The Jedi problem: who are we fighting?

The Jedi don't have to know certain aspects of the dark side in order to counter the Sith. This is an assumption that the dark side is stronger, which Yoda tells Luke that in fact it is not. Even if the Jedi allowed themselves excess to the Sith teachings, how many of them would corrupt themselves and confuse their Jedihood with learning the ways of the Sith? A lot of them would, which is why they can't allow themselves to go outside of their arena.

Palpatine served as a tempter as far as Anakin was concerned, and Anakin listened instead of listening to Yoda or Mace, which why he ends up as an artificial man.

 

how is compassion a byproduct? that's plain silly. it's central to a jedi's life and you call it a byproduct?
attachment per se isn't caring about yourself. it's being close with people. egotism is caring about yourself, get your terminology right.
caring for yourself and caring for others. if you do not care about yourself, you will die, mentally and physically. you stop feeding yourself, you stop loving yourself, you stop taking your pain seriously. in the end you die. caring about yourself is prerequisite to caring about others. if you aren't fully there and in the world, your care will remain empty because you will exhaust yourself easily. the sacrifices you make will remain empty because you force yourself to sacrifice these things. a forced sacrifice is worth nothing.

 

Vaders_Cape posted:

I think the strongest Jedi's were ones who had confronted and assimilated their own dark sides - it's important to know your weaknesses so that others can't exploit them.



Wise words indeed. At the end of ROTJ, this is what is achieved on a more universal level. The fact that the prophecy says that The Sith would be defeated and balance brought to the force, rather than the dark side being eliminated completely, is massively significant in understanding the central message of Star Wars.

The dark side can't be eliminated, because it exists everywhere and in all of us. Without darkness, there is no light. Without suffering there can be no happiness. In thr PT, the jedi were unbalanced in the force, because they were elevating the dark side to monumental proportions by telling everyone they must avoid all dark side emotions completely, rather than accepting that they exist and dealing with them in a balanced way.

Luke was the first in a new breed of jedi - more balanced as a person, if not as powerful in the traditional sense as the "old school" jedi who went before him.

 

The Jedi never completely knew who they were fighting because there was not enough room in the script

 

The sith are no where to be seen for a thousand years. None of the Jedi we see in PT had ever encoutered a sith before TPM. The republic and the jedi order crew stagnant. Easy to see why they would forget about the sith. Same sort of thing as in LOTR. The evil has been away for such a long time that you simply forget about it. It no longer feels relevant. Other matters look more important. And when the sith finally do return, no one believes it.

And finally a minor detail; I don't think Jedi surpress their feelings (except maybe for Anakin) but rather, they don't let their feelings get in the way. They let go of their passions before their passions get a hold of them. Like Buddhist monks in a way.

 

Absolutely my point, DarthDuckie, but expressed so much clearer! This even exists in physics, positive and negative (protons and electrons if memory serves), all of the universe is about balance. Even with regards to emotions (which is the topic of many a board) - to eliminate all emotion and passion in favour of 'logical and rational thought' is just as unwise and dangerous as to completely submit to one's emotions.
Luke was indeed the first of a new breed and a stronger, wiser breed of jedi for knowing how easy it is to fall and to be strong enough to face the dark side withing himself and control it. The old order were a classic example of the 3 monkeys see no evil, hear no evil, etc. To acknowledge all that is out there and within oneself and learn to live with it is to be in the strongest position rather than to hitch up one's petticoats and run away screaming.
Cheers, DD.

 

A Jedi who cares for others and not themselves, is a compassionate Jedi. By not being selfish and by not thinking of themselves, do we have a Jedi Knight. And as a byproduct of not thinking of themselve, they have compassion. It is essential part of their lives, but it's a byproduct of being selfless.

Don't tell that to me. Tell that to Lucas. Lucas is the one who says attachment is about yourself. I'm going of what he says.

