In Praise of Selectivity: Syncretic Jediism

Syncretism is not absorption but more like co-habitation. In spite of the silliness of rendering a religion to a number it is accurate to posit that some aspects of a religion are not compatible. For example, Christianity's belief in a single resurrection might not be compatible with a belief in karmic reincarnation. Religious syncretism is possible because religions are not one thing. Religions are composed of various and distinct beliefs and practices some of which compliment one another while others - not so much. Other examples of the syncretism of Christianity and West African religions (Yoruba) include Santeria, Candomble, and Voudon/Voodoo. On some of the islands of South East Asia Islam is 'layered' on top of the indigenous animist spirituality. Compatible integration of distinct religions can be seen in East Asia with Confucianism, Daoism and Buddhism. And in Japan, Shinto and Zen have integrated elements of each of these religions over the centuries.

Beyond the culturally specific imagery of the particular narrative, where the mythic content is interpreted according to a more generalized symbolic meaning, religions are more adaptable. Resurrection and Reincarnation as symbols of the importance of moral action in life and the belief in a form of afterlife can be integrated beyond their specificity. A Hindu might consider Jesus as another avatar of the divine Brahman (of which there are many). The exclusivity of revealed monotheisms makes syncretism more difficult but not impossible.

Your post is very interesting, like the subject, but there is a small thing that I feel confused about..

Alan: ,,Syncretism is not absorption but more like co-habitation''
Do we not all absorb at some level? Could absorption be a form/part of co-habitation?

Alan: ,,And in Japan, Shinto and Zen have integrated elements of each of these religions over the centuries.''

How can co-habitation exist without absorption? You said yourself that these co-habitation religions have parts of each other in it. How is that possible without absorption? Can it be that Syncretism needs absorption as much as co-habitation? :side:

~ Aqua

I think of the idea of absorption rather literally - an element losing its distinctiveness. True, some religious beliefs and practices become absorbed while others live 'in other words'. Like Yoruba deities being called by Christian names. But In Japan for example, one might have a Daoist wedding and a Buddhist funeral without any contradictions. Life is not so compartmentalized. Living our life is a single activity. We assign different meanings to different acts and aspects of it because we choose to.

In Jediism, the symbol of the Force as a principle of the underlying unity of reality is compatible with symbols of divine power found in monotheisms. The myth of the hero as the structure of our Jediism is very general and so can be syncretized with specific heroes from different, even several, religions.

Alan wrote: In Jediism, the symbol of the Force as a principle of the underlying unity of reality is compatible with symbols of divine power found in monotheisms. The myth of the hero as the structure of our Jediism is very general and so can be syncretized with specific heroes from different, even several, religions.

Do we have a symbol for the force? Sure you do not mean the temple logo? :blink:

Alan wrote: Syncretism is not absorption but more like co-habitation.

Honestly, I find syncretism to be more like discovering parts of your belief system in another faith structure. It's like you're building a house out of yellow Legos, you're own personal pile, and you begin to notice little yellow Legos in other boxes, in other piles. You recognize them, because you have them, too, and you borrow those Legos to complete your spaceship.

The Force is itself a symbol. For some, the word (concept, idea) is a symbol of the underlying unity of the cosmos. For others, it is a symbol for the principle of power that constitutes the fabric of reality. Some Jedi adhere to the literal meaning; that it is some sort of electromagnetic (or any other kind of molecular, atomic symbol) force. The principle of the Force yields greater meaning and significance when such literal interpretations are left behind and one enters into its myth and symbol.

Symbols are signs; expressions that communicate meaning.

Every sign, and symbols are a kind of sign, points to something beyond itself and stands for that something.

A symbol gathers together at one point a mass of significations which before giving rise to thought, give rise to speech.

Even when sign/symbols are perceived aspects of the cosmos (sky, sun, stars, moon) or nature (water, flora, fauna, thunder, earthquakes, rain, etc.) it is in what the phenomena symbolizes that we find meaning. The sacred is read on the world, on aspects, elements on the heavens, the sun, stars and moon, as well as waters, vegetation and fauna, meteorological phenomena: thunder, rain, earthquakes, etc.

The challenge is moving from the literal meaning to the symbolic meaning. For that we need to distinguish primary from secondary symbols.

Primary symbols describe the way things are; they detail the nature of reality; they narrate reality as we find it.
Primary symbols effectively represent the reality of human experience.
Words too are symbols, and the narrative of symbols is myth.
Myth is the narrative of the primary and secondary symbols.

Here's how it works, for example:
The Adam myth tells the story of the origin of death and the origin of our separation from the divine.
The primary symbol is exile from sacred perfection. The original archetypal humans were kicked out of the garden.
Exile, perfection and redemption are primary symbols.
The secondary symbols: the garden, the serpent, the tree, nakedness, hiding from Yhwh/God.
The Jesus myth is about redemption as the symbolic restoration of perfection that existed in the mythical Garden of Eden where humans lived in harmony with creation and Creator.
Secondary symbols represent a particular form of primary symbols: in this case, the cross that Jesus was crucified upon is the symbol for sin, sacrifice and redemption.
The secondary symbol of the cross and the meaning of redemption are found in the Gospels.
The Gospels are the narrative/myth of the Secondary and Primary Symbols.

If you would tell me that you are a writer, I would believe you.. When I wrote my IP I did mention some of what you said here.. But you give so much deep thinking to it.. So I hope that it is not a problem that I ask further about it, I like to ask.. :blush:

If we enter the principles of the force, and go into its myth and symbol, is there a specific concept that can be found back in all myth and symbols related to the principles of the force? Or do different myth and symbols show different principles of the force?

It is safe to say that the narrative myth that attracted most of us to this Temple are those found in the science fiction universe as interpreted by George Lucas. The Force therein is an important symbol of many things. The discussion of the symbolic meaning and significance of the Force is what the Temple forums, IP, and advanced studies are for. Star Wars is the narrative myth. Two of the symbols found in it are the journey of the hero and the Force. The Force can be interpreted as a symbol for the Dao/Tao, as I do. One way the principle of the Force can be symbolized is as the cosmic fabric into which all things are woven. The primary symbol of cosmic participation of all things in a single reality might be one way of expressing it, as Obi Wan does in A New Hope, or as Lao Tzu does in the Daodejing. Secondary symbols of the Force are varied, but in the Star Wars universe it is symbolized as a power to which adepts or initiates can access and manipulate. In Daoism, the secondary symbol is the Yin Yang.

May I quote you from time to time? I love the freedoms of Jedism and the gifts.