Seanchan and the AoL

[thisguy]

2) Which forsaken? Isshy was a male. How the heck was he to teach the females how to do that?

 

Are you seriously putting forth that Ishy couldn't have walked them through something that simple? He worked with women every day in the AoL after all.

 

Who do you blame for slavery? The original slavers? Or the people who continued slavery until they were freed. Just because your father gave you slaves doesn't mean you have to keep them.

 

Which is of course a ridiculously flawed analogy. I will give you this. You are excellent at coming up with most negative association a la slavery and genocide when describing AS negative traits.

I don't know if Ish could have taught them. Asmo had a hard time teaching Rand and they're both men. They've said many times that one sex cannot teach the other sex.

[roocifer]

Another point, multiple AS say throughout the series that what makes them AS is the Oaths they swore on the Oath Rod. It's what sets them apart from all other channellers (i.e. Windfinders, Wise Ones, the Kin, Damane). If becoming BA breaks one's Oaths, then are they really AS any longer, or are they just channellers posing as AS?

The AS in the AoL did not swear the 3 Oaths. The 3 Oaths were invented during the Breaking (correct me if I'm wrong) or shortly after. To call the Forsaken "AS" is quite a stretch as what was considered AS in the AoL was completely different than what we see in current Randland. A completely different organization with the same name.

 

Finally, I think this is a great tribute to RJ's skill as a storyteller. The AS were controversial to many of the people and cultures in Randland. It says something that RJ succeeded in making them so controversial that even we the readers find them controversial and have differing opinions on whether they were good or bad, failures or successful, helpful or a hindrance.

Considering that once upon a time AS never swore on the oath rod, does that make the newer generations of AS not AS. That's the same reasoning you're using for saying that channelers who have not sworn the three oaths are not AS. In every other aspect the BA are AS and are treated as AS even by their fellow AS.

 

What I'm saying is: what we know of present day AS as an organization, and the WT, has almost nothing in common with the group named AS in the AoL. The only things we know they have in common are the name and the fact that they could channel. It seems unfair to attribute the rise of the Forsaken to what we currently know as AS. In fact, multiple Forsaken scoff openly at the present day AS for daying to call themselves by that name.

[thisguy]

Another point, multiple AS say throughout the series that what makes them AS is the Oaths they swore on the Oath Rod. It's what sets them apart from all other channellers (i.e. Windfinders, Wise Ones, the Kin, Damane). If becoming BA breaks one's Oaths, then are they really AS any longer, or are they just channellers posing as AS?

The AS in the AoL did not swear the 3 Oaths. The 3 Oaths were invented during the Breaking (correct me if I'm wrong) or shortly after. To call the Forsaken "AS" is quite a stretch as what was considered AS in the AoL was completely different than what we see in current Randland. A completely different organization with the same name.

 

Finally, I think this is a great tribute to RJ's skill as a storyteller. The AS were controversial to many of the people and cultures in Randland. It says something that RJ succeeded in making them so controversial that even we the readers find them controversial and have differing opinions on whether they were good or bad, failures or successful, helpful or a hindrance.

Considering that once upon a time AS never swore on the oath rod, does that make the newer generations of AS not AS. That's the same reasoning you're using for saying that channelers who have not sworn the three oaths are not AS. In every other aspect the BA are AS and are treated as AS even by their fellow AS.

 

What I'm saying is: what we know of present day AS as an organization, and the WT, has almost nothing in common with the group named AS in the AoL. The only things we know they have in common are the name and the fact that they could channel. It seems unfair to attribute the rise of the Forsaken to what we currently know as AS. In fact, multiple Forsaken scoff openly at the present day AS for daying to call themselves by that name.

Well, then what is the AS but a name? All the BA are considered AS even by present day AS.

[Suttree]

Well, then what is the AS but a name? All the BA are considered AS even by present day AS.

 

They most certainly are not...they are considered "remnants cast out and scorned".

 

Again it is just basic common sense that once they swear to the shadow they cease to count. They become the enemy. I honestly can't even believe we are debating whether the actions of the Forsaken count against AS.

[thisguy]

Well, then what is the AS but a name? All the BA are considered AS even by present day AS.

 

They most certainly are not...they are considered "remnants cast out and scorned".

Only after they're found out. While they walk around unknown to be BA they are treated the same as any other AS. One even rises to 2nd in command.

