Saga Here is my unorthodox Star Wars opinion: change my mind!

They can love, but it has to be unconditional love.

Jedi can get angry, but the anger born from ambition and attachment is the worst. Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan were angry when arguing about Anakin and the Council. Obi-Wan and Anakin were angry when it came to their arguments. Yoda is irritated with Luke's impatience. But uncontrolled anger born from fear, those are dangerous. The Tusken slaughter and Anakin fighting Rush Clovis are prime examples.

Once a Jedi begins to train, they have to learn to master their emotions in order to help others including their loved ones.

"Part of the going into the tree is learning about the Force. Learning about the fact that the Force is within you, and at the same time, you create your own bad vibes. So, if you think badly about things or you act badly, or you bring fear into a situation, you're going to have to defend yourself or you're going to have to suffer the consequences for that. In this particular case, he takes his sword in with him which means he's going to have combat. If he didn't, he wouldn't. He's creating this situation in his mind because, on a larger level, what caused Darth Vader to become Darth Vader is the same thing that makes Luke bring that sword in with him. And so, just as later on we find out Darth Vader is actually his father - so he is part of himself - but he has the capacity to become Darth Vader simply by using hate and fear and using weapons as oppose to using compassion and caring and kindness. But that's the big danger of the series, is that he will become Darth Vader."

--George Lucas, TESB DVD Commentary.

Luke can help his loved ones, but he has to do it for the right reasons. He was doing it because he was thinking about himself and what he wanted and not about them.

"The key issue in these movies is for a Jedi not to use anger when he’s fighting. So the final confrontation here is primarily about trying to make Luke become angry, so that when he fights his father he’s fighting in anger, therefore begins to use the dark side of the Force, and therefore sort of succumbs to the dark side of the Force. In The Empire Strikes Back we had them confront each other and fight together. But in this film Luke has become more mature so that now he knows he shouldn’t be fighting him—that is the path to the dark side. So it’s basically a confrontation between two people and one of them doesn’t want to fight, and the other one keeps trying to push him into it. And then in the end when he gives up and they really do fight, what’s happening there is that ultimately Luke is turning to the dark side, and all is going to be lost."

--George Lucas, ROTJ DVD Commentary, 2004.

"It will be about how young Anakin Skywalker became evil and then was redeemed by his son. But it's also about the transformation of how his son came to find the call and then ultimately realize what it was. Because Luke works intuitively through most of the original trilogy until he gets to the very end. And it’s only in the last act—when he throws his sword down and says, “I’m not going to fight this”—that he makes a more conscious, rational decision. And he does it at the risk of his life because the Emperor is going to kill him. It’s only that way that he is able to redeem his father. It’s not as apparent in the earlier movies, but when you see the next trilogy, then you see the issue is, how do we get Darth Vader back? How do we get him back to that little boy that he was in the first movie, that good person who loved and was generous and kind? Who had a good heart."

--George Lucas, Star Wars Trilogy VHS Boxset 2000.

Luke lashes out because he is afraid that the Alliance will die if he doesn't kill Sidious. He is being selfish here. When he loses it over Leia being discovered by Vader, he is doing so because he is mad and afraid over everything. His fear is that she will turn and join the Sith. He wants destroy his father right now. He stops because he realizes that he is wrong here. He has to have faith in his friends and Leia. If they are meant to die, then they die.

EZRA: "Was it wrong for the Jedi to fight? Is it wrong for me to protect my friends?"

YODA: "Wrong? A long time, fought I did. Consumed by fear I was... though see it I did not."

EZRA: "You were afraid?"

YODA: "Yes, afraid. Surprised are you? A challenge lifelong it is, not to bend fear into anger."

Luke can help his loved ones for the right reasons. He helped Han and it was right. Obi-Wan helped Satine and it was right. What is right is how and why you fight.

Ripley doesn't have the Force, either. She confronts the Queen to rescue Newt because she is thinking about her and not herself. She knows that not only will she, Newt and Hicks die if she doesn't, but the Sulacco will be found and the Queen will be used by the bio weapons division. The correct comparison is Ripley wanting to die instead of helping the others destroy the Alien first, which is why Dillon tells her he won't do it first. Why he makes her agree to help him.

Anakin had dreams, but he didn't see that she was in danger until the last one. He saw her during a reunion and she twisted and vanished, right as he wakes up. That's just before the mission to Ansion. Ten years earlier he saw himself coming back as an adult and she vanishes before they can embrace. This is the dream that he refers to Qui-Gon. Obi-Wan and Anakin both had no idea what it meant.

There's no law on Tatooine, other than the Hutts. And the Jedi don't have visions of total strangers. Usually they are connected to the mission or to the Jedi. Yoda did not dismiss Ahsoka's visions of Padme being shot, which Anakin didn't have. Kanan didn't ignore Ezra's visions. But they have to be careful to not lose control over it.

