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

So does that mean all your claims from Wookieepedia are incorrect? It's everything or nothing you can't pick and choose bud.

 

I don't think you guys understand the rule of two. From the moment a Sith joins the Order he accepts the reality that death at the hands of his apprentice will strengthen the Order and continue the lineage of the Sith. THAT'S what the rule of two is about.

 

Agreed. What's the point of saying what a Sith from another Order would do or whether or not they'd agree with the Rule? Doesn't mean anything, because they're not part of the Order, and therefore have no reason to agree with it in the first place.

 

It's all about the true nature of the dark side. Those who use the dark side can only gain the most out of it by seeking personal power above all and everyone else. This means destroying all rivals except for eventually your heir, if he/she succesfully kills you. Bane and Revan understood this better than most. This includes setting a rival Master-apprentice relationship, so that the apprentice can learn all he/she can from the Master and then eliminate his/her Master as being the only primary rival for power. The apprentice then becomes the Master and selects his/her own pupil who is potentially powerful enough to learn from and replace them. The cycle continues, or at least its supposed to forever and ever. Palpatine inwardly ignored this rule not long after ruling as Emperor and became paranoid about losing his own life and power to someone else (Bane warned about this), which led to the Sith Order's defeat at the hands of Vader and then Luke. While it is fine for the two Sith to have many dark side minions and servants (servants which must be limited in their power or risk inner strife de ja vu), only two Lords at all times can fully embody the dark side in order for the Sith to be eternal, while constantly evolving in power.

 

No, that just means that Wook, like every secondary literary source (aka dictionary), could be wrong on rare occasions. Not sure if it is wrong this time, but claiming Vader was Supreme Commander in ANH strikes me as a bit odd. Don't really have enough information to make a call beyond that.

 

I can't really take credit for that because I was mostly just repeating the findings of someone else.

 

The whole "Supreme Commander" thing is a hotly debated issue... or at least it used to be. As you can see, the Wookieepedia article is sourced, but it displays no precise references... It also treats a vast array of titles (Supreme Commander, also Supreme Commander of the Imperial Forces, Supreme Commander of the Imperial Fleet, Supreme Fleet Commander, or Supreme Commander of the Imperial Military) as one and the same. As a Wookieepedia editor, it has been bothering me for some time. I think I'll actually take the time to search the listed sources and reference the article at the very least. Perhaps we'll end up understanding what that means.

P.S.: The mention of Vader "climbing the ranks" may be outdated (and thus superceded) canon. For that, I do have a source: Star Wars: The Visual Dictionary. "Vader rose through the Imperial ranks, fighting the resentment and contempt of higher officers." The very same book called him "a military commander" and "Tarkin's right hand man." As I just said before, however, that source is most obsolete, since it was published before the prequels.

 

Now i'm afraid that's just plain wrong.

Sidious, definitely not. He was constantly ignoring the rule of 2 and trying to become immortal/have dozens of apprentices. He just wanted personal power.
Vader, couldn't care less about the sith scheme. Just following his master and he too wanted personal power.
Tyranus, I don't think so.
None of them were willing to die to further the sith cause.

Maul? who knows he wasn't really around long enough to have an opinion lol.

 

I honestly don't really have much to contribute to this conversation given how many great points have already been expressed, but I will say this, the Sith have great ideas, the Rule of Two was the best idea, but they are not always good ones either, even the canon most powerful and intelligent Sith Lord in history, Darth Sidious, allowed his arrogance to blind him entirely to the reality of the situation.

This is most prevalent in the Thrawn Trilogy when he purposefully screws over the Grand Admiral's plans for no good reason behind sheer spite just because, as any intelligent commander would do in that situation, Thrawn took over control of the Imperial Remnant and made then a united Empire again, it's pretty much canon fact that if Palpatine would've merely merged the Remnant with his Dark Empire and allowed Thrawn to carry on, he would have had the first ever actual total Sith victory over the Jedi Order and the Galactic Republic in an all-out total war and taken control of the galaxy.

We all know how well things went for the Reborn Emperor after that happened.

 

Everyone understands the Rule of Two. That's the point. You are the one that doesn't understand what everyone is saying. The Rule of Two does not fit at all with Sith values. As has been explained many times already.

It's a wonder that it lasted 1000 years, and a bit hard to believe really. I doubt many of the masters were willing to die for the cause.

