  |
|
|
|
To Be a Jedi: Part 2Read the article this discussion is about
This archived discussion is "read only".
» JediJinSu - To Love or Not to Love? Actually, I think this article is particularly illuminating when it discusses the part of the Jedi Order Secluding themselves in an "Ivory Tower" cut off from the world. We even see this in The Phantom Menace. I believe it was Yoda that said that "too sure of themselves the Jedi have become, even those who are older and wiser." which would indicate that Yoda recognized that things were not necessarily the way they should be. The Force was out of balance.I think that by not allowing a being to fully reach their potential for love, whether that be a marriage with children or taking care of animals or what have you, you deny a part of yourself. You must give of yourself in a truly loving relationship and by denying yourself, and hiding things it makes you start to resent the life you have chosen. Resentment leads to hate, and we all know what path that leads to. ;) -- posted by JediJinSu » metark - RE: To be a Jedi: Part 2 Another very interesting and thought provoking article.I would not normally quote the bible but I think it applies here. In Mathew's gospel, it says, "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." This is what I am reminded of when I think about Anakin's words on the barge. The old republic Jedi believe in the singleness of purpose and don't want the distractions of material things or love. This may be rooted in this passage and, as you mentioned, the need to give up family to follow Christ, just as a child give up his/her family to give themselves to the Jedi teaching. At the risk of getting off on another subject, your discussion of the Jedi not being able to love also reminded of the Catholic church not allowing priests to marry in an attempt to keep one's focus on the Church. Certainly 99.9% of priests are able to do so, be we have seen recently the problems caused by those who haven't. The debate in Christian religions and with the Jedi is whether being married would be a distraction, keeping one from serving the true Master or, as you suggest, would it allow you to serve more deeply by truly experience life through union. The Jedi, like the Catholic church, have a long tradition that will not change unless it is forced to. Metark -- posted by metark » Dedalus47 - Re: To Love or Not to Love? In response to message posted by JediJinSu:Well, I tried to make it semi-illuminating. There did seem to be a fair amount of confusion about what exactly Lucas was getting at, and even what having no attachments more than likely means. The Jedi are a bit too sure of themselves. They've been defenders of the Republic for a thousand generations. There has been no major galactic conflict in quite some time apparently. The only enemy that ever gave them a run for their money - the Sith - appear to have come back, but they have been believed to be extinct for centuries. The Jedi have major aura and prestige in the old Republic. And like it or not, all these things do contribute to certainty and a very certain way of looking at things. I don't think the Jedi are all in the wrong in their Code, but again, anything that cannot adapt to new situations that inevitably arise often run into major snags. I understand their stance on deeply personal love, but love that is threatened to be smothered out tends to burn that much more brightly. And as I will get into later, if you're in love, you're in love. You can't exactly decide not to be, because it was never a conscious decision to begin with. -- posted by Dedalus47 » Dedalus47 - Re: RE: To be a Jedi: Part 2 In response to message posted by metark:Please quote away. I'm not above taking from anything I need, as I've proven thus far! And the quote was highly relevant. I think this is the Jedi's line of thought as well. Strictly my opinion, but it seems there must be someway around this dilemma. After all, the Force is not really God - apparently not in an orthodox theistic sense anyway - and Padme is not manna. Not to mention, the Force is obviously the ebb and flow of the universe itself, not something that is standing outside it guiding it from on high. And this means Padme is as much a part of the Force as anything, so I think I can get away with what I said. I remember Joseph Campbell once saying how that true spirituality comes from that union of matter and spirit, as opposed to compartmentalizing everything. That's why Yoda's quote about luminous beings vs. crude matter hasn't sounded exactly right to me. After all, the Force grows out of crude matter, and even becomes incarnate in crude matter in Anakin. I can only give him the benefit of the doubt and say that Luke was so hopelessly mired in crude matter and nothing but crude matter, Yoda had to go in the opposite direction to balance out the situation. Yes, Jedi can survive after death, but only in relation to crude matter! After all, every time we see a Jedi ghost, it's against the backdrop of the material galaxy. It has to be that way, like a gestalt impression. Otherwise everything would just be a neverending blur of luminosity. Granted, many people even today think that is a preferable form of existence, but I certainly wouldn't. But anyway, I agree with the bad situation in the Catholic church too. On one hand, I can appreciate the symbolism of being married to the church and so on, but on the other, I know anything pushed to an extreme rebounds as an opposite. The preacher's kids are always the wildest ones in town, as the cliche goes. The more codes one sets up to put two people apart, the more they grow determined to be together. It's odd, but many people, such as Brin, seem to honestly believe that Lucas is just recommending the Jedi way of life with no reservations whatsoever. I think he was just giving us something to think about it. It seems odd that we would go along with it himself, considering the importance he places on family and children. I certainly think he believes in letting go and detachment, but the important thing to remember is that this doesn't mean sinking into a faceless mass of indistinct nothingness. -- posted by Dedalus47
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion. |
|
|
|
