he Infallible Three Oaths?
by Tain Shari: 2004-02-18 | Not yet rated
What I write is not so much a theory but a question referring to the nature of the three oaths. I know that we have heard the speel from every Aes Sedai that has opened their mouths in the books about there inability to attack people and all that stuff... but what I am here to do is pose a few situations and put my two cents foward and see what you have to say.... This submission is concerning the Three oaths.
Before being raised to the level of Aes Sedai, each Accepted is required to swear three oaths while holding the Oath Rod, They bind the oaths bone deep.... yadda yadda yadda and we all know what these oaths are. But I am curious to people interpretation and ideas on how they are held to these oaths, I have always taken their oaths as a sub consious barrier that relies on a persons conscience ( I use this term lightly in the lack of better words) to hold them to them. Because an Aes Sedia couldn't say the sky was green because of that little voice in the back of their head that tells them that they damn well know it isn't.
One would have to consider a colour blind Aes Sedia (though I never heard of one) could she tell her self that the thing she was looking at was green (due to her colour blindness) when it really was red (like can the oath step out side the oath bearer and analys the situation?).... she is telling a lie, but she thinks something is green. Would she be able to tell an Aes Sedia in the red ajah, after being told that the Aes Sedai's dress was red, would she then be able to say "no your dress is green," cos she still sees it as green but she knows it is red. Now this is where I am heading, can an Aes Sedai attack some one if she was convinced the target was shadowspawn....
Like if she was shooting in the dark, and she saw a giant big dark shape, would she be able to fry it with out knowing it was shadowspawn. Would the oath allow her to shoot if she had doubt to its shadowspawness, So if Moiraine was in the middle of a paddock in the middle of the night, and she was expecting Loial to come to her during the fight would she be able to fry every dark shape in the night when she knew one of them could possibly be Loial?
During the liberation of Rand from his box, the pro-rand Aes Sedai threw themselves into battle because of the restraint of the third oath. They couldn't attack because they or their warder or another sister wheren't in danger. But could these Aes Sedai have got into the mind set of "If we loose I am dead", They are fighting for their life, so to speak. Because if they are beaten they would have to have died for the other team to win.
We all know Aes Sedai can turn the truth on its head and thinking that would still count as no lie, but would it be enough to by-pass the third oath? But then again this has just occured to me.... The oath mentions a sister in danger or the life of their warder. Could the Pro-Rand Aes Sedai have used the One power as a weapon becasue the enemy Aes Sedai where in danger. So could they have used that as a loop hole?
In the battle of edmond field Verin and Alanna made catapults that they then 'blessed' to make explode. Any one of those could have miss fired and killed a huge number of men. If there where dark friends (the regular human variety) in the trolloc ranks, could they have made the catapault? Knowing the death of these human would be because of the construction and use of the catapult. So if Verin made that catapult with the intention to kill trollocs, and it was just miss-used by the firing squad, would she still have violaten her oaths? But she has already made the weapon.... Quite a predicament.
If the block is on a purely subconsious level then the moment a person (namely elaine) was making a nice big sa'agreal that could, in the wrong hands, destory a city, think about the items destructive uses then would she still be able able to create it? Or if she was to take the oath so literal (which i am suprised they havn't yet) that she would say, well no guy can use this any hows.... But what if this little voice said to her "he could use it to hit some guy on the head and kill him!" Would she still be able to make it? So that is my thoughts, how far can you take these oaths before everything you do can no longer be done, can agreals ever be made? when it is cleary obvious what some one can with them. Can an Aes Sedai convice her self that she is in danger to by-pass the 3rd oath, what happens if she does try to attack some one, I have never read (not that I can remember any way) of them actually trying to attack some one, will the weaves fail to form or will they just not be pysically able to do it? Feel Free to rubbish this because in doing so you will answer my question and make my day... but at the same time add your own thoughts... I am truly stumped....
