logo Sign In

Anakin/Vader and mortality — Page 2

Author
Time

Of course, though, the whole concept of “balance of the Force” is needlessly confusing, in my opinion. The word “balance” implies some sort of equal duality, and since Sith are the opposite of the Jedi, it’s no surprise that people would interpret the Sith as being part of that duality.

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Servii said:

The point is, he toes the line of whatever the official canon narrative currently is, but if the official canon narrative is defective and contradictory, then that doesn’t mean much.

Yeah and that’s basically the point of his entire blog. It’s about viewing Star Wars from a Word of God perspective.

I have my own head canons. To me, the sequels aren’t canon, especially TROS, which makes absolutely no sense and probably has some of the most plot holes of any sci-fi/fantasy screenplay. And he has head canons too, if you look at his blog long enough. But for the most part, he talks about Star Wars from a “Word of God” POV and always clarifies when he’s not.

Servii said:

Of course, though, the whole concept of “balance of the Force” is needlessly confusing, in my opinion. The word “balance” implies some sort of equal duality, and since Sith are the opposite of the Jedi, it’s no surprise that people would interpret the Sith as being part of that duality.

It’s called balance because naturally there is supposed to be both light and dark sides of the force. The problem with the Sith is their end goal is always to conquer the entire galaxy and subvert the force. To plunge it into complete darkness. There’s already enough evil going around without them.

I do agree, it wasn’t explained well in the films at all. They do say that Anakin needs to destroy the Sith and bring balance to the force but they don’t explain what balance means in this context. This is another example of Lucas underexplaining things to stick to the bottom line of the story. The funny thing about this method though is more then anything it actually distracts from the point he’s trying to make. He made the prequels to teach people about letting go but now all people talk about is how Anakin was totally in the right because the Jedi are actually emotionally repressive bullies. Because people are desperate to fill in the blanks and his flat dialogue and “tell, don’t show” approach doesn’t give the right impression. The prequels desperately needed an additional writer (contrary to popular belief Lucas did co-write ESB and ROTJ).

My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time
 (Edited)

G&G-Fan said:

Servii said:

The point is, he toes the line of whatever the official canon narrative currently is, but if the official canon narrative is defective and contradictory, then that doesn’t mean much.

Yeah and that’s basically the point of his entire blog. It’s about viewing Star Wars from a Word of God perspective.

I have my own head canons. To me, the sequels aren’t canon, especially TROS, which makes absolutely no sense and probably has some of the most plot holes of any sci-fi/fantasy screenplay. And he has head canons too, if you look at his blog long enough. But for the most part, he talks about Star Wars from a “Word of God” POV and always clarifies when he’s not.

Ok, I get what you mean.

Servii said:

Of course, though, the whole concept of “balance of the Force” is needlessly confusing, in my opinion. The word “balance” implies some sort of equal duality, and since Sith are the opposite of the Jedi, it’s no surprise that people would interpret the Sith as being part of that duality.

It’s called balance because naturally there is supposed to be both light and dark sides of the force. The problem with the Sith is their end goal is always to conquer the entire galaxy and subvert the force. To plunge it into complete darkness. There’s already enough evil going around without them.

I do agree, it wasn’t explained well in the films at all. They do say that Anakin needs to destroy the Sith and bring balance to the force but they don’t explain what balance means in this context. This is another example of Lucas underexplaining things to stick to the bottom line of the story. The funny thing about this method though is more then anything it actually distracts from the point he’s trying to make. He made the prequels to teach people about letting go but now all people talk about is how Anakin was totally in the right because the Jedi are actually emotionally repressive bullies. Because people are desperate to fill in the blanks and his flat dialogue and “tell, don’t show” approach doesn’t give the right impression. The prequels desperately needed an additional writer (contrary to popular belief Lucas did co-write ESB and ROTJ).

I think a lot of confusion would have been avoided if the prequels simply used a different word besides “balance.” Also, it would make sense for the Jedi to mistakenly believe that the prophecy had already been fulfilled.

It also didn’t help that the “destroy the Sith” portion of the prophecy wasn’t mentioned until RotS, and the scene in which it was mentioned also happened to be the scene in which Yoda suggests the prophecy may have been misread.

AotC did have Jonathan Hales as co-writer. But his role seems to have been primarily jazzing up the script and improving the pacing. If George had had someone to bounce ideas off of while writing TPM, the prophecy might have been more well defined.

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time

Vladius said:

yotsuya said:

G&G-Fan said:

The only reason people have come to this uncharitable view of the Jedi Order is because George Lucas is not a good writer. Simple as that.

