What Makes A Sith?

Whats the basic definition of how one becomes a sith? it can't be just being able to use the dark side, becasue many dark jedi have done that.

 

It's like being a member of a club or maybe a freemason.

 

That depends on whether you think of Sith as a "title" or a "state of being" and whether you differentiate between "Sith" and "Sith Lord". Also, the difference between the Sith species and the Sith Order/Dark Lords of the Sith is an important one.

Anakin Skywalker became a Sith Lord simply because he gave in to the Dark Side and the current Sith Master (Darth Sidious) declared that he was a Sith Lord. He didn't really have time to learn any Sith teachings or make any pilgrimages to Korriban or the like. Acknowledgement from a "higher power" of some sort -does- seem to play a part in becoming a Sith though (or at least in becoming a "Dark Lord of the Sith"), as far back as Exar Kun and Ulic Qel-Droma, they weren't -really- "Sith Lords" until they were acknowledged by the spirits of the ancient Sith Lords. In later years (ie the "Rule of Two" millenia) this seems to have been replaced by simply being acknowledged by your Sith Master.

Most people agree that to -really- be a Sith you have to be a user of the Dark Side of the Force, must have some familiarity with the ancient Sith teachings and subscribe to the Sith viewpoints and goals, and have been formally acknowledged as a Sith by some higher source (see above). However in the absence of active "higher sources" it seems possible to become Sith simply by meeting the first two criteria.

However the easiest way to be a Sith is to be born as a member of the race that shares that name.

 

so its just a difference of being recognized by others as a sith lord then. its just a title.

 

In some ways, yes. It's possible to be called a Sith Lord without really knowing much/any of the Sith teachings, however that's a lot like being a member of a church without really following any of the precepts of said church. In other words, you can call yourself (or be called) a Sith Lord, but to live up to it, you have to meet deeper criteria.

It's a little confusing, but there's really a lot of different kinds of Sith, and it's really dependent on the time period you're talking about. It's hard to find a simple, basic definition of "Sith" that encompasses -all- of the various time periods of the Star Wars setting.

 

You really need some form or Sith teachings. Either from a Sith Lord, a Sith Spirit or a some sort of Sith artifact like a holocron.

 

I've got to disagree with Jmac1, here: Anakin wasn't declared a Sith simply because Palpatine said so. It wasn't nearly that arbitrary or divorced from Sith principles. Anakin was declared a Sith because he had just pledged himself to Palpatine's will and service, and Palpatine had agreed to take him on as an apprentice in the ways of the Sith.

 

The easiest definition is that to be a Sith you need to be recognized as one by another. To become Dark Lord of the Sith, all other currently active Sith must acknowledge you as one. This, however, does not reduce the meening of the title. Sith are, by their very nature, not too keen on admitting other to be equally or more powerfull than themselves. Also they know their history, that Sith always want to become stronger and more powerfull than their allies, mostly by sabering them when they look in the wrong direction. All good reason for the Sith to be careful with their choice of allies and apprentices.



/Charlii

 

Oh, I don't think we're disagreeing, I just forgot to mention the whole pledge of fealty bit. But the fact remains that Anakin didn't really have any "Sith teachings" that we know of before he was declared to be a "Dark Lord of the Sith". Thus, knowing Sith teachings are -not- necessarily a criteria for having the title. However you could likely say that -gaining- said teachings is very much a criteria for -keeping- said title.

 

But one would also need to be versed in the Dark Side as well.

 

Hm. Well my point wasn't that it wasn't just because Palpatine said so. It was because Vader was going to learn the ways of the Sith. Thus, it's not just the title, it's the teachings.

It does, however, have to do with the organization. Otherwise, what's to keep someone going to Korriban and becoming a Sith during the rise of the Empire era, while there are already two active Sith? It's a club, a fraternity, a religious order that requires ordination and rights of initiation...most of the time. Resurrectors of the order are obviously operating in a vaccuum. When there's no "real Sith" to measure you by, and you pledge yourself to the teaching and the resurrection of the order, you're the closest thing to the "real Sith." That's what gets me about this "pretenders to the title" bullcrap about the Legacy-era Sith: it's no different than the resurrection of any real life organization, religious teachings, fraternal order...it's not much different than the creation of said order. It happens often in the real world. Why it can't happen in Star Wars blows my mind.

