A Way to Evade the Oaths (Full Spoilers)

[Barid Bel Medar]

ha. yeah, oh well perhaps some of the posters didnt actually read the whole thing, it is, afrer all 52 pages.

 

But then i suppose you should at least read the first page to see what it is all about.

 

In any case, as yet I have not really seen any ways that the oaths could be evaded realistically, (oh, the whole, having a random ter'angreal that defeats oaths is possible, but its streching it pretty thin.) bar one,

 

What if Mesaana uses her alias' name in the oath? For instance "I, Danelle Brown Steele, hereby vow to never utter a false word, ..." . Since she is not Danelle, the whole statement is false, and the oaths would not be valid, anymore than she can vow that she will be Mr. Universe in ten days. :)

 

I quite like this one, and to me at least, its the most likely to happen.

Also, as Sharaman says, we should be thinking about "ways to defeat the Oath Rod." Now to me, and I know that this could be interpreted different, to me this doesnt mean, "oh theres a ter'angreal that can beat it" but sometjhing along the lines of finding the loopholes in the actual binding, as the quote above states. Howevre, thats only my opinion, im really not sure, ill be happy to RAFO

[Hadilmir]

What if Mesaana uses her alias' name in the oath? For instance "I, Danelle Brown Steele, hereby vow to never utter a false word, ..." . Since she is not Danelle, the whole statement is false, and the oaths would not be valid, anymore than she can vow that she will be Mr. Universe in ten days. :)

 

I quite like this one, and to me at least, its the most likely to happen.

Also, as Sharaman says, we should be thinking about "ways to defeat the Oath Rod." Now to me, and I know that this could be interpreted different, to me this doesnt mean, "oh theres a ter'angreal that can beat it" but sometjhing along the lines of finding the loopholes in the actual binding, as the quote above states. Howevre, thats only my opinion, im really not sure, ill be happy to RAFO

First of all, the testers would never let her change the wording of the Oaths. Secondly, in that example, she will be vowing as "I, Danelle", and since the Oath Rod binds perception she will be bound anyway as long as she knows the testers see her as Danelle. It is the same as why Aes Sedai cannot right lies, they perceive (even subconsciously) it to be speaking an untrue word.

[OptimusPrime]

ha. yeah, oh well perhaps some of the posters didnt actually read the whole thing, it is, afrer all 52 pages.

 

But then i suppose you should at least read the first page to see what it is all about.

 

In any case, as yet I have not really seen any ways that the oaths could be evaded realistically, (oh, the whole, having a random ter'angreal that defeats oaths is possible, but its streching it pretty thin.) bar one,

 

What if Mesaana uses her alias' name in the oath? For instance "I, Danelle Brown Steele, hereby vow to never utter a false word, ..." . Since she is not Danelle, the whole statement is false, and the oaths would not be valid, anymore than she can vow that she will be Mr. Universe in ten days. :)

 

I quite like this one, and to me at least, its the most likely to happen.

Also, as Sharaman says, we should be thinking about "ways to defeat the Oath Rod." Now to me, and I know that this could be interpreted different, to me this doesnt mean, "oh theres a ter'angreal that can beat it" but sometjhing along the lines of finding the loopholes in the actual binding, as the quote above states. Howevre, thats only my opinion, im really not sure, ill be happy to RAFO

 

Ive never considered this posibility and its been a while since I looked in this thread.

 

I like it. The fact that she would say something false or misleading in the Oath itself I suppose would indeed change the effect of the Oath entirely. Now, one thing I think is that Mesaana was bound in some way, unless Brandon didnt include her in the "every Aes Sedai in the Tower" but I think she was included. One way or another she was bound by it but the fact that she spoke as her alias might mean that she cannot lie/speak/act in a certain way while trying to pose as Danelle or whoever. If this was true, it simply means it might not be possible to pose as Danelle and still confidently act in character without the Oath stopping you from speaking in the wierdest places. So, Mesaana may have avoided the Oath, but I think Danelle or whoever might well suddenly go missing. We should look for particular Aes Sedai going missing and people trying to cover it up with "she was taken by the Seanchan."

[OptimusPrime]

First of all, the testers would never let her change the wording of the Oaths. Secondly, in that example, she will be vowing as "I, Danelle", and since the Oath Rod binds perception she will be bound anyway as long as she knows the testers see her as Danelle. It is the same as why Aes Sedai cannot right lies, they perceive (even subconsciously) it to be speaking an untrue word.