Sorry to cut out most of what you said, but that would be too long.

The Jedi have fallen from their high point and are now struggling and sacrifices have been made. Their teaching relies on avoidance rather than learning how to resist the dark side. Their missions have become more political - controlled by the Senate and Chancellor - than moral (going to help where they are needed). The Clone Wars are the final nail in their coffin because it emphasizes everything they are trapped into doing. And they get destroyed for it.

I don’t think it is the writing, at least not this part. I think this is all pretty clear. If there is nothing wrong with the Jedi, why do they need the Chosen One to come and balance things? We are left to imagine how the Jedi would have been before all this in their glory days. But the PT does not depict their glory days, it pictures them in decline and clinging to traditions and that is included in the films.

Please explain your distinction between avoidance and resistance. That just doesn’t make any sense. If you’re talking about temptation, avoidance is legitimately the best strategy FOR resistance. It’s better to prevent a situation or avoid getting into a situation than to intentionally put yourself near it and grit your teeth and focus really hard on not doing it. But the Jedi absolutely also teach how to do that if you’re in the situation. That’s the point. That’s why they’re always talking about clearing their minds, and meditating.

Sometimes the political missions are the moral missions. If they were sent out to free slaves, that would absolutely be a political mission as well. We don’t really know the details of what their missions look like anyway, or what most Jedi are up to outside of Coruscant. For all we know, they’re serving the people perfectly well.

The Chosen One isn’t to balance the Jedi, it’s to balance the Force, which in some way involves destroying the Sith. The idea is vague and not explained well, but at the very least it doesn’t say anything about getting rid of the Jedi or fixing them.

The PT does depict their glory days. According to Lucas, that was the point of Duel of the Fates being so different from the OT duels. They’re at the height of their abilities, so they’re doing all kinds of flips and whatsits and have faster choreography.

Avoidance vs. Resistance. When you are teaching someone and you don’t want them to do things you teach them to avoid them. You focus on that. But when you want to teach someone how to get along in the real world and you don’t want them to do something, you teach them the dangers in detail. You give them the tools and knowledge to know what the dangers are and how to avoid them by resisting the temptation to do something that might make sense in one situation. In the case of the Jedi, if you don’t want them to give in to fear or anger or hate, you need to teach them what fear, anger, and hate are, and how to avoid fear turning into anger and how to keep anger from turning into hate. We see this in TPM with Obi-wan. Qui-gon dies and Obi-wan acts in anger (he skips fear). For him to avoid going further down that path, he needs the teaching (which is sometimes instinctual and for others it is not). The same thing happens with Luke in ROTJ. Both avoid taking it any further. Both resist the temptation and recenter. Ankin is not able to do this. His anger takes control and the hate sets in. He was not given the tools he needed. Even though they sense several times that he is edging the wrong way. They sense he is in danger and they do nothing to help him. A good teacher (or master) would address the situation with Anakin and make sure he had the teachings he needed.

So basically, teaching avoidance is good for things that you are certain to be able to avoid. If situations can arise where total avoidance is not possible, you need to teach to resist. So for general students, teaching to avoid the dark side might be all you need. Drilling into younglings and Padawans that fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering, and that all leads to the dark side might give them the ability to resist just by virtual of persistent training. Anakin starts late. He hasn’t had as much time. A good teacher would know how to adapt the teaching. Yoda should know how to adapt and be able to advise Obi-wan on what to do. But instead there is a total failure to provide Anakin any additional teaching to keep him from being tempted by the dark side. He has been taught the theory without the tools to resist a real world test.

Author
Time

G&G-Fan said:

yotsuya said:

But this final statement I have to disagree with. I feel that Lucas created the Republic Jedi Order in a very deliberate fashion.

Obviously wrong as the things Lucas says goes against your head canon.

But they are out of balance with the galaxy. Their ability to access the force is compromised.

They’re ability to use the force being compromised is because of the dark side clouding their vision, not the Jedi being bad at their jobs.

How they handle slavery is also addressed. Qui-gon says they are not there to free slaves. Okay. If it was a timing issue, why didn’t they go back and free some of the slaves. At least Shmi. That would have been one way to help Anakin get on the right path. Qui-gon might have had he lived. The other Jedi did nothing. So it was not a timing issue. It was a policy issue. The Jedi were being politically correct for their role in the Republic.

I already talked about this. I even brought up Shmi specifically. Please read what I said.

The Jedi have fallen from their high point and are now struggling and sacrifices have been made. Their teaching relies on avoidance rather than learning how to resist the dark side. Their missions have become more political - controlled by the Senate and Chancellor - than moral (going to help where they are needed). The Clone Wars are the final nail in their coffin because it emphasizes everything they are trapped into doing. And they get destroyed for it.

