In Praise of Selectivity: Syncretic Jediism

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 2 months ago #224606 by
Distilling symbol systems (aka religions) to their respective primary symbols is most helpful exercise in establishing a consistent syncretism. The criteria of what makes one primary symbol consistent with another is where the discussion of what a religion is and believes gets most interesting.

One definition of religion is from Clifford Geertz: “a religion is a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive and long-lasting moods and motivations in persons by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.”

Starting with the opening phrase, Geertz posits that a religion is a system of symbols. Symbols in this context are the secondary symbols found in narratives (myths). All symbols have meanings, but not everything that conveys meaning is a religious symbol. Symbols can be pictures, objects, actions, events, or relationships.

Regarding religious symbols, they are a symbol because they:
  • convey some message to us about the nature of our world
  • teach us to see or understand our world in a particular way
  • shape our experience
Both primary and secondary symbols communicate something about our worldview. Each expresses how things are in the world. But symbols have a specific purpose, they tell us how to respond to our experience, that is, they tell us how we live, or how we ought to live. Religious symbols communicate something about our ethos - our ideals, values, and way of living.

Religious symbols perform a distinctive function: they persuade us that there is a direct connection between our worldview (how the world is) and our ethos (how we live or ought to live).

Religious symbols tell us that we ought to live a certain way because the world is a certain way.
In a benign circle, myths and symbols tell us that the way the world really is is to match the way we live.
In religious symbols, worldview and ethos (the way we see the world and the way we live in it) should reinforce one another.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
8 years 2 months ago - 8 years 2 months ago #224735 by Adder
I'll need to contemplate this more to help me with my readings in Buddhism.

I was shifting meaning to symbol up through each tier. Such that the myth itself was the symbol within the base tier, and the collection of core messages were its meanings (in that base tier). Then those base tier messages became the symbols for the tier above it. Leading to the primary tier to elucidate its own refined singular meaning/message.

Given I was using a singular concept as the top tier, I thought I'd better make it the Force to hook into my Jediism... which saw me blow out the tiers from 2 to 3 :silly: Probably confusing and unnecessary!!

So, in my new secondary tier I gave it a polar nature to define a basis for morals in the context of the myth's message. And in my new tertiary tier I gave it a tripartite nature to define ones experience of time of how to best view the past, present and future, again in the context of the myth's message.

I'm not suggesting its a good way to do it, but just explaining what I posted why I did.

Knight ~ introverted extropian, mechatronic neurothealogizing, technogaian buddhist. Likes integration, visualization, elucidation and transformation.
Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med ~ Dis
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu
Last edit: 8 years 2 months ago by Adder.
The following user(s) said Thank You:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 2 months ago #224905 by
Interpretation of the Buddhist myth of the Four Marks yields several primary symbols: illusion, suffering, and desire. These primary symbols describe the nature of the world as experienced by Buddhists. In the myth 'The first sermon of Buddha following his enlightenment' Gautama preaches the Four Noble Truths. This sacred narrative tells how suffering is the result of craving and that the end of suffering is nirvana. Craving is a primary symbol but I am unclear whether nirvana as a state of being the result of knowledge, wisdom or insight is a secondary or primary symbol. Buddhist art and architecture is rife in symbolism, but within the context of these two myths one of the most foundational secondary symbols is life is a path, in other words, the way to the end of suffering is a path.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 2 months ago #224908 by

Alan wrote: Interpretation of the Buddhist myth of the Four Marks yields several primary symbols: illusion, suffering, and desire. These primary symbols describe the nature of the world as experienced by Buddhists. In the myth 'The first sermon of Buddha following his enlightenment' Gautama preaches the Four Noble Truths. This sacred narrative tells how suffering is the result of craving and that the end of suffering is nirvana. Craving is a primary symbol but I am unclear whether nirvana as a state of being the result of knowledge, wisdom or insight is a secondary or primary symbol. Buddhist art and architecture is rife in symbolism, but within the context of these two myths one of the most foundational secondary symbols is life is a path, in other words, the way to the end of suffering is a path.


The small part what I do understand is that Buddha makes a difference between life and enlightenment. Could it be that your symbol type of Nirvana (secondary/primary) is dependent on the point of view?

That Nirvana could be secondary in life, but primary in enlightenment? :blush:

Can that be possible?

~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~


The four noble truths talk all about suffering. Nirvana talks about the ultimate goal of a Buddhist? Enlightenment trough suffering? The Buddha told us that "Life is Suffering"
  • The truth of suffering (dukkha)
  • The truth of the cause of suffering (samudaya)
  • The truth of the end of suffering (nirhodha)
  • The truth of the path that frees us from suffering (magga)

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 2 months ago #224928 by
Some secondary symbols are also primary symbols.

Point-of-view? Always, though some interpretations are 'better' than others.

Primary symbols describe the nature of reality in which we find ourselves. One way to express it is in the form of a question a child might ask a parent. For example: Why do people die? Why doesn't God live with us everyday in our ordinary lives? The answer is found in the myth of the Garden of Eden. These primary symbols are true: everyone dies and God doesn't walk with us as was our state when the original humans lived in the Garden Paradise of Eden. This is the narrative of the original human's disobedience that resulted in exile from paradise. Primary symbols in monotheism are sin, impurity, exile, and separation of God from humans. Secondary symbols are garden paradise, tree of knowledge of good and evil, serpent of temptation.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 2 months ago - 8 years 2 months ago #224956 by

Alan wrote: Some secondary symbols are also primary symbols.