Here is one of my loonier Theories.... I have been thinking that the oath rod dosn't just bind the oath bone deep but onto the pattern thread of bearer of that oath. This burning of the oath would make a link with the pattern and mark them out.... So that when they go to use the power their little thread does something that is like a radar 'ping' and picks them out in the patterns "eyes". We are told that the pattern would allow you to move down the left path not the right and still alow you to keep going, but it wouldn't let you become king because of the amount of shifting the pattern would have to absorb.... What if the power had that sort of restrictions. The oaths they pledge aren't important but breaking their oaths would be like you trying to be king, The pattern just wouldn't let you. So when you try and attack some one the pattern relieses what you are doing and dosn't alow it because it knows the breaking of that oath would result in a massive shift in the pattern and it wont alow for it. So hows that..... But yeah Thats my two cents worth.....
You cannot rate theories without first logging in. Please
log in.
1
Tamyrlin: 2004-03-07
I think there are cultural limitations, psychological, and physical limitations. Culturally, Aes Sedai are sensitive to tow the line of the Oaths, in hopes that people will trust them to use their Power responsibly. Culturally, they want the trust of the world, so they try to steer clear, in normal circustances, from the appearance of breaking an oath, even if something, by the books, wouldn't be against the oaths they have sworn. Psychologically, Aes Sedai are gun shy. They have tried to, in most if not all cases, to go against the oaths; they know what it feels like, they know how helpless they are, so they know there is a line that can't be crossed. Finally, physically, there is a line, but I don't think it touches the Pattern; they stop themselves from lying. But, they also know how to skirt the truth. They have learned where the loop holes are, like the weapon you mentioned Verin and Alanna made. It was made with the intention to kill Trolloc. How it is used is another matter. How misleading information is used is not the problem of an Aes Sedai that misled with that information. I look at the oaths as the "letter of the law", but there is a bunch of room to manuever in if you have tested the law, and know where it is weak.
2
Dorindha: 2004-03-07
FYI: the reason the AS at Dumai's wells could fight was because their lives were in danger by their wandering into the battle, therefore they were defending themselves (and possibly their warders).
As for angreals, they aren't a weapon, therefore I don't think the oath would come into it. If an AS wanted to use an angreal to level a city, it wouldn't be the angreal that was doing it, it was just magnifying the power and then the AS decides what to do (and she would be prevented, as she can't harm humans).
Overall, I think you are right about the oaths being subconscious but relying on what is on the conscious level, although I don't think it relies on her conscience per se: she still has to say her perception of the truth as a fact.
3
Unicorn: 2004-03-07
WOw that was long. Have to admit that I didn't acutally read all of it closely, but I will take the liberty of commenting anyway. The oaths really depends very much on the -- oathee?, the oath taker anyway - insofar as interpretation of the action. The one qoute which I just know will be posted at least six times is the one I will spend hours digging out now. HA got it tPoD ch 26,Seaine and Pevara interogating Zerah it is too long to write in full "'.... Admit the lie girl'
If Zerahs eyes had been wide before, they bulged now. The Rod dropped from her hands to roll across the tabletop, and she clutched her throat. A choking sound came from her suddenly gaping mouth. Pevara stared at her in shock, but suddenly Seaine understood.
'Lights mercy' she breathed. 'You do not have to lie, Zerah' Zerahs legs thrashed beneath the table as if she were trying to rise and could not get her feet under her. 'Tell har Pevara. She believes it's true! you 've commanded her to speak the truth AND to lie. Don't look at me! She believes'", I think there are other instances where an Aes Sedai says something not true, because she does not know better. I think this goes for all the oaths, the subjectivity. If your intention is against the oaths you will not be able to go through with your actions. You cannot convince yourself that the sky is green(just picking up the example don't nitpick), because you know it is not, and you know you are trying to convice yourself in order to lie. As to the weapons part, specifically the catapult ammo made by Verin and Alanna. The oath is not to make a weapon for one man to kill another - they didn't, this is not to say they did not make a weapon that one man could use to kill another - but they are not Aes Sedei for nothing are they :o). HTis goes for the Sa'angreal bit as well. Then there is only the last part left. See rule number one, If the AS has reasonable fears that whatever is outthere is Shadowspawn or that it threatens her or her warder or her sisters life, then there will be no problem.