I also talked about their association with the Republic and not freeing slaves in the Outer Rim. Again, you’re not actually reading what I said.

Also the Jedi do learn to resist the dark side. It’s a part of their way.

https://www.tumblr.com/david-talks-sw/679421723083522048/balance-when-talking-about-a-jedi?source=share

If there is nothing wrong with the Jedi, why do they need the Chosen One to come and balance things?

The Chosen One prophecy is about destroying the Sith. Not the Jedi. The Sith are a cancer in the galaxy. They need to be destroyed.

https://www.tumblr.com/david-talks-sw/679554898557353985/bmnl?source=share

The Jedi teaching that we get in the first 6 films are all based on avoidance. “Once you start down that path, forever will it dominate your destiny” So don’t even start or you are doomed. But what about if you have taken that first step? How do you get back? If you have a situation that leads to fear or anger, how to you stop it from happening again? That is why teaching avoidance makes no sense. It is a good policy for beginners, but the advanced class needs to have tools to deal with the real world and situations that would lead to an emotional response that could potentially lead the dark side and how to recover from it. If you learn how to fly a cesna and then advance to a P-51, the rules change. Just as advancing from youngling to Padawan to Knight to Master. The rules change. The real world situations change. The chance of being lured by the dark side increases. In most things you have to be taught the rules first and how to break them the right way later. The Jedi never teach how to break the rules the right way so that it does not become a dark side trap. Basically the way they Jedi teachings are portrayed, any slip up leads to a permanent risk of turning to the dark side. And yet they never address those slips with Anakin.

As far as I’m concerned, freeing slaves is a minor point. I understand why they didn’t, though freeing Shmi would have been in Anakin’s best interest. I think freeing her would have prevented Anakin’s fall. But they Jedi were too self assured to think they needed to take that precaution.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

The Jedi teaching that we get in the first 6 films are all based on avoidance.

No, it’s not.

“…overcome fear which leads to hate”. Oh, it’s almost like a Jedi needs to face their fear and overcome it. Not avoid it.

Yoda saying “Once you start down the dark path…” is not saying “Once you feel fear once, you’l; be on the dark side forever.” That’d be ridiculous, especially considering Yoda admits he’s afraid for Anakin’s training at the end of Phantom Menace. It’s saying, “Once you turn to the dark side, you’ll never be able to turn back.” Which is true, for the most part. Sidious never turned. Maul never turned. Dooku never turned. Vader only turned because of his son. Even his wife and master couldn’t convince him to turn. If it weren’t for Luke, the dark side would forever dominate his destiny. Yoda is making a generalization.

A big part of the path of the Jedi is about confronting your fears and overcoming it. It’s what the scene with Kanan and the temple guards is about, in Rebels. The Ithorian youngling getting his kyber crystal (overcoming his fear of the scary cave) in The Clone Wars. Yoda overcoming Dark Yoda in The Clone Wars. It’s why Yoda told Luke to go into the dark side cave on Dagobah in The Empire Strikes Back. Because he knew Luke would see what he’s afraid of. He needs to face it and overcome it. If Jedi’s relationship with fear was avoidance, he would’ve told Luke not to go in there.

My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time

You know, the more I read this discussion, the more I realize that this is not a discussion about the Jedi teachings and theology, but simply a confrontation between two philosophies and two different ways of understanding life.

On one hand, there are those who are in favor of Romanticism, expressing their passions and having selfish feelings, but without letting these things take over and balancing them with altruism. On the other hand, there are those who are completely opposed to passion and selfishness and profess absolute altruism, instead of a form of altruism that Is balanced with selfishness. It’s for this reason that Anakin’s story and tragedy have a different meaning depending on the person who talks about them.

Our contrasts have actually nothing to do with Star Wars, they’re simply a reflection of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So if anything, if we have to discuss these things, I think we should do it in the appropriate sections, where we can discuss about personal things, philosophy and stuff like that. Because again, this discussion about the Jedi is nothing more than a transposition of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So I think we should bring the discussion back to the objective reality of things, without necessarily having to involve Star Wars.

«This is where the fun begins!»
(Anakin Skywalker)

Author
Time

G&G-Fan said:

yotsuya said:

The Jedi teaching that we get in the first 6 films are all based on avoidance.

No, it’s not.

“…overcome fear which leads to hate”. Oh, it’s almost like a Jedi needs to face their fear and overcome it. Not avoid it.

