noun: religion

Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of wise men, seek what they sought. -Basho

Some interesting bits I pulled together from Australian caselaw, with some interesting quotes about religion;


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.


So basically, in Australia is seems the minimum is both;

1. belief in a supernatural Being, Thing or Principle; and
2. the acceptance of canons of conduct in order to give effect to that belief, though canons of conduct which offend against the ordinary laws are outside the area of any immunity, privilege or right conferred on the grounds of religion.

JohnsonMD wrote: Most assuredly Wescli! However, I have found my truth, there is no reason to discover it - nor is that my question.

My question is: The TotJO states that its a religion, and that it has a doctrine (as supported by the site, and the page(s) dedicated to such)...yet I find very few people actually using said doctrine as a basis for their...Jedi-ness.

Instead, I find people doing, expressing, feeling, being whatever they want (not that I am saying those things are bad mind you) and calling themselves Jedi. That said, the confusion is that on one hand there is the Doctrine...and on the other there what people seem to make up "for their own truth." Sometimes this is compatible, sometimes it is not - regardless, if that is the case, it can't really be called a religion (as defined in my OP).

Does that make sense?

People will do what people do. In any religion you will find those that interpret things their own way. If they don’t, then they are probably just saying back what they have memorized. Either is fine so long as you are willing to live with it.

I have never found a religion where if one dug enough they would never find something that didn’t quite jive with everything else. That does not mean I merit them any less credit or question the belief of its followers.

And with that said, religion is basically ones people’s perception of what the truth is. If you didn’t believe it, why would you follow it?

Your argument makes sense. And I am not saying that what you have observed is not true from your point of view.

But…

I remember reading your intro. And I have been impressed with many of your posts. You have a good head on your shoulders. And I recognize that you believe you have found your truth. So, other than sharing ideas with other like-minded, or like spirited, people… why are you here?


I am a little familiar with our doctrine. And I could probably argue its validity and how it pertains to how others interpret it as well as the next guy. But a part of me feels that is not what you are really asking.

Not to mention:

My question is: The TotJO states that its a religion, and that it has a doctrine (as supported by the site, and the page(s) dedicated to such)...yet I find very few people actually using said doctrine as a basis for their...Jedi-ness.

Is not a question. It is a statement or observation.

So, other than sharing ideas with other like-minded, or like spirited, people… why are you here?

I am a little familiar with our doctrine. And I could probably argue its validity and how it pertains to how others interpret it as well as the next guy. But a part of me feels that is not what you are really asking.

There exists a fine line between that which one calls dogmatic faith that they follow, and that which has universal meaning to oneself as it applies to one's life in light of this dogmatic faith. Having found this truth for myself, and while that truth has most assuredly all the universality I need - there are of course other (both incorrect and correct) ways to go about things in life. Some of these things (for good or ill) are compatible with said truth, some of them are not.

For example, no religion/faith etc can claim to hold that "being nice" is the thing to do in said faith and not others. Meaning...you can most assuredly be nice to people and not have to follow any set sect/group/religion etc....and yet, you can find that aspect (being nice in this example) in many of said faiths/religions, etc.

That said...what I seek is a set of ideals that is compatible with my core truth (ie, my set of dogmatic beliefs on religion, etc). What I found in the Doctrine (with only a few slight exceptions) is just that: A set of ideals/ethics/codes that are compatible with my approach to spirituality.

However, and to address the second part of your post...what I don't find in my observations of the TotJO is that the Doctrine is well respected, used, or even really meaningful to a vast majority of the members here. This is disturbing to me, since it is so predominately displayed on the site, and quite nicely sets forth a system of beliefs that one could follow (again, I have a few issues w/ the doctrine itself, but that is another thread), and yet...few follow it - seeking instead to just do what they want, call it Jediism and put forth some pseudo-existential individual set of beliefs that seem to only apply to themselves as they see fit, when they see fit for it to be so.

Now, that is all well and good. And if the ultimate goal is to just express yourself in whatever way one wishes...that is perfectly fine; but then why have a doctrine? Why define it, why set out a Code, Tenants, a Creed, 16 Teachings and 21 Maxims?? Why bother if that is the answer?

That is what i'm after, and what I'm asking. Not a single person has yet to refer to the doctrine, or anything contained therein when speaking to me (or that I observe in discussion), and thus I wonder the worth of said Doctrine...I wonder if it does have meaning at all. Sure, somebody will stand up quickly to tell me that it has whatever meaning I wish to ascribe to it - but that is missing the point of having a doctrine in the first place. I get that sentiment...what I don't get is why have a doctrine, if nobody uses it?

I read on another thread (not sure which) that Jestor (i think??) stated that if people have an idea, he challenges them to be ready to embrace it...I think he said "make it their baby", etc. I agree!!! Yet, who is following the doctrine? How is using it to define the Jedi-ness? So far, I haven't found anyone...and so I question the worth of it...and thus I question the foundation of the TotJO itself.

If that sounds harsh, it isn't meant to be so. For I truly want to contribute, help out and bring forth something of substance and usefulness to people...yet I see Chaos...and the Doctrine tells me that There is no Chaos, there is Harmony. I don't see Harmony among the "order"...and so..

Why am I here?
To find that Harmony.

What am I really asking?
Where has it gone...?

