Proof that Bran can have an effect on a time that we readers or characters in the story would class as "the past".

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

6 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I agree to an extent & if I had to guess I don't think GRRM will have Bran changing the past or the future. I think it would be something more like Bran realizing that he actually caused something to happen in the past. For an example maybe today's Bran tries talking to Aerys in an attempt to keep him from killing his uncle & grandfather but in doing so makes Aerys go mad & kill his uncle & grandfather. Almost like a self fulfilling prophecy. Or maybe in an attempt to prevent Lyanna's death Bran tells Rhaegar "Don't take Lyanna, she will die in child birth" But Rhaegar only gets some of the words & hears ".... Take Lyanna... child birth" & becomes convinced he must have a child with Lyanna. Then Bran has caused exactly what he was trying to prevent. But it was always going to happen that way anyway. Obviously I'm just speculating with my examples, I have no evidence to suggest any of that would or has happened but my point is past, present, & future are all one to the weirwoods. It isn't going to change but that may not stop Bran from trying. Possibly he van change the future outcome but the past is written I believe. 

I gather that this is how a giant portion of the readers (or at least people on this forum) interpret the potential time travel aspect of the story. But simply put, this is not how GRRM has written about time travel in his other stories. Time travelers in his stories actually change the past. See my above response to the OP.  

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

3 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I gather that this is how a giant portion of the readers (or at least people on this forum) interpret the potential time travel aspect of the story. But simply put, this is not how GRRM has written about time travel in his other stories. Time travelers in his stories actually change the past. See my above response to the OP.  

I will have to read those. I love time travel. It's of course absolutely possible that there is no time travel in aSoIaF, or that if there is it does change the past. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for this series to be different than another book or books he has written in regards to time travel though. 

[SirArthur]

33 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

*sigh* I think you are misunderstanding me. I am in no way, shape, or form suggesting Bran will mess with Aerys' mind as I have no evidence to suggest this. I was just using this as an example to explain what may happen if Bran attempted to change the past. That being said one could argue that by stopping Aerys from killing Brandon & Rikard he keeps the fuel from RR. If Robert doesn't become King the Lannisters never come to WF & Bran never gets pushed out of the window. Ned never becomes hand of the King & therefore doesn't die & the RW never happens so neither does Cat. 

And Brandon marries Catelyn and Bran will never exist. 

I bring up Aerys because looking at the evidence there has to be more evidence for the time travel idea. Prophecies are a point to be made. Or Aerys. And that is what I mean. Bran exists because events happened as they happened, even Iron rebellion was before his birth. Bran is a summer child, much like Shireen. Arya is born in the same year (and is never called summer child) as Shireen but you have to accept that Bran only exists because events run in a very specific order.

And yes, this discussion is going in a different direction, so let's go back to time travel Bran without suggesting he will have a real impact up to this time. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

25 minutes ago, SirArthur said:

And Brandon marries Catelyn and Bran will never exist. 

I bring up Aerys because looking at the evidence there has to be more evidence for the time travel idea. Prophecies are a point to be made. Or Aerys. And that is what I mean. Bran exists because events happened as they happened, even Iron rebellion was before his birth. Bran is a summer child, much like Shireen. Arya is born in the same year (and is never called summer child) as Shireen but you have to accept that Bran only exists because events run in a very specific order.

And yes, this discussion is going in a different direction, so let's go back to time travel Bran without suggesting he will have a real impact up to this time. 

Yes which is precisely the point I was making with my example. That he cannot change the past & any attempt he would make would probably end up causing that which he was trying to prevent. 

[Davjos]

@Lyanna<3Rhaegar

I agree completely with your interpretation of the effects Bran may have on the past. I think he will not be able to change anything that already happened, I think he could have (in the future) caused things in the past to happen. To take the example by the OP, the leaves rustled and the wind blew years before Bran actually said 'Father'. But it still happened anyway. Years before Bran was born and awakened, he had already said those things. So he's affecting the past, but in no way shifting the past from anything that already happened. I think all the events are already set in stone. Everything happened, happens, and will happen and Bran's effect in those deeds has already occurred. 

 

Therefore I really appreciate your example with the Mad King. He was already mad, even though future Bran perhaps caused that madness.

 

@Macgregor of the North

( Glad to see you on the forum again! During my long time as a 'lurker' you were one of my favourite contributors). 