Yoda saying “Once you start down the dark path…” is not saying “Once you feel fear once, you’l; be on the dark side forever.” That’d be ridiculous, especially considering Yoda admits he’s afraid for Anakin’s training at the end of Phantom Menace. It’s saying, “Once you turn to the dark side, you’ll never be able to turn back.” Which is true, for the most part. Sidious never turned. Maul never turned. Dooku never turned. Vader only turned because of his son. Even his wife and master couldn’t convince him to turn. If it weren’t for Luke, the dark side would forever dominate his destiny. Yoda is making a generalization.

A big part of the path of the Jedi is about confronting your fears and overcoming it. It’s what the scene with Kanan and the temple guards is about, in Rebels. The Ithorian youngling getting his kyber crystal (overcoming his fear of the scary cave) in The Clone Wars. Yoda overcoming Dark Yoda in The Clone Wars. It’s why Yoda told Luke to go into the dark side cave on Dagobah in The Empire Strikes Back. Because he knew Luke would see what he’s afraid of. He needs to face it and overcome it. If Jedi’s relationship with fear was avoidance, he would’ve told Luke not to go in there.

Well, you kind of made my point there. Yoda said that fear leads to anger which leads to hate which leads to suffering. At what point are you doomed to the dark side? It isn’t just fear. The entire teaching is based on stopping at fear. It is established in The Phantom Menace than Anakin has fear. The council does not want to teach him based on that. He has not given in to his anger, which we see when Palpatine is testing his chosen apprentices. The movies establish that the jump from anger to hate is where you get trapped. The Jedi are stopping at fear to avoid anger and hate. They are avoiding the path to the dark side by cutting it off at fear. Conquering your fear is a good teaching. But it was not the point that Anakin needed. Yes, we see both Obi-wan and Luke give in to anger and fight like wildcats (TPM and ROTJ), but were either one on the path the dark side? They did not let their anger consume them. It did not turn to hate. Well, no more than a moment. For Anakin, fear is an old friend. And there was so much he didn’t have to fear. He was very powerful so a great many things did not cause fear. But fear of loss and change was deep in him. For him to succeed he needed a different set of teachings, one the Jedi were not prepared to provide. But one that Qui-gon apparently would have.

When Obi-wan warns Luke in TESB he says “Don’t give in to hate. that leads to the dark side.” That totally resets what Yoda said in the PT. Looks like some reflection on Anakin’s fall led him to rethink how to warn Luke. Luke does not give in to hate where his father did. But Luke’s actions in TESB are driven by his fear for his friends. So Obi-wan gives him a more accurate warning for where the danger point really is. And we see the results.

So given what we seen and the dialog, the PT Jedi are setting the bar for the dark side well to the safe side of the actual danger point. They want to avoid fear (a good teaching but not accurate for the fall to the dark side). But in TESB Obi-wan gives Luke the honest point, one that all the dark side masters use in their temptations, as giving in to hate. The difference between fear and hate is vast. It was the difference between Anakin staying on the light side and him falling to the dark side. It is right there in the movies. So regardless of what Lucas has to say, his films speak for themselves and reveal the disparity between what the Jedi taught and what the danger point really was.

Author
Time

Darth Malgus said:

You know, the more I read this discussion, the more I realize that this is not a discussion about the Jedi teachings and theology, but simply a confrontation between two philosophies and two different ways of understanding life.

On one hand, there are those who are in favor of Romanticism, expressing their passions and having selfish feelings, but without letting these things take over and balancing them with altruism. On the other hand, there are those who are completely opposed to passion and selfishness and profess absolute altruism, instead of a form of altruism that Is balanced with selfishness. It’s for this reason that Anakin’s story and tragedy have a different meaning depending on the person who talks about them.

Our contrasts have actually nothing to do with Star Wars, they’re simply a reflection of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So if anything, if we have to discuss these things, I think we should do it in the appropriate sections, where we can discuss about personal things, philosophy and stuff like that. Because again, this discussion about the Jedi is nothing more than a transposition of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So I think we should bring the discussion back to the objective reality of things, without necessarily having to involve Star Wars.

I would agree that often our personal beliefs and experiences color how we look at things. I find that in examining why I have the opinions I do about Star Wars and the various films and series, that it leads back to my own personal experiences and studies. Some things are generational. Some things are age of exposure. Some are background. And you mix them all up and each of us comes to these topics with vastly different perspectives. I find that there are people I argue with on one topic that I agree with on another.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Darth Malgus said:

You know, the more I read this discussion, the more I realize that this is not a discussion about the Jedi teachings and theology, but simply a confrontation between two philosophies and two different ways of understanding life.