 

Sorry, you posted while I was writing. With regard to the bolded bit...

 

Mesaana was not bound WHILE speaking the words. Only after she spoke them. Mesaana could say whatever the hell she wants into the Oath. She could say she would stop posing as Rand al'Thor. Since she hasnt started posing as Rand in the first place I wouldnt be surprised if she could start posing as Rand, and the Oath would be valid because at some point she would stop.

 

Got mixed up for a sec then

[Hadilmir]

Sorry, you posted while I was writing. With regard to the bolded bit...

 

Mesaana was not bound WHILE speaking the words. Only after she spoke them. Mesaana could say whatever the hell she wants into the Oath. She could say she would stop posing as Rand al'Thor. Since she hasnt started posing as Rand in the first place I wouldnt be surprised if she could start posing as Rand, and the Oath would be valid because at some point she would stop.

 

Got mixed up for a sec then

But by saying "I, Danelle" she is binding herself while posing as Danelle. If she said "I, Rand Al'Thor" it would have no immediate effect because Mesaana knows no one she is talking to thinks she is Rand Al'Thor. She does, however, know that they think she is Danelle, so she will be bound to speak no word untrue while someone who thinks she is Danelle is present. Also, my first point is the stronger of the two anyway, and you can't argue against that one.

[DemandredFO]

I don't see any Foresaken, much less Mesaana, being bound by the binder even temporarily.  Even though she was chastised by Shaidar for disobedience I don't think she would do it.

[Val Mickey]

First of all, the testers would never let her change the wording of the Oaths. Secondly, in that example, she will be vowing as "I, Danelle", and since the Oath Rod binds perception she will be bound anyway as long as she knows the testers see her as Danelle.

 

Is including your name a real change someone can object to? Remember, only Egwene knows of Mesaana. Other Aes Sedai would never suspect an oath being less if you include your (apparent) name in it.

 

Secondly, Mesaana knows she is not Danelle. Since the whole sentence is a lie, it cannot be construed as an oath.

 

Thirdly, I think it doesn't matter how the testers see her. Isn't it possible to bind an oath all by yourself? I think the Rebel Hall did it, and Verin must have attempted it.

 

P.S I beat the Rod!

 

P.S.S Hallowed be Mr. Ares, who is never around when you need him. (It's a metal virgin thing, if you get my drift)

[Hadilmir]

First of all, the testers would never let her change the wording of the Oaths. Secondly, in that example, she will be vowing as "I, Danelle", and since the Oath Rod binds perception she will be bound anyway as long as she knows the testers see her as Danelle.

 

Is including your name a real change someone can object to? Remember, only Egwene knows of Mesaana. Other Aes Sedai would never suspect an oath being less if you include your (apparent) name in it.

 

Secondly, Mesaana knows she is not Danelle. Since the whole sentence is a lie, it cannot be construed as an oath.

 

Thirdly, I think it doesn't matter how the testers see her. Isn't it possible to bind an oath all by yourself? I think the Rebel Hall did it, and Verin must have attempted it.

 

P.S I beat the Rod!

 

P.S.S Hallowed be Mr. Ares, who is never around when you need him. (It's a metal virgin thing, if you get my drift)

Firstly, yes. It does matter.

 

Secondly, an Oath doesn't have to make perfect sense to be binding. Besides "I, Danelle" would bind as "I, as Danelle" and when speaking to people Mesaana knows think she is Danelle she will be bound.

 

Thirdly, What is this? I don't even.

 

P.S. I lol'd  :D

[darth_hel]

Except as far as I could tell, the oath rod never bound you based on what others thought, only based on your own perceptions. If she knows that she is not Danelle then there's no reason that it would bind her based on others thinking she's Danelle.

[Val Mickey]

Thirdly, What is this? I don't even.

 

What I mean is this : If there is no need of another person while swearing the oath - then only what you say would matter. If this holds true in one case, it will hold true in all, meaning that whoever is present, one, many, or none, only what you say matters. And when Mesaana swears I, Danelle Steele,  she doesn't mean I as Danelle Steele. She means to say a lie, and lies cannot be sworn to. My confusion is in regard to Hadilmir's "since perception is bound". Could you back that up please?

 

P.S I think Luckers is on leave or AWOL. Lets post things he wouldn't approve of, or bad-mouth him. ;)

Luckers, you're a tyrant!

