What did Anakin "balancing the force" really mean?

Most seem to think that Anakin bringing balance to the force in ROTJ meant the eradication of the Sith, and the light side to prevail again.

But in current canon, maybe that isn't what the balance was at all. Maybe the balance he brought back was just ensuring that there would be equal dark and equal light in the galaxy moving forward?

Thoughts?

I think Anakin fulfilled the prophery by wiping most of jedi and killing the sith lord(Sidious) temporarily. Makes the galaxy a place free from both jedi and sith
Thus ensuring the majority of normal people can decide their fate.
Though the canon never stated it. I feel more convincible that bringing balance to the force was meant to be a universal nature. Not just mere sith and jedi conflicts
After all, Isn't the force existing in everywhere, Connecting everything together? Jedi and sith just one of the force's aspects

I'm pretty sure GL's intent in the original films was that total eradication of the Sith = "balance". However, The Son's comment in the Mortis trilogy(which GL was also heavily involved in creating) altered that a bit: "How simple you make it...Light and dark...As if there is one without the other."

And Snoke's statement from TLJ cements this concept: "Darkness rises, and light to meet it... I warned my young apprentice that as he grew stronger, his equal in the light would rise."

IOW, if there is light there will always be equal dark, and vice versa. The Force will always strive to balance itself out. Anakin fulfilling the prophesy essentially removed the overwhelming dark side presence from the galaxy, and rebalanced the light/dark ratio a bit... Albeit briefly.

That said, you could still poke holes in this concept all day long.

I wonder why more force users don't take a page from the Prime Jedi's book, and use BOTH sides of the force to achieve perfect balance?

Wouldn't that be like the ultimate way to balance the force?

It's inconsistent and most likely always will be tbh. My headcanon is destroying the Sith still leads to balance for the most part because the Sith are always trying to manipulate both sides the biggest evidence being Revan and Bane talking to the Son. Doesn't mean other dark siders don't do this however.

Yeah, even George Lucas appeared a bit muddled on what "balance" actually means, with his stance seeming to repeatedly change over the years. I mostly agree with Galan007's opinion here.

However, just going off of some of George Lucas' interviews, con appearances, and the like, my take away regarding balance in the Force is a little different. From what I can tell, George's primary view on balance is that the light side is the Force in balance, and the dark side is imbalance. Light side Force users follow the will of the Force, while dark side Force users twist the Force to their will instead. When Anakin renounced the dark side and slew Palpatine, the two largest sources of imbalance in the galaxy disappeared, tipping the scales back toward their natural state.

Of course, this is severely damaged by Palpatine's revival in both Canon and Legends, and the continued existence of major Dark Side powers in Legends well beyond the point of the movies. I guess the Prophecy isn't all it was cracked up to be. As Yoda put it, "a prophecy that misread could have been." It's possible that Anakin's role in the prophecy was simply to destroy the Sith tradition as it had been, ending the Banite line. This technically holds true in both Canon (Palpatine never took on another apprentice after Vader) and Legends (Lumiya was not a Banite Sith, and Darth Krayt radically reorganized the Sith as we think of them).

Personally, I like Alex's take from Star Wars Explained. There may not be a singular, true "Chosen One," but rather a 'chosen one' each generation. During the Clone Wars, it was Anakin. During the Galactic Civil War, Luke. During the First Order Uprising, Rey. For the Old Republic, we had Nomi, Revan, and the Outlander. During the High Republic, it sounds like either Avar Kriss or Stellan Gios could fit this role as well.

From what we've seen, the Force likes to choose vessels to carry out its will. The examples I provided above tend to possess roughly the same caliber of gift as Anakin (if not quite to the same extent). They all develop in the Force at an insane rate, rapidly surpassing most of the masters of their era by the time they're just reaching Knighthood, despite many of them becoming a Jedi much later in their lives than normal. And they all have a monumental role to play in galactic events, particularly when it comes to preventing the Sith from gaining a permanent foothold. The chosen one story of a fated Jedi hero stopping the Sith in their tracks is one that's played out several times throughout the Star Wars mythos, so it makes sense for the Prophecy to possibly apply to each generation instead of one particular point in time.

