Why the emphasis on confronting Vader?

From the way the story evolved, I know the answer to this question; however, from the point of view of in-universe logic, I do not:

Why do Kenobi and Yoda feel it is so important that Luke confront Vader, the junior partner in the firm of Palpatine & Vader, LLP, instead of the Emperor himself? Killing Vader does not bring down the Empire; killing Palpatine would. Palpatine has already trained other apprentices before, at least Maul and Dooku, so if he loses Vader, can't he recruit and train someone new?

As Kenobi and Yoda did not think they could bring Vader back to the light, they clearly did not believe that he was the only one who could kill Palpatine (i.e. the "prophecy"); so Luke kills Vader, like they intended him to, and they are left with the more powerful Emperor still in control.

Now I understand that originally the Emperor was not necessarily conceived of as a Sith Lord, so Vader might have been the power behind the throne, however, the RotJ and the PT clearly establish him as not a puppet-beaurocrat controlled by a force user, but rather the most powerful of all the force users. So why the emphasis on killing Vader? That doesn't solve the bigger problem, does it?

 

Hi, old friend

I don't have a clearly formed view on this subject, to be honest, but it may have to do with having to confront your fear in order to become a true Jedi. This is not something that is spelled out in any of the movies, but I believe that a Jedi must be able to face his/her fears without giving in to them(since they are the path to the dark side).

I would guess that Luke's greatest fear is to succumb to the dark side as a result of a confrontation with Vader. It's quite possible that Yoda and Obi-Wan understand this.





Fear - it's essential
/LM

 

It occurs to me that Yoda and Kenobi want to take things in stages. From their POV, Luke is young and inexperienced, and needs first to confront and defeat Vader (whatever that may specifically entail), then later, after becoming more powerful, to confront and defeat the Emperor.

This connection is hinted at when Kenobi declares that "the Emperor has already won" when Luke asserts that he can't kill his own father.

 

I think the idea was to kill the iron fist first - the guy running around causing all of the problems with his power - even if it was under the guidance of Sidious (and sometimes it extended to Vader's own desires). Palpatine would have to take on a new apprentice, who would not be as experienced as Vader. But in the interim, there would just be Sidious left to deal with and I figure he'd be the next target - before he had time to get his new apprentice really up and running.

 

I concur with the above posts. I believe Luke confronting Vader has more
to do with Luke's personal growth, and not so much with him defeating
Vader or the Emperor.

Then again, maybe Yoda thought Luke was too cocky and just wanted Vader to beat him up.

 

Obi-Wan and Yoda never told Luke that he had to kill Vader. They just said the words "face" and "confront." Luke assumed that meant he had to kill Vader, but that assumption was false.

 

It is strongly implied by Ben's "then the Emperor has already won" quote. Confronting him means facing the possibility of having to kill him. Also, ROTS ( in Obi-Wan and Yoda's "I cannot kill Anakin" conversation and Obi-Wan's subsequent failure to reason with Anakin ) supports the idea - also expressed in TESB - that the Jedi do not have great faith in the possibility of redeeming darksiders.

 

That line means that Luke had to be willing to kill Vader if it came down to it, but that it shouldn't be his ultimate goal. Luke, of course, misinterpreted it to mean there were only two possibilities: Kill Vader, or let Vader kill him. And as it turned out, it didn't happen either way.

 

The Jedi themselves doubted Vader's chances of redemption, so I wouldn't say that Luke misinterpreted Ben.

 

Obi-Wan didn't say anything about a last resort - he was bemoaning the fact that all was lost if Luke couldn't kill his father. The whole point of his telling Luke that there was nothing of Anakin left and Vader was more machine than man was to indicate that there was no alternative except to kill him. Plus both Yoda and Obi-Wan were trying to be sneaky in not revealing Vader was Luke's dad, in order to both spare him the anguish and waylay any compassion on his part. It was Vader who tipped the scales when he told Luke that Ben lied and went on to reveal that he was his father. Obi-Wan was incapable of sensing the good in Vader, I don't know why, but he didn't from ROTS through the end. Yoda to my recollection, was never in Vader's presence to sense anything. So they were speaking from the heart based on their true belief, but I feel their intent was that Luke kill his father and then go on and kill the Emperor (or try and if he failed, they'd start working with Leia).