Marvel did a story where Sabe was sent to Tatooine to rescue Shmi and as many slaves as she could, but Shmi was already freed. She couldn't find Watto and had no idea where Shmi was now. This was the "Queen's Shadow" arc.

Anakin didn't contact Obi-Wan or the Council about his final vision. Obi-Wan would have either gone himself or spoke with Yoda and Mace, who would have sent someone to Tatooine. Anakin takes off without doing the very thing that Obi-Wan said to do.

OBI-WAN: "Anakin, don't do anything without first either consulting myself or the Council."

Kind of hard to help if you are unaware of the situation.

Too many. Most of the Jedi who fell did so because of attachments or out of ambition.

"Sometimes it’s ambition, but sometimes, like in the case of Anakin, it was fear of losing his wife. He knew she was going to die. He didn’t quite know how, so he was able to make a pact with a devil that if he could learn how to keep people from dying, he would help the Emperor. And he became a Sith Lord. Once he started saying, “Well, we could take over the galaxy, I could take over from the Emperor, I could have ultimate power,” Padmé saw right through him immediately. She said, “You’re not the person I married. You’re a greedy person.” So that’s ultimately how he fell and he went to the dark side.

And then Luke had the chance to do the same thing. He didn’t do it."

--George Lucas, Star Wars.com interview, 2019.

 

To be exact, it was the YA novel Queen's Shadow, published by Egmont. Marvel SW's Sabe-centric arc is set in the TESB era, not between TPM and AOTC.

 

I dunno when they adopted this rule in canon. The Republic giving Jedi the legal right to recruit children while denying it to other Force sects thus creating the situation in The Acolyte should be response to the tyranny of the Sith otherwise I feel it is very hard to justify but the no attachments rule can be much older then the existence of the Sith in canon.

But Vader wasn't irredeemably evil, Dooku was executed by Anakin at the behest of the Emperor rather then be given the chance (and his very truthful information he gave about his master to Obi-Wan fell on deaf ears), quite a few of the Inquisitors proved redeemable in the end, as did Ventress and Quinlan.

In Legends quite a few Exiles other then Ajunta Pall, Freedon Nadd and Exar Kun went pretty irredeemably evil. Where Ajunta Pall eventually saw the futility of his ways, we got a fair few Force Ghosts who believe in the Dark Side after spending several millenia conciously alone with their thoughts to mull it over. But Darth Desolous is like that too and he is post attachment rules.

 

Considering that the Jedi philosophy has its basis in Buddhism, where attachment is one of the three poisons (along with ignorance and aversion), we should probably assume that non-attachment was a thing very early on in the Jedi Order.

The most widely spread version of the Jedi Code mantra, by the way, is:

There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no chaos, there is harmony.
There is no death, there is the Force.

...but it's not the only official version:

Emotion, yet peace.
Ignorance, yet knowledge.
Passion, yet serenity.
Chaos, yet harmony.
Death, yet the Force.
(Source: Wookieepedia)

You see, the Jedi don't deny the existence of their own emotions. They just look beyond them, because emotions are not the point - they are a function; indicators, warnings, reassurance etc. All part of our survival instincts. Not something to dwell on. So they just let them be. They don't feed their emotions because they have nothing to gain by doing so.
Instead, they focus their beings on mindfulness, knowledge and balance. That way lies true strength and harmony.

 

Who the ****'s opinion am i supposed to change?

 

Not mine. Cuz mine is the right one.

 

STAR WARS should have accessible heroes with good stories, and they should have struggles, shortcomings and lessons to learn in those stories. The organization of the Jedi within those stories should not have everything that creates a challenge or something to rebel against removed from it. That would make the stories boring.

 

The thing that most Star Wars stories about unorthodox Jedi characters have in common is that they ultimately show us why the Jedi Code is right. That's the real point in the end. They teach us Jedi truths in entertaining ways.

 

Disagreed. The Jedi Code remains true and correct in its presentation. Differing takes are just biased.

 

The Jedi Order survived for almost 25 thousands years where other religions were gone. Its a reason why and they are doing the right thing. The biased of certain creators dosent change the fact that the Jedi Order is right.

 

It should also be noted that Daoism is an intrinsic part of Jedi philosophy and thus not to be considered a deviation from it.

 

All I read in the last few pages is nothing but moralizing. I have come to the point where I couldn't care less what either the Jedi or Lucas think. They are all too full of themselves with their "no attachment" rules. I don't care if their dogma worked for millennia. Christianity "worked" for a while as well.
All I know is that Christianity has produced more bigots and criminals than possibly any other movement in human history.
Another thing I have noticed. Y'all like to go on and on about Buddhism and even Daoism. Has any ONE of you ever read some of the original teachings in Sanskrit or classical Chinese? If not, what gives you the illusion of deep knowledge that apparently makes you feel so high and mighty on those philosophies?
I have no clue about Sanskrit. But I have spent several semesters studying classical Chinese, including Daoist texts. But I in no way feel entitled to preach about its deeper meaning. Give me any given piece of writing by Lao Zi, and I just MAY, after hours of research with the right kind of books, be able to come up with something halfway intelligible in English. And yet I might be entirely wrong. At least I would not be arrogant enough to claim I have access to that higher knowledge as manifested in the few written texts available today and likely concocted from countless secondary sources or oral accounts.
Let's just regard SW as what it is. Entertainment for 20th and 21st century kids or young adults, not some profound philosophical insight. Y'all just get over yourselves.
Oh, and I am STILL not buying the "no attachment" concept!