Originally posted by Eli Vanto
I wonder why more force users don't take a page from the Prime Jedi's book, and use BOTH sides of the force to achieve perfect balance?

Wouldn't that be like the ultimate way to balance the force?

Ezra is about the only Jedi I can think of in canon who seems to be able to use the dark side at will(as seen when he opened/studied the Sith holocron), without showing a clear affinity towards it. It's very rare for a Force user to be able to harness both aspects like that, while maintaining their own inner balance.

Originally posted by Galan007
Because it's not exactly easy for a Jedi to freely access the dark side, without being corrupted by it.

Ezra is about the only Jedi I can think of in canon who seems to be able to use the dark side at will(as seen when he opened/studied the Sith holocron), without showing a clear affinity towards it. It's very rare for a Force user to be able to harness both aspects like that, while maintaining their own inner balance.

I don't know. I'd argue Ezra did display a clear affinity toward the dark side up through the Season 3 premiere.

His first Force push was an act of fear (for a friend). His first two encounters with the Grand Inquisitor both have him displaying dark side emotions, with Ezra subconsciously drawing on it during the second encounter to summon the large fyrnock. The groundwork was all there to show Ezra falling to the dark side.

It wasn't until season 3, when Ezra realized the cost that was born of his actions that he chose to renounce his dabbling of the dark side. At the very least, I would certainly never call Ezra "balanced" in regards to his use of the light and dark sides of the Force. When he started willingly using the dark side, he went full dark side.

Lucas never intended to make sequels to his Original Trilogy.

Originally posted by Galan007
I'm pretty sure GL's intent in the original films was that total eradication of the Sith = "balance". However, The Son's comment in the Mortis trilogy(which GL was also heavily involved in creating) altered that a bit: "How simple you make it...Light and dark...As if there is one without the other."

And Snoke's statement from TLJ cements this concept: "Darkness rises, and light to meet it... I warned my young apprentice that as he grew stronger, his equal in the light would rise."

IOW, if there is light there will always be equal dark, and vice versa. The Force will always strive to balance itself out. Anakin fulfilling the prophesy essentially removed the overwhelming dark side presence from the galaxy, and rebalanced the light/dark ratio a bit... Albeit briefly.

That said, you could still poke holes in this concept all day long.

Luke was a middle runner but in the sequel trilogy you had an undead Sith Lord housing all the Sith Spirits and the entire Jedi Ghost Brigade.

So it was really off balance because you had more Jedi, then after Vader wiped them out it was off-balance until Luke redeemed him, then in Rise of Skywalker we have all the Sith Spirits and all the Jedi Spirits facing off in two individuals really, Rey and Palpatine, what Vader really did was cause that to happen

Originally posted by Underachiever59
I don't know. I'd argue Ezra did display a clear affinity toward the dark side up through the Season 3 premiere.

His first Force push was an act of fear (for a friend). His first two encounters with the Grand Inquisitor both have him displaying dark side emotions, with Ezra subconsciously drawing on it during the second encounter to summon the large fyrnock. The groundwork was all there to show Ezra falling to the dark side.

It wasn't until season 3, when Ezra realized the cost that was born of his actions that he chose to renounce his dabbling of the dark side. At the very least, I would certainly never call Ezra "balanced" in regards to his use of the light and dark sides of the Force. When he started willingly using the dark side, he went [B]full dark side. [/B]

Vader alluded to it in S02: "You have unlocked the secret of the Temple. How did YOU accomplish this?"

And by S04, he was capable of fully unlocking the gateway to TWBW -- something not even Palpatine could do, and something I don't think any random Jedi could have done either.

I think the dark side is necessary when tamed by the light, and it exists within everything. But when disconnected from the light, it is evil. Kinda like how according to christian teachings, anything disconnected from God's love is considered evil.

