A Way to Evade the Oaths (Full Spoilers)

[myn0s]

Just expanding on the whole 'thinking to yourself' idea. To foreswear all previous oaths would you have to say it out loud of just think it?

[Jong]

The 1st oath is: To speak no word that is not true.

 

That is expressed as a double negavtive. Double negatives are considered fualty grammar in modern English. For english speakers (an apparently for all 3rd age people in WOT) the double negative is interpreted as a positive statment.   Its possible that for a Age of Legends teacher, the faulty grammar may render the oath meaningless to her. "I was an English teacher damn it! Did you think your poor caveman grammar would work on me?"

 

In other languages Spanish (and in English spoken in shakesperean times) for example double negatives gave added emphasis and do not negate the negation, the 1st oath with the same double negatives in spanish would actually mean: To speak only a word(s?) that is not true. Its possible that language from the AOL may have different grammatical rules from the standard we expect and that the 1st oath may be understood to mean something completely different to Messana (swearing to lie or something else).

 

The word true also has numerous meanings. 3rd age Aes Sedai following the first oath seem to interpret the word true to mean things that are strictly speaking literally or factually true to the best of their own knowledge, consistent with reality, truly believed and honest. There are other meanings for the word true.

 

Messana could interprets the first oath to mean:

 

-To speak no word that is not loyal or faithful to a cause. Not loyal to the dark one? Her own health?  

-To speak no word that is not genuine. E.G. to speak no word that is not actually a word, "um" ... <strangulation noises>

-To speak no word that is not Accurately placed, delivered, or thrown... As in she must only use snappy comebacks.

 

Then there is possibly the fact that the forsaken could hide behind some translational technicality. After quickly scanning a reference to the Old toungue, we see that there are atleast 3 different root words for truth in the old toungue: Jenn, Jaed'en  and Tai... there are almost certainly others.

 

 

 

 

[AnimusMessor]

Just expanding on the whole 'thinking to yourself' idea. To foreswear all previous oaths would you have to say it out loud of just think it?

 

What Im saying is that its unavoidable that Messana would have had to swear on the oath rod. So she DID re-swear on the Oath Rod infront of Egwene and the Sitters out loud. Now once they asked her ¨are you a darkfriend¨ or even ¨are you one of the forsaken¨ she could get around it by asking herself a question in her HEAD, i.e.: Am I a man?. Then answer out loud No. So technically shes answering her own question and not Egwenes. Thats how you fool lie detectors.

[StefanR]

Everybody seems to be forgetting the context Brandon meant

 

"3. Question: She could swear that she’s not a Darkfriend on the Oath Rod, right?

 

3. Answer: As long as she believed it to be true. Every remaining Aes Sedai in the Tower has retaken the three oaths.  You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it."

 

Not a way to defeat the 3 oaths, but defeat the OATH ROD. Obviously there is something to get around being bound, and it is something that would apply to ANY OATH, not just the 3 oaths AS swear.

 

So the whole, "oh i'm not a darkfriend, i'm a chosen blah blah blah" avoidance method seems to maybe work for that one, but that it's not what Brandon meant.

 

Mesanna would still be bound by the other two oaths if she did as most of you seem to think. Brandon implied that she was not bound by ANY of them at all.

 

 

[Durinax]

Everybody seems to be forgetting the context Brandon meant

 

"3. Question: She could swear that shes not a Darkfriend on the Oath Rod, right?

 

3. Answer: As long as she believed it to be true. Every remaining Aes Sedai in the Tower has retaken the three oaths.  You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it."

 

Not a way to defeat the 3 oaths, but defeat the OATH ROD. Obviously there is something to get around being bound, and it is something that would apply to ANY OATH, not just the 3 oaths AS swear.

 

So the whole, "oh i'm not a darkfriend, i'm a chosen blah blah blah" avoidance method seems to maybe work for that one, but that it's not what Brandon meant.

 

Mesanna would still be bound by the other two oaths if she did as most of you seem to think. Brandon implied that she was not bound by ANY of them at all.

 

 

Does the book say whether or not the person swearing the oaths is the one to channel into the rod? because if Mesaana was allowed to channel into the rod during her oaths then she could simple have stopped the thread of spirit required mere mm's away from teh rod thus the rod isnt doing a thing since the 'fuel' for it isnt there

[StefanR]

Everybody seems to be forgetting the context Brandon meant

 

"3. Question: She could swear that she’s not a Darkfriend on the Oath Rod, right?

