Lit Why do Sith Masters encourage their apprentices to kill them?

Why do the Sith Masters encourage their students to try and kill them if they become weak? I never got this. If you're really evil, the first thing you do is change the damn rules so that the apprentice doesn't kill off the master. I mean, they'll probably turn on you eventually, but do you really want to encourage that sort of behavior? "Go ahead. Kill me. I want you to try!" If you're amoral, you shouldn't really have any problems changing the system so it benefits you and screws your underlings. Just raise the little tyke from infancy to be a mindlessly loyal dark side slave that won't hesitate to sacrifice themselves at your whim.

 

To quote Noah "The Spoonyone" Antwiler, "Do you wan't to play D&D or not?"

There is stupid crap in types of fiction you have to accept, Thanks to Lucas "The Great and Terrible" this is now a thing. Call it rule of 2 or what have you. It makes little sense, and we now have to deal with it. Its like the United Federation of Planet's moneyless society that so many writers have to just write around.

It makes no sense, it is stupid, it is creator mandated, we just have to deal with it.

 

I think it's part and the way of the Sith: betrayal, treachery, and all those things

And they want the best at the top, the Master, obviously. The Master is 'the Master' for a reason and it helps the Sith evolve

Am I making any sense?

 

I think he is more questioning why engage it it when it so often leads to the sith's own self destruction.

 

Well the Apprentice wants to become the Master. They want the power, title, may even hate their master, hate their ideas, feel they've learned all they can from them, etc. Sidious is an example of several of these, he didn't like how involved Plagueis was with the Trade Federation, saw him as an obstacle, had learned everything he could, etc

Once the old Master is out, in the new one is, and again this helps with evolving. Then all they have to do is find a new apprentice or they may already have an apprentice stashed some where or someone in mind. For example, again in Darth Plagueis, when Sidious killed Plagueis he already had Maul, but when he died he was already influencing Dooku.

 

It is said there are 3 results of conflict

You kill your opponent.

Your opponent kills you.

You kill each other.

One slip up and the sith wipe themselves out, at best leaving behind a very under prepared secret apprentice.

 

Because the force makes you duuuuuumb.

Only half a joke, I'm pretty sure that's exactly what happens.

 

The short of it is that the apprentice is the fire the master holds beneath their own feet to ensure they keep advancing and growing ever more powerful. If they didn't have to worry about the apprentice, they could just sit back, relax and settle for being mediocre.

And, typically, Sith would rather die than be mediocre.

 

Because each and every Sith Lord thinks he/she is IMMORTAL AND THE MOST POWERFUL EVER and wants to use their apprentice to test their own power.

 

Raising a useless chump like that would pretty much screw over the future of the Sith Order, though. Especially in the case of the Rule of Two. And to be a Rule-of-Two practicing Banite Sith, caring about the future of the Sith Order is a pretty important criterion. Teaching your student to crave power is the only way to ensure that the Sith will continue to survive.

 

To reiterate a bit what others said, any Sith master not capable of striking down their uppity apprentice isn't worthy of being the master.

 

Well, Sidious did raise mindlessly loyal minions in the form of the emperor's hands. I agree that badguys like the Sith dont really have rules (Vader and Sidious both broke the rule of two all the time for example). However, rule of two expressly benefits a Sith Master because instead of dozens of darksiders trying to kill them, it is just one.

 

Some reasons. Pick your poison.

a)
Maybe even Sith desire a son/daughter/heir and having a pupil is pretty much the only way to fulfill that psychological need without showing "weakness". If you are a father or mother, you might take pride in your offspring surpassing you even if it means death.

b)
Some might believe in the future of the Sith order, selflessly sacrificing themselves for the cause. Evolution doesn't work when one generation isn't replaced by the next at some point of time. Therefore death is pretty much the only option sooner or later.

c)
Some might feel they need the challenge because otherwise they would grow complacent and weak.

 

Because as far as the Order of the Sith Lords go one of their main goals is to make the order as a whole stronger. This means that only the strongest can rule, and it's a rule that's been implemented since Darth Bane's time, and has been passed on from master to student. It's basically something that's ingrained into the head of each apprentice from the start. Each master trains the apprentice, until the apprentice believes he/she/it has surpassed the master and can take over. The master is always 100% confident in their own superiority and never goes into the fight expecting to actually lose. However, if they do lose, they were the weaker member and deserved to die, so their life is at an end. If they win however, they themselves haven't failed, the apprentice has, and the master goes on living and trains a new apprentice. The entire system is helped along by the fact that both betrayal and a lust for power, as well as domination, are traits that naturally come with the Dark Side. Realistically, the master could go for decades training an apprentice, never once mention it, and the apprentice would still attempt to kill the master to advance in power.

 

This.

Every Sith Master subscribes to the same rule: Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough.

Sure, you could say to them that load of dead Sith thought the same but a proper Sith Master will reject that with contempt: Yeah? They ain't me!

 

I'll second that.

 

Ah, a good call. The bragging. After all, some Sith also unapologetically build balls of steel with planet destroying capability.

Should add this to my list of possible reasons.

Man was Palpatine lucky during the events of ghost prison! It must have cost Vader infinite resolve to not murder his master right then.

 

The Baneite Sith situation can only be examined within it's specific historical context. While it happens to have been the rule established by the Sith during the PT, the Rule of Two, with the attendant murderous apprentices issues, applies only to a portion of Sith history. Outside of the Baneite Sith there were plenty of Sith masters who chose to keep only weak minions and lickspittle apprentices, or barely trained servitors.

