PT "Seeing you alive brings warm feelings to my heart"

The problem is - he doesn't make that distinction clear to Anakin - hence, his language makes him look hypocritical.

 

Of course. Ordinarily, people can form attachments without letting them totally blind and control their lives. But attachments are forbidden anyway. This is why the Jedi code is expressed as an absolute.

 

Some Jedi phrase their advice a bit better. Not "don't get attached" but "don't get too attached":


Depa Billaba from the Kanan comic:

"You must not grow too attached, too fond, too in love with life as it is now. Those emotions are valuable and should not be suppressed...but you must learn to rule them, Padawan, lest they rule you."


A counterpart for Yoda would be "don't miss them too much".

As Legends Luke put it:


Mourning the loss of a friend and teacher was both fitting and honorable, but to dwell unnecessarily on that loss was to give the past too much power over the present.

 

I don't know how people read this line and think Yoda is attached to Padme.

 

Because people have a broader understanding of what an attachment can be than the narrow definition of something that would make you turn evil just to avoid letting go of that attachment.

It's because Anakin is told that all attachments are forbidden that people are compelled to describe Yoda's expressions of his feelings as something other than recognition of an emotional attachment (which he may or may not be prepared to let go of for the greater good).

 

But attachment in the SW universe is inability to let go of things/people, it's Jedi literally loosing it if those attachments are threatened like we see with Anakin. It doesn't mean they can't have emotions or form friendships (e.g. Obi-Wan and Dex). Do we see Yoda resort to killing when he sense Oder 66? Or when Padme dies? No he feels sadness because Jedi (even during the prequels) can show "normal" emotions. The point, of course , is to not let those emotions take over their responsibilities, something Anakin was unable or unwilling to do.

 

The first thing he does after Order 66 is kill the clones in his immediate vicinity. Admittedly that has an element of self-defence about it - but why couldn't he slam them, knocking them out, the way he does Imperial Guards later?

 

But what I meant is that he's not doing it out of anger or revenge.

 

That needed to be made clear by the film. The inability to let go of something is not how anyone would normally define their attachments.

If the bespoke definition of an attachment is counterintuitive to what the audience understands an attachment to be then it cannot just be assumed that audience will follow. They should at least expect the audience to infer a subtext from certain behaviours being at odds with expressed codes. e.g. Miss them do not + Miss you I will = Yoda not practicing what he preaches about attachments.

What if a Jedi stated. "Well I follow the Jedi code as close as possible. But it's not like I'm not attached to it. If I think there's a better option or if it's impossible or unhelpful to follow the Jedi code, then I'll let the jedi code what feels right." ?

 

I do agree to an extent he should have pushed them and didn't resort to killing. Though the clones are far more aggressive to Yoda than the guards. I think it can be accepted.

 

You mean like the repeated lessons to "let go" by multiple characters?

 

I think RL Buddhists would disagree. The whole attachment vs. compassion distinction is taken from Buddhism. Star Wars is heavily Buddhist in a lot of ways, this among them.

Did Lucas convey what he'd borrowed from Buddhism in a clumsy way? Yes. The man has strengths, clear and concise wording (especially in dialogue) is not really one of them - and he seemed to think the general audience would be as familiar with Buddhism as he was/"get" the ideas quickly and easily because, to him, who was already familiar with all the particulars, it seemed so obvious.

But he did convey it, and speak about it further outside the films themselves many, many times. "Attachment" is "attachment" as taken from Buddhism, and it's impossible to have a real discussion about what the Jedi actually believe when people resist acknowledging this or reading up on it. Lucas' personal wording may be (very) clumsy, but put his explanations and characters' statements next to the Buddhist ideas and they do match.

 

I think Lucas did a good job conveying what the differences was. However, you do have a point. I think he did intend the audience to "get" it through just expressing the dialogue and examples given to the film. I understood it but I can see where the audience, if they were to describe more about the philosophy would get a little tripped up by not being familiar with it.

Lucas has always said that he doesn't treat his audience like children.

 

You haven't read my posts. I'm talking about their bespoke definition of attachments. Not their policy of letting go.

 

Anakin defines attachments as possession and when you possess things you don't want to let go of those things. Same things for people. Jealous people will go to the extreme to not let their "possession" go.
YODA: "Attachment lead to jealousy. The shadow of greed ,that is. (...) Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose."