 

3. Answer: As long as she believed it to be true. Every remaining Aes Sedai in the Tower has retaken the three oaths.  You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it."

 

Not a way to defeat the 3 oaths, but defeat the OATH ROD. Obviously there is something to get around being bound, and it is something that would apply to ANY OATH, not just the 3 oaths AS swear.

 

So the whole, "oh i'm not a darkfriend, i'm a chosen blah blah blah" avoidance method seems to maybe work for that one, but that it's not what Brandon meant.

 

Mesanna would still be bound by the other two oaths if she did as most of you seem to think. Brandon implied that she was not bound by ANY of them at all.

 

 

Does the book say whether or not the person swearing the oaths is the one to channel into the rod? because if Mesaana was allowed to channel into the rod during her oaths then she could simple have stopped the thread of spirit required mere mm's away from teh rod thus the rod isnt doing a thing since the 'fuel' for it isnt there

 

I don't believe it said who channeled the thread of spirit @ the end of TGS. However, when the sisters in the tower made Talene swear the oaths, I think somebody else did it. I wouldn't quote me on that though, I haven't read that part in awhile.

[Hadilmir]

Does the book say whether or not the person swearing the oaths is the one to channel into the rod? because if Mesaana was allowed to channel into the rod during her oaths then she could simple have stopped the thread of spirit required mere mm's away from teh rod thus the rod isnt doing a thing since the 'fuel' for it isnt there

No, it is the person holding the rod who is bound, not the channeler, unless they are the one holding the rod. She also could've compulsed the Aes Sedai who was channeling into the rod before it was her turn.

[Mordaunt]

Who channeled the spirit when Galina was forced to swear to Therava?

[morkhon]

The 1st oath is: To speak no word that is not true.

 

That is expressed as a double negavtive. Double negatives are considered fualty grammar in modern English. For english speakers (an apparently for all 3rd age people in WOT) the double negative is interpreted as a positive statment.   Its possible that for a Age of Legends teacher, the faulty grammar may render the oath meaningless to her. "I was an English teacher damn it! Did you think your poor caveman grammar would work on me?"

That's not a double negative. The sentence given as a double negative would be said something like..

 

"To not speak a word that is not true."

 

 

Anyway, two questions. Can you use a Mask of Mirrors on someone else? And how skillfull was Mesaana at compulsion? Could she not disguise another Sister in the form she's taking (probably Danelle), and compell her to take the Oaths in her place?

 

Edit - Well, after actually reading the first post of this thread it looks like Luckers already had this notion.

[StefanR]

The 1st oath is: To speak no word that is not true.

 

That is expressed as a double negavtive. Double negatives are considered fualty grammar in modern English. For english speakers (an apparently for all 3rd age people in WOT) the double negative is interpreted as a positive statment.   Its possible that for a Age of Legends teacher, the faulty grammar may render the oath meaningless to her. "I was an English teacher damn it! Did you think your poor caveman grammar would work on me?"

That's not a double negative. The sentence given as a double negative would be said something like..

 

"To not speak a word that is not true."

 

 

Anyway, two questions. Can you use a Mask of Mirrors on someone else? And how skillfull was Mesaana at compulsion? Could she not disguise another Sister in the form she's taking (probably Danelle), and compell her to take the Oaths in her place?

 

Edit - Well, after actually reading the first post of this thread it looks like Luckers already had this notion.

 

I don't think you can use MoM on anybody but yourself. However, I haven't seen a quote saying otherwise so it could be possible.

[Sharaman]

Does the book say whether or not the person swearing the oaths is the one to channel into the rod? because if Mesaana was allowed to channel into the rod during her oaths then she could simple have stopped the thread of spirit required mere mm's away from teh rod thus the rod isnt doing a thing since the 'fuel' for it isnt there

No, it is the person holding the rod who is bound, not the channeler, unless they are the one holding the rod. She also could've compulsed the Aes Sedai who was channeling into the rod before it was her turn.

 

We've seen both methods used. In cases of prisoners (Galina, Talene,) the channelling was done by someone else. When Egwene , Romanda, Pevara, etc, did it, they channeled themselves. So either method works.