 

Found the sith lord

 

Do you know what is my unorthodox Star Wars opinion? If George Lucas stopped making movies after the Original Trilogy and let the EU authors explore the rest of the universe as they saw fit — including the Prequel era, this whole discussion about the Jedi would not exist, and I suspect that the entire fandom would be much more united in general. I wish I could visit that universe.

 

Classic deflection tactic. And you call us preachy? We're just analyzing and discussing. Call it whatever you want, that is literally all we're doing. If that bugs you, why do you keep holding on? Be a Jedi and let go of your attachment to this discussion.

 

Jedi should carry feather dusters instead of lightsabers

bladed weapons are not for peace keepers


change my mind!

 

They cant defend the peace then and would live under a facist regime

 

You know, that is an interesting point. Once upon a time, about twenty years ago, I was thinking of ideas for a third Saga trilogy. One of those ideas was that some politicians would be in opposition to the Jedi and in one scene, one of them would point out the hypocrisy of the Jedi choosing a weapon as a symbol for peace.

Now, I personally don't think that's a hypocritical choice - I think it suits the Jedi that they use what is really a multipurpose tool that can illuminate, defend, deflect, attack, destroy, maybe even weld - but it's still an interesting topic to look at from different angles.

 

Reminds me of "The Day of the Doctor", when Ten and Eleven start brandishing their respective sonic screwdrivers like weapons, and the War Doctor has to remind them, "They're scientific instruments, not water pistols!"

 

Because the Jedi are the most moral people in the galaxy. Their entire mandate is to help others for no reward and without a sense of self. To live a life without worrying about your loved ones is correct. To accept death as part of life is right.

LUKE: "Master Yoda, you can't die."

YODA: "Twilight is upon me, and soon night must fall. That is the way of things. The way of the Force."

Where do you think the Sith came from?

Duḥkha is what Anakin suffers from with his attachment issues and he finally finds Sukha, which his son and the other Jedi found in their lives.

 

you saying Sith are an off-shoot of former Christians?


this thread gets more weird by the hour.

 

Well, why does Kylo Ren wield a Petrine Cross, hmmm?

 

Is it?
The Jedi Code would say that Anakin in TPM should not be trained. He is too old, he has an attachment to his mother and there is much fear in him.
So what would have happened if he was not trained? Palpatine's plan would be mostly unchanged as he did not really need Anakin. And if Anakin had been sent back to Tatooine to his mother, now that Palpatine is aware of him, he could grab him and train him as a Sith. So likely things would be worse.

The Jedi Code also says that Jedi should not have children, so no Luke or Leia. And no Luke then Vader would not turn good and kill Palpatine.

And what would the Jedi Code say about Vader? Yoda in RotS was clear, Vader is evil, Anakin is gone, he must be killed. Luke saw things differently and he was proven correct in the end.
Showing that the wise are not always.

Anakin married and had children and one could make the case that his marriage is what caused him to fall but his children were what saved him. So Anakin was first doomed but then saved by his attachments.

This is fiction and everything in this fiction is based on the whim of the creator/creators.

So if the creator says that the Jedi have existed for 25 000 years, that in of itself says nothing about how right or wrong they are. They could have been 100 % wrong all the time and still have existed for many millennia as long as this is what the creator wants.

In the film Battlefield Earth, the Phsyclos are a race of dimwits and imbeciles that are beaten by cave men flying 1000 year old Harrier jets. And yet we are told that they conquered Earth in nine minutes and have conquered galaxies.

From what little I have read, for most of their existence, the Jedi did not have these strict no-attachment rules. They only came into play relatively recently so for most of these 25 000 years Jedi were allowed to marry and have children and people could start to train when they were adults.

Lastly, what does the PT and OT say about the Jedi's rules?
At the end of RotS, Yoda and Obi-Wan have infant Luke and Leia to deal with. They know that Anakin was too old when he started to train, he had attachments. So could they not think that Luke and Leia must be trained younger and to make sure that they do not have these "bad" attachments?
But they do not do this, they send both away to live with families, in Leia's case, one that adopts her and in Luke's case, a step-family. So Luke and Leia could then develop these "bad" attachments.
I know that since the OT was made first, they could not really do other but the characters in the story does not know that.
So why?
Did they think that their code had been too restrictive and maybe they could be a bit more loose with the rules? Possibly.

Bye.
Old Stoneface