Do we hide behind our titles? Thoughts?

Lykeios wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: I say personally there can not be a more or less of a Jedi . There can only be YOUR path of Jedi ism , which is yours and never in competition with mine. Never. There is no contest ever. In that light there has to be difrent interpitations. Not who's got what code or how much more ... Right !?
Pm me if u like for more if u like !

This, frankly, is why I left Jediism. There is no ruling on what makes someone a Jedi or makes them not a Jedi. It's this wishy-washy bologna that drove me away.

If that is what drove you away i really worry about you , maybe its a good idea to set your own boundaries and find your own line in the sand , do you want to be a Jedi ? Then only the Force can stop you. Do you not wish to be a Jedi ? Then no Force can make you one. In the short period i have spend in the community i have seen a lot of things that might scare one away from the path , but giving people the space to figure out what Jedissm means to them is not one of those things that should make you leave....

"What is a Jedi"
Do you mean what is a Jedi in general or what is a TOTJO Jedi? A TOTJO Jedi could be considered one type of Jedi among the others at other communities. Then within TOTJO, you have different apprenticeships that teach and learn different areas of things. Are you the samurai-type of Jedi? Are you the philosophical type of Jedi? Are you some kind of blend of both? The doctrine is actually a Rorschach test. Different ideas come to mind when reading any of it, different levels of agreement and disagreement. And in time, those ideas may regularly alter as one grows and further matures. There is nothing static about being a Jedi.
So, there can't be just A single definition.

However... If you peel back all of those questions and distinctions, what do you get? Can you tell me? (What is it we all have in common here, and if you get the answer, then think about exactly what that answer entails - hint: Joseph Campbell)

Lykeios wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: I say personally there can not be a more or less of a Jedi . There can only be YOUR path of Jedi ism , which is yours and never in competition with mine. Never. There is no contest ever. In that light there has to be difrent interpitations. Not who's got what code or how much more ... Right !?
Pm me if u like for more if u like !

This, frankly, is why I left Jediism. There is no ruling on what makes someone a Jedi or makes them not a Jedi. It's this wishy-washy bologna that drove me away.

This very reason is one of my favorite things about Jediism. I don't have to bend over blindly to dogma or be shamed into submission. I have put my house in order. I've built it with discipline and courage. No one tells me how to be. I decide with the tools I have.

Titles are just words used to describe/convey and idea.

As hard as it is for some to accept , words to have power :blink: .
Power in their meaning and that is it. But that in and of itself is more than enough to shape a civilization. And that power is like electricity in it has to be directed. It is neutral and thus neither good nor bad until the intent of the individual wielding it has done so. And just like electricity sent to a device, words have no more power over you than you allow it to have by your design; your knowledge, understanding, receptiveness and willingness to be influenced by them.
So, titles convey something and you, not someone else, decide how you will use what is conveyed.

Ego, is nothing more that the perception of self. If that perception is accurate and in harmony with what is then it is completely possible to have a healthy ego. When it is not n tune, or accurately reflect; or, when we do not represent what we wish our ego to be, then we get a distorted ego that must be nourished. Often times this results in “feeding” the ego to feel better about ourselves. That is often when people use the power of words like titles to inflate themselves.

But it is not the word itself that is good or bad. The word is just that, a word. It has the authority of its meaning, conveyance, but nothing more. How it is used and how you decide to receive it is what gives the words authority “power.”

So my question is, are you using words for your “egotistical” advantage? Or are you letting others use their words to their advantage at your expense?

Only the naive respond to titles. Did you have to transform into something exceptional in order to achieve yours? Whether the answer is yes or no, its the person you are that interacts with the community, not the title.

I grew up in the military. Titles and positions are definitely a part of that organization. However, rarely did I see a title or position that did not have a purpose.

A title only explains your level of authority and responsibility to an organization. If a title does not have a purpose, it is fluff, and holds no meaning other than ego stroking.