In the end I do not think that the oath has any direct link to the pattern, that whether or not a violation of the oaths is imminent is controlled largely by the oathee. AND that any deliberate attempt to circumbent the oaths will fail.
4
Elder Haman: 2004-03-07
1: It is absoulutly clear that Aes Sedai can (must?) speak falsehoods if they believe it to be the truth.
2: It's clear Aes Sedai can interpert the oaths literaly and intentionally mislead by tellling only part of the truth. I assume such could be extended to actions involving the other oaths.
3: This is where it gets really tricky. Apparently some Aes Sedai can stretch the oaths to incorporate sarcasm and hyperbole. I assume these must be post-modern Aes Sedai who argue that the meaning of words are arbitrary and that their purpose is communication so speaking a literal falsehood is not a lie if the tone of one's voice modifies the meaning of the words to something approximating truth. Furthermore this extends to the other oaths, particularly revoling around the meaning of the word harm. Apparently some Aes Sedai have been able to convince themselves that hurting people with the power is acceptable if it's "for their own good." It is also explicitly shown that the forbiding of harm does not extend to actions that indirectly lead to harm. (Such as a restraint allowing a Warder to cut your throat.)
This is as much as I can figure out for the books.
5
TheNetweaver: 2004-03-07
It's an interesting point, and one that I've wondered about. If an Aes Sedai believes something that is false, is it still a lie? If Verin, for instance, truly believes the Dark One doesn't exist, would she lie when she voiced this opinion? I don't think so. It would seem to me that it's a psychological block (are there any instances in the series when an Aes Sedai states something untrue because of bad information?) Here's another example: somebody points an arrow at an Aes Sedai, but has no real intent to shoot--it's only a bluff. If the Aes Sedai believed her life was in danger, I think she can break the oath.
All of it is a matter of perception. As for the proposal that the oath road can actually influence the pattern, that seems a little extreme, although it is possible. The oaths would be much more binding than the perception model that I laid out. Are there any ter'angreal that have shown the ability to alter the pattern? I don't have the books with me, and I can't think of any off the top of my head. The Finns perhaps? But they seem like more than an ordinary ter'angreal...
6
Khaos: 2004-03-08
It is very much a question of belief determining what an Aes Sedai can do. If they believe something is true then they can act upon it if they don't believe its true then they can't.
Elder Haman as far as I can recall the 3 oaths mention nothing about harming people with the power its all about using it as a weapon.
Basically Aes Sedai are bound by the words of their oaths and not their intent as they clearly do lie but without speaking a word that is not true.
The oaths are 1) To not speak a word that is not true. They are prohibited from doing exactly that but that doesn't mean they can't add inflection tone, body language, ommission to change the meaning of that word but the word is still true.
Question: Is there any evidence in the books that Aes Sedai can write words which are not true? I would think that they probably can.
2) Not to use the power as a weapon except against shadowspawn and a in the defence of her life another sister or that of her warder.
We have seen that this does not prohibit the use of the power for torture, this one is a little fuzzier. I assume that as long as you have no intention of causing any permenant damage its not a weapon. An interesting thought though is that according to this oath if an Aes sedai came across a person slitting the throats of children they still could not use the power as a weapon.
3) Not to use the power to make a weapon for one man to kill another.
The two rivers battle shows that they can make weapons to be used against trollocs. I think that had the sisters known that their were DF's mixed in amongst them they would NOT have been able to make explosive ammunition.
Question: As Aes Sedai seem to be bound by the words and not intent would it be right to suppose that they could make weapons for WOMEN to kill whomever they please?