On one hand, there are those who are in favor of Romanticism, expressing their passions and having selfish feelings, but without letting these things take over and balancing them with altruism. On the other hand, there are those who are completely opposed to passion and selfishness and profess absolute altruism, instead of a form of altruism that Is balanced with selfishness. It’s for this reason that Anakin’s story and tragedy have a different meaning depending on the person who talks about them.

Our contrasts have actually nothing to do with Star Wars, they’re simply a reflection of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So if anything, if we have to discuss these things, I think we should do it in the appropriate sections, where we can discuss about personal things, philosophy and stuff like that. Because again, this discussion about the Jedi is nothing more than a transposition of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So I think we should bring the discussion back to the objective reality of things, without necessarily having to involve Star Wars.

I’m just talking about Lucas’ intentions in all this. I am a very passionate person (more then most, I think) and I don’t think having selfish desires is inherently a bad thing at all, especially when it comes to romantic relationships. Hell, I have Peter and MJ from the MCU in my pfp lmao.

I don’t think Lucas does either though. He’s married. He has kids. He’s a passionate guy. We’re talking Mr. “I want to make the film I want to make and I refuse to back down the studios”. The Jedi are allowed to leave if they want to pursue their selfish desires. But as Lucas says, “A Jedi can’t be selfish”. Being a Jedi is a commitment, a way of life. It’s something that a Jedi has to do. The Jedi’s is based on his philosophy somewhat (especially when it comes to unchecked fear being the root of evil and letting go of things), but at the same time they’re an Order that needs to have rules. If Lucas doesn’t think anybody should get married then he shouldn’t have gotten married. But he did. Twice. He got married again in 2013 after making the prequels. It’s obvious that’s not him saying, “You can’t get married, ever! Bad!” He’s saying that a Jedi can’t get married because of commitment. If you want to get married, you need to leave the Order.

yotsuya said:

Well, you kind of made my point there. Yoda said that fear leads to anger which leads to hate which leads to suffering. At what point are you doomed to the dark side? It isn’t just fear. The entire teaching is based on stopping at fear. It is established in The Phantom Menace than Anakin has fear. The council does not want to teach him based on that. He has not given in to his anger, which we see when Palpatine is testing his chosen apprentices. The movies establish that the jump from anger to hate is where you get trapped. The Jedi are stopping at fear to avoid anger and hate. They are avoiding the path to the dark side by cutting it off at fear. Conquering your fear is a good teaching. But it was not the point that Anakin needed.

Yeah, the point is that they need to conquer their fear and confront it instead of bottling it up and leaving it unattended. If you don’t confront your fear, it’ll consume you. And anger and hate is what it’ll lead to. Conquering fear is not a bad thing for Anakin. It’s what he needs to do to live a healthy life. And as I’ve said, the reason they reject him is because he is bottling up his fear. He won’t conquer it because he won’t acknowledge that it exists.

Also the Jedi did not change their opinion on fear by ESB. Yoda even lists fear as one of the things that leads to the dark side. “Anger, fear, aggression, the dark side are they”.

My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time

G&G-Fan said:

yotsuya said:

The Jedi teaching that we get in the first 6 films are all based on avoidance.

A big part of the path of the Jedi is about confronting your fears and overcoming it. It’s what the scene with Kanan and the temple guards is about, in Rebels. The Ithorian youngling getting his kyber crystal (overcoming his fear of the scary cave) in The Clone Wars. Yoda overcoming Dark Yoda in The Clone Wars. It’s why Yoda told Luke to go into the dark side cave on Dagobah in The Empire Strikes Back. Because he knew Luke would see what he’s afraid of. He needs to face it and overcome it. If Jedi’s relationship with fear was avoidance, he would’ve told Luke not to go in there.

Exactly. It astounds me how many people don’t understand the nature of Yoda having Luke go into the cave or go to face Vader in ROTJ.

Author
Time

yotsuya said:

Vladius said:

yotsuya said:

G&G-Fan said:

The only reason people have come to this uncharitable view of the Jedi Order is because George Lucas is not a good writer. Simple as that.

Sorry to cut out most of what you said, but that would be too long.

The Jedi have fallen from their high point and are now struggling and sacrifices have been made. Their teaching relies on avoidance rather than learning how to resist the dark side. Their missions have become more political - controlled by the Senate and Chancellor - than moral (going to help where they are needed). The Clone Wars are the final nail in their coffin because it emphasizes everything they are trapped into doing. And they get destroyed for it.