 

So possessiveness is forbidden. Not attachment.

Jealousy is forbidden and not attachment.

Kind of like how driving is not forbidden, but driving recklessly, without due care, or when knowingly unfit to drive are all outlawed. People prone to being reckless or careless or be unfit to drive are still allowed to drive as long as they pass their test and observe the rules while driving.


Some forms of attachment can lead to possessiveness and jealousy. One of the people involved may not even be aware of the attachment, never mind the possessiveness or jealousy of the other person. It is the dysfunction of the person and the dysfunction manifest in their handling of an attachment that leads to the jealousy and possessiveness. Not the attachment.

People have been known to become possessive and jealous of other people whom they've never even spoke to or met in their life.

However. In order to avoid the darkside, the Jedi code is explicitly prohibitive of attachments because they lead to jealousy. etc. It does not say possessive attachments of jealous people are forbidden.

 

The only hard and fast rule about killing is that it has to be in self-defense, of yourself or others and as a last resort. Yoda sensed his life was in danger and reacted accordingly. When he uses the Force on the Royal Guards, for all we know, he snapped their necks when then shoved them into the wall.

Anakin says that possession is forbidden. He refers to the notion of becoming possessive towards someone that you have developed an attachment to. Wanting to keep those attachments and not letting go of them. And attachment is forbidden because you become attached to someone and in doing so, if something happens to that person, you are very likely going to go to the dark side in order to hold onto them. Jealousy, which Yoda says, is the shadow of greed. The jealousy is Anakin wanting to protect her from everything and anything, becoming fiercely protective which leads him down the path of the dark side.

 

...

You can form and attachment without you and the other person actually being "attached". You know? Like if you weren't going to be able to see an old friend again or for some time and you missed them because of it. Missing someone is definitively expressing the sense of loss at not being able to tangibly enjoy that person's company.

No. If you become inordinately attached and possessively, jealous (again, an actual attachment between two people is not even necessary for someone to be those things) then you are probably likely to allow your judgement to be clouded by those negative emotions. And in star wars terms that's the path to the dark-side of the force. But the vast majority of the time, the attachments that people form don't prompt such negative emotions and behaviours except in people who are dysfunctional and in dysfunctional relationships.

Having a vision of someone in pain and wanting to prevent that is not jealousy. Anakin's jealousy is rather clumsily shoehorned in by him wondering aloud if Obi Wan had visited Padme. And it turns out that he was there because he wished to tell Padme was concerned about Anakin, which Anakin then immediately validates by admitting to Padme that he feels lost.

A person who jumps from worrying about their wife's health (due to a vision) to wondering if his best friend (like a father) had visited, is someone with behavioral/mental problems. Not a normal or even familiar reaction to someone's health (which isn't normal in the first place).

 

1. Yes, I am aware of friendship attachments. Anakin also has that problem with Obi-wan and Ahsoka. Just as Luke does with Han and Leia, before finding out the latter was his sister. Just like Kanan did with Ezra, his Padawan. Just like Ezra has to not only Kanan, but everyone else that is part of the crew of the Ghost. Just like Rey has with Finn.

2. Yoda will miss his friends, but he is also not attached to the Wookiees. He has let go of them a long time ago. Chewie was nearly two hundred years old in ROTS. Yoda has good relations with the Wookiees. This is not the first time he's gone to Kashyyyk on behalf of the Wookiees to aid in a matter of importance. Yoda is not attached to them. Likewise, Obi-wan friends with Dex and misses his company when he's off on assignments. He even hugs him when they see each other. But he is not attached to him. Luke hugs Han as well and learns to let go of his attachments to him and to Leia. If in TLJ, Luke and Leia hug, the same will hold true with them.

They're not attached to them. I keep telling you that.

Jealousy has more than one definition.

-feeling or showing envy of someone or their achievements and advantages. "he grew jealous of her success" synonyms: envious, covetous, desirous;

-feeling or showing suspicion of someone's unfaithfulness in a relationship. "a jealous boyfriend" synonyms: suspicious, distrustful, mistrustful, doubting, insecure, anxious;

-fiercely protective or vigilant of one's rights or possessions. "Howard is still a little jealous of his authority" synonyms: protective, vigilant, watchful, heedful, mindful, careful, solicitous "they are very jealous of their rights"

Anakin is jealous not just because of the friendship between Padme and Obi-wan, but also because he is fiercely protective of Padme. He wants to protect her from everything bad in the universe. When she was infected with the Blue Shadow Virus, he wanted to do everything to find the cure and get it to her. Jealousy. When he thought that Rush Clovis was trying to seduce her away from him, he became jealous. When he sees her dying, he becomes jealous because he wants to hold onto her.

