PT Isn't it destructive to Sith order when Sidious is always replacing one apprentice to the next?

And that's not the entirety of emotion.

 

Grief too: "Mourn them, do not. Miss them, do not."

 

I don't think Sidious had a choice when it came to Maul and Dooku. I doubt that he had anticipated Maul's death at that time. But I suspect he had plans to get rid of Dooku in order to make way for Anakin.

 

Dooku certainly thinks so, in his last moments:

"Anakin," Palpatine says quietly. "Finish him."
Years of Jedi training make Anakin hesitate; he looks down upon Dooku and sees not a Lord of the Sith but a beaten, broken, cringing old man.
"I shouldn't—"
But when Palpatine barks, "Do it! Now!" Anakin realizes that this isn't actually an order. That it is, in fact, nothing more than what he's been waiting for his whole life.
Permission.
And Dooku—
As he looks up into the eyes of Anakin Skywalker for the final time, Count Dooku knows that he has been deceived not just today, but for many, many years. That he has never been the true apprentice. That he has never been the heir to the power of the Sith. He has been only a tool.
His whole life—all his victories, all his struggles, all his heritage, all his principles and his sacrifices, everything he's done, everything he owns, everything he's been, all his dreams and grand vision for the future Empire and the Army of Sith—have been only a pathetic sham, because all of them, all of him, add up only to this.
He has existed only for this.
This.
To be the victim of Anakin Skywalker's first cold-blooded murder.
First but not, he knows, the last.
Then the blades crossed at his throat uncross like scissors.
Snip.
And all of him becomes nothing at all.

 

It is when it comes to Jedi facing the temptations of the dark side while using the Force in battle. Jedi have emotions, but they must draw upon the positive and keep check on the negative. When a Sith fights, they're using their anger and hatred. They've already learned to control their fear. They're motivated by personal greed.

"Palpatine has told Dooku. 'I have somebody who I think will be a great Sith Lord and I think we can get him to join us. But we need to test him. So we're going to setup a situation where you fight him. If he gets the best of you, then I'll stop the fight and he'll have passed the test. If you get the best of him, then we'll let him go, and we'll let him stew for a few more years until he's ready.' But behind it, obviously, is Palpatine's real intention: If Anakin is good enough, Anakin can kill Dooku and become Palpatine's new apprentice. But he didn't tell Dooku that."

--George Lucas, The Making Of ROTS; Page 41.

"After Darth Sidious' first apprentice is killed, he has to come up with a new apprentice, and rather than coming up with some baby that he trains from birth, which is what he should have done--well, he shouldn't have gotten himself in a position of getting his apprentice killed anyways--he's decided to make his move, so he needs somebody that was already trained. The point is to set up that he turned this one Jedi, so that he could turn another Jedi. It has to be set up that way."

--George Lucas, AOTC DVD Commentary.

 

Self-control seems to often get confused with suppression, but from my understanding, attaining such genuine mastery allows one to control the effect one's emotions has on them, instead of being controlled by them.

 

it was only "no attachment" and that's while you were serving the order. jedi were free to leave and start families if they wanted. it's like being a monk or a priest. you have a choice.

 

I've never really liked the rule of two philosophy. To me, it's a fundamentally flawed understanding of the Sith. The idea of the rule of two where the Sith devote themselves to passing on the torch and continuing the line, in a way, seems kind of selfless. After all, if you are fully aware that your apprentice will kill you when he/she is strong enough then you have accepted that there is something out there which is more important than your own goals and your own life. Yet aren't Sith supposed to be motivated by greed and selfishness?

Anakin himself says: "The Sith think inwards, only about themselves."

In this light, the Emperor stunting the growth of his apprentices makes perfect sense and fits with the behaviour of someone who is motivated by his greed. He wants his apprentices to be powerful enough to extend his own power but not powerful enough to kill him because if he dies then, obviously, he loses his power.

Palpatine himself says: "All those who gain power are afraid to lose it."

In Harry Potter, Lord Voldemort searches for a way to become immortal so that he can live forever and hold onto his power forever. He is not interested at all in passing on his power to the next generation because he is selfish and motivated by greed and hatred, just like the Sith in Star Wars.

 

What do you think the Jedi were doing, when they were going to such great lengths to maintain their role within the Republic? Including encouraging Anakin to spy on Palpatine?

 

The Sith are the natural enemy of the Jedi. As George Lucas describes it, the Sith were once in control of the galaxy 1000 years in the past. Unfortunately, the Sith's hunger for conquest got the better of them-so many Sith lords were vying for ultimate control that it led to infighting among their ranks. Such internecine struggles were exploited by the Jedi Knights of the era, and they were able to turn the tide and defeat the Sith.

As Ki-Adi-Mundi states in Episode I, the Sith have been extinct for a millennium; however, not all were wiped out. A surviving Sith Lord sought to rebuild the order, to retake the galaxy, and to take revenge. This Sith Lord realized the dangers of having too many in the order, so he kept his existence a secret. It would be a long time coming, but he carefully plotted revenge. There would be only two Sith Lords at a time, a master and an apprentice, working in secret, planting the seeds for their eventual rise.

--Star Wars Insider, issue 78; page 60

"One of the themes throughout the films is that the Sith Lords, when they started out thousands of years ago, embraced the dark side. They were greedy and self-centered and they all wanted to take over, so they killed each other. Eventually there was only one left, and that one took on an apprentice. And for thousands of years, the master would teach the apprentice, the master would die, the apprentice would then teach another apprentice, become the master, and so on. But there could never be any more than two of them, because if there were, they would try to get rid of the leader, which is exactly what Vader was trying to do, and that's exactly what the Emperor was trying to do. The Emperor was trying to get rid of Vader, and Vader was trying to get rid of the Emperor. And that is the antithesis of a symbiotic relationship, in which if you do that, you become cancer, and you eventually kill the host, and everything dies."

--George Lucas, Bill Moyers Time Magazine Interview; 1999.

You're confusing their motives with Palpatine twisted point of view when he was turning Anakin. The Jedi Council asked Anakin to spy on Palpatine because they believed that he was either corrupted by Darth Sidious, or corrupt on his own and did not have the common interest for the greater good. A Jedi would have to put aside any personal feelings and do their duty. Anakin couldn't do that very well and when he found out Palpatine was Sidious, he realized that the Council had good reason to not trust him. The Council realizes that if the Chancellor is corrupted by the Sith, or as they learn, is a Sith, they will face extermination and the Republic becomes an Empire. Which is exactly what happens.

 

It's not selfless, it's actually self-preservation. The rule of two is in place to make sure that the Sith organization survives, but, more to the point to protect the stronger of the Sith from getting wiped out by two (or more) lesser/weaker Sith. This means that only the strong keep moving forward. That their knowledge keeps getting passed along and doesn't get lost with them if they are killed by multiple weaker Sith. That's why Palpatine was so strong, besides being naturally strong with the Force, he had a thousand years of Sith knowledge passed on to him.

So when Maul was killed, it may have been un-expected by Sidious, but I would imagine he looked at it as if Maul wasn't a very good Sith, and deserved what he got. He may have overestimated Mauls worth and power. That is why in ROTS, the confrontation between Anakin and Dooku was setup by Palpatine to see if Anakin was powerful enough for him (Palpatine) to start pressing him harder for the turn to the Dark Side. If Dooku wins and kills Anakin, well Anakin wasn't strong enough to ever be a Sith. If Dooku wins but Anakin evades being killed, well Anakin still needs time to grow. If Anakin wins, well he has proved his is strong enough, and willing to use his emotions to get what he wants (killing Dooku). Palpatine was always thinking ahead (no pun intended).

 

Yup. "Vying for ultimate control," "infighting." That's the natural state of affairs for bunches of greedy, self-centered folks motivated by hatred and ambition the world over.

Yeah, and that's not very Sith-like because the master has accepted that world domination will not come to him/her but to future Sith. The master has also accepted that they're going to get killed, again not very Sith-like. Greedy people want it all now, not for somebody else to have it in the future. And they certainly don't want to get killed.

And that is precisely my issue with the rule of two. The term "symbiotic relationship" implies that one can't survive without the other. But look at it this way, the master teaches the apprentice everything they know and then they get killed. That's not exactly a good deal for the master is it. I mean, who would want to become a Sith master?! It's a death sentence! That is why Sith masters, in my view, would naturally want to stunt the growth of their apprentices to make sure they don't get themselves killed. Believe me, if your only goal in life is to amass as much power as possible, you're not going to be excited by the prospect of your second-in-command taking all your power for themselves and then killing you.

But this is precisely my point. Ensuring a powerful Sith Order is not self preservation because in the process you will get yourself killed by your more powerful apprentice. Someone who taps into their darkside and is motivated by their own greed and hatred and lust for power should be like: screw the Order, I want all the power for myself and I don't want my uppity apprentice to slice my head off! Passing on knowledge to the next generation is something a Jedi would want to do, not a Sith. I know that's short-termist but then really, how many people who are motivated by ambition and greed turn out to be long-termists?

 

Either way, Palpatine should've picked bananas for his first two apprentices. At least they would've lasted longer.

 

I think Jedi Merkurian said it best:

 

Sorry, I missed your post until now. I don't agree with your going to such great lengths to maintain their role within the Republic interpretation at all. They were going to such great lengths to ensure that the power of the legislature was not subverted by the power of the executive. And lets not forget that this is an executive who has remained in office long after his term has expired.

Obi Wan: "Anakin, our allegiance is to the Senate, not its leader."

Q.E.D, they were doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing. They were doing their job.

Iron_lord and Jedi Merkurian
Interesting post but seriously, isn't the "what next" question a rather thin thread on which to hang your own life? It makes much more sense to simply have an apprentice that's powerful enough to do your bidding but too weak to challenge you.

I cannot cannot cannot get my head around the idea that an ultimately selfish and hateful person (a.k.a a Sith master) would be happy to sacrifice themselves for the "good of the order" or for passing on knowledge. That's not how selfishness works. IMO the rule of two is an enormous mistake in Sith ideology.

 

I agree that self sacrifice is the very opposite of a Sith stands for but currently I can't understand the rule of two in different terms. If the master is aware that they will be killed and they are aware that that action will strengthen the Sith order then that to me seems like self sacrifice. So I'd be very to read your interpretation on the rule of two and see how you understand it differently.

 

Jedi Merkurian So you say that the rule of two is a con which both Master and Apprentice leverage against each other for their own ends? Ok. I can go with that. But from my point of view there is still a gaping hole:

Why does the reigning Sith master not ensure that there is only one Sith in existence - him/herself? That way, the master has no rivals to keep track of and no threat to their own power. If they need powerful servants to do their bidding they can train dark acolytes (I'm thinking Ventess or Mara Jade here) or they could use droids/cyborgs (Grievous) or they could use a stunted and crippled apprentice (Vader).

Ultimately, where is the logic in a Sith master teaching an apprentice all of their powers when that apprentice is more than likely to use their powers to kill the master? Yes, the apprentice is a useful tool but as I have mentioned above, there are safer alternatives which will work almost as well.

 

You know what, that's a perfectly reasonable explanation. I'm going with that. Thanks

 

And why the Jedi could exploit that.

Bane understood the fundamental flaw in simply going back out and picking up with the others left off. If he attempted that, nothing would change except he would be outnumbered by the Jedi. So just as they learn to control their fear and channel their anger and hate, so too, must he learn to control his darker nature and teach that control to his Apprentice and so on down the line. In teaching patience to future generations of Sith, they were able to grow stronger in the Force and thus be at their zenith when the time to enact the plan came. Any Apprentice who couldn't get on board with that was eliminated and replaced with someone who would. As we saw with Palpatine, he had loads of patience. He waited a long time before he killed Plagueis, waited to train Maul to where he was and then wait another ten years before he could start the war. And then there's Vader who waited twenty years before he could even find someone suitable enough to enlist in his crusade.

One in which they accept knowing full well that it would happen. If the Apprentice is not capable of replacing his Master, then he is no good to the Sith Order. For once, the Sith were thinking not so much of themselves, but of their greater good. This is why the Jedi had trouble figure out what their plans were, because they wrote a new playbook and were winning.

Those who are wise enough to understand that a lack of control is precisely why the Sith were wiped out. As I said, if they cannot get on board with that...

It's not self sacrifice. The Apprentice must earn their spot in order to become the Master. If the Apprentice can best the Master, then he has proven to be the Master. Palpatine chose not to fight Plagueis, but instead kill him in his sleep thus showing that he was better than his Master. The Master expects death, but that doesn't mean that they're going to simply roll over and die.