7
Aelfinn: 2004-03-08
About the Finns:
They have nothing to do with the ter'angreal, it just allows people to access them. Like I have nothing to do with the door on my house, but if I couldn't leave and that was the only entrance, then you might think that.
But getting back on topic...
The Oaths can't be like realized Compulsion; with Compulsion you're more likely to obey the SPIRIT of the law.
And as for the lying thing:
If I said that I bought 2 books, when I really bought 56 books, that would be technically true; I didn't buy ONLY 2 books, but to buy 56 of ANYTHING you must have at least 2. I've used that trick plenty of times, and it works unless you're asked how many IN TOTAL. If you want to learn something from an Aes Sedai, ask them a direct question. They can't get past that. As said many times before, if there's a loophole, they'll find it. (Should all be politicians....)
Post-modern Aes Sedai: I don't think so. That type of thinking didn't permeate our culture until a (relatively) short time ago, and I have a feeling that something in the AS culture wouldn't accept it.
8
charliec: 2004-03-08
I don't see the need for the rod to affect the pattern myself, it seems to accomplish what it does by simply binding the person... while Aes-Sedai can think a lie they are simply unable to say it... they can want someone dead, but are simply unable to kill them with the power...
Remember the Oath Rod was made to bind criminals... it was just an east, instant rehabilitation tool, not intended for such grand use as it has received in the third age...
9
The Leveler: 2004-03-08
Anyways, an "Aes Sedai" could quite easily convince herself "Everyone knows we are "good". So anyone who balks me or refuses me something MUST be a Darkfriend." So I therefore think the Oaths are a load of crap.
10
Callandor: 2004-03-08
**Question: Is there any evidence in the books that Aes Sedai can write words which are not true? I would think that they probably can.**
No, they can't.
**TITLE: Fires of Heaven, CHAPTER: 51 - News Comes to Cairhien
“It is her hand,” Moiraine said. “What do you make of it, Rand?” “I think there's a rift in the Tower, whether Elaida knows it or not. *I assume an Aes Sedai can't write a lie more easily than she can speak one?” He did not wait for her nod.* “If Alviarin had been less flowery, I might have thought they were working together to pull me in. I can't see Elaida even thinking half of what Alviarin wrote, and I can't see her having a Keeper who could write it, not if she knew.”**
11
Daekyras: 2004-03-09
Some of the Aes Sedai have been turned into Damane. I think one was even referred to as a model of obedience or something like that. That would suggest they use the one power as a weapon and probably did in Ebou Dar and maybe falme. If the Oaths were infallible, they could not have done this. No amount of specious reasoning like "..if I don't kill the 'enemy' I'll be hurt..." just doesn't really work for me...
12
Unicorn: 2004-03-09
Now that, Deakyras is a very good point, never really thought of it. One explanation is that it is a glitch, Rj didn't think of it - not
The other is that, while the Seanchan, and others see it as leashing or chaining, depending on view, we have seen the forsaken(don't remember who, don't remember when someone should be able to help) call it an "involuntary link", this indicates that the two channelers are linked, no matter which way you turn it I think we can safely say the the sul'dam is the leader(term?). Now the big philosophical question is who is "using" the power in a circle - the leader or is it all participants. Following this line of thought the leader is the one, and the other participants are not "seen" as "users".
I know this is thin but it is the only thing I can find to explain it. But it is a good question should be put to RJ someday.
13
: 2004-03-09
I have thought about these three oaths and your theory. They seem more attached to the mind- say on a subconcious level. Kind of like a lie detector, if you believe something than it is not a lie to you(although a lie detecting machine measures your heartbeat rate). Usually when they stand truth on its heads it is because of the wording and terminology they use. We have seen when someone believed something, so they were able to say a corresponding comment. Some of you may disagree with this if you think Verin is black ajah, but when Verin meets up with Rand in Great Hunt and says Moirane sent her. Or when Pevara and Saerin capture Talene who is black (but they make her re-swear to tell the truth)and she tells them that Elaida is black ajah- that is what she believed. This also goes along with when Verin and Alanna made the catapults to use against trollocs. They had no intention of creating a weapon to use to hurt anyone but shadowspawn and it was in last defense of their lives.