In the Mortis trilogy, it was suggested that The Son did not start out evil. He was necessary in protecting and watching out for his sister, The Daughter, it was his purpose.. but the more he disconnected himself from that purpose and started using his powers for selfish desires, he started to become evil. The scene with the sith spirits talking to The Son, in my mind, was supposed to represent the sith causing imbalance throughout history by disconnecting the dark side(The Son) from its purpose, and manipulating it for selfish goals.

Palpatine, being the embodiment of evil and "all the sith," took it to the extreme by not just wanting to disconnect the dark from the light, but by attempting to snuff the light out from the equation completely. In this way he would fashion the universe in his image. He views that the existence of light side is what's holding the dark side back from it's full potential, and is the only thing keeping him from his ultimate goal. Therefore, it was necessary that the force took extra steps to rid itself of Palpatine by creating Anakin.

originally, I always assumed that Luke was the balance; taking the best of the Sith and the Jedi mannerisms into himself and the ST sort of goes in that direction as well except they tried to make Rey what Luke was supposed to be only they ****ed it up royally

Originally posted by Dominis
I think the dark side is necessary when tamed by the light, and it exists within everything. But when disconnected from the light, it is evil. Kinda like how according to christian teachings, anything disconnected from God's love is considered evil.

In the Mortis trilogy, it was suggested that The Son did not start out evil. He was necessary in protecting and watching out for his sister, The Daughter, it was his purpose.. but the more he disconnected himself from that purpose and started using his powers for selfish desires, he started to become evil. The scene with the sith spirits talking to The Son, in my mind, was supposed to represent the sith causing imbalance throughout history by disconnecting the dark side(The Son) from its purpose, and manipulating it for selfish goals.

Palpatine, being the embodiment of evil and "all the sith," took it to the extreme by not just wanting to disconnect the dark from the light, but by attempting to snuff the light out from the equation completely. In this way he would fashion the universe in his image. He views that the existence of light side is what's holding the dark side back from it's full potential, and is the only thing keeping him from his ultimate goal. Therefore, it was necessary that the force took extra steps to rid itself of Palpatine by creating Anakin.

The Dark Side is embodiment of evil. It being kept in check by the Light Side does not make it any less evil or more "good".

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
The Dark Side is embodiment of evil. It being kept in check by the Light Side does not make it any less evil or more "good".

When I said Dark Side, I was referring to what the Son from TCW's Mortis Trilogy seems to represent, which isn't some evil side to the force. He is implied to be a necessary part of it, but when out harmony with the light (love), he became an opposing force.

But yes, the term "Dark Side" as we know it, and how it's often used by characters, tends to mean the evil side of the force. Just seems like George Lucas and now the story group of Lucasfilm wants it to be a bit more complicated than that (judging from The Mortis Arc, Luke's teachings to Rey about powerful light and darkness, the Prime Jedi and etc., all suggesting that the darker aspect of the force is necessary and isn't evil until disconnected from it's purpose and used/abused for selfish goals; for then a person becomes addicted to such power), and what I typed out was just an interpretation of that. Such interpretation suggests that true balance is when the darker aspect of the force is working in harmony with the light instead of opposing it, NOT that good ("light side"😉 and evil ("dark side"😉 are meant to be in eternal conflict--as if evil is a natural and necessary state-- the way some interpret it to be.

BTW, I'm not saying my interpretation is the absolute correct one. Just fun to share.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
It being kept in check by the Light Side does not make it any less evil or more "good".

Also, if I wasn't clear, this statement is false, unless you're using the term "dark side" to describe evil. If that's the case, then I agree, evil is evil. However, things like death and violence, which are darker aspects of the force, aren't necessarily evil. For example, the act of killing Palpatine was an act of violence, but such an act, depending on how it was done, wasn't evil and was actually necessary for the light and life as we know it to thrive, since Palpatine was a threat to the light and all of life. But killing Palpatine out of revenge and hate, would have become a purely self motivated act, and would have opened a link for evil (Palpatine) to take over Rey's body. It's the intent. Using the darker aspects of the force (or "darkness" as Luke called it) for evil intentions corrupts the force and the individual using it, which is what the sith have been doing since recorded history.