(If the answer to the last is 'you must find it for yourself'...well, then I am in the wrong place)

Blessings!

How is using it to define the Jedi-ness? So far, I haven't found anyone...and so I question the worth of it...and thus I question the foundation of the TotJO itself.

So show us a better way. Be the change you want to see.

JohnsonMD wrote:
That said...what I seek is a set of ideals that is compatible with my core truth (ie, my set of dogmatic beliefs on religion, etc). What I found in the Doctrine (with only a few slight exceptions) is just that: A set of ideals/ethics/codes that are compatible with my approach to spirituality.

However, and to address the second part of your post...what I don't find in my observations of the TotJO is that the Doctrine is well respected, used, or even really meaningful to a vast majority of the members here. This is disturbing to me, since it is so predominately displayed on the site, and quite nicely sets forth a system of beliefs that one could follow (again, I have a few issues w/ the doctrine itself, but that is another thread), and yet...few follow it - seeking instead to just do what they want, call it Jediism and put forth some pseudo-existential individual set of beliefs that seem to only apply to themselves as they see fit, when they see fit for it to be so.

Now, that is all well and good. And if the ultimate goal is to just express yourself in whatever way one wishes...that is perfectly fine; but then why have a doctrine? Why define it, why set out a Code, Tenants, a Creed, 16 Teachings and 21 Maxims?? Why bother if that is the answer?

That is what i'm after, and what I'm asking. Not a single person has yet to refer to the doctrine, or anything contained therein when speaking to me (or that I observe in discussion), and thus I wonder the worth of said Doctrine...I wonder if it does have meaning at all. Sure, somebody will stand up quickly to tell me that it has whatever meaning I wish to ascribe to it - but that is missing the point of having a doctrine in the first place. I get that sentiment...what I don't get is why have a doctrine, if nobody uses it?

I read on another thread (not sure which) that Jestor (i think??) stated that if people have an idea, he challenges them to be ready to embrace it...I think he said "make it their baby", etc. I agree!!! Yet, who is following the doctrine? How is using it to define the Jedi-ness? So far, I haven't found anyone...and so I question the worth of it...and thus I question the foundation of the TotJO itself.

You and I had a really invigorating conversation recently about the doctrine, which I really enjoyed. It forced me to revist some of my beliefs around it, which can only be a good thing. Yet throughout our discussion and the following ones that Ive observed, you seem convinced that the doctrine is not adhered to or valued, which I assure you is not the truth, though perhaps none of us are eloquent enough to make our relationship to the doctrine clear when discussing it. You have already discovered that we are quite open and individualistic in our interpretations, so perhaps the question you need to be asking each of us is "how do you interpret and live the doctrine". I imagine that you would find many common underlying values in each of our answers that might well reflect a common set of beliefs... like the doctrine maybe ;P

I wonder though, is what is true of Jediism not true of any other religion? Something you've mentioned repeatedly is that our definition of the force is too broad. What is the exact definition of God? If the basic doctrine of Christianity is the 10 commandments, why bother with the rest of the bible?

I believe that any doctrine is a kind of frame work and gateway. Very few people are aware enough to see spiritual truth without a few pokes in the right direction. That is why religion exists. Its a general map of the area where treasure is buried. Its meant to give you the frame work to explore in which you may discover the truth for yourself. And the more one finds truth, the less one needs doctrine, "ideals" or a set of regulations to adhere to.

I am curious, if you have found your truth, why do you not simply follow that. Is truth, after all, not enough?

Well that's not the correct definition for religion... here:

Religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to the supernatural, and to spirituality.

From the totjo doctrine:

Jediism is a religion based on the observance of the Force, a ubiquitous and metaphysical power that a Jedi (a follower of Jediism) believes to be the underlying, fundamental nature of the universe.

I somewhat agree that people on the forums may or may not always be following the doctrine. Some are new people like me and just learning jediism for the first time. For me it's an exploration, an adventure, something like that. I bounce around the initiate program, my journal, the forums, and life offline randomly and in bursts and spurts. It's fun to learn and the people here help a lot.

I mean if you really want to be technical, this is actually a self-help site where you can read how various people interpret things through the eyes of a jedi. I've seen a lot of discussions about the force, jediism, how to handle things, etc. More recently people have moved on to other topics.

JohnsonMD wrote: That is what i'm after, and what I'm asking. Not a single person has yet to refer to the doctrine, or anything contained therein when speaking to me (or that I observe in discussion), and thus I wonder the worth of said Doctrine...I wonder if it does have meaning at all. Sure, somebody will stand up quickly to tell me that it has whatever meaning I wish to ascribe to it - but that is missing the point of having a doctrine in the first place. I get that sentiment...what I don't get is why have a doctrine, if nobody uses it?

It has whatever meaning I wish to ascribe to it... oh wait thats not what I was going to say

Nobody!? I use parts of the doctrine all the time. LOL, what I mean by that is I have a belief about a mathematical approach to consciousness and I ascribe the doctrinal values into functional relationships as operational processes for state of mind.

Not a single person has yet to refer to the doctrine, or anything contained therein when speaking to me (or that I observe in discussion), and thus I wonder the worth of said Doctrine...

I wonder the value of being able to quote scripture. A gifted person can quote it to justify almost any action.