The thing is that Anakin thinks that he cannot live without someone and that's simply not true. People lose their loved ones a lot. Not everyone dies of a broken heart. People move on and accept that nature or fate has removed that which they care about. What Anakin does is attach himself to people. His reasons for saving people are motivated by his greed and inability to accept change. We've gone over this before. This is where his failings are. We as human beings are able to accept change. We as human being accept death. We don't like it, but we accept it.

No one says that you don't have to stop loving yourself. But what is being said is that we as a society must accept that change is good. Change is important. There are some things that we can fight and some things that we cannot fight. We have to accept these things. We cannot be willing to sell our soul for power. We can care and love people, but we cannot do things which are unnatrual. Which are wrong.

Anakin was not ready to be married. What would he have done if Padme divorced him? What if she fell out of love with him? He can't force her to stay. He can't force her to love him. That's what he's trying to do. He's trying to force her to live. He's trying to exert his will over her. He is trying to fight fate. And for someone who is connected to the Force, they cannot afford to be greedy and selfish. They cannot become attached to people. They can love. But as Lucas defines it, they cannot do what Anakin did.

Once again, I cite the difference between the relationship between Han Solo and Leia Organa vs Anakin Skywalker and Padme Amidala. Han & Leia's relationship is the kind of relationship that Lucas is talking about. That's a compassionate relationship. One without attachments. Where fear of loss, of change does not control their actions. Compassion, love and acceptence strengthen the relationship of the former. While greed, passion and denial weaken the relationship of the latter. Han is willing to accept change. Anakin isn't willing to accept it. Han is willing to let go of Leia, despite that he thinks that he will be on the short end of the stick. Anakin isn't willing to let go of Padme, thinking that if he is all powerful, he will cheat death.

 

I have to repectfully suggest that if the Jedi are meant to have a flaw, it is not in regards to their outlook on attachment. And, sorry if this post runs on a bit...*S8

Someone earlier noted that the Jedi talk abot attachment has echoes of Buddhist philosophy. I totally agree! It also has echoes in Stoicism... and many OTHER philosophies, across Easter and Western cultures. GL is clearly aware of this - in addition to his references to Joseph Campbell, this attachment thing comes up again and again in his interviews, etc.

I don't pretend to be an expert on philosophy. And the concept IS not one that "comes easy". But this idea of clearing onesself of attachment...is, perhaps perversely, NOT about clearing onesself of love, or compassion, or emotion, which we tend to associate WITH attachment. Not at ALL! One is not to become attachment-free by becoming indifferent to people, by ceasing to care. One is supposed to still care deeply about doing right by folks, about caring for them, about helping them and being tolerant, and so forth. In fact, one could argue, one is supposed to have those feelings about ALL people, to a greater extent than most of us very-attached folks do NOW!

I am more familiar with the Stoics than the Buddhists, so let me use them as an example - again, not claiming expert status here, not at ALL! But, if you read Stoics, you see that it is about acknowledging that YOU are not "in charge". It is about realizing the transitory, almost illusory nature of the ever changing material world, embracing the fact that change is inevitable and natural, that we are not really in charge of when we live or die, nor when death claims those around us. That does not mean we fatalistically fall into inaction - one is expected to do the right thing, and one can certainly ACT to help those around us (for example, Stoicism wouldn't require one to forego medical treatment, or suggest that you should LET bad things happen to those around you...not at all!). But, rather, one is to accept that life is about change, that a greater "force" than ourselves is in control, and that what matters is only how WE behave... that we keep ourselves good and true (which involves treating others well). In the end, only our character matters (not praise, glory, material wealth, external trappings). Appreciate every moment you have with those you love...but understand that the time will come when you ARE separated, and accept that this is the way of all things.

Sounds a BIT like what we have heard from Yoda and company, no? I think so...*S* And again, this is not unique to Stoics, by any means. As has been pointed out, similar themes are expressed in Buddhism and elsewhere. It seems pretty clear that GL drew on this mindset in shaping his image of the Jedi (granted, his Jedi take this to an unusual extreme... I think we could have a whole OTHER discussion about whether the Jedi "cheat"...*S* after all, it is my understanding that one is to foster this ability to resist over-attachment not by being removed from temptation (taken from parents, etc!) but by disciplining the mind..but I digress!).