I agree that your example is the closest thing we have to absolute certainty that Bran can cause something in the past, I still do not qualify this as absolute certainty. Although I very much lean exactly in the same direction you do, I would like to play a little devil's advocate.

• Is it not Bran's own perception that his words are the wind and the rustling leaves? It could be still just one 'witness' perceiving that 'absolute reality'.
• Is it possible that he altered the perception of the reality/past event without actually altering them. Is it possible that he sees Ned looking at the tree, but he didn't actually do that. Like a dream about something that happened, in which you have control over the events in the dream, but not over the actual events.
• Is this causation or correlation. Did Ned look at the tree because of Bran, or did he look and Bran thinks he looked at him, but he didn't. 
• If Ned looked at the tree because of Bran's words, does that mean that Bran was predetermined to say those words, since Ned has already looked years before he said them. Did he then actually have a choice to not say those words. Because that would mean that if he hadn't said them, his dad wouldn't have reacted if his words caused that reaction? I doubt GRRM would like a story in which characters have no choice. 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

3 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I will have to read those. I love time travel. It's of course absolutely possible that there is no time travel in aSoIaF, or that if there is it does change the past. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for this series to be different than another book or books he has written in regards to time travel though. 

It is definitely possible that time travel in asoiaf is different from those other 2 stories. But I highly doubt it based on what he wrote in those stories. GRRM went out of his way to avoid paradoxes in both stories, and he wrote dialogue specifically addressing the issue of paradoxes in both. Basically, when a person goes back in time, they create an entire new timeline/universe that is an exact copy of the universe they came from. And then they can change stuff. Paradoxes are entirely avoided because you aren't actually altering the timeline that you came from. You are altering a completely new timeline. So for example, you could go back in time and kill your own father before you were born, and it wouldn't cause a paradox because in the original timeline/universe your father is still fine (and you were born so you could eventually go back in time). But in the new timeline/universe you will never be born because you just killed your father.

If GRRM decided to go with different time travel mechanics for asoiaf, I think he would still make sure that paradoxes are avoided. But GRRM-style time travel is the only form of time travel that entirely avoids paradoxes. The whole closed/stable loop concept is neat, but it doesn't really make sense. It requires huge suspension of disbelief, because in real life nothing happens without a cause. For example, in the Terminator movies, modern computer technology was invented by a guy after he got a hold of the robotic hand of a terminator that had traveled back to his time from the future - thus directly leading to the creation of terminator robots. It's a cool plot point, but it doesn't make any sense. So while I could see GRRM wanting to do something different, I personally can't think of any other way to avoid paradoxes with time travel.

[ravenous reader]

On 11/3/2017 at 1:10 PM, The Hidden Dragon said:

In looking at the effect Bran's voice may have had I think the next paragraph in the book provides some more context.  Here it is:

Eddard Stark lifted his head and looked long at the weirwood, frowning, but he did not speak. He cannot see me, Bran realized, despairing. He wanted to reach out and touch him, but all that he could do was watch and listen. I am in the tree. I am inside the heart tree, looking out of its red eyes, but the weirwood cannot talk, so I can't..

 

This brings a few questions to mind - Did Eddard look long at the weirwood because he heard a sound or perhaps because he was contemplating? Would he have looked long at the weirwood if Bran wasn't there?  I don't think we can know the answers to these questions.  We can make assumptions of course, but I don't think we can know.  

Later, Bran realizes that the weirwood cannot talk and, therefore, he cannot talk. In that case, why are his words in quotes if cannot talk? 

Good point.  The answer is: because it's audible; GRRM tends to put the audible transmission in quotes vs. the so-called 'silent shout' telepathy in italics, to differentiate.  That said, we still have no real idea of what exactly Ned heard; we can only infer that he would have heard something -- something Bran initiated...

Quote

What did Eddard hear?  Did Eddard hear words or the simply the wind and leaves rustling? 

Well -- 'Words are Wind,' I've heard it's been said...

(you are asking all the right questions, Hidden Dragon!)

Quote

Even more, did Eddard hear anything at all?  We aren't told this part of the story from his POV, but I would like to believe that he heard something, perhaps the wind and leaves...

The last question I'm left with is, did Bran actually, physically, cause the wind, did he actually cause a physical rustle of leaves?  Think about that for a second...could he physically make leaves move to therefore cause the sound of their movement? 