The individual that holds a title, does not mean they are always doing what that title/position should be doing. We have all seen bosses who were terrible leaders/holders of their position. You have to look at each individual and decide for yourself whether that title befits that person and whether or not you will honor that title.

Lykeios wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: I say personally there can not be a more or less of a Jedi . There can only be YOUR path of Jedi ism , which is yours and never in competition with mine. Never. There is no contest ever. In that light there has to be difrent interpitations. Not who's got what code or how much more ... Right !?
Pm me if u like for more if u like !

This, frankly, is why I left Jediism. There is no ruling on what makes someone a Jedi or makes them not a Jedi. It's this wishy-washy bologna that drove me away.

To be In A place where everyone is difrent and no one person has controll or a majority . There is a standard and the standard is to you. Why is that so difficult to accept? Every one is much alive and able as I. Frankly , I am more worried about myself than every one else . My Jedi ism is to me , not to any one else. My focus is what is MY path , not some one else's or is some one else's valid or even ... Proper. I already have an answer for that. Your valid as I. Your findings are a result of your seeking. LDoesn't seem wishy washy to me.

Alexandre,
"Does Watts say that we need to work on dropping our egos ? :huh: When ? He actually says to regard the ego for what it is : 'wanting to get rid of one's ego is the most egotistical thing we can try doing'.

Ego (the word) only means "I". How can we get rid of that and still have experience ? Do we have (present) experience, or do we have but memories of experiences ? And how reliable are those memories ? How much of the judgements and feelings associated with them are merely learnt 'things' (example : feeling indignant because we think we ought to -- mistaking of ought for is )"

Touche sir touche............So, I suppose I should present it as such, as the word dropping may not be the best way to put it. Particularly because technically I am pulling meanings from his words from "my" perspective, meaning they may not really have been intended. So say, I want to slowly peel away the levels of ego. I am first examining the outside layer of ego which is the I that I think that I am. Now I have lots of awesome qualities let me tell you ; but if the mental I only examines those instead of the negatives I am not truly examining my ego/character traits collected from experience, from an objective point (not that it is even possible to do so but again something to strive for. IMO). So at this point I have already contradicted myself as establishing a point of view from my own ego about my own ego is pretty egotistical, to place moral relevance on my ego, and even further say that I am trying to make it not exist is even more divergent from the idea of peeling away layers to see what is truly there instead of my expectation of what is there. Or is it? This is where I see a lot of confusion on my part, and to say I have comprehended his lectures entirely that I have heard would be an out right lie. But, that's kinda the point right? I am looking at peeling away the layers of what I think that I think that I am and slowly hopefully getting to see the I that actually exists, which in reality probably looks nothing like the sweet mental portrait of what I think I am. So, since I have already been defining me by this mental portrait when I finally get to the point where I can maybe see the I that truly exists, will I even comprehend the image before me (which in itself is still an image of ego since there will be a moral shading due to the perspective of the self)? In all realness with out looking through the layers of the ego I will look like just a stroke in a painting. For example, If I showed you Starry Night by Van Gogh, you would instantly know that painting (if you have seen it before or if it has been described to you). However, if I were to enlarge the painting many times and show you just a very small portion, it would look the exact same as every other oil painting shown in the same way. So, when I say dropping the ego, I suppose I am referring to my own ability to see what magnification I have the painting under (and magnification device). To further this then I have to ask should I be looking at the painting this close to understand how it was painted or should I just enjoy the art for what it is? So, then this all becomes very perspective based and the whole study of the ego in itself becomes futile? I am not sure however, again I think that's the point (ego talking) is to not really understand what we are looking at and accept that it's not the picture that's the goal it's understanding the process behind the picture's construction.

Thank you Alexandre for making me think! I love this, we will need to talk more about this and I am going to have to revisit Watts some more!


Dang, I had other things to say but I forgot them all, *brain explodes*

Love and respect to everyone who has commented here (this whole discussion makes me a stronger Jedi)*says ego Kobos),
Kobos

"Jedi Circle, there you go. Now go live. Congrats you are a Jedi."- Opie Macleod