If GL had intended this philosophy to be the Jedi's fatal flaw, he had plenty of chances to show it. But he DIDN'T. Think about it... it would have been easy to make the conflict in ROTS all about Padme in a DIFFERENT sense. Imagine the Jedi "discover" Anakin's relationship, and demand that he choose..give up Padme or give up your Jedi "powers" (some sort of midichlorian cleansing or some such thing! *S*). Sidious offers an alternative. Anakin renounces the Jedi. This would clearly make Anakin's break with the Jedi a referrendum on their "attachment" policy. Other similiar scenarios are imaginable.

BUT... instead, Anakin falls precisely because he CANNOT let go. Because the thought of Padme's dying is too much for him to bear. In fact, I take it further... there is something Anakin fears MORE than Padme's death... it is how HE would FEEL if she were to die. Anakin is AFRAID to feel that pain. He will do anyting to avoid it! This is

 

Cool Thread!

For my part I think the blindness of the Jedi was a learned behavior of caution.

"I do not fear the dark side as you do!" Anakin Ep3

In order for me to rationalize I have to go to EU a bit. I would wager that when they first learned about the darkside and the first Jedi fell away and was bannished, the Jedi were wary. Then as others examined it and fell away also and the Sith were formed; which led to the great war; the Jedi most likely adopted a policy of no dark side knowledge other than than the emotional impulses that takes one there. They probably only sense the dark side because it's diametrically opposed to them, not because they understand it from personal experience.

After the Sith Wars and only Darth Bane survived, the Jedi likely thought that the Sith had been wiped out because the bulk of the conflict was over. What they failed to realise is that the Sith were destroyed not because of the superior skill of the Jedi but because they turned on each other. What this tells me is that the dark side; although more powerful; is inherrently weaker because of its' reliance on passion. And in the end even the rule of two wasn't successful.

 

Would also like to respectfully submit that there is a bit too much reliance on the question of who "wins" various physical confrontations, as if that always demonstrates "who is more powerful"...or even, for that matter, who is right. I think this is really antithetical to some of the key concepts in SW...

Count Dooku knocks Obi Wan unconscious...but is then bested by Anakin. However, Anakin is then bested by Obi Wan. Hmmm. Sidious "defeats" Yoda (or, at the least, Yoda retreats!).... but Mace bested Sidious. And wasn't Dooku able to hold his own, for some time, against Yoda? However, Mace is taken off guard by Anakin. Maul kills Qui Gonn...but is then beaten by Qui-Gonn's Padawan.... by now, I think our heads should be spinning if we think that combat always comes down to some neat, "who has the higher power rating" standard. A LOT of factors enter in. Where the fight takes place. The intent of the combatants. The CHARACTER of the combatants, etc.

I also think it is wrong to focus on the power of particular practitioners. That is.... once GL decided there would always 'only' be two Sith, it was a practical necessity that any particular Sith be VERY powerful. Otherwise, how could the story function? The Sith would always be in BIG trouble if they limited their numbers, if they WEREN'T made very powerful - by Lucas, not the Force! *S*

Beyond that... isn't the question which side of the FORCE is stronger, not which INDIVIDUALS are stronger? The Dark Side leads to pain, suffering, betrayal, murder, despair, conquest, enslavement, loneliness, and all that is negative. It is, as Yoda noted, quicker, easier, more seductive....but it is ultimately empty and consuming.

Shadow


PS - I think it worth noting too that Sidious' greatest victories have nothing to do with Lightsabers or Force powers... his rise to REAL power is political! It is due to his clever manuvering, his manipulation of people (not just Anakin), his scheming, his planning, etc. You can perhaps attribute some of this to a sort of Dark Side-cunning, but really, Sidious is dangerous not because of his lightsaber skills.. or not MOSTLY because of such!... but because of his tremendous lust for power and his cleverness in working "the system" to attain it!