[Shadow Rider]

Does the book say whether or not the person swearing the oaths is the one to channel into the rod? because if Mesaana was allowed to channel into the rod during her oaths then she could simple have stopped the thread of spirit required mere mm's away from teh rod thus the rod isnt doing a thing since the 'fuel' for it isnt there

No, it is the person holding the rod who is bound, not the channeler, unless they are the one holding the rod. She also could've compulsed the Aes Sedai who was channeling into the rod before it was her turn.

 

We've seen both methods used. In cases of prisoners (Galina, Talene,) the channelling was done by someone else. When Egwene , Romanda, Pevara, etc, did it, they channeled themselves. So either method works.

 

I remember a quote by one of the Chosen (can't remember who or when) who was surprised at what they use the Rod for....obviously in the AoL it was used for something else...maybe Messana channeled the flows meant for the Rod and it had a different effect.

sorry I can't remember where I read it....

[Sharaman]

Does the book say whether or not the person swearing the oaths is the one to channel into the rod? because if Mesaana was allowed to channel into the rod during her oaths then she could simple have stopped the thread of spirit required mere mm's away from teh rod thus the rod isnt doing a thing since the 'fuel' for it isnt there

No, it is the person holding the rod who is bound, not the channeler, unless they are the one holding the rod. She also could've compulsed the Aes Sedai who was channeling into the rod before it was her turn.

 

We've seen both methods used. In cases of prisoners (Galina, Talene,) the channelling was done by someone else. When Egwene , Romanda, Pevara, etc, did it, they channeled themselves. So either method works.

 

I remember a quote by one of the Chosen (can't remember who or when) who was surprised at what they use the Rod for....obviously in the AoL it was used for something else...maybe Messana channeled the flows meant for the Rod and it had a different effect.

sorry I can't remember where I read it....

The rod was used as a binder which kept criminal channelers under control.

[MikeRiley]

Would it be immediately noticed if she channeled into the wrong end of it? Or in a slightly different location? Maybe she did something while holding the rod that would cause the effects of it to be nulled, such as channeling an inverted weave into one end while the visible weave went into the other. She'd need only to fake the reaction of the oaths settling in, and would have seen a number Aes Sedai do it already to have a fair idea of how that should be done.

 

If you have to do something different to remove an oath with the rod, then I could see the effects being countered if you do both ways at the same time.

[Casabamelon]

What Im saying is that its unavoidable that Messana would have had to swear on the oath rod. So she DID re-swear on the Oath Rod infront of Egwene and the Sitters out loud. Now once they asked her ¨are you a darkfriend¨ or even ¨are you one of the forsaken¨ she could get around it by asking herself a question in her HEAD, i.e.: Am I a man?. Then answer out loud No. So technically shes answering her own question and not Egwenes. Thats how you fool lie detectors.

 

For starters, there's a lot of people who disagree with the opinion you just stated as a fact.

 

Also: We know that the oath rod comes down to belief. If she believed that what she said was going to lead someone to draw the wrong conclusion, then she would not be able to speak it. It's the inverse of Cadsuane using sarcasm. Technically, what Cadsuane said was not true, but because the person she's saying it to knew it wasn't true and knew it was sarcasm, Cadsuane was able to say it without choking on her words. With Mesaana, it'd be the same principle in reverse.

[MikeRiley]

But that would still leave her with the other two oaths which are much more binding for a forsaken in this setting. Unless she had a trick up her sleeve, there's no way she would have sworn those oaths. She'd have to have a death wish otherwise. She would be thinking anything at all could happen between her swearing the oaths and obtaining the rod again so that she could have them removed. But Brandon Sanderson didn't say we should be looking for ways to defeat the oaths, he said we should be looking for ways to defeat the oath rod. It's a safe assumption there is a method that can be used to swear the oaths with a rod and not have them bind.

[StefanR]

But that would still leave her with the other two oaths which are much more binding for a forsaken in this setting. Unless she had a trick up her sleeve, there's no way she would have sworn those oaths. She'd have to have a death wish otherwise. She would be thinking anything at all could happen between her swearing the oaths and obtaining the rod again so that she could have them removed. But Brandon Sanderson didn't say we should be looking for ways to defeat the oaths, he said we should be looking for ways to defeat the oath rod. It's a safe assumption there is a method that can be used to swear the oaths with a rod and not have them bind.

 

Exactly. My post above goes off on it more, but people seem to think because the whole darkfriend/chosen statement after the oath lying can be avoided, the rest don't count.

[Paerish Swar]

I posted these back in January.  This is my theory on how Mesaana did it.  Just a theory.