I don’t think it is the writing, at least not this part. I think this is all pretty clear. If there is nothing wrong with the Jedi, why do they need the Chosen One to come and balance things? We are left to imagine how the Jedi would have been before all this in their glory days. But the PT does not depict their glory days, it pictures them in decline and clinging to traditions and that is included in the films.

Please explain your distinction between avoidance and resistance. That just doesn’t make any sense. If you’re talking about temptation, avoidance is legitimately the best strategy FOR resistance. It’s better to prevent a situation or avoid getting into a situation than to intentionally put yourself near it and grit your teeth and focus really hard on not doing it. But the Jedi absolutely also teach how to do that if you’re in the situation. That’s the point. That’s why they’re always talking about clearing their minds, and meditating.

Sometimes the political missions are the moral missions. If they were sent out to free slaves, that would absolutely be a political mission as well. We don’t really know the details of what their missions look like anyway, or what most Jedi are up to outside of Coruscant. For all we know, they’re serving the people perfectly well.

The Chosen One isn’t to balance the Jedi, it’s to balance the Force, which in some way involves destroying the Sith. The idea is vague and not explained well, but at the very least it doesn’t say anything about getting rid of the Jedi or fixing them.

The PT does depict their glory days. According to Lucas, that was the point of Duel of the Fates being so different from the OT duels. They’re at the height of their abilities, so they’re doing all kinds of flips and whatsits and have faster choreography.

Avoidance vs. Resistance. When you are teaching someone and you don’t want them to do things you teach them to avoid them. You focus on that. But when you want to teach someone how to get along in the real world and you don’t want them to do something, you teach them the dangers in detail. You give them the tools and knowledge to know what the dangers are and how to avoid them by resisting the temptation to do something that might make sense in one situation. In the case of the Jedi, if you don’t want them to give in to fear or anger or hate, you need to teach them what fear, anger, and hate are, and how to avoid fear turning into anger and how to keep anger from turning into hate. We see this in TPM with Obi-wan. Qui-gon dies and Obi-wan acts in anger (he skips fear). For him to avoid going further down that path, he needs the teaching (which is sometimes instinctual and for others it is not). The same thing happens with Luke in ROTJ. Both avoid taking it any further. Both resist the temptation and recenter. Ankin is not able to do this. His anger takes control and the hate sets in. He was not given the tools he needed. Even though they sense several times that he is edging the wrong way. They sense he is in danger and they do nothing to help him. A good teacher (or master) would address the situation with Anakin and make sure he had the teachings he needed.

So basically, teaching avoidance is good for things that you are certain to be able to avoid. If situations can arise where total avoidance is not possible, you need to teach to resist. So for general students, teaching to avoid the dark side might be all you need. Drilling into younglings and Padawans that fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering, and that all leads to the dark side might give them the ability to resist just by virtual of persistent training. Anakin starts late. He hasn’t had as much time. A good teacher would know how to adapt the teaching. Yoda should know how to adapt and be able to advise Obi-wan on what to do. But instead there is a total failure to provide Anakin any additional teaching to keep him from being tempted by the dark side. He has been taught the theory without the tools to resist a real world test.

They do teach all of that. There’s nothing showing that they don’t. Like I said, that’s what all the meditation and “clear your mind” stuff is for. Qui Gon tells Obi Wan to keep his mind on the here and now. It sounds hokey but this is exactly what people everywhere teach now as mindfulness training, which is supposed to help with stress and negative emotions. (It doesn’t help me personally but it does apparently work for a lot of people.)

Anakin’s choices are the issue. All this extra baggage that people place onto the story about it being the Jedi’s fault comes from their own cultural assumptions.

Author
Time

Darth Malgus said:

You know, the more I read this discussion, the more I realize that this is not a discussion about the Jedi teachings and theology, but simply a confrontation between two philosophies and two different ways of understanding life.

On one hand, there are those who are in favor of Romanticism, expressing their passions and having selfish feelings, but without letting these things take over and balancing them with altruism. On the other hand, there are those who are completely opposed to passion and selfishness and profess absolute altruism, instead of a form of altruism that Is balanced with selfishness. It’s for this reason that Anakin’s story and tragedy have a different meaning depending on the person who talks about them.

Our contrasts have actually nothing to do with Star Wars, they’re simply a reflection of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So if anything, if we have to discuss these things, I think we should do it in the appropriate sections, where we can discuss about personal things, philosophy and stuff like that. Because again, this discussion about the Jedi is nothing more than a transposition of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So I think we should bring the discussion back to the objective reality of things, without necessarily having to involve Star Wars.