 

Just to point something out within the context of the Rule Of Two: Taking just the movies, Luke killing Vader would leave the Empire with no clear number two, and more importantly, Palpatine with no apprentice to carry on his legacy, plus the balance of power would shift back towards the Jedi if Vader was dead and Luke alive and growing stronger as a Jedi Knight. Luke presumably could have eventually defeated Palpatine-at least, Vader, Yoda, Obi-Wan and the Emperor all view Luke as a potential threat to Vader and the Emperor and say as much over the course of the films. It's not the same situation as the end of ROTS if Vader had died then-Obi-Wan and Yoda couldn't best Palpatine even together, and it would be decades until Luke or Leia was a threat to the Sith.

Vader suddenly being killed by Luke-assuming Luke didn't fall in the process-would leave the Jedi and the Rebellion holding the best cards in the deck and Palpatine facing potentially two Jedi who could have become more pwoerful than he could ever hope of being. Not a good situation from his pov, I'm sure.

 

I used to believe like the previous posters that Obi and Yoda sent Luke to kill Darth Vader, as AF noted it is spelled out specifically on-film. But after further analysis I think Obi and Yoda thought there was a chance that Luke would bring his father back to the light side. Certainly they anticipated that there was a possiblity that DV wouldn't come back, so Luke would have to kill him, hence Obi's line. But after the Prequels, with Yoda agreeing to go into exile to wait for Luke and Obi living on Tatooine awaiting Luke's young adulthood, it seems to me they figured Luke could get through to Vader was their best chance to overthrow the Sith.

They could have searched the GFFA for other Force users, but they waited 20 years to attempt to overthrow the Empire. Heck, they didn't even come out of action to eliminate the Death Star, the ultimate weapon. How many people were killed and innocents enslaved while they waited?

I also think, much like Obi in ROTS, Luke could not defeat the Emperor in combat. The best chance to overthrow Palpy played out pretty much like the film, him not expecting DV to take out the Emperor. Even if DV had come back to the light on Endor during his scene with Luke, I don't think DV and Luke combined could defeat the Emperor.

 

Obi-Wan did.

 

I always felt (OT only, ie before 1999) that the whole "I can't kill my own father" was more about Luke's refusal to consider that a possibility, rather than that's what he had to do.

 

I don't see how that's changed post-1999, personally. Sure, Obi-Wan didn't seem to be in a very redemptive mood in ROTS, but he didn't just spend 20 years in the desert thinking about being wrong, either.

 

It hasn't changed. I was trying to emphasise that I've always felt that, even before the prequels

 

I think even though Obi Wan and Yoda felt that Anakin was lost, he was still the only Force user in the GFFA powerful enough to end the reign of the Darkside. He was the chosen one, after all. Luke was not.
In Luke, they were given a "New Hope". Only Luke could bring Anakin back. They knew that Luke would never be powerful enough to defeat the Emperor - only Anakin, the child of the Force had that power (barely).
Additionally, if Luke WERE somehow capable of defeating the Emperor, Vader would surely take his place.
Let's assume the confrontation never took place: Vader would surely have gone full-on Darkside. He lost his mother, his wife and now his Master because of the Jedi - his own son had turned against him!
Thus, Luke's confrontation against his father was the only solution. Luke didn't need to defeat him, he just needed to force Anakin Skywalker to overcome Darth Vader.

 

The Emperor himself admits that Luke could destroy him. According to the EU Luke has the same potential as Anakin.

 

In Return of the Jedi, it is clear that he could not. Vader's intervention saved Luke, remember?

 

After Luke threw away his saber, remember? And you said Luke could never become powerful enough, which is a different position from Luke simply not being powerful enough in ROTJ. Luke has Anakin's original potential.

 

Yes, indeed. And therin lies the problem. Luke had exactly the same potential as his father, and Obi Wan and Yoda realized this. Luke was in no way prepared to defeat the Emperor without giving in to the Darkside, and striking him down in an act of rage. Luke's true power came from making himself powerless.
It's the same reason he gave himself up to Vader on Endor. He threw down his saber in a final act of defiance against his 'destiny' ("Your weapons...you no longer need them").
In refusing to attack and destroy, he at last became a true Jedi. He enabled Anakin return from darkness and bring balance to the Force by ending the reign of the Sith.