 

BS made it pretty clear that there is a way to defeat the Oath Rod itself, not just a specific oath.  So, how does one defeat the Rod?  What is the Rod? - a ter'angreal.  So, how do we defeat a ter'angreal?

 

That very question set me on a little search through the books that I'm fairly certain has not been discussed yet in this thread.

 

How is the Oath Rod used/activated?  Quote:  "Pevara channeled a thread of Spirit to the Rod" (WH, Snow)

 

A single thread of spirit? . . . Interesting!

 

Are there any other ter'angreal which we know to use a single thread of spirit to use/activate them?  Quote:  "an iron disc . . . and a plaque no longer than her hand . . . channel a flow of Spirit into either ter'angreal, and it would take you into sleep and then into Tel'ararn'rhiod." (tSR, What Lies Hidden)

 

A few ter'angreal that require just a single thread of spirit to activate . . . what might that mean?  Quote from Elayne:  "There seemed to be one common thread in those tiny structures for ter'angreal that required channeling to work, and another for those that simply made use of the Power . . ." (LoC, A Matter of Thought)

 

Possibly related Quote from Alanna after Egwene's testing for Accepted:  "I should have stopped this when I had the chance, when I first noticed that - reverberation . . . the ter'angreal almost seemed to be trying to shut off the flow from saidar . . ." (tDR, Sealed)

 

So, we all know that when you use a ter'angreal too near another that has a very similar purpose that really bad things can happen.  But, what if you use a ter'angreal too near another that doesn't have a similar purpose, but has that common thread that Elayne describes - the structures that require channeling to make them work, especially if they both require the exact same flow/thread to activate them?

 

Maybe they end up canceling each other out?!?

 

Why is this important?  We know that Sheriam had just stolen all the dream ter'angreal from the rebels within 48 hours of the Black Ajah purge in the White Tower.  She presumably delivered those ter'angreal to Mesaana as directed, which means that Mesaana had direct access to them.  And, Yes . . . the original iron disc and plaque were among those ter'angreal!

 

Here's my theory for directly defeating the Oath Rod itself:  Mesaana has the original iron disc or plaque hidden away on her person, like stuffed down her blouse or something.  Somehow the two ter'angreal interfere with each other in a way that renders them both useless.  Maybe if she channeled a flow of spirit between the two ter'angreal such an interference could happen?  Maybe she wove two threads and one of the threads of spirit was inverted? 

 

I don't fully understand the exact process which Mesaana could use to nullify the ability of the Oath Rod, but I think she could figure it out since there appears to possibly be a precedent for such processes existing.

 

I especially like this theory because it creates a "trail of bread crumbs" by which Egwene can figure out who Mesaana is posing as in the WT.  Egwene has some experience with ter'angreal interfering with each other, she has some experience with dream ter'angreal specifically, and she is already the WT's only Dreamer.  Also, any other questions Egwene may have about the nature of ter'angreal can easily be answered by her confidant, Elayne the queen of all things ter'angreal.

 

She has the experience and tools to follow the trails and make all the connections that would illuminate Mesaana's method for evading the Oath Rod.  Once she connects evading the Oath Rod with the stolen dream ter'angreal she will come upon her primary lead.  All she has to do from there is hop into Tel'aran'rhiod and use NEED to search for the stolen items.  Whoever's room it is that she finds the items in TAR, is the room of the sister that Mesaana is impersonating.

 

Sharaman - I think the two issues you bring up are completely on the money and they do make the theory itself a little tough to swallow, and I have to say that I did consider some of those problems myself.  That's why I admitted that I don't really understand the exact process by which Mesaana could make the theory work.

 

But, here are a couple more thoughts on the topic that might tighten up this theory.

 

We know that really bad and dangerous things happen when two ter'angreal that have the SAME or similar purpose are really close to each other and one or both are activated.  We do NOT know what happens when two ter'angreal that have completely DISSIMILAR purposes, but IDENTICAL means of activating are really close to each other and one or both are activated.

 

Now for a crazy thought.  What if ter'angreal that require the One Power to activate them have some kind of fail-safe or internal "circuit breaker" embedded into their design?  (We know that angreal have buffers for safety purposes) 

 

Imagine in the Age of Legends when there were ter'angreal all over the place.  If a channeler tried to use one of his or her ter'angreal in the vicinity of another that did something completely different, but had the same means of activation, wouldn't it be a smart safety measure to make it so that the ter'angreal you are trying to use "shuts down" while you're so near to the other one.  That way you wouldn't accidentally activate the other ter'angreal and inadvertently do something you hadn't intended.

