How do you interpret the prophecy of the chosen one

Even if we were to ignore Lucas' quotes, three force wielders called Anakin The Chosen One. The Son and Daughter, who were embodiments of the force, and their Father, who also had the ability to see both the past and future from their 'pocket dimension' known as Mortis.

The Son himself even broke the "laws of time" in order to turn Anakin to the dark side. These beings were immensely powerful and knowledgeable.

 

Ah yes, the age-old question:

The "chosen one bringing balance to the force" prophecy means simply:

A person (Anakin Skywalker) was destined to destroy the sith. The Force is unbalanced becasue the Sith's core belief is that they are the masters of the Force, the Force must bend its will to the user, as opposed to the traditional Jedi order of go-with-the-flow and live with the will of the force (like hippies living alongside nature, a methodology that got corrupted in the Jedi order's final years once they became military leaders in the Clone Wars.)

An article at making star wars under the "you seek knowledge" section explains the whole thing beautifully. Instead of comparing the jedi and sith to two sides of a scale that need to be balanced, think of a cymbal (part of a drum set) that needs to be perfectly horizontal. The sith are trying to tip the balance their way but the jedi must live with the force evenly. When Anakin destroyed Palpatine and himself he essentially removed the last remaining Sith, (aka, the individuals tipping the "cymbal.")

With that said, I have no idea where Disney is taking it with Kylo Ren and Snoke entering the picture. My best guess is that the Force got unbalanced unintentionally once Luke trained Ben Solo. If I was part of the Lucas story group, I would not settle with this repeated storyline. I would go for something much more tantalizing: what if the living Force has something else in mind and needs stronger dark side/light side users? Hence, the Knights of Ren and Rey's incredible awakening.

 

First we need to decide, because a prophecy has been made does it mean it will become true? The movie establishes a prophecy made by a person who foretold or foresaw future events. There credibility is unspecified so we the viewer must assume credibility to be based on previous successful foresight or foretelling of future events.
I asked if the Chosen one was destined.

In the absence of a destiny, the prophecy is a prediction, a foretelling. With the inclusion of destiny the prophecy is a foreseeing. As all events in the life of the destined chosen one must happened in a way preordained culminating in the completion of bringing balance, the prophecy to which we refer with the inclusion of destiny then relates to future events as seen.
If destiny is attributed to the chosen one the foreteller has foreseen events that have not yet (but will) transpire. Destiny then becomes more clear. The seer literally foresaw events, that will later be carried out. The events are, from the perspective of the chosen one merely being repeated.

How that prophecy is fulfilled is not specified, so any side that interprets it relative too there own needs at the time will attribute to anyone that makes an impact, fulfilment of the prophecy. You could say, any prophecy that does not specifically name the person, the acts they will commit and the impact that there act committed will have on the landscape become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So perspective is important, as is making a distinction.
Fulfilment of destiny and subjective self-fulfilment are mutually exclusive. If we apply destiny, events have happened and will happen in no other way then how they were foreseen.

 

Well said sir.

Interesting. I have a theory about the Force being drained - that this is what happened to Jakku many moons ago causing its change and that this draining could happen on an individual and even galactic scale. Bit far fetched, but perhaps there's something in that which links into your idea? You're right, it would be better to create a different story rather than just "destroy the bad guys who are spreading evil".

 

@master_shaitan I wonder, if we are to precede with a discussion on how we interpret the prophecy, we keep our opinion to what was committed to screen.

These type's of comment really do not further the discussion. I would also like to draw your attention to your earlier comments in the hope you recognise the merit of putting forth your own point of view regardless of how it aligns.

Because just to be clear you yourself are now espousing and quote a "massive difference to what George Lucas laid out" by your own words.

 

Just to be clear, no I'm not - I am saying that I don't think there is going to be a physical dark side source/well, thus the films won't deviate from what Lucas presented to us as the Force.

Clearer still, I'm not suggesting we can't form our own points of view but that it's worth while understanding what the creator wanted to show us. This then allows for a greater understanding of what is really going on.

 

You suggest a red ink blue ink in relation to the force, if red represent the dark side, and we presuppose unbalance inline with your view that the dark side creates imbalance.

In accordance with the prophecy "one will come who will bring balance" the chosen one will arrive at a time there is imbalance. There will be a time the force normally comprised as you describe

Will become unbalanced comprising mostly of red, red representing the dark side.