[bobothebarbarian]

;D Luckers on leave? that just doesn't make sense to me! lets debate if it is true lol ::)

[Hadilmir]

What I mean is this : If there is no need of another person while swearing the oath - then only what you say would matter. If this holds true in one case, it will hold true in all, meaning that whoever is present, one, many, or none, only what you say matters. And when Mesaana swears I, Danelle Steele,  she doesn't mean I as Danelle Steele. She means to say a lie, and lies cannot be sworn to. My confusion is in regard to Hadilmir's "since perception is bound". Could you back that up please?

 

P.S I think Luckers is on leave or AWOL. Lets post things he wouldn't approve of, or bad-mouth him. ;)

Luckers, you're a tyrant!

The Oaths bind a channeler's perception. If an Aes Sedai thinks something is the truth (regardless if it is or not) then she may speak it as true. She perceived it to be true, just like an Aes Sedai can think she is in danger without truly being endangered. The Oaths bind her based on her perception. Anyways, I guess you are right about lies not being swear-able, but would the testers let her is the big question?

 

Also, Luckers is dead! Shai'tan has been slayed. Hurreh!

[farthammer]

Rather than a name change, you could just dig up a word in the Old Tongue that sounds remarkably close to the AS oaths to say in your head while also completely changing the meaning of the oath.  Maybe that's why the Seanchan have the worst accent ever, you couldn't even fully understand what they were saying.

[Val Mickey]

Anyways, I guess you are right about lies not being swear-able, but would the testers let her is the big question?

 

How would the testers know she's not who she claims?

 

I think Rand's Can Breat slip will help identify Mesaana.

[Lambada]

Ok, I don't personally go for the "mental trickery" route for avoiding the Oath Rod, but this one just hit me.

 

"I vow to speak no word that is not true"

Word. Singular. Nothing there to stop them from saying multiple words that aren't true.

 

Just figured I'd throw that out there - although I still don't like this route of avoidance.

[Val Mickey]

Isn't that how they do it already?

 

And you'd still be bound. BWS asked us to think on how to 'evade'.

 

I still think my 'lying method' should work.

[Lambada]

Isn't that how they do it already?

 

And you'd still be bound. BWS asked us to think on how to 'evade'.

 

I still think my 'lying method' should work.

No - the conventional interpretation is that they all speak the truth, it's just that they shroud it in maybe's, or answer a tangent. They never say either single or multiple words that aren't true.

[ROB_88]

i don't think that works.

the line makes them speak no word that's not true, none at all.

 

and even with you'r logic you still need one to make two, but since you can't make one it's therefore impossible to make two

[Lambada]

i don't think that works.

the line makes them speak no word that's not true, none at all.

 

and even with you'r logic you still need one to make two, but since you can't make one it's therefore impossible to make two

Meh, as I said I don't go for this mental hocus-pocus as the answer anyway. I always find the best way to test a theory is to chuck it out there and let others destroy it.

[DaughterOfNight]

 

Seeing how RJ has always set us up with information before it's needed, I think we should consider Verin's clever little loophole around her DO oath's... the part about 'until the hour of death'. 

 

I can't find the person whose comment I wanted to quote regarding this but basically, I am definitely leaning more in the direction of Mesaana finding a way around the actual wording of the oaths more than the theories favoring oath ter'angreals and such.

[Barid Bel Medar]

 

Seeing how RJ has always set us up with information before it's needed, I think we should consider Verin's clever little loophole around her DO oath's... the part about 'until the hour of death'. 

 

I can't find the person whose comment I wanted to quote regarding this but basically, I am definitely leaning more in the direction of Mesaana finding a way around the actual wording of the oaths more than the theories favoring oath ter'angreals and such.

 

Ill agree with this.

 

 

Although I think it is more than just avoiding the lying part, perhaps something to render the WHOLE of the Oaths void

[DaughterOfNight]

 

Seeing how RJ has always set us up with information before it's needed, I think we should consider Verin's clever little loophole around her DO oath's... the part about 'until the hour of death'.  

 

I can't find the person whose comment I wanted to quote regarding this but basically, I am definitely leaning more in the direction of Mesaana finding a way around the actual wording of the oaths more than the theories favoring oath ter'angreals and such.

 

Ill agree with this.