I don't know if he 'did' in that particular instance with Ned, but he most certainly 'can' make things move -- i.e. telekinesis -- as evidenced by his interaction with Theon:

Quote

The night was windless, the snow drifting straight down out of a cold black sky, yet the leaves of the heart tree were rustling his name. "Theon," they seemed to whisper, "Theon."

The old gods, he thought. They know me. They know my name.

A Dance with Dragons - A Ghost in Winterfell

The night was 'windless' -- so the only way the leaves could be moving is if Bran is responsible for moving them in a manner independent of natural ambient conditions, i.e. supernaturally!  You could think of the animating force as the 'voice' or 'breath' of the greenseer -- a supernatural 'wind'...

In TWOW, Theon confirms that the sound effect was not only audible, but that it was accompanied by the visible movement of leaves:

Quote

He was shaking by then, trembling like an autumn leaf. "The heart tree knew my name. The old gods. Theon, I heard them whisper. There was no wind but the leaves were moving. Theon, they said. My name is Theon." It was good to say the name. The more he said it, the less like he was to forget. "You have to know your name," he'd told his sister. 

(Theon I)

 

A greenseer is capable of harnessing the forces of nature, because s/he can speak the True Tongue -- which is synonymous with singing the Song of the Earth...

Quote

The World of Ice and Fire - Ancient History: The Dawn Age

Brandon the Builder sought the aid of the children while raising the Wall. He was taken to a secret place to meet with them, but could not at first understand their speech, which was described as sounding like the song of stones in a brook, or the wind through leaves, or the rain upon the water. The manner in which Brandon learned to comprehend the speech of the children is a tale in itself, and not worth repeating here. 

I like to think of these different 'songs' as dialects of the same basic magical language -- in the end, 'song' is just a euphemism for magical spell at best, and sorcerous abomination at worst:

-- the song of stone (element that is being moved by the greenseer: earth)

-- the song of wind (element that is being moved by the greenseer: air)

-- the song of rain (element that is being moved by the greenseer: water)

So...what about the one he left out:

-- the song of fire?  Can greenseers move fire?

Quote

Imagine the implications of him having the ability to make things physically move!  I don't think I can believe that.  I don't think I can accept that as a possibility, at least not yet. 

I think you have to accept it, based on the Theon passage I quoted!

Perhaps greenseers can move celestial bodies around -- the song of stone should not be any different in space.  I subscribe to @LmL's theory that the greenseers brought about events such as the 'hammer of the waters' which was likely a meteoric impact event, as LmL has described.  The novel part I've added to his theory is that I believe the greenseers did this by using a magical language, 'singing', or 'calling forth' the spheres as weapons -- metaphorically-speaking, the comet/meteor is more than a 'killing sword,' it represents a 'killing word.'

Quote

If Bran could not make things move and he cannot talk (as he says he can't) then how could he make a sound? 

He says 'the tree can't talk', therefore 'I can't talk' -- this is faulty reasoning; when the greenseer is 'hooked' or 'tuned' into the weirwood -- and only then -- can the tree 'talk'.  It's just not always in a language the recipient can comprehend, nor as fluent a communication as the greenseer might desire.  

Quote

I don't know.  Eddard is my favourite character and I would love him to have heard something or to have sensed something.  I hope he did. 

Catelyn has the same thought as we do...

Quote

Not even a cricket could be heard, and the gods kept their silence. Did your old gods ever answer you, Ned? she wondered. When you knelt before your heart tree, did they hear you?

ACOK - Catelyn IV

 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

2 hours ago, Ethelarion said:

Therefore I really appreciate your example with the Mad King. He was already mad, even though future Bran perhaps caused that madness

Thanks

 

39 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

It is definitely possible that time travel in asoiaf is different from those other 2 stories. But I highly doubt it based on what he wrote in those stories. GRRM went out of his way to avoid paradoxes in both stories, and he wrote dialogue specifically addressing the issue of paradoxes in both. Basically, when a person goes back in time, they create an entire new timeline/universe that is an exact copy of the universe they came from. And then they can change stuff. Paradoxes are entirely avoided because you aren't actually altering the timeline that you came from. You are altering a completely new timeline. So for example, you could go back in time and kill your own father before you were born, and it wouldn't cause a paradox because in the original timeline/universe your father is still fine (and you were born so you could eventually go back in time). But in the new timeline/universe you will never be born because you just killed your father.