 

I don't think the order has ever been revived from nothingness, bit by bit the different orders through time are retconned together, soon we will have an unbroken line from Adas to Krayt.
That's how I interpret LFLs actions at least...



/Charlii

 

I guess you're right. Even Exar Kun was ordained by spirits. Lumiya was taught by Vader.

 

I know it's cool to know but I think it takes a bit of the mystery away.

 

We at least get to hold onto the mystery of what exactly "Sith teachings" are.

 

To be a Sith you must be a force-user that embraces the Dark Side and claims or is to admitted the Sith Order. From the time of Darth Bane on there was the Rule of Two, which meant there was only 2 Sith Lords. Which is one reason I don't buy the Lumiya was taught by Vader line. He taught her force techniques, Jedi ones likely.

Back in TPM, when Qui-Gon Jinn was reporting to the council on Darth Maul, he stated that Maul was well versed in "the Jedi arts". Which makes sense, since the modern Sith Order was founded by rogue Jedi who fell to the Dark Side. But Sith knowledge is passed from Master to Apprentice, from Sith Lord to Sith Lord. The Rule of Two prevents the wider teaching of Sith knowledge. Vader and Palpatine trained, essentially, Dark Jedi, not minor Sith. That path ended over 1000 years before Lumiya came on the scene.

So yes, Lumiya is a Sith (much as I wish the editors/writers/whoever would have let the Sith die and come up with something original). But she is not part of the Sith Line of Darth Bane that ended with Palpatine and Vader. That line was ended by the Chosen One. The Sith Order she is trying to create will be a pale shadow of that one, since, from what I understand, she has no access to the knowledge that most powerful line of Sith developed, relaying instead on older information and teachings.

editted because I left words out

 

[Cryptic]Expect a lot more of this question to be answered perhaps in the Darth Bane book...[/Cryptic]

 

Lumiya trained briefly by the two most powerful Sith in history, Sidious and Vader, and completed her knowledge from holocrons and ancient teachings. Luke trained briefly with two of the most powerful Jedi at the time of the purge, and completed his knowledge using ancient holocrons and teachings.

Note I'm not really disagreeing with you. I think Luke's Jedi Order would have been much better off if they'd had more post-Ruusan knowledge available to them. They lost out on 1000 years of very relevant information and tradition. Lumiya has been trained initially in Bane's tradition, but seems herself to want to move away from it. She's reinventing the order, or at least starting from scratch/where her ancient predecessors left off.

 

True, but the point I'm making is that Vader and Palpatine nevertaught her any Sith Techniques. They trained her in the ways of the force, in some of the Jedi arts even, tainted with the Dark Side. But Sith knowledge at that time was reserved for the two Sith Lords, as per the Rule of Two. So all that knowledge from Darth Bane to Sidious is something she has no access to. She has to start from an earlier, cruder point, which is why her Sith Order can not match that the one that was destroyed.

 

Two points:
1) Vader was training her as an apprentice should he one day overthrow Palpatine. All the hands were taught SOME Sithliness, or at least a great deal of training in the use of the dark side.
2) You're assuming some great innovation in the intervening 1000 years, as opposed to simply a perpetuation of Sith techniques and building up for the creation of the Empire. The Jedi, for example, don't seem to have really changed much in knowledge over the 1000 years since Ruusan. In addition, Lumiya's order - and Krayt's, whether they're separate or linked somehow - seem to seek movement in a separate direction from Bane's, so I don't think it could necessarily never be as powerful as Bane's order, simply not as used to being Sith as Bane's order was, seeing as we've really only seen a 100 year progression of Lumiya's way of doing things.

 

She also had Adas' holocron, which is like Sith teachings incarnate, and a bunch of other things (she knew how to take souveniers )

 

She probably hired Indiana Jones.





















I think the idea of Indiana Jones on Korriban just gave me a nerdgasm.

 

Only Bane's Sith Order, personified in Darth Sidious, required the direct intervention of the Force itself in creating a Chosen One to destroy it. I'd say its got something the other Sith Orders lacked.

 

Or Plagieus messed up when trying to make the perfect apprentice.

 

Depends on the outcome of Legacy (novels), no?

What if he (if he really created Anakin that is) actually created BOTH the Chosen One AND the Sithari at the same time?

He just didn't know it...