 

+1 to darth. Honestly, discussing attachment in SW forums tends to feel a lot like the following:

Person A: The Blue-ites think everyone should be sad. They're bad people.

Person B: That's not the definition of "blue" being used in the story. It's about the color blue, which is sacred to them and they believe surrounding yourself with it will soothe your spirit and help you reach enlightenment. The director even talks about color theory in commentaries and interviews.

Person A: No, "blue" means sad. They think everyone should be sad and they're bad people.

(repeat infinitely)

 

Your logic about when it's ok to miss people is that you can miss friends as long as they aren't dead. Once they are dead you mustn't miss or even mourn them. That goes against everything that just about every psychiatrist will tell you. Only cults that want you to devote your emotions and your time to their interests insist on that kind of unrealistic and unhealthy detachment as an absolute. Yoda never says, you cannot let mourning and absence dominate your life. You have to let go, eventually. He just says. Let go now before they are even dead. Do not mourn them when they die.

What if Anakin said, well they aren't dead yet, but I miss them at the moment. Is that ok? Yoda's answer would have to be yes, then he would have to try and explain the perverse logic behind that policy. Because if he says no you mustn't miss people whether they are living or dead (because it's precisely the same emotion) then he is a hypocrite. There's no getting away from it.


Why would the sight of a specific person being alive bring warm feelings to someone's heart of they did not have some emotional attachment to them?

Why would you miss someone you do not have some emotional attachment to?

The fear of the foreseen death of a loved, which you have been told WILL happen, one does NOT induce jealousy. Jealousy of whom? You could only conceivably have jealousy for people who ARE able to prevent their loved one's from dying unnecessarily. Anakin declares that the Jedi powers that he has and others can teach him are not enough (..more powerful than any Jedi"). So he rules out Obi Wan and the others from being the target of his jealousy since he decides that they have nothing to offer him.

 

Anakin is missing and mourning her before she dies. You cannot spend the rest of someone else's life, much less yours, worrying about losing someone. That is what Anakin does in ROTS. When other Jedi miss their friends, they do so and then move on to other concerns. Obi-wan isn't thinking about Dex on Geonosis and Yoda isn't thinking about Chewie while fighting Palpatine. They are focused on what is more important than emotional concerns. They have to live and not curl up and die, because they cannot deal with life. That's how you live knowing that you could lose someone. Care for them, but do not become attached to them.

Yoda is happy that Padme is alive because he cares for her as a friend, but not because he is attached to her. He sees her as a beckon of light in growing darkness. She is a voice of calm and reason in an uncertain time and believes in her message. He believes that she can help in preventing the war. Caring for people, but not being attached are not at mutually exclusive. It's the same way you're glad someone wasn't seriously injured in an accident, but you don't know them.

Because they're your friend. You don't have to be attached to them, to care.

Anakin wasn't told that Padme's death was a foregone conclusion. He assumes that. All Yoda told him is to be careful of his visions and to not let his attachment to people be an issue. As to the jealousy, again, it isn't about other people. It is about being fiercely protective of one's rights or possessions. Padme is a possession to him and he will not lose her. He even accuses Obi-wan of turning her against him and trying to take her from him.

 

I think it was odd how Padme coldly ignored Yoda

 

^ I agree on that. Surely it wouldn’t have taken any time for her to bow and say, “Thank you, Master Yoda,” before asking him directly if he knew who was behind the attack.

 

Because Yoda's advice assumes that it will happen.

Friendship is an emotional attachment. You do not express your inner warmth for hearing that people are alive and not dead (in which case you wouldn't mourn or miss them), or that you will miss them while in exile (before they are dead), if you didn't have an emotional attachment to them.

Because he's be told just to let go and not miss or mourn Padme. Based on the pat answers given by one of his teachers, that would be a reasonable assumption. Particularly since doing nothing until it was too late meant that Anakin only go to witness the death of his mother which he had also foresaw.