If GRRM decided to go with different time travel mechanics for asoiaf, I think he would still make sure that paradoxes are avoided. But GRRM-style time travel is the only form of time travel that entirely avoids paradoxes. The whole closed/stable loop concept is neat, but it doesn't really make sense. It requires huge suspension of disbelief, because in real life nothing happens without a cause. For example, in the Terminator movies, modern computer technology was invented by a guy after he got a hold of the robotic hand of a terminator that had traveled back to his time from the future - thus directly leading to the creation of terminator robots. It's a cool plot point, but it doesn't make any sense. So while I could see GRRM wanting to do something different, I personally can't think of any other way to avoid paradoxes with time travel.

I get what you are saying it just seems like Bran's messing around in the past & causing whole new time line in a mammoth series like this would be very hard to write. I suppose it's possible GRRM could show a few examples of Bran changing something, causing a new time line & briefly describe how it played out just to prove to Bran he cannot change this time line or this universe. 

Out of curiosity which of the 2 time traveling books you named earlier by George did you like better? I want to read them but can't decide which first. 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

11 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I get what you are saying it just seems like Bran's messing around in the past & causing whole new time line in a mammoth series like this would be very hard to write. I suppose it's possible GRRM could show a few examples of Bran changing something, causing a new time line & briefly describe how it played out just to prove to Bran he cannot change this time line or this universe. 

Out of curiosity which of the 2 time traveling books you named earlier by George did you like better? I want to read them but can't decide which first. 

That is a good point, but I predict that the way GRRM will get around the issue is that Bran has already traveled back in time to change the past and we are witnessing a timeline already altered by Bran. So he won't need to briefly describe how it played out, because we are witnessing it play out now. He will simply reveal what Bran changed (or at least some major event that Bran changed).

I definitely like Unsound Variations better, but they are both good and both very short. You could read them back to back if you really wanted. Under Siege is also a sci-fi rewrite of a historical fiction story called The Fortress. I have not yet read the original version, but GRRM actually suggests in Dreamsongs that you read The Fortress first and then Under Siege. But obviously you can be a bad fan like me and not bother reading the original version if you just want to gain a perspective on time travel.  

Also, Under Siege is mostly an extremely depressing story and makes me sad.  

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

9 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

That is a good point, but I predict that the way GRRM will get around the issue is that Bran has already traveled back in time to change the past and we are witnessing a timeline already altered by Bran. So he won't need to briefly describe how it played out, because we are witnessing it play out now. He will simply reveal what Bran changed (or at least some major event that Bran changed).

I definitely like Unsound Variations better, but they are both good and both very short. You could read them back to back if you really wanted. Under Siege is also a sci-fi rewrite of a historical fiction story called The Fortress. I have not yet read the original version, but GRRM actually suggests in Dreamsongs that you read The Fortress first and then Under Siege. But obviously you can be a bad fan like me and not bother reading the original version if you just want to gain a perspective on time travel.  

Also, Under Siege is mostly an extremely depressing story and makes me sad.  

That would be interesting! 

I'm having a hard time figuring out where to buy either of them

I figured they would be easy to order online or as an ebook but I have had no luck so far! 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

That would be interesting! 

I'm having a hard time figuring out where to buy either of them

I figured they would be easy to order online or as an ebook but I have had no luck so far! 

They are both contained in Dreamsongs which you can easily find as an ebook

it is like 40 GRRM stories + commentary for $20, well worth it   

[wolfmaid7]

To weigh in on a different angle.I don't subscribe to the theory that Bran affect the past.

"And through such gates you and I may gaze at the past

The past remains the past. We can learn from it, but we cannot change it.

Once you have mastered your gifts, you may look where you will and see what the trees have seen, be it yesterday or last year or a thousand ages past."

I believe him when he says they cannot change the past.From what I see they can:

1.Influence and manipulate individuals.Via Skinchanging nature to bamboozle the masses into thinking the gods wish X or Z.

2.Glimpse the future.

Based on what they glimpse they can alter it by doing # 1.

My theory is this really is about Skinchanging.We have seen a very common theme in this story and it has to do with escaping death.The Skinchangers and the second life aspect.

The prologue of Dance shows two possibilities.

1.What happens when a Skinchanger dies.

2.Revelation that if they are dying they can "body snatch"as V6 tried to do with Thistle.V6 rightfully deduced that his gift would die if he successfully took Thistle.