When I say Palpatine is the embodiment of evil (if that's what you're taking issue with), well in the context of the story, that is exactly what he represents. He is the culmination of the sith, who are responsible for corrupting darkness and using it out of harmony with the light. He is completely cut off from the light, spreading his evilness throughout the cosmos and snuffing out the light in his quest to dominate and reshape reality in his image. Everything that is considered evil ("dark side"😉, Palpatine embodies to the fullest extent.

Originally posted by Dominis
When I said Dark Side, I was referring to what the Son from TCW's Mortis Trilogy seems to represent, which isn't some evil side to the force. He is implied to be a necessary part of it, but when out harmony with the light (love), he became an opposing force.

But yes, the term "Dark Side" as we know it, and how it's often used by characters, tends to mean the evil side of the force. Just seems like George Lucas and now the story group of Lucasfilm wants it to be a bit more complicated than that (judging from The Mortis Arc, Luke's teachings to Rey about powerful light and darkness, the Prime Jedi and etc., all suggesting that the darker aspect of the force is necessary and isn't evil until disconnected from it's purpose and used/abused for selfish goals; for then a person becomes addicted to such power), and what I typed out was just an interpretation of that. Such interpretation suggests that true balance is when the darker aspect of the force is working in harmony with the light instead of opposing it, NOT that good ("light side"😉 and evil ("dark side"😉 are meant to be in eternal conflict--as if evil is a natural and necessary state-- the way some interpret it to be.

BTW, I'm not saying my interpretation is the absolute correct one. Just fun to share.

Violence is not an act of "darkness" unless it is oppressive. Also, The Son is simply an embodiment of the Dark Side and an analogy to the Devil/Lucifer the Morning Star. You are also misunderstanding The Father. When he said too much light or dark would destroy universe, he was actually refering to radicalism because the sin is stored in us and we are flawed beings.
Too much dark(suffering) would simply send the galaxy into chaos and death.
Too much light(comfort) would make beings lose their minds, and start do crazy acts. Like how riches become pedophiles, etc

In the end it's us who are broke and not the universe itself. If we were robot or robot-likes, then too much light would not be a bad thing.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
The Son is simply an embodiment of the Dark Side and an analogy to the Devil/Lucifer the Morning Star.

I don't see it, TBH. The only similarity between them, is that neither started out evil, except the devil is just a fallen angel, whose evil actions and manipulations caused a trickle down effect which is still being felt today; whereas The Son, from my understanding, is implied to be a necessary embodiment of something that exists within all living beings, an actual and necessary aspect of the force.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
You are also misunderstanding The Father. When he said too much light or dark would destroy universe, he was actually refering to radicalism because the sin is stored in us and we are flawed beings.
Too much dark(suffering) would simply send the galaxy into chaos and death.
Too much light(comfort) would make beings lose their minds, and start do crazy acts. Like how riches become pedophiles, etc

In the end it's us who are broke and not the universe itself.

How would you apply "bringing balance" as it pertains to the force to this interpretation?

And you believe The Son and The Daughter are two different representations of how the force is used/abused, instead of being actual aspects of it?

The Ones were undoubtedly aspects of the cosmic Force. The balance on Mortis tipping one way or the other(via the Son or Daughter) directly impacted the Force in the material realm on a galactic scale.

The Father: "As the balance in this world crumbles, so shall war escalate in your galaxy... As my Son has descended into the dark side, so have the Sith gained strength."

Originally posted by Galan007
The Ones were undoubtedly aspects of the cosmic Force. The balance on Mortis tipping one way or the other(via the Son or Daughter) directly impacted the Force in the material realm on a galactic scale.

The Father: "As the balance in this world crumbles, so shall war escalate in your galaxy... As my Son has descended into the dark side, so have the Sith gained strength."

Yeah, I agree with this. That's one of the quotes I'm remembering.

The Father makes a distinction between his son and the dark side/evil, not that his son is the embodiment of evil the way Nadd seems to be interpreting him to be. It kinda makes his use of the term radicalism seem kinda redundant if he believes there is no middle ground for The Son. IDK, I'm confused with his interpretation.