Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

not sure if its been thought of but an issue with the three oaths.


rettus
 Share

Recommended Posts

I keep seeing in books where Aes Sedai have said that their names are different than there actual real names. How do they get by doing this? Do they say something like "I have been called this before, or known as this before." Or is it just a loophole that nobody thought of. Anybody?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think it is the Warders that lie about the names. The Aes Sedai themselves just answer to the name without lying. But I can see where this can be a loophole in the oaths. It would be interesting to see if it has been discussed before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The three oaths are full of these types of loopholes.

 

The Warder gives the names, and the Aes Sedai simply does not tell the truth that it's not their name. Half truths are not lies.

 

 

They may also kill without the one power at any time, the oath against killing only deals with using the power as a weapon.

 

Also, they may use the one power to enhance an already existing weapon, without violating the oath against creating them.

 

Also, if they feel something is true, they may lie all they want about it. For example, say that an Aes Sedai feels that Rand does not deserve to be king of Illian, and still considers Mattin Stepaneos den Balgar to be the true king. They could outright say that Mattin Stepaneos is the King of Illian, since they consider it to be the truth. The fact that Rand was given the crown and named king would be irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edit: changed post because I read something wrong the first time around.

 

As for a weapon not sure what you are saying is correct. Feel like we would have been shown something along those lines. There certainly is no proof that it has been done IIRC.

Edited by Suttree
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is probably taught in White Ajah novice lessons that a weapon is anything that harms another person, or some other definition along those lines. Thus, to use the OP to kill someone by pushing them off a bridge you would have to convince yourself that the definition of weapon is different than you were taught. That is probably a large part of why Compulsion is banned, if you were good enough at compulsion you could compel someone to believe that weapon means bunny and they could murder as many people with the OP as they wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, they may use the one power to enhance an already existing weapon, without violating the oath against creating them.

 

But we know that Talent has been lost since the AoL. Neald is the first to create power-wrought weapons in 3000 years.

 

My impression (based on Neald's experience) is that the power can be used to enhance a weapon during its creation; not afterwards. If that is correct, AS cannot enhance an existing weapon.

Edited by Theodril
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep seeing in books where Aes Sedai have said that their names are different than there actual real names. How do they get by doing this? Do they say something like "I have been called this before, or known as this before." Or is it just a loophole that nobody thought of. Anybody?

 

Somebody posts a topic on this once every few months or so. It even came up during Brandon's #wotrr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, they may use the one power to enhance an already existing weapon, without violating the oath against creating them.

 

But we know that Talent has been lost since the AoL. Neald is the first to create power-wrought weapons in 3000 years.

 

My impression (based on Neald's experience) is that the power can be used to enhance a weapon during its creation; not afterwards. If that is correct, AS cannot enhance an existing weapon.

 

We see Verin (and at this very moment it dawns on me that she was quite probably Black Ajah back then!) and another Aes Sedai (Alanna?) walk around between the Catapults in the Two Rivers in preparation for the Trolloc or White Cloak invasion and modify the boulders to have an explosive effect when landing.

Sure, it might not be a "weapon" as such, it is just a stone that someone later might end up using in a Catapult, but they sure are enhancing the destructive effect of the catapults.

Just getting this from memory so might have got it wrong.

Edited by Ferdawoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, they may use the one power to enhance an already existing weapon, without violating the oath against creating them.

 

But we know that Talent has been lost since the AoL. Neald is the first to create power-wrought weapons in 3000 years.

 

My impression (based on Neald's experience) is that the power can be used to enhance a weapon during its creation; not afterwards. If that is correct, AS cannot enhance an existing weapon.

 

We see Verin (and at this very moment it dawns on me that she was quite probably Black Ajah back then!) and another Aes Sedai (Alanna?) walk around between the Catapults in the Two Rivers in preparation for the Trolloc or White Cloak invasion and modify the boulders to have an explosive effect when landing.

Sure, it might not be a "weapon" as such, it is just a stone that someone later might end up using in a Catapult, but they sure are enhancing the destructive effect of the catapults.

Just getting this from memory so might have got it wrong.

They were to be used against Trollocs, so the loopholes are multiple:

1) Probably falls within the scope of using the power as a weapon rather than making a weapon, and was to be used vs trollocs so fine

2) If not, is not a weapon "for one man to kill another"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They could make weapons with the 'intention' of giving them to women, then haplessly leaving them out where any enterprising young warrior could come across them.

There are many comically simple ways around the oaths, it's just part of the job.

 

Lol ... Let the exclusive female club be gender-insensitive! I think the word "man" in the oath refers to mankind, both men and women. So, the oath won't let them make a weapon for a woman to kill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The oaths work on perception, not reality, so one AS could make a weapon, while the other could not. However, since this culture may have developed the thought that man=mankind, then it is effectively the same as saying "dont make weapons"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure the weapons-making with the Power was around up to at least the Trolloc-wars. What sense would it make to take an Oath to not do something you haven't been able to do for over a thousand years?

 

As for interpretations of the Oaths, I have little doubt that the specific meanings of the Oaths are discussed quite thoroughly in Accepted classes, and that the Aes Sedai would be most scrupulous in forbidding the most liberal interpretations. And it's not like a person's interpretation of the Oath can vary that widely from someone else's. If they could, they wouldn't have made a very effective means for dealing with criminal channelers. "I vow not to use the One Power to steal TV's any more." "Oh, I'm not stealing it, I'm just borrowing it. I'll give it back eventually." Yeah, it wouldn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that. However, taking a random girl who just finds out she can channel, gets stolen away to the white tower and takes the oath, with no influence beforehand on the meanings, and immediately sending her back to her hiding place, only giving her knowledge of the weaves, there is a chance they could be interpreted as only applying to men, specially in Randland, with women's attitudes so condescending towards men and their believed superiority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know...I think we ALL would love....to see the Aes Sedai learn about a little thing called..."Lie by omission."

 

THAT would be EPIC :D

 

No more "Why would you do that?" +"So you can get killed later on brat...i mean....dont mess with Tower stuff boy"

Edited by Naggash
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know...I think we ALL would love....to see the Aes Sedai learn about a little thing called..."Lie by omission."

 

THAT would be EPIC :D

 

No more "Why would you do that?" +"So you can get killed later on brat...i mean....dont mess with Tower stuff boy"

AS are already aware of the concept, and use it frequently. It's at the heart of their subversion of the Oaths - they cannot speak words that are untrue, but they can leave out as many true words as they like.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for interpretations of the Oaths, I have little doubt that the specific meanings of the Oaths are discussed quite thoroughly in Accepted classes, and that the Aes Sedai would be most scrupulous in forbidding the most liberal interpretations. And it's not like a person's interpretation of the Oath can vary that widely from someone else's. If they could, they wouldn't have made a very effective means for dealing with criminal channelers. "I vow not to use the One Power to steal TV's any more." "Oh, I'm not stealing it, I'm just borrowing it. I'll give it back eventually." Yeah, it wouldn't work.

Obviously the Three Oaths which are voluntarily (to a degree) taken and meant to make AS seem safe to the rest of the world have are different from ones to bind criminals. Look at Galina, she was told never to pick up the Oath Rod, but she could get it handed to her. The authorities in the AoL would of been well aware of the limitations of it and probably had a set of iron-clad standard oaths that left no rooms for slipping around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...