I would conclude if one was to except your initial premise, a energy/force comprised mostly of red/darkside would be very much in line with a physical dark side.

If we transpose this to emotion or bad energy

Created by the collective that merges with the energy field becoming the force.

You would still very much be talking about a physical source. Your arguments consistently seem to unforesee the wider implications of what you are saying.

Your point ultimately concluded there to be a physical (energy source) created by the collective consciousness of the people, thats becomes polluted.

 

@master_shaitan moving passed our recent issues. Having read some of your recent theories you really may benefit with reading more on this.

I have included a link for you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yin_and_yang
There has been years of though dedicated to the ideas we ourselves are debating certainly relating to balance and opposing forces. You clearly are prepared to broaden your initial view and adopt ideas that fit better into the broader picture. You may find this illuminating?

 

Not "my view". George Lucas' view:

"As evil begins to take over, it pushes the Force out of balance".

The person who created Star Wars and all the imagery and dialogue that we're debating.

There were forseen dark times. This prediction came true. The force likely provided someone with this vision because, with everything being connected, it provided an insight into the gradual rise of evil in the galaxy.

...which is what causes imbalance. When evil takes over good. It destroys the natural order of the galaxy.

The Force is made by energy created by living things. That is indisputable.
This energy is then likely, in basic terms, dark, light and grey.

No. The notion being discussed about "the source of the Dark Side" is a suggestion that the Dark Side is an external power, originating from one source - such as the Devil or something similarly silly. I'm saying, as the films emphatically show us, that the force is created by all living things. The source is everything and everyone. The Dark Side, whether this manifests itself as a physical pool of energy or not, is very much a product of the emotions, actions and mindsets of living beings.

My point is very simple and the one clearly shown in the films: The Force is created by all living things. All living things create the light, dark and grey energy that goes into the Force.
For harmony to exist, which the galaxy desires and by extension as does the Force, dark cannot dominate light.
The light side represents the energy, ways of living, etc that are optimal for harmony and growth.
The dark side, though it will always exist, is a destructive, cancerous energy.
The will of the Force desires an end to the domination of the Dark Side.

 

@master_shaitan Did you read the link?

 

I don't need to look at a Wiki page about Yin/Yang. It's a very well known philosophy.
In terms of Star Wars, the battle between dark and light and good and evil is central.
I'm not sure what your point is.

 

@master_shaitan If you read the page you may understand the point more?
You say the collective consciousness of people create the energy. When the energy is most polluted that the Energy is mostly comprised of negative energy and the energy itself is the force which itself has a function.
"use the force Luke"

Do you see that this description would constitute a dark side source. What you seem to be doing is separating the creation of the energy from the energy all the while attributing power to the energy that force users then use.

Let me make a suggestion in line with your beliefs that might add to your view.
If there are a small amount of Sith that create fear impacting the collective so there emotions (negative) then create pollution, which slowly infects the energy (force) which is then intern drawn on by the force wilder, this would go so way to explain how imbalance works in-term’s of why 2 Sith can destroy all the Jedi. If they are drawing on the same resource but it is now all bad (energy/force) the Jedi’s strength would itself be being polluted while the Siths would be growing every increasing.

 

No. I know what Yin and Yang is.

No, I say that all living things creates the energy. The collective consciousness is the term I give to explain the will of the Force.

I don't know what you mean.
I've said that all living things create the Force - that is the source of the Force, the light and the dark.
I don't buy the notion of one source of the Dark Side, such as a devil like figure. That's all I have ever said about that.

Again, I don't follow.
My point, and Lucas', is very very simple.
The Sith imbalance the Force because they spread evil everywhere. And because evil is easy to come by, it spreads like a contagion.
2 Sith were able to take down the Jedi because they were able to spread evil everywhere. The more evil there was the more powerful the sith became.
When this happened the Force itself was of course impacted by the greater negative energy over the positive. (It is also why the Jedi's powers were limited as the Dark Side took over). But Luke was THE NEW HOPE. And he was able to help the light side fight back and, through redeeming his father, eventually displace the dark side so that it no longer dominated resulting in a return to harmony - a state where symbiosis can thrive.

 

Lets move past this now this discussion has become very stale, also you have not actually addressed the point being made.
Let me reframe it. You presently say all living things create the energy, When the energy is most polluted the Energy is mostly comprised of negative energy and the energy itself is the force which itself has a function.