But what if you had the means to get bodies with "the gift"

This is what I think has been happening in Bloodraven' s cave. Old Nan would get the Brandon's mixed up thinking they were all one.I think this is a hint that they are in a sense.

Not that Bran is going back in time.But that the original Bran(Bran the Builder) has been;with the help of a few tree dreams luring suitable replacements when his current body reaches to the point Bloodraven did.

He's been watching until the situation as of agot' s made it possible to snag a vulnerable and  perfect replacement.

It's the Changling myth over again.BR is really BTB and what  other poor souls that got consumed by the trees.

This is what I think is happening to our Bran he is slowly becoming sympathetic because the trees (BTB) is/are "teaching him" aka slowly and by subterfuge pulling a V6.

Its about never dying never going Into the trees so you can continue to watch and affect an outcome by using Skinchanging abilities to manipulate peoples choices.

This is an awesome thread for discussing the Bran question.

 

 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

1 hour ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

They are both contained in Dreamsongs which you can easily find as an ebook

it is like 40 GRRM stories + commentary for $20, well worth it   

Thanks!

[The Hidden Dragon]

Ravenous, thanks for your response.   Much appreciated. 

5 hours ago, ravenous reader said:

Quote

The night was windless, the snow drifting straight down out of a cold black sky, yet the leaves of the heart tree were rustling his name. "Theon," they seemed to whisper, "Theon."

The old gods, he thought. They know me. They know my name.

A Dance with Dragons - A Ghost in Winterfell

The night was 'windless' -- so the only way the leaves could be moving is if Bran is responsible for moving them in a manner independent of natural ambient conditions, i.e. supernaturally!  You could think of the animating force as the 'voice' or 'breath' of the greenseer -- a supernatural 'wind'...

In TWOW, Theon confirms that the sound effect was not only audible, but that it was accompanied by the visible movement of leaves:

Quote

He was shaking by then, trembling like an autumn leaf. "The heart tree knew my name. The old gods. Theon, I heard them whisper. There was no wind but the leaves were moving. Theon, they said. My name is Theon." It was good to say the name. The more he said it, the less like he was to forget. "You have to know your name," he'd told his sister. 

(Theon I)

When I was originally picturing rustling of leaves I was picturing leaves on the ground being moved, but your quotes make it clearer to me that the rustling leaves are still attached to the tree.  So, because Bran is inside the tree, then it makes sense to me that he could move the branches of the tree, and therefore rustle the leaves, because he is, in effect, the tree.  

But that's not telekenisis.  Telekinesis would be moving something, say a rock or sword, with your mind only.  I don't think Bran was using telekinesis in either of the book quotes you or I gave.

5 hours ago, ravenous reader said:

He says 'the tree can't talk', therefore 'I can't talk' -- this is faulty reasoning; when the greenseer is 'hooked' or 'tuned' into the weirwood -- and only then -- can the tree 'talk'.  It's just not always in a language the recipient can comprehend, nor as fluent a communication as the greenseer might desire.  

I agree that Bran is likely communicating using the True Tongue, which Ned would not be able to comprehend.

But getting back to the point of the OP, Bran being able to speak in the True Tongue does not mean he caused Ned to look at the tree. We don't know if Ned heard anything or not.  And if Bran did not make a sound that caused Ned do anything different, then we have no proof that Bran can effect the past.

[The Dragon has three heads]

As far as the best example of bran time traveling goes, the OPs is I think possibly the poorest.

Jons wolf dream where he speaks to bran-or bran speaks too him while he is in ghost-is a much, much better example.

At this time 'real' or current bran has not left winterfell, but brans voice through the small shabby mountain weirwood is clearly saying he's with the crow, and safe. 

Look it up.

[OtherFromAnotherMother]

It's clear (to me at least) that Bran can actually be an active participant when inside the tree as @ravenous reader has shown from the Theon example. It is important to remember that this is happening in 'real time'. Bran is in the cave at this point. The Eddard episode is different. I believe we need to consider this when looking at the two episodes side by side.

Some may poo poo that Theon doesn't know what he saw or heard due to his unstable mental state. I don't buy it. George put this in the books for a reason. Although he sure loves his ambiguity, so who really knows?

[wolfmaid7]

24 minutes ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

It's clear (to me at least) that Bran can actually be an active participant when inside the tree as @ravenous reader has shown from the Theon example. It is important to remember that this is happening in 'real time'. Bran is in the cave at this point. The Eddard episode is different. I believe we need to consider this when looking at the two episodes side by side.