Pretty much everyone in real life, as well as the Jedi, agrees that you have to have a personal balance of acting for your own self-preservation and interest, and altruism.

The divide is more modern versus ancient, secular versus religious, or western versus eastern. The modern, western, secular perspective is essentially Freudian and liberal - your strong emotions and desires are your authentic self, and as long as they don’t harm other people, you should be able to do whatever you want. If you constrain them too much, then you’re “repressed” and it’s going to make you blow up eventually or act out in some way. It’s focused a lot on sex, and the whole thing is a sexual metaphor. From this point of view, having a large group of people all commit to control their desires is bound to fail spectacularly, and it’s only justified and held up by a bunch of superstition, mysticism, and unnecessary tradition.

The ancient or medieval, religious, eastern perspective is that emotions and desires are like horses. They’re extremely useful, but you need to train them, bridle them and keep them in check. Once you’ve done that, you can keep doing it indefinitely because you have the training and discipline. You might slip up occasionally but if there’s a big deviation it’s because you made a choice. When people make oaths or give their word, they generally mean it. Their “word is their bond.”

From the first perspective, the Jedi are doomed to failure because they don’t allow attachments and they teach initiates to control their emotions, which is ultimately impossible. Anakin is just the latest and worst in what must surely be a long line of blow ups. The Expanded Universe and the sequel trilogy seem to confirm this for a lot of people because there’s almost always someone turning to the dark side so that the story can happen. Luke’s Jedi got massacred too? Welp, looks like it was his fault for not “learning from the Jedi’s mistakes,” and suppressing Ben Solo’s emotions somehow. (This is inferred because of course we don’t see it.)

From the second perspective, Anakin tragically chose not to live the Jedi’s teachings. He chose ambition and power over his own family, friends, and allies. It’s a Faustian deal with the devil. But that only makes complete sense for people that believe in the concept of a devil, or temptation, or evil, as opposed to just competing priorities or sets of desires.

Author
Time

There’s still the problem of Jedi being taken in as babies. Because of that, their lives as Jedi are all they know. They have the option to leave the Order if they wish, but with a few exceptions, none of the Jedi have lives or key social connections outside of the Order. I’m not counting casual friends like Dexter Jettster. I mean connections that could take the place of a family or a community. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if padawans would stay in the Order simply out of fear of being on their own in the outside world.

This sort of ascetic lifestyle is something that a person really needs to consent to be a part of. I know the rationale, that if you wait too long before you start training, they’ll develop attachments to their family. But that doesn’t stop people in the real world from becoming monks on their own. And feeling a connection to your family is certainly not a bad thing, anyway.

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time

G&G-Fan said:

Darth Malgus said:

You know, the more I read this discussion, the more I realize that this is not a discussion about the Jedi teachings and theology, but simply a confrontation between two philosophies and two different ways of understanding life.

On one hand, there are those who are in favor of Romanticism, expressing their passions and having selfish feelings, but without letting these things take over and balancing them with altruism. On the other hand, there are those who are completely opposed to passion and selfishness and profess absolute altruism, instead of a form of altruism that Is balanced with selfishness. It’s for this reason that Anakin’s story and tragedy have a different meaning depending on the person who talks about them.

Our contrasts have actually nothing to do with Star Wars, they’re simply a reflection of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So if anything, if we have to discuss these things, I think we should do it in the appropriate sections, where we can discuss about personal things, philosophy and stuff like that. Because again, this discussion about the Jedi is nothing more than a transposition of what we think and what our philosophy of life is. So I think we should bring the discussion back to the objective reality of things, without necessarily having to involve Star Wars.

I’m just talking about Lucas’ intentions in all this. I am a very passionate person (more then most, I think) and I don’t think having selfish desires is inherently a bad thing at all, especially when it comes to romantic relationships. Hell, I have Peter and MJ from the MCU in my pfp lmao.

I don’t think Lucas does either though. He’s married. He has kids. He’s a passionate guy. We’re talking Mr. “I want to make the film I want to make and I refuse to back down the studios”. The Jedi are allowed to leave if they want to pursue their selfish desires. But as Lucas says, “A Jedi can’t be selfish”. Being a Jedi is a commitment, a way of life. It’s something that a Jedi has to do. The Jedi’s is based on his philosophy somewhat (especially when it comes to unchecked fear being the root of evil and letting go of things), but at the same time they’re an Order that needs to have rules. If Lucas doesn’t think anybody should get married then he shouldn’t have gotten married. But he did. Twice. He got married again in 2013 after making the prequels. It’s obvious that’s not him saying, “You can’t get married, ever! Bad!” He’s saying that a Jedi can’t get married because of commitment. If you want to get married, you need to leave the Order.