 

 

Although I think it is more than just avoiding the lying part, perhaps something to render the WHOLE of the Oaths void

 

Good point... but how?  Like most of us, I'm stumped as to how this is all going to play out and I've exhausted my mind trying to come up with every idea I can think of.

 

Not sure how much I believe of this but, as others have mentioned, perhaps Mesaana has such control over her mind that she can make herself believe that she isn't lying.  I think about how one can pass a lie detector test even though they aren't telling the truth.  Takes absolute control but it's possible, I guess.  Thinking about how mind control is very important in T'A'R... seems like this could factor in.

[Durinax]

She made a new OR! she commisioned a carver from shara to make an ivory rod identical to the OR, then she used her researcher background to cahnge the feeling of the new rod to the OR but the new one isnt a ter angreal so cahnnelling into it will do absolutely nothing and she will be free of the oaths.

Then the placebo effect causes all other AS to take the oaths literally causing the effects but mesaana knows they are false and doesnt get effected by them

 

 

btw this is a joke

[Sharaman]

 

Seeing how RJ has always set us up with information before it's needed, I think we should consider Verin's clever little loophole around her DO oath's... the part about 'until the hour of death'. 

 

I can't find the person whose comment I wanted to quote regarding this but basically, I am definitely leaning more in the direction of Mesaana finding a way around the actual wording of the oaths more than the theories favoring oath ter'angreals and such.

 

Ill agree with this.

 

 

Although I think it is more than just avoiding the lying part, perhaps something to render the WHOLE of the Oaths void

 

Good point... but how/?  Like most of us, I'm stumped as to how this is all going to play out and I've exhausted my mind trying to come up with every idea I can think of.

 

Not sure how much I believe of this but, as others have mentioned, perhaps Mesaana has such control over her mind that she can make herself believe that she isn't lying.  I think about how one can pass a lie detector test even though they aren't telling the truth.  Takes absolute control but it's possible, I guess.  Thinking about how mind control is very important in T'A'R... seems like this could factor in.

 

This whole thread started because Brandon answered a specific question about exactly this possibility and indicated that there was another way to do it -

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.

 

That means just going around in circles if you continue to think along these lines. 

 

[Lambada]

Ok, I've been on the Theoryland database, and this quite jumped out at me

 

The Gathering Storm Book Tour, Vroman's Bookstore, LA 17 November 2009 - Robert Moreau reporting

 

Q: Do the Forsaken consider themselves Darkfriends?

A: Oooh, you are tricky! I know what you’re doing. I would say that, in general, yes they do consider themselves Darkfriends, though there are ways somebody would be able to get around that. I would say, yes, that that is not the sort of mental gymnastics that…it is very easy to convince yourself that you are not a Darkfriend.

Source: http://docs.google.com/View?docID=dcjspjqg_835dprjs4gb&revision=_latest

 

This directly addresses the most common theory of her not considering herself a dark friend.

 

Now to me atleast, this answer is a bit of a mess, so let's break it down and see what he was actually saying.

A: Oooh, you are tricky! I know what you’re doing.

If this doesn't make sense, then you why are you reading this thread?

I would say that, in general, yes they do consider themselves Darkfriends,

Ok, so by default Forsaken do think of themselves as Darkfriends. Ask 13 Forsaken, and at least half will say yes.

though there are ways somebody would be able to get around that.

This quite plainly says that it is possible for a Forsaken to consider themselves not a darkfriend.

I would say, yes, that that is not the sort of mental gymnastics that…it is very easy to convince yourself that you are not a Darkfriend.

Now, that 'yes' I think is not so much part of the answer, but more a Brandon thinking to himself about how to answer best. Hence it could be removed (This is why audio recordings really can help! If you know of one with this question please post and let me know!). So this bit, the tricky bit, now reads

I would say that that is not the sort of mental gymnastics that…it is very easy to convince yourself that you are not a Darkfriend.

Let's take the first part

I would say that that is not the sort of mental gymnastics that…

Here he seems to be going on to say that the thinking needed to believe yourself not a darfriend is uncommon, or rare.

it is very easy to convince yourself that you are not a Darkfriend.

Now he seems to have totally changed tack, and possibly totally changed what he was going to say.

 

It seems to me that by itself that last bit is pretty compelling evidence. BUT taking in context, it is far less so. If anything, I would say that it seems like a too easy confirmation of the mental gymnastics theory.

 

Now go ahead, and knock this house of twigs down :P