The Jedi Golden Rule

Khaos wrote: It cannot be simplified? Hmm, well, Einstein said that if you cannot explain something simply, you dont understand it well enough.

Then there is also Bruce Lees quote on stripping away the inessential, so the process should not become more complex, but more refined.

I have always thought that ones understanding of there path is represented in how simply they can explain it, and live it. It should not get more convoluted, but less so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0hJveJ8Hp0

You know, the problem, I find, with that whole "if you can't simplify" line of thinking is that I can think I've dumbed an idea/concept down to one freaking word, and still the person being explained to might not understand...

So, when the explainer says "I can't get any more basic", the one trying to understand says, "well, if you can't, then maybe you don't understand either"...

Its why we (people) butt heads...

I could say "Being" to me, would be the Golden Rule, or possibly "Acceptance", and one who doesn't use the words as I do, would not understand...

Like the word "Faith", in previous discussions....

I can complicate the issue, by telling you (metaphorical you) how I define things, but then I'm told "I'm not using the words right" or at least not as how the other person understands....

Its so.... Interesting, lol....

Maybe a derail, but im the OP... :lol:...

What about Kant's categorical imperative. I always liked that one.

"Act only according to the maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."

If what you're doing isn't working, try something else.

Jestor wrote:

Khaos wrote: It cannot be simplified? Hmm, well, Einstein said that if you cannot explain something simply, you dont understand it well enough.

Then there is also Bruce Lees quote on stripping away the inessential, so the process should not become more complex, but more refined.

I have always thought that ones understanding of there path is represented in how simply they can explain it, and live it. It should not get more convoluted, but less so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0hJveJ8Hp0

You know, the problem, I find, with that whole "if you can't simplify" line of thinking is that I can think I've dumbed an idea/concept down to one freaking word, and still the person being explained to might not understand...

So, when the explainer says "I can't get any more basic", the one trying to understand says, "well, if you can't, then maybe you don't understand either"...

Its why we (people) butt heads...

I could say "Being" to me, would be the Golden Rule, or possibly "Acceptance", and one who doesn't use the words as I do, would not understand...

Like the word "Faith", in previous discussions....

I can complicate the issue, by telling you (metaphorical you) how I define things, but then I'm told "I'm not using the words right" or at least not as how the other person understands....

Its so.... Interesting, lol....

Maybe a derail, but im the OP... :lol:...

Nope, I think this illustrates my point perfectly.

Most people arent trying to communicate here to begin with, not really.

Misunderstanding here, I have found is more intentional.

That is, people need to feel unique and special, hence, any understanding cannot be simple, because the individual feels reduced as such.

So then, one is so complex, so unique, so singular, that they cannot be understood.

At least thats my theory.

Still, people are hardly as complicated as they like to present themselves, philosophy and spirituality simply plays to that kind of ego centric thinking is all.

Can we expect to be able to capture a universal message accurately and completely enough in summary form with verbal language with all its limitations?

Should we?

There will always be somebody who does not agree (or identify) with something put in verbal form, whether it be the golden rule or any other thing in the doctrine, or even outside of it.

Perhaps a golden rule can be simplified down to one sentence....

However, that sentence may be very different between one person and another - even if we all speak the same language, we all have our own ways of wording the same thing.

Perhaps this is better than having one static verbal message that demands to be conformed to by everyone...

The golden rule in my language comes from my own chosen mantra:

Be things as they are.
Do things as they do.
Know not one but all. (See who I am outside of my ego)
Know not all but one. (See things not as "many" things but as one)
Breathe and feel life.
Smile and know joy.
Laugh and know play.
Nothing else matters.

The bolded lines remind me to be aware of the reason the golden rule exists in the first place. The golden rule means nothing (or is simply not honest in nature) unless I am aware of my connection to everybody and everything else.

Silvermane wrote: You make a valid point, Khaos. The question I ask though, if you over simplify something such as Jediism, aren't you taking away from what it truly is?

Not at all. Oversimplification is, in this context, an inaccurate way of looking at it. I don't think it's possible to oversimplify beliefs or points of view. They either get more focused or become all encompassing. I like to think of levels of understanding as points along a 3 dimensional wave. At the largest point you have all the different facets and points of view and ways of comprehending a certain idea. As you move toward the smaller points, those ideas and beliefs become more refined and detailed but also closer together and you begin to see the connections between them. At the smallest point, all has been understood to such a degree that a single mode of expression is possible and all previous points of view, ideas, and beliefs are connected under one central concept. Once all things can be centralized, you can see through the other end and see all the other things that this centralized understanding reveals. Then the process begins again. This doesn't diminish the understanding of the previous points. Rather, it's more like adding another color of paint to your palette. So nothing can really be oversimplified as long as all previous points along the wave are understood.

My question is are we trying to think of a golden rule that anyone (as in someone not familiar with any facet of Jediism) can understand fully, or one that is meaningful to us (us being people familiar with Jediism)?

That might dictate how simplified the statement can be.

They either get more focused or become all encompassing.

I like this idea that a simple statement can be more all encompassing, but a person without knowledge of Jediism may not understand what all is encompassed.

Goken wrote: My question is are we trying to think of a golden rule that anyone (as in someone not familiar with any facet of Jediism) can understand fully, or one that is meaningful to us (us being people familiar with Jediism)?

That might dictate how simplified the statement can be.
I think one that people can understand without any knowledge of Jediism but can also gain a deeper understanding when they know more about Jediism.

They either get more focused or become all encompassing.

Goken wrote: I like this idea that a simple statement can be more all encompassing, but a person without knowledge of Jediism may not understand what all is encompassed.

I was speaking with a Buddhist monk a couple weeks ago about meditation and he said that one time, after literally weeks of 17 hour a day meditation sessions (with short breaks in between) he fell into a trance like state after about 5 minutes and actually witnessed himself meditating on top of a mountain inside a large glass sphere. Once he realized he was looking at himself, the sphere burst and he "fell" back in to his body. I asked him to tell me what it was like and he said, "It won't make any sense. Because you haven't meditated at that level, my words won't be sufficient to describe it." Basically, my lack of experience meant that that type of knowledge was not yet within my grasp. However, that doesn't mean I can't meditate. I speak Arabic, but am in no way a native speaker. I understand a lot, but the nuance of Arabic poetry or some idioms would be lost on me. Someone might not understand all of what is encompassed, but that doesn't mean they can't understand some of it and also benefit from it.

Oneiros wrote: Someone might not understand all of what is encompassed, but that doesn't mean they can't understand some of it and also benefit from it.

This is true in some cases... In others, incomplete information can lead to misinterpretations and misconceptions that may counter the intended message. It is good to be mindful of how a discretely worded message might be interpreted by those who are approaching it from different perceptions than your own.

Perhaps the key is not having a golden rule, at least not for everyone. If the risk is we either confuse others, miss out too much, include too much etc. Perhaps it's better to have a rule for just ourselves individually.