Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00543)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Meredith" 
<meredith_bill@e...> wrote:


> Haven't seen the movie yet, but I do recognize an absolute 
statement when I 
> see one. Obi-Wan is making an absolute statement. And because his 
> statement is framed as an absolute (specifically by the word Only) 
he in 
> effect negates the validity of the statement even as he says it. 
Unless of 
> course Obi-Wan is a Sith. The Star Wars saga deals with 
absolutes. It is a 
> modern version of good vs. the dark side and like all previous 
versions 
> good will triumph over evil in the end. Is George Lucas a Sith?


Perhaps a Sith.com? (lol)

I take your point, though. Perhaps every central religious or 
philosophical statement is wrapped, formally, in an absolute 
discourse. A few occur to me here:


"The word that can be said is not the true word." (Lao Tzu)

"You never step into the same river twice." (Heraclitus)

"There is no independent source of evil in Nature." (KH)

"Only Brahman is real." (Upanishads)

"Truth is a pathless land." (Krishnamurti)

"Your are either with us or you are our enemy." (Anakin Skywalker 
quoting George W. Bush)


What saves Obi-Wan from becoming a Sith spin-doctor, imo, is the 
word "deal" in his statement. In other words, how does one relate to 
life and existence around us? If one takes refuge, intellectually, in 
an absolute point of view, there is simply no relationship at all, 
for reality is eternal movement, change, growth. 

Perhaps Obi-Wan is re-stating a Taoist view: if you understand what 
the Force is you don't get stuck in a separate sense of self.

Anyway, enough of spoilers. Have a look a Senator Palpatine 
discourse. He really makes Sith happens.


pedro