Point-of-view? Always, though some interpretations are 'better' than others.

Primary symbols describe the nature of reality in which we find ourselves. One way to express it is in the form of a question a child might ask a parent. For example: Why do people die? Why doesn't God live with us everyday in our ordinary lives? The answer is found in the myth of the Garden of Eden. These primary symbols are true: everyone dies and God doesn't walk with us as was our state when the original humans lived in the Garden Paradise of Eden. This is the narrative of the original human's disobedience that resulted in exile from paradise. Primary symbols in monotheism are sin, impurity, exile, and separation of God from humans. Secondary symbols are garden paradise, tree of knowledge of good and evil, serpent of temptation.


,,Some secondary symbols are also primary symbols.''

Mm.. if point of view is not that what it would be, how can one know if nirvana is primair or secundair? It would always be matter of point of view? Would that mean you can never know the 'true' secondary or primary symbol?


Alan: ,,I am unclear whether nirvana as a state of being the result of knowledge, wisdom or insight is a secondary or primary symbol.''

edit: if nirvana does have multiple views, it must have multiple states of being?
Last edit: 8 years 2 months ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 2 months ago #224958 by
My understanding is that nirvana is no view. It is the state of being without ego, self, etc. In that state then there would be no point of view because there would be no ego having an opinion about the way things are, or the interpretation of this or that. Nirvana is no one viewing. That doesn't mean that there is no longer a human who sees but that the way of being in the world is a way that is no longer attached to the person or ego. One of my favorite expressions for this way of being in the world...

Before Enlightenment: chop wood, carry water.

After Enlightenment: chop wood, carry water.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 2 months ago - 8 years 2 months ago #224970 by

Alan wrote: My understanding is that nirvana is no view. It is the state of being without ego, self, etc. In that state then there would be no point of view because there would be no ego having an opinion about the way things are, or the interpretation of this or that. Nirvana is no one viewing. That doesn't mean that there is no longer a human who sees but that the way of being in the world is a way that is no longer attached to the person or ego. One of my favorite expressions for this way of being in the world...

Before Enlightenment: chop wood, carry water.

After Enlightenment: chop wood, carry water.


Haha so funny :blink: :laugh: ,,chop wood and carry water!'' You are so funny :side: So the Nirvana is actually in the same world, but it is just the state of ego? Did I ever told you that I have a quote book of Kosmos with 12.000 quotes? Have a small paper in front of the book, time to add this one! This is pure fun! Could not explain it more clear to me Alan.. Never knew that Enlightenment was so much fun.. Chop wood, carry water.. how primitive lol :D
Last edit: 8 years 2 months ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 1 month ago #225049 by
Jedi Myth of Origins

In the time before time, the darkness of the void was an unseen chaos. All that was was formless and separate. Without light or order there was strife and from out of this struggle light and order emerged. All was flux and all was change, but what was returned, and so there was order. The returning was the same but it was also different. The order of returning was not the returning itself. Each returning was distinct from what was before. What remained was the order of the returning.

From out of the primordial strife emerged the order of returning that was light itself. And the light shone in all that returned. And the light pulsed in all that was ordered. When, in the strife of returning, the light encountered again the dark, the light ordered it according to the way the light itself was ordered. And the pulse of returning brought light and dark together and from their strife was born all that is.

All that was born from their encounter was so ordered. Sharing order was meaningful though this meaning was neither plan nor purpose. Everything encountered was as something meaningful. Meaning is woven throughout all that is present. Meaningful presence is found in all that is for what is present shares the order of returning from out of darkness into light. All is infused with the order and so can be known but only by those beings aware of the returning. Only in the awareness of what light shines upon can meaning be uncovered from the darkness. From the arising of awareness of what is uncovered comes knowledge that there is knowing. A knowing that searches for and finds that it is searching and uncovering. Out of the awareness comes knowledge that there is one who is doing the searching, doing the finding, uncovering and discovering the order and that is seen woven into the order is meaningfulness found to be the light that emerged from the strife in the time before time.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 1 month ago #225173 by
One particular primary symbol in Buddhism makes it difficult to syncretize with Hinduism. In Buddhism there is no personal soul just as there is no self. In Buddhism, this is anatman. Peel away the layers of naming who we think we are and what others think we are, and what is found beneath all this is nothing. On the other hand in Hinduism, at the bottom of it all is atman, the universal sharing of the one soul, Atman. The Hindu’s greeting namaste is seeing the one divine shared soul in the other. Everyone has their own ‘little piece’ (atman) of the one soul (Atman) which all living things share. This primary symbol, Atman/atman, gives rise to the belief in reincarnation, the necessity of karma and the caste system – for it takes more than one life time to excavate through all the accumulated actions to free the atman and achieve moksha. In Hinduism, getting off the wheel of life-death-rebirth (samsara) is moksha. Moksha is not nirvana. Nirvana is the realization that there is no atman beneath it all, therefore anatman, no self. It is difficult to understand how some Buddhists can reconcile this difference and believe in both karma and reincarnation. Syncretism seems to work best at the secondary symbol level of interpretation and in the sharing of narrative myth ignoring divergent primary symbols.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi