BigBird, thankfully, moves us in a direction we've not really explored before, namely, the significance of the Ben/Vader duel in ANH. He concludes [hl=yellow] . . . the real point of his confrontation (secondary to getting Luke & Leia out safely) was to have Luke see his death. He wanted to instill in Luke a sense of hatred and loathing for Vader that could not be removed easily. He knew there was some chance that Luke would learn of his lineage, but even so he needed something which always stick with Luke, reminding him that there was NO good left in Vader.[/hl] In many ways I agree with this assessment. The point of the confrontation was for Luke see his death. He did need something to always stick with Luke. But it wasn't hatred for Vader. While I admit that SW2 and SW3 have already been promised to shed more light on Ben's actions in this battle, and that my opinion may have to change to accommodate these new revelations, I've believed from the first time I saw ANH that the point was more oblique. It was an instructive tool. He was trying to show the difference between how the Light and Dark sides work. The Light side is passive, the Dark, aggressive. No, it's not hatred for Vader that Ben was trying to impart. It was the simple question, "Why?" Why would a powerful Jedi simply give up? And it's really this question that motivates Luke's passage throughout the trilogy. He would encounter the question again when in the Dagobah cave, and he failed to follow Ben's example. He would face it in the Emperor's Throne Room when he strikes off Vader's hand, only to see the reflection of Vader in himself. Only when he throws down his lightsaber and refuses to fight does he get Ben's point: opposition to the Dark Side must be done according to Light Side principles. And this means recognizing, among other things, that you gain more, sometimes, by refusing to fight than by fighting brilliantly well. Now, understand, I'm not saying that Jedi were always trained in this way. I'm not saying the Padawan necessarily has to witness the death of the Master to advance (though it is curious that this is the ONLY paradigm we have at the moment). I'm saying that this lesson was very specific to the Skywalkers. We have to remember that Luke's situation and consequent training was in many ways abnormal. He started late, he had no fellow students, and he had exceptionally difficult goals placed before him. He was expected not only to vanquish the Emperor but to reignite the flame of the Jedi. So I think Ben chose this method of teaching because it would clearly and precisely define the Light Side in a way that Luke would remember and pass on. I think before this seeming last gasp of the Jedi, the training process was probably more subtle. The training process, because it lasted longer, and because there were more candidates, could afford to very precisely deliniate the actions one could take in battle and not violate the Light Side. There was time to teach the intricacy and subtlety involved in, for lack of a better word, passive-aggressive fighting. But with Luke, the point had to be made quickly. I think, too, there's a motivation behind Obi-Wan's action that is selfish. I clearly believe the movies are about Ben's redemption as much as Vader's. And I think in the moment of opportunity that Ben sees he has, he believes he's found a way to more effectively make a point that was lost on Luke's father. Finally, I think Ben is wordlessly telling Luke precisely what needs to be done to defeat Vader. I think he's saying to Luke, "If you want to win against Vader, you have to turn off your lightsaber." In other words, I think that this ANH sequence proves my point more than yours. I think he's demonstrating how "confront" does not mean "kill."