Assuming the force to be mostly comprised of bad energy or red staying with your metaphor and the force is drawn on by the force users this would actually meet the criteria of a

And If one side of the physical source / energy or force is bad

And it becomes polluted to the point it is all bad you would have to say, the force while in its most corrupted state is mostly bad.
Though your saying there is no isolate dark side in the absence of ligh/blue, a fully corrupted mostly bad force would actually be just that. A physical source of mostly bad energy / corrupted force.
I cannot clarify this further. the force would not have to be singular as in an isolate source of dark and light, for in its most corrupted state there would be no difference. it would be a physical source that the force user by your definition would draw on.

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 31, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 31, 2016 ---

@master_shaitan This is a irrelevant point now, I was using it as an example that wether or not you realise your point of view has implications that can conflict with George Lucas. I highlight this because you regularly refer to George when you feel you arguments do not stand on there own merit.

George understood that the best use of a prophecy is an interpretive one. One that can be both interpreted and misinterpreted. That Is why it is none specific and broadly applicable. "there will be one who will bring balance"
The interpretation and misinterpretations throughout the latter movies are very much purposeful story telling. Centred around this point.

 

Says he who can't explain what the balance of the Force is after 36 pages...

 

maybe you didn't to understand when I explained last time, would you like me to clarify again?

 

Feel free.

 

When we are talking balance of the force, we should start with, people that unset the balance of the force are force users.
As the saga focus's on specifically force users, and this is a discussion on the saga's prophecy. We have no reference for any none force user having any real impact, that is contained in the saga.

When there are no force users to upset the Neutral force (as I see it) its homeostasis is neutral and balanced. None force users make no real impact on the force that we have seen.
When there is an equal proportion (like yin and yang) of each side, there is balance. This would be where we digress in to a "but thats not literal numbers debate" so I will address this.
If you agree with my premise that in the absence of force Users the force is balanced. There needs to be a number of force users to begin with that upset its homeostasis.
Any number of force user would effect its natural state, causing unbalance. It would return to a some what natural state if opposing sides counterbalance each other, or are removed.

Numbers are relevant. In the absence of any number of force user there is balance. So any number of force users, not in equal proportion cause unbalance. How a force user implements there force ability to though is important.
We have no way of measuring the impact a Sith has in damage so the only real way we can articulate in a discussion like this, the effect, is to acknowledge one Sith can do more damage than none, therefore a natural conclusion to this would be two Sith can do more damage then one. This becomes recourse incorporating and acknowledging both number and action i.e., how a force user employs there power to be significant.

Re-emergence has to be a factor in a tale that needs both good and bad polar opposites for there to be a conflict to resolve. As there will always be a need for both sides. Either side can therefore never maintain complete control. As a natural conclusion when either side has a proportionate level of control it is at its most balanced. Void of being able to remove all parts reverting it back to its natural state of homeostasis.

I hope this goes some way as to explain how I see balance of the force.

 

1. JJ and Lucas have both asserted that anyone can use the force and some people use it unconsciously.
2. It's called "balance of the force". If it were about those that use the force it would be called "balance of the force users".
3. There can never be no force users. There always have and always will be force users. Everyone can use the force.
4. Why would the Jedi or San Tekka believe that balance can be restored by destroying the Sith?
5. If balance is about equal proportion of force use/damage/whatever you're suggesting between Jedi and Sith then why does the force go out of balance as the Sith emerge and evil spreads? Surely the force is moving towards balance by your "logic" in the pt?
6. I dont agree that only Jedi and Sith/force users impact the balance. When evil takes over, there is imbalance. Anyone can achieve that whether they use the force of not. It's just easier for the Sith to do it than others.
7. Lucas specifically states that Anakin brought balance when he destroyed the Sith. He also stated the growing evil pushes the force out of balance. Ignore this at your peril. But at the very least you should realise this makes my suggestion the more plausible!
8. As a story would it not be a little silly for Anakin not to have brought balance when he destroyed the Sith? That is what Lucas' 6 films were about!
9. Are you saying that we haven't seen the force be balanced in the saga yet?

 

I can't take you serious anymore. Though there has admittedly been a recent retcon made by George prior to him selling the franchise I'm not sure wether this was in part responsible for the major backlash that led to his departure. The original saga 4-5-6 Is clearly Luke's story. I pose you a challenge, find a friend who has not seem the movies and ask them to watch the trilogy and tell you who the main protagonist and antagonist is.
I repeat I believe Anakin viably could be the Sith chosen one, we disagree on how balance was brought.