I did say that you must believe it to be recognized sub-consciously, which is why the White Tower is so adament about teaching what is right and wrong to their initiates. When the time comes Aes Sedai are programed already to know what to do.
14
Davian93: 2004-03-10
****Some of the Aes Sedai have been turned into Damane. I think one was even referred to as a model of obedience or something like that. That would suggest they use the one power as a weapon and probably did in Ebou Dar and maybe falme.****
I believe it was actually mentioned that the AS damane couldnt channel in battle or lie or break any of the oaths. I dont have the quote available, but I know for a fact they couldnt force an AS to lie even with the collar. Therefore the other Oaths must be just as strong.
15
Khaos: 2004-03-10
Callandor not to be picky and all, Moiraine doesn't actually say they can't she nods to Rand's assumption that they can't. Which for the cynically minded amongst us can be construed as strong evidence that they can write words which are not true.
16
charliec: 2004-03-10
although the sul'dam do mention having tried VERY hard to make an Aes Sedai damane lie, but with no success.
I don't think they mention success or failure using them as a weapon... but then we haven't had many sul'dam POVs, and the ones we have had may not have tried yet...
I sincerely doubt a non-BA Aes-Sedai could use the power as a weapon, even as a damane.
17
Anubis: 2004-03-10
i wonder if the three oaths would permet channeling in defense of ones own life in a kill him or i kill you type situation.
18
Callandor: 2004-03-10
**Callandor not to be picky and all, Moiraine doesn't actually say they can't she nods to Rand's assumption that they can't.**
What does a nod mean to you, other then "yes"? She is telling Rand that he is correct in his assumption.
19
Tamyrlin: 2004-03-11
Callandor, it is still an assumption. A good assumption, but with Aes Sedai, you never can tell.
20
Khaos: 2004-03-11
It all comes back to whether you think they are held to the letter of their oath or the spirit of that oath. A nod does indicate yes, but she is bound against saying a word which is not true not aginst nodding yes when the answer is no.
Which of course doesn't mean she wasn't indicating the truth merely that it's still a grey area (well for me anyway). Besides I don't think this will become an issue anyway and I would think it is even easier to write something deceptive using true words than it is to say.
21
dragonsceptor: 2004-03-11
Callendor, a nod would imply yes. However, this could be a very smart move by Moiraine. The oath is not to SPEAK a word that is not true. A head not is not a spoken word. She did not SPEAK anything and therefore did not lie. However, by nodding her head she would be able to lie without SPEAKING a word that is untrue. There isn't any proof that she lied but I agree that knowing AS, this seems like a classic example of a way to get around the oaths.
22
Callandor: 2004-03-11
**However, this could be a very smart move by Moiraine. The oath is not to SPEAK a word that is not true. A head not is not a spoken word. She did not SPEAK anything and therefore did not lie. However, by nodding her head she would be able to lie without SPEAKING a word that is untrue. There isn't any proof that she lied but I agree that knowing AS, this seems like a classic example of a way to get around the oaths.**
Why would she lie? She has no reason to. Also, Moiraine KNOWS that it is true that Aes Sedai cannot write a lie, otherwise she could not preform the action. Do we see Aes Sedai saying "Yes, this is true." while shaking their head no? No. Why? Because they know that it is either true or untrue and cannot lie.
23
charliec: 2004-03-11
But why on earth would Moiraine want to lie about that? My vote: moot point.
24
Dorindha: 2004-03-12
At the point of this nod from Moiraine, she was all out for Rand - she'd even sworn to obey him, so I would go with the nod.
