart from war (from healing to negotiating). However, this doesn´t change the purpose of the Asha´man and the philosophy behind their education cleary shows that. They are weapons to be directed by somebody else (Rand, in this case). You don´t need oaths or the like for weapons. Contrarily you trust the people who handle the weapon to be able to do the thinking instead of limiting the weapon´s basic power. Thinking about it, I´d rather compare Asha´man and Damane, it makes more sense in that scenario.

 

AS on the other hand are anything but warriors in the first place. Their education is a much broader one. They always try to negotiate and rule things from behind the scenes. Yes, most people also do not really trust them, but AS have solved lots of problems and have been having influence to nearly any crown in randland. I don´t exactly recall which book it was but from what I recall Egwene wasn´t forced the opinion to keep the 3 oaths by Halima/Aran´gar. On the contrary she herself realizes that if the 3 oaths wouldn´t exist, nobody in the whole world would ever trust any AS and the only possibilities for AS to interfere in any decision would be by forcing it with the One Power.

 

AS needed these restrictions in the first place, to gain a grain of trust after The Breaking and the purpose of AS clearly isn´t to use the force as a weapon, but to bring peace by negotiating. To be able to do that they had to convince people of their intentions. They did this with the oaths and to some extent they still work.

[Mr Ares]

I don´t exactly recall which book it was but from what I recall Egwene wasn´t forced the opinion to keep the 3 oaths by Halima/Aran´gar. On the contrary she herself realizes that if the 3 oaths wouldn´t exist, nobody in the whole world would ever trust any AS and the only possibilities for AS to interfere in any decision would be by forcing it with the One Power.

Considering she said that she planned to get rid of them, then later changed her mind, I think it is reasonable. As fir trust, it does not foster trust. If that was the plan, it failed. They swear not to lie, not to make weapons, and not to use the Power as a weapon. What does that signify? That thse are trustworthy people? Hardly. It gives the impression that the only thing holding them back from lying, weapon-mongering and going on OP-murder sprees is the Oath Rod. Most people are trusted on their own merits. AS apparently need extra restriction in order to be trusted. And people still don't, because eveyone knows that although they cannot lie, they can be pretty clever with how they use the truth. In fact, while they cannot lie, they actually seem to think that it is alright to say whatever the hell they want to mislead. They don't just speak clearly. If the police had to swear an Oath that they couldn't break saying that they wouldn't go around murdering people, would you sleep safer in your bed? Knowing that the people guarding you need to be forced into a position where they cannot murder, rather than the police just hiring the sort of people who don't go around murdering people willy-nilly? Egwene's original reason for getting rid of the Oaths still holds - AS should be trusted on thier own merits, same as anyone else. If someone says something, you should be  able to trust what they say, at face value, without thinknig of every possible meaning of what they said to make sure they aren't trying to con you. The Wise Ones are trusted. The Windfinfders are trusted. They aren't bound. So why must AS be, in order to gasin trust? Because they are not trustworthy. They need to become trustworthy in order to be trusted, and the Oaths are not the way to do that. They were a blind alley, a dead end, not a good idea for a way forward.

[Idril]

The comparison with Windfinders and Wise Ones is flawed in my opinion.

 

Firstly, hardly anyone knew that these two groups could channel until recently.

Secondly, who trusts them? Basically their people(s) and that is mainly due to their cultural development and social structure (Wise Ones and Windfinders stand quite high in their relevant societies).

Thirdly, due to their channeling not being public wisdom for most of the history Wise Ones and Windfinders aren´t and have never been connected to The Breaking. The latter is the most important point in the debate about the sense or nonsense of the Oath Rod.

 

AS are strongly connected to The Breaking, this is the reason no one trusted them in the aftermath. Instead of forming a new society and structure (and renaming it) they chose a different way, which is The Oath Rod.

 

You can also compare it e.g. to The Kin. They are also trusted and socially high-standing in their relevant surrounding, however, nobody knows that they can channel and I hardly doubt that they would enjoy such public confidence if everybody knew they could.

 

 

Basically, what I want to say is this: Channelers had two possibilities after The Breaking:

 

a) Seperating yourself completely from the old concept of 'Aes Sedai' and keeping your ability to channel near-secret (I don´t really know, but I doubt it is common knowledge among Atha´an´Miere that Windfinders are Channelers. With Wise Ones the situation is a bit different, however, the mass of Aiel people know very little about their history, thus the assumption that the circumstances of The Breaking or even the general concept of 'The One Power' are far from common knowledge seems valid).

 

b) Finding a different way (AS -> Oath Rod; Seanchan -> total control). Indeed, the point that the validation of the Oath Rod in the present and recent circumstances is questionable seems true.

But that would kind of be like saying a modern Democracy could abandon its Consitution to be able to act more freely. However, it should never be forgotten that the Constitution is the reason it came into being in the first place. I´d call that something like 'Historical Justification' or the like (True, this comparison is also flawed, it shouldn´t be taken literally, of course. I just tried to illustrate my thoughts).

[balefireruinssteaks]

we also really don't have a reference for how long male channelers live vs. how long female channelers live without the Oath Rod.  Most male channelers up to this point were captured and gentled and then died from it eventually.

 

I think it was Mesaana that said that when she went to the Dark One she was in her 300s and only considered in her middle years at that point, so we can assume that female channelers live to be in their 6 and 700s perhaps before they die naturally.  I imagine that the male channelers lived just as long, but we really don't know how old any of the male Forsaken were before they were caught in the Bore. 

 

Maybe men and women are as different in this respect as they are in any other respect concerning the One Power.

[Mr Ares]

Firstly, hardly anyone knew that these two groups could channel until recently.

The groups themselves did.

Secondly, who trusts them? Basically their people(s) and that is mainly due to their cultural development and social structure (Wise Ones and Windfinders stand quite high in their relevant societies).

Which is the point. They are trusted by their societies, they stand high, they have no need of Oaths. So why do AS?

AS are strongly connected to The Breaking,

Specifically, gentling all the men and thus stopping it. Also, the Oaths were not introduced over night. AS were around for a long time without them.

 

How do the Oaths help build trust, as no-one trusts them anyway? They swear an Oath not to lie, and everyone knows they twist the truth. All of them give the impression that if they weren't restrained, these women would be lying, murdering weapon-smiths. Aes Sedai are not trusted. So the arguemnts for giving them in the first place and for keeping them are flawed.