[thisguy]

The rebels made Egwene their Amyrilin and she wasn't even sworn in. YET, for all intents and purposes, she was Aes Sedai.

[thisguy]

The whole reason that the AS now swear the 3 oaths are because people became afraid of them. I'm sorry, I can't believe you don't see the truth of this.

[Vardar]

2) Which forsaken? Isshy was a male. How the heck was he to teach the females how to do that?

 

Are you seriously putting forth that Ishy couldn't have walked them through something that simple? He worked with women every day in the AoL after all.

 

Who do you blame for slavery? The original slavers? Or the people who continued slavery until they were freed. Just because your father gave you slaves doesn't mean you have to keep them.

 

Which is of course a ridiculously flawed analogy. I will give you this. You are excellent at coming up with most negative association a la slavery and genocide when describing AS traits.

 

I don't feel like digging them up but the reasons for why that oath rod method was flawed and wouldn't have worked in the long run have been discussed ad nauseum in old threads.

 

Actually the slavery point was about blame, since you asked me about Malakier. So, no I did not directly associate it to AS.

 

and I've never associated genocide to AS, I actually said your statement about "doing what someone feels feels is right" can excuse anything, even genocide. You associated it to AS, not I. Don't take me out of context.

 

So your conclusion is because the Oath Rod method is flawed, with new discoveries and things only the Forsaken knew at the time, that nothing should have been done and they can't be held accountable for the actions of their members and their refusal to police their own force? Really?

[thisguy]

So, were the rebels Aes Sedai? If they had lost and been captured, they would have been gentled.

 

If Elaida had made the fourth oath a reality, would the Aes Sedai who swore it still be Aes Sedai? How about the ones who refused? If the whole tower but three women swore the 4th oath, would those three women still be Aes Sedai?

[thisguy]

How about if 13 reds captured Rand and gentled him, would you consider them Aes Sedai?

[thisguy]

Sorry, any BA running around would be treated as Aes Sedai. She's been trained by Aes Sedai, probably still follows orders to a certain degree (like most Aes Sedai) and would be able to order around an AS with less power than her.

[thisguy]

Is it swearing the oath to the DO that cuts them out of the Aes Sedai order? How about Siuane? She pulled strings for the Dragon and was gentled and cast out. Did you ever think of her and Moiraine as not AS even though they were going against the Order?

[Vardar]

I think you're both correct here. Yes they are remnants, cast out and scorned, however that does not mean the Tower as a whole is no longer responsible for their actions. If you could recruit, train and equip people, and when they go rogue (If you allow it or not doesn't matter) and claim you're not responsible for their actions and you're not bound to stop them, what does that make you? Why would people continue to let you have the power to gather those forces if you're not going to police them?

 

If you're responsible for their existence, then you're responsible for policing them.

 

So guy and sutt are both right on that front, they're AS and yet not, at the same time.

[thisguy]

Anyway, the point is, being an AS makes you no more good, perfect, or wise than being a Stone Dog, a member of the Kin, the Queen's Guard in Caemlyn or a the Queen of Andor.

[thisguy]

I think you're both correct here. Yes they are remnants, cast out and scorned, however that does not mean the Tower as a whole is no longer responsible for their actions. If you could recruit, train and equip people, and when they go rogue (If you allow it or not doesn't matter) and claim you're not responsible for their actions and you're not bound to stop them, what does that make you? Why would people continue to let you have the power to gather those forces if you're not going to police them?

 

If you're responsible for their existence, then you're responsible for policing them.

 

So guy and sutt are both right on that front, they're AS and yet not, at the same time.

 

This is exactly the reason that the AS ARE so irresponsible about searching for the BA. If the world found out, then people would shun the AS even more than they already do and few would listen to them. They could easily have put up safe guards to try and weed them out. How about swearing on the oath rod every three months?

 

It's all about power.

[Morden]

TBH I think part of the whole problem in the tower, is that they assume that anyone who swears the three oaths is on the side of the light. You'd think they would have realised that just because you swear them, doesnt mean you wont change allegiance at a later date. They put too much faith in the three oaths, they tried to make a whole group persona out of them. and Instead of being honest, it made them learn how to trick and deceive people into believing they heard differently than they did. The fact that everyone knows not to trust that what you hear is what an AS is really saying, says it all. Better to out right lie than to manipulate and dissemble to that degree. They started using the three Oaths after the Trolloc wars, which ironically was when Ishammael was released from SG. Do you think that it is possble he gave them the Oath Rod when he created the BA? as a way to make them seperate themselves from humans, shorten their lifespan and generally make them more trusting of other Aes Sedai. It would make sense that he would tell the BA how to get around it, Assuming he didnt give the BA a second rod... (thats my belief at least as he has several such artefacts.