25
Blademaster: 2004-03-14
Near the very beginning it was said that it might be difficult to create angreal because of the third oath. I think this is a classic example of "guns don't kill people, people kill people." the angreal in and of itself is not a weapon, no more than the rings Elayne creates are, I mean, if some body was skilled enough in T'A'R, they could pull somebody into T'A'R and have complete domination. The ring is not at fault, just the wielder. The same holds for angreal and sa'angreal.
26
Khaos: 2004-03-15
Why would Moiraine deceive Rand? I can think of 3 possible reasons.
1) She is Aes Sedai. Deception is what they do its a difficult habit to break.
2) This is post Rhuidean, Moiraine knows she will die/disappear before the end and has letters already prepared for this eventuality. What if not everything in those letters is 100% accurate.
3) She wants to distance Rand from the Elaida controlled Tower. Perhaps she is hoping to implicate Alviarin as BA. She doesn't know that Alviarin is BA so she can't say it, but if Rand were to catch a lie in her letter and believing that Aes sedai can only write the truth Moiraine would be able to say that logic dictates that Black sisters can lie and let him make the assumption that she is BA.
27
Aelfinn: 2004-03-15
This idea has been written twenty zillion times, but not this particular example.
One Aes Sedai said that Moiraine was dead. Another Aes Sedai said that Moiraine was alive. Obviously, one of them has to be the truth, and another has to be a lie. (She's ALIVE! but that has nothing to do with this.) It's what they believe to be true that counts.
"*whispering* If I said that *out loud* The sky is purple with green stripes *whispering* that would be a lie."
Classic example.
28
Callandor: 2004-03-15
**1) She is Aes Sedai. Deception is what they do its a difficult habit to break.**
She already sworn to obey Rand TFOH, Chapter 6.
**2) This is post Rhuidean, Moiraine knows she will die/disappear before the end and has letters already prepared for this eventuality. What if not everything in those letters is 100% accurate.**
There are no lies in the letter Moiraine addressed to Rand. What is said is not the absolute truth, but no lies; just like how an Aes Sedai talks.
**3) She wants to distance Rand from the Elaida controlled Tower. Perhaps she is hoping to implicate Alviarin as BA. She doesn't know that Alviarin is BA so she can't say it, but if Rand were to catch a lie in her letter and believing that Aes sedai can only write the truth Moiraine would be able to say that logic dictates that Black sisters can lie and let him make the assumption that she is BA.**
She told Rand to trust no Aes Sedai in the letter she gave him, and in Chapter 20 of TFOH, she tells him to trust no Aes Sedai, other then her, Egwene, Elayne and Nynaeve. What is the need to space Rand further from the Tower?
The nod signifies that Aes Sedai cannot write no untrue words, just as they cannot speak them. That does not mean that the letter to Rand is not false; after all, Alviarin is Black Ajah.
29
Oatman: 2004-04-11
The Oath is not to SPEAK a word which is not true, and i doubt aes sedai wouldnt take note of this and take advantage of it. Maybe most never try, BELIEVING it impossible, and BELEIVING it is the same as speaking a lie making it impossible, but if they didnt think it was the same thing, which it isnt, than they should be able to write lies, and I believe thier is proof some do. In one of the books, Verin is taking notes on the Aiel Aes Sedsi 'Apprentices' she writes in a code of flowers or plants or somthing as her observations. Logically she couldnt write this if the 3 Oaths prevented her from writing the truth. So unless Verin is black Ajah or some other way released from her Oaths, which i thouroly disbelieve, than it is possible for Aes Sedai to write lies
For another thing to muse on, could an Aes Sedai read or quote somthing she believes or knows to be a lie to give a false version of events as she believes they happened? Combined with the previous part of my reply, could an Aes Sedai write a lie, and than quote thier own writing to directly lie to a person while effectively avoiding the 3 oaths?
Think about it.
