TV Discussion Ahsoka The path to immortality?

My first ever thread…. Someone please tell me if I’ve done something wrong or missed a tag

So my theory is

Spoiler

since the mortis arc on TCW, is that Ahsoka has cheated death a few times, (most recently in episode 5) - so is Ahsoka immortal?

Reminds me slightly of captain Jack in doctor who being resurrected, but when he was brought back indefinitely.

Keen to get others thoughts.

 

Welcome to the JCF

I'm not much of a Doctor Who fan, but I think Filoni is expanding on concepts from TCW. "Force Visions" have been central to Star Wars since ESB and he likes playing with that. Destiny is a really existing phenomenon in SW because The Force has its own will, or Wills. Some people are chosen to be arbiters of the Wills, and Ahsoka's master was The chosen one, or so the prophecy said. She's his apprentice, everything he was, so is she.

The metaphysics of Star Wars has always been pretty loose imo. George was trying to incorporate New Age concepts, which was an (American) counterculture product. 40 years later that counterculture milieu has thoroughly morphed to the point it's not really counteracting the mainstream Mass Culture anymore. In Ahsoka Ep5, Filoni is chasing the face of emerging reality, where long-animated concepts are recreated by actors in studio. That surrealist transition is the juice

 

Immortality - as in forever living on this mortal plane - would be a dark side thing, so no.

 

Agreed but it’s not Ahsokas doing if daughter brought her back to life indefinitely…

 

No, if Ahsoka had made the wrong choice, she would dead.

And it's not immortality if others have to keep you alive or bring you back to life.

 

Immortality is a dark side thing. And no a force ghost isn’t really immortality either

 

Well, why not? We don't need to define immortality as eternal biological life. It's just eternal life, like any god worth their salt.

 

It’s because the common definition refers to not physically dying/ decaying.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "common" definition. For the vast majority of human history, immortality was rooted in the concept of a non-physical soul that would live on after the death of the body.

Physical immortality has usually been framed as eternal youth, or lack of aging -- in other words, longevity.

However physical longevity is not nearly as omnipotent as the classic concept of an eternal living soul because souls cannot be destroyed (they are non-physical, after all) while immortal physical bodies can be.

So back to the Sith discussion, the best term for what the Sith want is physical longevity. They want to be able to cease the aging process so that they don't suffer a physical death.

However, as we can see from the canon, although some Sith lords have achieved physical longevity, living longer than is natural, they can still have their bodies destroyed.

The irony as most of us know very well has always been that the Sith can't achieve real immortality, living forever in a spirit form that cannot be destroyed, but the Jedi can.

When you say "common" definition of immortality, you seem to be saying most people today don't think of immortal souls anymore but perhaps immortality achieved through science?

Since most dictionary definitions refer to both physical and spiritual immortality, I don't think that notion of common is justified unless we did some kind of massive poll. Personally, I don't buy it because most people are still religious in some sense, even if they don't go to church, and most are likely to think they will live forever as a soul, not as a human body (unless you mean they think they will be resurrected as immortal physical bodies?).

Back to the character Ahsoka that started this discussion. Immortality, physical or spiritual, usually presupposed that a person has the power in themselves, the means that is, to be immortal on their own. They wouldn't need, in other words, others to constantly save or resurrect them.

The Greek Gods often make humans immortal, but this is different, I think, from what we see with Ahsoka and the Daugther.

Ahsoka really could have died in E5 if she has made the wrong choices.

 

I don’t think immortal soul so the most common definition of immortality at all. Because the common sense meaning of mortal is someone who can die, you can die and your soul lives on, but you were a mortal. When people speak of human immortality they mean the physical body, when speaking of immortal souls they specify the soul

 

First, I ask again, what are you basing this idea of "common definition" on? Most dictionaries and encyclopedias talk about both physical and spiritual immortality, and historically the term almost always refers to souls because most people did not think bodies could become immortal.

Second, even if most people these days did think of immortality in mostly physical terms, how would you know this? Where is the evidence?

Finally, what actually matters is the Star Wars definition of immortality. Don't forget that Lucas has a clear view on this, as expressed through Yoda in Revenge of the Sith and ESB.

Yoda tells Kenobi that

Immortality in SW is spiritual immortality.

The Sith, on the other hand, typically choose physical immortality, which is more accurately refered to as longevity because although a person can live forever, they can still be killed. Hence, not true or total immortality.

 

It’s because we’re discussing mortal beings becoming immortal, and not discussing gods. In that context, becoming immortal commonly refers to not physically dying.

 

Yeah. Lucas' take on things arose from Joseph Campbell. But I guess we could call them a bit New Age-y. He encouraged us to use the imagination.

There is a discussion of immortality in the EU with the Servant becoming the Mother and then Abeloth. The Ones were presumably already immortal. And there were some immortal Jedi like Master Fey...presumably immortal, I should say.

But the path to immortality is different now. Anakin as a Force ghost, Yoda and Obi-Wan as Force ghosts, etc. have different powers that I didn't know or expect to hear about in the new material. I rather like Anakin's, and I believe his is linked to the Father, a member of the Ones. It is partially related to his being Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker, the father of Luke Skywalker and Leia Organa. Basically, I think Lucas' intent changes a bit. And his influence has waned with the advent of the new Lucasfilm. But he clearly stated back in 2005 that the Jedi could attain immortality, whereas the Sith could not. The Jedi do in spirit. The Sith cannot take their physical power with them. They cannot take their dark power, their minions, their treasure, etc. with them. This is reflected in how Sam Witwer portrays Darth Maul in TCW and Rebels. Maul is poisoned by greed and fear, whereas Obi-Wan lets go of the physical, or the material, if you will, for something higher and more permanent. What this means is that Obi-Wan, Yoda, Ahsoka, Luke, Leia, Rey, and Ben Solo can all forgo their attachments. It's about their energy and legacy living on, not physical immortality.

Even so, the notion that Anakin having a physical form in the World Between Worlds is interesting. He may be connected to many beings like the Bendu. So, in the old EU, it was said that Anakin/Vader destroyed Palpatine to give the Jedi and Sith an equal playing field to replace the Ones. What we'll see with this new form of immortality here is that he may have replaced one of the Ones or all of them. I personally didn't like the Sequel Trilogy because I felt that Rey was a cool character who could clean up a post-Palpatine Sith Order with the help of her friends. Not sure why she had to clean up Anakin's mess again. If they had set her up to be one of the new Ones, that would have been fine in my book. But they were clumsy and we'd be here all night if I went into my dislike of the messy Sequel Trilogy films. I do think that Anakin's story was much better told. And I don't really see Anakin as a masculine figure per se even though he starts off as a mortal male. Much like Spider-Man in the Marvel world is meant to be relatable to anybody, I'd say that Anakin is intended to be likewise. His flaws are universal and within all human beings, regardless of outer appearance or experience. Despite this, his great gifts and power should also be considered relatable to all humans, since every person has the capability to heal as he does.

At least that's how it is idealistically speaking. Whether this is realistic or not is up to you.