 

Regarding the WT and its corruption and pettiness though. Daes Dae'mar says it all. they invented it, play it best and that is why they are feared and dispised by most of the human population. Because of how flat out untrustworthy anyone who practised it is.

 

RJ shows time and time again how much power corrupts. But that just because you are corrupted does not mean you set out to be evil. Look at Mordeth, Rand was corrupted but managed to pull through, the WT was corrupted and is still in the process of pulling through. Egwene is trying to do her best to make the sitters act in an honest and less deceitful secret fashion. Do you think she would need to do that if the system was not flawed and corrupt?

[Suttree]

The whole reason that the AS now swear the 3 oaths are because people became afraid of them. I'm sorry, I can't believe you don't see the truth of this.

 

I have no idea what your multiple posts are even referring to at this point.

 

The rebels and reds regardless of their actions are of course AS. I hold them responsible for their actions in the "vileness" even though the BA played a hand in setting it up. What has never been accepted, by even one person in the entirety of the fandom is that AS are responsible for the actions of the Forsaken. Further once a BA member swears to the shadow they cease to be AS. They are no longe working for the light and serve a different power.

 

Edit: As for the oaths, yes they were a mistake and they put far too much faith in them. Further their institution has failed and their system is flawed. It needs a total overhaul of which Egwene has already been working towards. None of that however changes the fact that they have saved the world a few times over and have been the major force against the shadow for three thousand years. They have without a doubt done more good than harm. That was my original point. You can argue method and whether they are still best suited to lead the light at TG. What you cannot argue is their intentions.

[thisguy]

TBH I think part of the whole problem in the tower, is that they assume that anyone who swears the three oaths is on the side of the light. You'd think they would have realised that just because you swear them, doesnt mean you wont change allegiance at a later date. They put too much faith in the three oaths, they tried to make a whole group persona out of them. and Instead of being honest, it made them learn how to trick and deceive people into believing they heard differently than they did. The fact that everyone knows not to trust that what you hear is what an AS is really saying, says it all. Better to out right lie than to manipulate and dissemble to that degree. They started using the three Oaths after the Trolloc wars, which ironically was when Ishammael was released from SG. Do you think that it is possble he gave them the Oath Rod when he created the BA? as a way to make them seperate themselves from humans, shorten their lifespan and generally make them more trusting of other Aes Sedai. It would make sense that he would tell the BA how to get around it, Assuming he didnt give the BA a second rod... (thats my belief at least as he has several such artefacts.

 

Regarding the WT and its corruption and pettiness though. Daes Dae'mar says it all. they invented it, play it best and that is why they are feared and dispised by most of the human population. Because of how flat out untrustworthy anyone who practised it is.

 

RJ shows time and time again how much power corrupts. But that just because you are corrupted does not mean you set out to be evil. Look at Mordeth, Rand was corrupted but managed to pull through, the WT was corrupted and is still in the process of pulling through. Egwene is trying to do her best to make the sitters act in an honest and less deceitful secret fashion. Do you think she would need to do that if the system was not flawed and corrupt?

That's an excellent point. Liandrin was a darkfriend when she went to the tower. Yet, she made it all the way to full Aes Sedai. Was she an Aes Sedai if she was already a darkfriend? Apparently so.

[Vardar]

I think you're both correct here. Yes they are remnants, cast out and scorned, however that does not mean the Tower as a whole is no longer responsible for their actions. If you could recruit, train and equip people, and when they go rogue (If you allow it or not doesn't matter) and claim you're not responsible for their actions and you're not bound to stop them, what does that make you? Why would people continue to let you have the power to gather those forces if you're not going to police them?

 

If you're responsible for their existence, then you're responsible for policing them.

 

So guy and sutt are both right on that front, they're AS and yet not, at the same time.

 

This is exactly the reason that the AS ARE so irresponsible about searching for the BA. If the world found out, then people would shun the AS even more than they already do and few would listen to them. They could easily have put up safe guards to try and weed them out. How about swearing on the oath rod every three months?