yotsuya said:

Well, you kind of made my point there. Yoda said that fear leads to anger which leads to hate which leads to suffering. At what point are you doomed to the dark side? It isn’t just fear. The entire teaching is based on stopping at fear. It is established in The Phantom Menace than Anakin has fear. The council does not want to teach him based on that. He has not given in to his anger, which we see when Palpatine is testing his chosen apprentices. The movies establish that the jump from anger to hate is where you get trapped. The Jedi are stopping at fear to avoid anger and hate. They are avoiding the path to the dark side by cutting it off at fear. Conquering your fear is a good teaching. But it was not the point that Anakin needed.

Yeah, the point is that they need to conquer their fear and confront it instead of bottling it up and leaving it unattended. If you don’t confront your fear, it’ll consume you. And anger and hate is what it’ll lead to. Conquering fear is not a bad thing for Anakin. It’s what he needs to do to live a healthy life. And as I’ve said, the reason they reject him is because he is bottling up his fear. He won’t conquer it because he won’t acknowledge that it exists.

Also the Jedi did not change their opinion on fear by ESB. Yoda even lists fear as one of the things that leads to the dark side. “Anger, fear, aggression, the dark side are they”.

My point has been that starting the path to the dark side at fear is inaccurate. Conquering fear is definitely a good thing. But if that proves difficult, making sure it does not lead to anger or hate works as well to ensure you don’t fall to the dark side. Obi-wan saw this and in TESB warns luke about hate. Palpatine was working at that same place. He knew that fear was not sufficient to lead someone to the dark side. Aggression, anger, and most importantly hate. “Let the hate flow through you.” Not fear, but hate. A Jedi can fear. A Jedi can be angry. But hate is anathema to a Jedi and is the door to the dark side. The path may begin at fear, but through proper teaching that path can be trod without falling to the dark side. But when you get to hate, you are at the doorway and can fall through. As we see with Anakin. That was also one of the things they played with in the Sequels. Kylo Ren never really let the hate consume him. Anger yes. He was very angry, but he never fully gave himself to hate which enabled his return to the light side. But I’d rather focus on the OT and PT. The OT makes it very clear that hate is where the Dark Side pulls you over. Anakin could have avoided that if he had been taught to accept his fear and not let it extend further into anger and hate. But they repeatedly harped on fear.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

My point has been that starting the path to the dark side at fear is inaccurate.

No. If you leave your fear unchecked, eventually you’ll get angry at it. Then you’ll hate it. And once you let that hate consume you, it’ll lead to suffering.

Basic example: a kid has abusive parents. This leads him to fear them. If he doesn’t confront this fear and get out of the situation somehow, then he starts to get angry at them because of this. He gets angry because of his powerlessness and the fact that he has to keep dealing with it. He then hates them, and if he lets his hate consume him, it leads to suffering.

This is literally shown step by step in the prequels. You know all those cheesy edits that show Anakin at different stages of his life with the words “Fear. Anger. Hate. Suffering”? Yeah.

The path may begin at fear, but through proper teaching that path can be trod without falling to the dark side.

It’s almost like that’s the point. You can overcome fear. You can overcome anger. You can overcome hate. But if you let yourself get consumed by any of them, you’re on the path to the dark side.

My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time

Servii said:

There’s still the problem of Jedi being taken in as babies. Because of that, their lives as Jedi are all they know. They have the option to leave the Order if they wish, but with a few exceptions, none of the Jedi have lives or key social connections outside of the Order. I’m not counting casual friends like Dexter Jettster. I mean connections that could take the place of a family or a community. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if padawans would stay in the Order simply out of fear of being on their own in the outside world.

This sort of ascetic lifestyle is something that a person really needs to consent to be a part of. I know the rationale, that if you wait too long before you start training, they’ll develop attachments to their family. But that doesn’t stop people in the real world from becoming monks on their own. And feeling a connection to your family is certainly not a bad thing, anyway.

Again, that’s a very modern point of view. No one consents to who their parents are or where they grow up. You could just as soon argue that anyone’s parents are being cruel to their children by not having them tour around the world and figure out which of the thousands of cultures they want to join. I don’t personally agree with having Jedi raised from birth but that’s just me.

And we don’t really know whether or not Jedi could find friends elsewhere. It seems reasonable that they could. In one of the Jedi Apprentice books, Obi Wan finds a political cause on a planet that he agrees with and he’s ready to leave the Jedi to help out his new friends. Qui Gon has to talk him out of it.