 

Well, I know that's a little far-fetched, but what about this?

 

Since the Oath Rod and the Dream ter'angreal have such different purposes (while still maintaining some notable similarity in means of usage), perhaps the resonance/interference that occurs between them is of a much lower level of disturbance - just enough to disrupt the efficacy of the ter'angreal, but not enough to create some visibly dramatic problems.  And even if there was a certain level of discomfort for Mesaana to put herself in the middle of some ter'angreal interference, I don't think the other Aes Sedai would necessarily notice.  The process of removing all the oaths is noticeably painful, and the settling of the oaths on the body are likewise not exactly comfortable.  Whatever discomfort Mesaana might experience would be taken as a natural response to what the watching Aes Sedai assumed was occurring. 

 

So there you go.

 

Thoughts?

[StefanR]

Well, we know the Wise Ones mention being in TAR partially and awake at the same time. Messanna could channel into a dream ter angreal that sends her partially into TAR?

 

LOL Other than that I don't have any guesses about your theory.

 

I definitely think it has some validity though.

[Durinax]

Well, we know the Wise Ones mention being in TAR partially and awake at the same time. Messanna could channel into a dream ter angreal that sends her partially into TAR?

 

LOL Other than that I don't have any guesses about your theory.

 

I definitely think it has some validity though.

do the Chosen need any ter angreal to even access tar

[Sharaman]

Well, we know the Wise Ones mention being in TAR partially and awake at the same time. Messanna could channel into a dream ter angreal that sends her partially into TAR?

LOL Other than that I don't have any guesses about your theory.

I definitely think it has some validity though.

do the Chosen need any ter angreal to even access tar

 

Some of them might need ter'angreal in order to reach it in their dreams.

Any channeler can reach TAR in the flesh.

Dreaming ability is much rarer.

There were only four such dreamwalkers in the entire Aiel nation (which has 6000-odd channelers) and Egwene is the only one in the Tower since Coreanin.

 

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I remember when Lanfear visited Mat in the White Tower back in The Dragon Reborn and he asked her if she was a Darkfriend, she answered contemptuously in the negative and mocked them as fools who think that Ishamael is going to give them immortality or something like that.  Granted, she wasn't bound by any oaths or anything, but it does seem to indicate that the Forsaken don't consider themselves Darkfriends and see themselves as a separate group.  If Messana doesn't consider herself a Darkfriend, then she can be bound and say "I am not a Darkfriend" without any trouble even if the people listening to her would consider her a DF because she serves the Dark One.

 

For the Black Ajah, maybe they had a meeting and decided they didn't want to be Black Ajah anymore and are now the "No Homers" club.  Then they take the Oaths and say they're not Black Ajah.

 

[StefanR]

Well, we know the Wise Ones mention being in TAR partially and awake at the same time. Messanna could channel into a dream ter angreal that sends her partially into TAR?

 

LOL Other than that I don't have any guesses about your theory.

 

I definitely think it has some validity though.

do the Chosen need any ter angreal to even access tar

 

Probably not no, but it would tie in with needing a thread of spirit, since those are what dream ter angreals use. Which according to the theory above might disrupt the oath rod.

 

 

and @ Tom Sawyer, YES but that DOES NOT help her escape the other oaths. Brandon said there was a way to beat the OATH ROD, not one particular oath

[Tom Sawyer]

and @ Tom Sawyer, YES but that DOES NOT help her escape the other oaths. Brandon said there was a way to beat the OATH ROD, not one particular oath

 

I always assumed that that statement was meant to be taken in the context of beating the oath rod by beating the test they were giving after they reswore the oaths, which only tested the oath against lying.

 

3. Answer: As long as she believed it to be true.  Every remaining Aes Sedai in the Tower has retaken the three oaths.  You should be thinking about ways to defeat the Oath Rod.  There is a way to do it.

 

The question was specifically about the lying part.  By "thinking about" it, he seems to be referring to it in terms of a logical puzzle, not some kind of deus ex machina thing where she randomly uses some odd magic trick to get around it.

 

[StefanR]

I think it'll something that any AS will be able to do to affect any oath, making the oath rod obselete. Which would allow AS to live for much longer and not have to listen to Egwene's "that's what makes us AS, even though it cuts our lifespan in half." crap