 

It's all about power.

 

What's sad is the people will never know. Most people will never realize WT policies encouraged the BA, even if they manage to discover there is a BA. They'll probably just pawn it off on the Seanchan. They'll use clever words like, Those were not Aes Sedai, and using Sutt's logic, technically they weren't.

 

The people would have more respect if they knew about the BA, and knew the tower was hunting them to destroy them, even if it's been going on for thousands of years. Every group has it's corruption, and people understand that. Refusing to believe in corruption is where the issue comes in.

[thisguy]

The whole reason that the AS now swear the 3 oaths are because people became afraid of them. I'm sorry, I can't believe you don't see the truth of this.

 

I have no idea what your multiple posts are even referring to at this point.

 

The rebels and reds regardless of their actions are of course AS. I hold them responsible for their actions in the "vileness" even though the BA played a hand in setting it up. What has never been accepted, by even one person in the entirety of the fandom is that AS are responsible for the actions of the Forsaken. Further once a BA member swears to the shadow they cease to be AS. They are no longe working for the light and serve a different power.

How about Liandrin? A Darkfriend before even going to the tower yet sworn in as an Aes Sedai? She was one and was a darkfriend.

[Morden]

I think you're both correct here. Yes they are remnants, cast out and scorned, however that does not mean the Tower as a whole is no longer responsible for their actions. If you could recruit, train and equip people, and when they go rogue (If you allow it or not doesn't matter) and claim you're not responsible for their actions and you're not bound to stop them, what does that make you? Why would people continue to let you have the power to gather those forces if you're not going to police them?

 

If you're responsible for their existence, then you're responsible for policing them.

 

So guy and sutt are both right on that front, they're AS and yet not, at the same time.

 

This is exactly the reason that the AS ARE so irresponsible about searching for the BA. If the world found out, then people would shun the AS even more than they already do and few would listen to them. They could easily have put up safe guards to try and weed them out. How about swearing on the oath rod every three months?

 

It's all about power.

 

I dont believe they even realised the Oath rod could remove them until the later books, and I think the level of pain would put many off needlessly doing it, especially without proof, to many the BA was pure superstituion because they flat out ignored it and it was essentially taboo to mention the BA. That and the more I think on what Verin said when she mentioned how the Oaths channelers take to the DO are not so easily loosened makes me think the BA have their own Oath Rod.

[thisguy]

All the AS had to do was make a fourth oath to never go over to the dark side or stay true to the light and have the women reswear it a couple of times a year. But, they don't do that. Liandrin was AS. Sorry.

[thisguy]

The whole reason that the AS now swear the 3 oaths are because people became afraid of them. I'm sorry, I can't believe you don't see the truth of this.

 

I have no idea what your multiple posts are even referring to at this point.

 

The rebels and reds regardless of their actions are of course AS. I hold them responsible for their actions in the "vileness" even though the BA played a hand in setting it up. What has never been accepted, by even one person in the entirety of the fandom is that AS are responsible for the actions of the Forsaken. Further once a BA member swears to the shadow they cease to be AS. They are no longe working for the light and serve a different power.

 

By the way, my multiple post were showing how AS in all sorts of circumstances are still AS - Even Egwene before swearing the three oaths. She was AS because they accepted her as AS. A good part of her training wasn't even at the tower.

[thisguy]

There is no oath to the light and no oath not to go to the dark side.

[MasterAblar]

The whole reason that the AS now swear the 3 oaths are because people became afraid of them. I'm sorry, I can't believe you don't see the truth of this.

 

I have no idea what your multiple posts are even referring to at this point.

 

The rebels and reds regardless of their actions are of course AS. I hold them responsible for their actions in the "vileness" even though the BA played a hand in setting it up. What has never been accepted, by even one person in the entirety of the fandom is that AS are responsible for the actions of the Forsaken. Further once a BA member swears to the shadow they cease to be AS. They are no longe working for the light and serve a different power.

 

How could the AS possibly be responsible for the actions of the Forsaken?

 

I do agree that the AS cannot be held responsible for the actions of the BA. That said the should have done a better job of weeding out the darkfriends in their organisation. They didn't even seem to fully accept the BA existance until Egwene gave them absolute proof. Their sense of superiority really hurt them here. While they can't be expected to be perfect and have no darkfriends among them, they should have done a better job of limiting their numbers.