Some may poo poo that Theon doesn't know what he saw or heard due to his unstable mental state. I don't buy it. George put this in the books for a reason. Although he sure loves his ambiguity, so who really knows?

I think this is right he can be an active participant.However,as that incident showed it was in real time.And I have no doubt that because they can glimpse possible futures they can nudge individuals in directions they want them to go.However,to quote ehem "Bloodraven" "The past is already written and cannot be changed"

There would be a serious problem from a writing standpoint if Bran could change the past.

There would be no such thing as a real history.How would we know what was ever real? Bran would just be changing things trying to get a result that he could never change.Oy vey!!!

It doesn't matter how many eyes he has, and how long he does it.There is no way to skillfully manuvere every detail over eons across time and space to ensure one possible outcome amongst gazillions of other possibilities.

What would happen is an endless loop.Names and places may change but each generation will be doomed to continue the loop unless the greenseer pulling the strings gets taken out and the loop stops once and for all.Fading into the trees as he should.

Lastly,there should be evidence of Bran changing history because again it doesn't matter how many eyes he has across past, present and future it still won't be enough to discern every bit of detail.

Present manipulation to achieve some future glimpsed through the trees yeah.

But changing somethings in a past that we can never be sure was in the first place? That's The Matrix wrapped up in some Cloud Atlas type concoction with Terminator 1&2 as sprinklings man.That is the worst kind of prison....For us to.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

So I'm in the middle of a reread & ACoK while Jon is sleeping (while traveling with Qhorin) & warging Ghost there is this:

Quote

Jon?
      
      The call came from behind him, softer than a whisper, but strong too. Can a shout be silent? He turned his head, searching for his brother, for a glimpse of a lean grey shape moving beneath the trees, but there was nothing, only …
        A weirwood.
         It seemed to sprout from solid rock, its pale roots twisting up from a myriad of fissures and hairline cracks. The tree was slender compared to other weirwoods he had seen, no more than a sapling, yet it was growing as he watched, its limbs thickening as they reached for the sky. Wary, he circled the smooth white trunk until he came to the face. Red eyes looked at him. Fierce eyes they were, yet glad to see him. The weirwood had his brother’s face. Had his brother always had three eyes?
      

 Not always, came the silent shout. Not before the crow.
      
      He sniffed at the bark, smelled wolf and tree and boy, but behind that there were other scents, the rich brown smell of warm earth and the hard grey smell of stone and something else, something terrible. Death, he knew. He was smelling death. He cringed back, his hair bristling, and bared his fangs.
      
      
      Don’t be afraid, I like it in the dark. No one can see you, but you can see them.
            But first you have to open your eyes. See? Like this. And the tree reached down and touched him.
       And suddenly he was back in the mountains

So it seems Bran does have a form of communication through the weirwoods. 

This is all before he meets BR. It seems he is speaking telepathically to Ghost. 

[Lost Melnibonean]

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

So I'm in the middle of a reread & ACoK while Jon is sleeping (while traveling with Qhorin) & warging Ghost there is this:

So it seems Bran does have a form of communication through the weirwoods. 

This is all before he meets BR. It seems he is speaking telepathically to Ghost. 

Bran is talking to Jon through a weirwood while Jon is having a wolfdream with Ghost. The location of the weirwood is odd because the George had just indicated earlier in the chapter that they were above the tree line, and we know from the Arryns' attempts to have a godswood in the Eyrie that weirwoods dont grow above the tree line. (All they could get to grow was some shrubbery, right?) So, now we know that Bran is greenseeing after having his third eye opened by Bloodraven, and that the lines between Bran and the weirwoods and Summer have kind of blurred. The earth, stone, and death are a hint that Bran was not killed by Theon but is hiding down in the Winterfell crypts. Liking the dark compares interestingly with Bloodraven telling Bran to use the dark, and Qhorin telling Jon that shadows are friends to the Nights Watch. Did anyone open Arya's third eye? 

Then, Jon sees the wilding host through Ghost's eyes before Orells eagle attacks Ghost. So, was Ghost magically transported from one location to another? Was the weirwood above the tree line actually in Jon/Ghost's consciousness rather than a physical location?

[Knight Of Winter]

Regardless of how likely or not this theory is, I hope it doesn't end up being correct. Temporal paradoxes always end up offering more questions than solutions.