Darth Bane devised his system based on several key insights. The most important being that Sith Empires don't work. Any massive organization with large numbers of dark siders collapses under its own weight, produces unity amongst the disparate peoples of the galaxy, and causes the light siders to get off their buts and start unleashing righteous wrath. So Bane chose to devise a system for the Sith to remain undetected and accumulate power until they could topple the Republic in one fell swoop (which they did).

The Rule of Two was not Bane's first choice. He wanted to simply live in the shadows forever, accumulating endless mastery over the Force. However, he realized this wasn't going to happen. That's the other big insight of Darth Bane: even though he reached for immortality, he recognized it as the extremely unlikely possibility it was and planned out a system to survive him. That's something other mighty Sith Lords, such as Vitiate and Palpatine, completely failed to do.

That's why there's a Rule of Two: because the master will inevitably die, and by concentrating on one apprentice and one apprentice only, the system ensures that the apprentice will be strong enough to endure and preserve the Sith going forward. It also had the side effect of minimizing exposure and risk during a period of time when the Sith were outnumbered. The Jedi - whatever their faults - are generally quite vigilant against dark side orders accumulating any real modicum of power. Two Sith, no minions, were something that could be manageably concealed.

 

Sure thing. Palpatine cleverly set himself up as Vaders only friend and father figure so Vader would be hesitant to kill him. Sons like to rebel against their fathers, but they rarely kill them.
Also Palpatine was his main source for Sith knowledge. During RotS Vader knew basically nothing about what it means to be a Sith and about all the techniques and ancient knowledge. If he wanted to maximize his potential, he would need to study at Palpatines feet.
Still, it must have cost him a lot of willpower not to slay Palpatine then and there.

Hah, self correcting! If only it were. In reality the introduction of the RoT achieved absolutely nothing. It took the Sith a Millennium to climb back up to the power of Lord Kaans order (who, quite cleverly, set himself up as a martyr like figure) and then they were destroyed because of an inherent flaw in the RoT, namely, that if both Sith were to die the game is over. There are a bunch of other practical flaws like when the master dies too soon or when the Sith are discovered by Jedi. Etc.

Also, no, the Sith don't automatically kill each other until there are only two, because there are usually other threats to content with, like the Jedi or Mandalorians or whatever have you. The Sith would only focus on each other when they are bored with all the other enemies.

How does that prove the RoT? It only proves that all the Sith are in their hearts traitors. Truth. A clever Sith monarch would play all the different factions of Sith against each other to ensure his rule. No RoT needed. Treachery occurs in both systems sooner or later, it is absolutely inevitable...

 

I have to disagree. The largest flaw in the Rule of Two as it pertained to Sidious and Vader is that one of the Sith could be redeemed, while one could be killed, leaving no Sith behind. However, that's a flaw with not only the Order of the Sith Lords, but any group in existence. Betrayal is the way of the Sith, it will inevitably happen eventually. This has been seen many times, from Freedon Nadd and Naga Sadow, to Exar Kun and Nadd, down to Sidious and Vader (Who even in ROTS, not that long after his fall was planning on getting rid of Sidious, and the only thing that stayed him was his loss of power. Had Mustafar never happened, he certainly would've done away with Sidious within the next few years.) Darth Bane realized this and so sought to turn it into an inevitability that would at the least serve the Sith, making their greatest weakness into their greatest strength. Previous Orders were flawed due to having so many members, which could lead to weaker Sith banding together to kill the master, which in the end did nothing but weaken the Order as a whole. By making it a requirement that their only be two Sith it became impossible for something like this to happen, and it made sure that only the strongest Sith actually survived to rule, whereas in Kaan's Order everyone was "equal".

When discussing Banite Sith one has to understand that they were all united in a singular goal. Yes, as Sith do, they each wanted power for themselves, but even more than that they wanted to destroy the Jedi and rule the galaxy. This led to each member placing the Order before themselves, to a point, and is why they again taught their apprentices under this rule, with the end goal being for the two of them to duke it out to see who was top dog, and when the apprentice one, having been indoctrinated in this Rule, they'd train their apprentices the exact same way. And the Rule is validated by history as it did indeed work, and was only cast aside towards the end, once the goal had finally been achieved.

 

That's were playing different factions against each other comes into play. A wise and powerful Sith worth his salt would maybe even refuse to play the top dog and instead pull the strings of some underling, making him the target. Only the most intelligent Sith would be able to survive at the top.

On the other hand, there are so many possible ways the RoT could lead to the orders downfall. Master dying to young, pupil dying when Master too old, both Sith dying, one Sith converting to the light side, one of the Masters becoming senile (like Palpatine during the last years of his rule), Jedi discovering the sith. Many of these possible outcomes lead to a loss of knowledge or even the eradication of the entire order.

A huge order is far less vulnerable as it is very difficult to kill all the Sith off. Some would always be in hiding biding their time until the moment arises to strike and take control.

That's what Kaan claimed, but it was a white lie to ensure the loyalty of as many Sith as possible. It was not, in any way, the truth. Kaan is a genius level manipulator. It is a shame he went insane and used the thought bomb.

An ideology with selflessness as core principle will never work well for the Sith.

And no, it didn't work. Palpatine turned out a horribly unfit ruler and was killed after 20 years. The Sith had to hide for a Millennium and were rewarded with nothing but death, 'cept for Palpatine who was also ended prematurely.

Plus even Bane himself violated the RoT, proving what a joke it is.

 

According to the Darth Plagueis novel, the order managed to survive one master (Darth Gravid) moving toward the light side (his apprentice killed him before he could destroy everything the Sith had) - but he took the secret of Essence Transfer to the grave with him.

 

Yes, loss of knowledge is one of the greatest risks of the RoT. One guy dies too soon and a lot is lost to the order.