ATTN: COUNCIL; Updated Doctrine Proposal
So with the help of Church Members that wanted to weigh in on the editing process, we have a new proposal for the Doctrine. In case you missed the reasoning behind this project in the other thread:
ToTJO's doctrine takes two documents written by different people in the overall community and has them just kind of inserted into what we believe. Despite the fact that these two documents have been edited over time by members of ToTJO, they still remain two separate documents with a lot of material for people to get through. They have a lot of the same information, but when you look at it as two documents...it looks like a lot more than what it really is.
Although much of the membership has left ToTJO over the years, it's still an old enough order that it owes itself the respect to choose one document and to stick with it: Be it the 21 Maxims, the 16 Teachings, or the document enclosed that is tentatively named "The Principles of Jediism" (no marriage to the name! just the only thing I could come up with last minute XD).
I, personally, am in favor of the document "The Principles of Jediism", because it takes both of the documents we have been using to raise up Jedi and melds them together.
The document below also includes the rest of the Doctrine we use. There were a couple of edits (the definition of Jediism, a new name for The Creed [based on a discussion with Br. John], and a short introduction of the Jedi Code), but it is largely the same thing. By looking at what the new complete doctrine would look like, it is my hope that you will see just how much less intimidating it would be for people coming onto the path to have one document vs. 2.
Thank you for your time, I truly hope that you will take the time to consider what has been said. *bows*
P.S. I don't know what's up with the other attached things. Ignore them :/. The only one that is important is the one displayed below.
As the future structure of our organization is in a possible transition (I'm aware nothing has been set in stone, but there is strong talk of this) the one thing that isn't being talked about is how to refocus our membership on what it means to be a Jedi. As it stands, the Doctrine is a part of that problem. For more than a decade, there have been maybe 5 people that ever use the Doctrine as the basis of their arguments- and that is something we need to fix.
In part, I'm willing to bet that some of those problems stem from the fact that we don't have an IP built around the Doctrine. Which has been something I've said for years (more vocal at the beginning of this last decade, and more silent as it progressed). But another reason is that we have way too much in our doctrine TO build an IP which focuses upon it.
You can say that the IP does, because we have it as an assignment. But by and large the IP was never designed to focus people on what the Jedi Path was, but rather for knights and masters to get to know who their potential students are, to weed out those that don't want to put in any work (and I'm not saying that as an observation, that's literally the answer I've received from council members that were present earlier this decade).
But even if we wanted to build a new IP having 2 documents would make that process far more daunting. It's my belief that we need to settle on ONE document. There are now three to choose from.
I think your comment "when it comes to Jedi doctrine, well, there isn't much of it" is telling of how much the order has failed to make our doctrine a central figure of what we believe. The Jedi Path isn't confined to ToTJO, we all know there are other orders out there that exist. But what is there and what is here do not have to match.
I think it's helpful to have different groups. Like "Denominations" or "Sects", where ToTJO represents one of those. There's also a lot of opportunity in this order to bring about discussions of how different tenets in our doctrine (whatever we choose) is echoed in another culture (calling back to our roots in Joseph Campbell's work).
Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies.
ren wrote: If anything, doctrinal changes should make the journey greater, not duller.
Which suggests that you think this change makes the doctrine duller. I myself would disagree with this, as would the apparent thoughts of those who have previously commented on this thread. Though I accept that this is still a massive minority of our 'official' membership
Truthfully -Those present are the membership - funny thing about a ever changing place like this. The flow moves people in and out there and here and in many places at once sometime.
This isn’t objection to any change officially - I’m not sided only a few concerns more than questions if you please.
The doctrine here as I’m aware, I may be wrong- is open for application purposes. Any one can apply it anywhere they like. It’s like the book of change- nowadays- any one can write a “Tao of me or a TAO of you.” That doesn’t make it any less special or valuable or even worth less but more for doing more with it. Those are the basics for individuals to create their own faiths - their own - practices and their own levels of faith as well. To me - what it seems like to me - I’m only human- is these are more personal and more clearer to those who have made them- prolly not others. It’s hard in Jediism to define things because the definitions are mostly for the individual Jeddist to create or adapt or so on and so forth. It’s not wrong to share. Not even. If anything this should be in a place in the library as a resource we can all look to for guidance on how to translate our own doctrine into a personal applicable doctrine for each of us.
It’s like a light saber- you can give and get one but a Jeddist would benefit more if when they make it themselves. Give others opportunities to do this - for them self’s rather than do it for them. Maybe show and give a lesson on how to tune our own personal doctrines or something like that?? If individuals need more personal definitions - it is always encouraged to do just that. Maybe that’s what we need more of - less do this and more do this for yourself - just my thoughts.
So my question.
How can we adapt some one else’s personal interpretations to doctrine? Can we really? How do we encourage others to do this very thing for them self’s? How do we give this freedom to everybody? How do we stop giving fish and teach others to fish? Can we?
I will gladly look over any proposal sent out way. Ren is the secretary so he has a secretary of the council email somewhere. Send it to him when you feel it’s time.
Leading people is hard. Leading smart people - even harder. Leading Jeddist today... is an oxymoron. Living with them - that’s the stuff many paths are made of. I’m not set in any one way currently just to be open and honest. I’m not objective , I really want to hear more. I’m for change and growth hands down.
I just wrote my first “Jeddist book of change” and although I want to share it with the world and let every one see what I’ve done - at the same time - I want those who choose to to do it on their own for them self’s. Nothing I do can’t be done. Same can be said for many things in a Jeddistic way. Anything we can create for outselfs- any one can do that for them self’s as well.
I could take the time to make my own doctrine and codes and maxims ( I have and I encourage others to do the same.) shouldn’t that be the charge rather than take my words as yours ? Can it be make your own?
- Kelrax Lorcken
I'm uncertain, is this actually being left up to The Knights, entirely, or will their decision influence the Council? The bureaucracy of this place has never been clear to me.
Honestly, when this discussion first started, I was opposed, but, seeing the final product... I like it. It still works for it's intended purpose, giving guidance while requiring thought and questions over time. It's flexible enough to still be however meaningful it needs to be, for whomever needs it, and achieves this more efficiently, without being repetitious.
I'm not here to debate it, really, just offering my opinion, here.
as a practical matter where my own training through the IP is concerned, how soon might we expect a yay or nay on this? It would affect the part I'm about to do, so I'm particularly eager to see how this works out.
I would suggest do the assessment as per the criteria laid out at the time of assessment - ie, as it is now.
Training institutions are always working through updates at any given point in time, however I've yet to see one that has the teachers burst into the room mid-exam, kick over the tables, and screech "PLUTO IS NOT A PLANET! EVERYONE CHANGE THE ANSWER TO QUESTION SEVEN!"
Or, if you really want to be a labrat - do it twice, once with the current doctrine, and once with the proposed doctrine - that will assist the Master Jedi here with seeing how the changes may affect the IP and people's understanding of it.