 

It's only wrong when it disproves your points then.

 

The rule of two IS a Sith value. It had been outlined by Revan in his holocron. He said a master without an apprentice is a master of nothing, but to train more than one apprentice is foolish as they will inevitably rise against you. This is the rule of two at its core.

 

Each of those Sith pledged themselves to the Order embracing the rule of two. That's proof. Sidious took Vader as his apprentice knowing that Anakin would surpass him in power. That's furthering the Sith cause. You can keep denying that as much as you want. Fact is fact.

 

I'm sorry but the fact is that is completely wrong. Neither Sidious nor Vader would ever have willingly died for the furthering of the Sith cause.

Sidious defied the rule of 2 constantly. As did Plageuis for that matter. Neither of them planned on ever dying.

 

Look, because you don't seem to get it. The Wook is only a collection of all the information available about Star Wars and the EU, including retcons. If sources conflict with each other or what is presented makes no sense the Wook is pretty powerless. Plus there is always the factor of human error. No secondary source should ever be taken as gospel, it is nonsense.

And I didn't say Wook was wrong. I said it "strikes me as odd" as in not fitting well with the movies. I'd need to read up on the primary source to make the call. If he is Supreme Commander from the get-go I don't understand why so many Imperials react openly negative to Vader. You'd think the power would generate fear and respect, not derision.

 

If you take scene in ANH on the death star with Vader/Tarkin and the moffs it's obvious that Vader is not the "supreme commander" at that point in time.

Seems like that clashes with the wook then whatcha gonna do? Sources clash all the time. Is it just me or did Vader seemed to have a lot more power in ESB than ANH?

 

Yes, I absolutely agree. But the Supreme Chancellor apparently has a problem understanding what I am trying to say.

 

Sidious took Vader as his apprentice knowing that Anakin would surpass him in power. That's furthering the Sith cause. Fact is fact. Stick your head in the sand if your denying that this happened.

 

So after 20 years of political scheming (as Darth_Pevra claims) he wasn't promoted until after his disastrous failure at Yavin? Not buying it.

 

As had been said numerous times, Sources often clash in Star Wars. Get over it . . . claiming that you must be "right" because the last source you read about says so doesn't mean anything.

Fact is fact. I agree. But you're not stating facts lol. You're making things up and saying they are facts.

Sidious took Vader as an apprentice not to serve "the sith cause", but to serve Sidious. This is like the 4,000th it's been said in this thread, but since it's obviously not enough, here it goes again: Sidious, like almost every other sith in Star Wars film and literature, cared about one thing only. His own personal power. He couldn't care less if Vader died, he wanted to replace Vader with Luke . . . have you even watched the films?

 

Sidious took Vader as his apprentice knowing that Anakin would surpass him in power. That's furthering the Sith cause. Fact is fact. Stick your head in the sand if your denying that this happened.

He rushed to Mustafar to save a dying Vader. That directly contradicts you saying he couldn't care less if Vader died. Have you seen ROTS? It's around the end after Vader's duel with Obi-Wan.

Every Sith master wants his apprentice to "serve" him. This IS the rule of two. It inherently furthers the Sith cause by making them more powerful through generations. The apprentice serves the master, inevitably begins to hate the person who has made him thier servant, becomes more powerful in the Force, and when he reaches the apex of his power he kills his master and a new more powerful Sith master is born. From personal power the Sith cause is now closer to its ultimate goal.

Understand yet?

 

What in that sentence did I make up? Are you trying to refute that Darth Sidious says to Yoda "Darth Vader will become more powerful than either of us." (Reveneg of the Sith) AND "He is powerful, potentially more powerful than myself." (Revenge of ther Sith novelization) ?????

 

Even in KOTOR we see aspects of the rule of two. Malak betrays Revan, thinking him weak and not deserving of leading the Sith. Then Malak takes Bastila on as his apprentice, teaching her that she will one day have to face him in combat if she is ever to become the new Sith Master.

"A master without an apprentice is a master of nothing." -Darth Revan.

 

So after 20 years of political scheming (as @Darth_Pevra claims) he wasn't promoted until after his disastrous failure at Yavin? Not buying it.

 

Actually the Rule of Two presents Sith values in the fullest. It is a one on one relation ship rife with hatred, jealousy, anger, pain and betrayal. If that's not Sith I don't know what is.